AB-InBev fights to prevent HB602 from becoming law

[coryforsenate]

HB602 is a bill which lets small, up and coming breweries let people take home beer from the brewery. A brewery qualifies for this if they produce less than 75,000 barrels a year. Obviously, AB-InBev doesn't meet this requirement.

http://blog.chron.com/beertx/2011/05/ab-inbev-gives-hb602-a-case-of-the-hiccups/



With the sting from Goose Island still fresh, how do y'all feel about this?

 

[Zamial]

...how do y'all feel about this?

Just about the same as a moment ago...

 

[iaefebs]

Why does HB602 discriminate against Breweries that produce over 75,000 barrels? Seems like a dumb restriction.Let all breweries let someone purchase beer to go.

 

[Airborneguy]

Why does HB602 discriminate against Breweries that produce over 75,000 barrels? Seems like a dumb restriction.Let all breweries let someone purchase beer to go.

Exactly. Sounds like "small beer" lobbied for something to benefit them. Imagine that! I thought craft beer producers only cared about the "art"?

 

[wreals]

Seriously, prohibition ended more than 70 years ago. All breweries should be able to sell to who ever they want to, wherever they want and how ever they want to, unless they are selling to minors.

 

[Backporchbrewery]

why does hb602 discriminate against breweries that produce over 75,000 barrels? Seems like a dumb restriction.let all breweries let someone purchase beer to go.

+1

 

[bovineblitz]

It's stupid that we can't just take beer home from any brewery. Alcohol laws are so ridiculous.

 

[trevor_b]

coryforsenate- fellow aggie I presume? What year?

Also, how long have you been into homebrewing? You have a lot of beer bottled, I'm only on my 1st batch. Just got into it last month.

 

[JoshuaWhite5522]

Seriously, prohibition ended more than 70 years ago. All breweries should be able to sell to who ever they want to, wherever they want and how ever they want to, unless they are selling to minors.

Hey the little guys need to drink too! Seriously though this is one of the times I have to side with AB/inbev. We want the big guys to play fair and give the smaller breweries a chance, we have to be willing to do the same to them.

 

[Patrick604]

Just can't see myself making a road trip to St Louis to pick up a six pack of Bud when I can buy it anywhere. I would, however, stop into a small craft brewery to make a purchase if I were in the area.

Perhaps the small brewery, with a limited distribution network, is looking to add one more outlet to their retail chain that the big boys really don't need. Then again, what the heck, let BMC sell a six pack to people who take their tour. I can't imagine the sales will have a significant impact on their bottom line like it could at the small breweries though.

 

[coryforsenate]

@ trevor b

Yeah, I'm working on my Ph.D. Bachelor's was 2008. I've been brewing for about two years. I've made a lot more beer than what's listed. If I drink all of it, I remove it from my "bottled" list.

What was the first beer you made? I've got an Oktoberfest lagering right now and will probably make an american amber next week.

 

[Zamial]

I see this is a way for a brewery to become a "food-less brew pub." It would REALLY help small up and coming breweries. As previously stated it wouldn't have much of an effect, even if there was no limit on quantity produced, to BMC. I am sure they do not want to make it easy for anyone to get their thumb into the pie...

What is funny is that there are ways to get around all that red tape nice an neat. You can sell "brewery tours" that include "drink chips". You can tell people they can have a glass filled or turn the chip in for a bottle to take home. Funny how there does not seem to ever be anyone concerned about how many tours you are buying...at least that is how it worked last weekend!

 

[pwndabear]

stupid, STUPID laws.

 

[unionrdr]

Well,it was the fact that bars back in the early half of the 20th were "tied houses"-tied to whatever brewery sold them their beer. And in many cases,built the bar. So many built,in fact,that there was one bar for every 80 people on average! The bar owners had to resort to prostitution & gambling to make any money for themselves to speak of. This is what brought on prohibition.
Now,the breweries want to go back to selling directly to the public. Just don't own the bar anymore. Sounds like the same old song & dance to me. The laws repealing prohibition stated that the breweries could no longer sell directly to the public so the hookers & gambling wouldn't be used by the bar owners to make any money. They saw that that caused the social problems to start with.
We better be careful that this new law doesn't send us into a backward spiral by giving breweries there old rights back.

 

[optimatored]

how is this different from getting a growler from the local mirobrewery/nano?

 

[motobrewer]

HB602 is a bill which lets small, up and coming breweries let people take home beer from the brewery. A brewery qualifies for this if they produce less than 75,000 barrels a year. Obviously, AB-InBev doesn't meet this requirement.

http://blog.chron.com/beertx/2011/05/ab-inbev-gives-hb602-a-case-of-the-hiccups/



With the sting from Goose Island still fresh, how do y'all feel about this?

did you actually read it?

“We’re not against the smaller guys having the right to do that,” he said, adding that AB-InBev would simply like the same option should the brewery decide to offer regular tours.

what sting from goose island??

 

[mrmcdowe]

I think more blame goes to the State Senators. Inbev is a business protecting there bottom line. I don't agree how they go about protecting there profits but they have that right to do it. Now the senators on the other hand are meant to represent the people and not the large corporations.

I saw this on another blog and people went on and on about inbev. Ok..... But where is the blame for the elected Senators?

I guess beer wars needs to be watched again by more people other then home brewers.

Just my opinion....

 

[pwndabear]

what sting from goose island??

they have plans to start filling their bottles with pisswater

 

[WildGingerBrewing]

Exactly. Sounds like "small beer" lobbied for something to benefit them. Imagine that! I thought craft beer producers only cared about the "art"?

This is from another article about the same thing. It appears to me that the bill was set up to fail to begin with. Small brewers were not pushing for barrell limit until the distributors got involved.

"But here is where it gets delicious. Small brewers were encouraged to add a brewery output stipulation to the bill by the Wholesale Beer Distributors of Texas. Ostensibly, as Keith Strama, an attorney for the suds lobby, told the committee, 'The bill was designed to promote local breweries as they gain market share'.”

Here's the link to the other article if anyone is interested.
http://www.texaswatchdog.org/2011/0...s-bill-in-texas-legislature/1305140275.column

 

[meatwad]

Wait...so I can buy a growler of beer from a brewpub. And I can buy a "tour" with free bottle of beer from a small brewery. But I can't buy a beer from a brewery.

That pretty much it?

All this nonsense about prohibition and prostitution (seriously dude, it's not 1918 anymore) , and with strong consideration for temperance and minority drinking, why would anyone oppose this?

Talk to me like I'm 4 years old so I can understand it.

Thanks and tip one back for "small" <ahem, 75K BBL, ahem> producers!

 

[unionrdr]

I basically thought that this would be the beginning of more new laws that would slowly get rid of the "middle man" over the course of time. It just looks like a step for the big breweries to take advantage of laws designed to help the little guy.

 

[motobrewer]

they have plans to start filling their bottles with pisswater

f--k! i just strained my eyeroll muscles!!

what a ridiculous statement.

 

[doctorRobert]

Huh? Every brewery I've been too, let me take beer home. That's half the point of their free tasting, is to sell you some beer.

 

[DrawTap88]

It just looks like a step for the big breweries to take advantage of laws designed to help the little guy.

That is exactley what I was thinking. I can also see the big guy's point though. We, as beer lovers, enjoy fresh beer. Where do you, hopefully, get the freshest beers? At the brewery. I'm sure Joe Regulardrinker will want to get a fresh Bud Light in St. Louis or a fresh Miller Lite in Milwaukee. I don't think that would cut out the middle men (distributors) so long as it's limited to a six pack or two person.

 

[RIT_Warrior]

Well,it was the fact that bars back in the early half of the 20th were "tied houses"-tied to whatever brewery sold them their beer. And in many cases,built the bar. So many built,in fact,that there was one bar for every 80 people on average! The bar owners had to resort to prostitution & gambling to make any money for themselves to speak of. This is what brought on prohibition.
Now,the breweries want to go back to selling directly to the public. Just don't own the bar anymore. Sounds like the same old song & dance to me. The laws repealing prohibition stated that the breweries could no longer sell directly to the public so the hookers & gambling wouldn't be used by the bar owners to make any money. They saw that that caused the social problems to start with.
We better be careful that this new law doesn't send us into a backward spiral by giving breweries there old rights back.

Why are you paying attention to the stated reasons of prohibition? The opponents of prohibition had the end result in mind already (ban alcohol), and they would say anything, true or not, to get that.

Are you telling me you really think bars will start offering gambling and prostitution again to get customers if we allowed voluntary association between alcohol producers and consumers (not that there is anything wrong with gambling or prostitution).

 

[badmajon]

Why does HB602 discriminate against Breweries that produce over 75,000 barrels? Seems like a dumb restriction.Let all breweries let someone purchase beer to go.

True! Texas has a weird, weird distribution system. I love that state, but feck, what stupid distro laws.

 

[motobrewer]

That is exactley what I was thinking. I can also see the big guy's point though. We, as beer lovers, enjoy fresh beer. Where do you, hopefully, get the freshest beers? At the brewery. I'm sure Joe Regulardrinker will want to get a fresh Bud Light in St. Louis or a fresh Miller Lite in Milwaukee. I don't think that would cut out the middle men (distributors) so long as it's limited to a six pack or two person.

you can certainly do this in milwaukee. beer is free on every tour i've been to in wisconsin.

 

[rico567]

The ''discriminatory" 75K bbl. part of the legislation is the flaw -perhaps intentional- that lets the big brewers, who are not included, in the door to protest (and possibly kill) the bill.

It will be worth following to see what happens. Easily fixed, just remove the quantity restriction. But will it be fixed, or was the intention all along to write legislation that couldn't be passed in that form, not amend it, and just let it die at some point in the legislative process.

{NB The following is either analogous, or , depending on your view, so read at your own risk} The Illinois General Assembly just failed to pass a CCW (carry concealed weapon) bill last week, and IMHO the proposed legislation (HB148) was per the argument above- a piece of nonsense that nobody could like. I want CCW here, but don't believe I would have voted for that thing.

 

[kniles38]

The ''discriminatory" 75K bbl. part of the legislation is the flaw -perhaps intentional- that lets the big brewers, who are not included, in the door to protest (and possibly kill) the bill.

It will be worth following to see what happens. Easily fixed, just remove the quantity restriction. But will it be fixed, or was the intention all along to write legislation that couldn't be passed in that form, not amend it, and just let it die at some point in the legislative process.

{NB The following is either analogous, or , depending on your view, so read at your own risk} The Illinois General Assembly just failed to pass a CCW (carry concealed weapon) bill last week, and IMHO the proposed legislation (HB148) was per the argument above- a piece of nonsense that nobody could like. I want CCW here, but don't believe I would have voted for that thing.

Bingo. It was not "perhaps intentional". It was intentional.

 

[unionrdr]

Why are you paying attention to the stated reasons of prohibition? The opponents of prohibition had the end result in mind already (ban alcohol), and they would say anything, true or not, to get that.

Are you telling me you really think bars will start offering gambling and prostitution again to get customers if we allowed voluntary association between alcohol producers and consumers (not that there is anything wrong with gambling or prostitution).

I was stating the historical facts of what being a bar owner was like when they were "tied house". The brewery OWNED YOU. You,as the bar owner,didn't make much money as a result of that,& way to many "tied houses". If the breweries can directly sell you all the beer you want,then far fewer bars,etc,if you can get it fresh. I'm not saying they will again at all. But,as often is proven with greedy humans,history repeats itself. Don't tell me you didn't get that from what has been said? That kind of thing is another reason Spitzer couldn't get his casino over in the old Lorain Port Authority he bought. The horse race track owners played up that angle,& people believed it to start with. I'm just saying that if you let them start selling directly to the public on a larger scale (which the repeal of prohibition law made illegal),then they'll want more laws changed to suit there greedy whims. Just leveling the playing field would be better,with caution.