"St. Louis residents have grown accustomed to seeing local corporations gobbled up by outside firms. But losing Anheuser-Busch could be the cruelest cut of all...
"Reports that the company might be purchased by brewer InBev of Belgium have residents worried they might lose a company as closely identified with St. Louis as the iconic Gateway Arch..."
Associated Press article:
gobbled up by outside firms. But losing Anheuser-Busch could be the cruelest cut of all...
residents worried they might lose a company as closely identified with St. Louis as the iconic Gateway Arch..."
The best beer though comes from Belgium and they maybe actually saving the Brewery. The St Louis location is the oldest and first Busch location. But I often wondered if someday they would move their main headquarters somewhere else.
Belguim is the Valhalla for beer. IIRC a Belgium company owns half of the Ommegang Brewery in Cooperstown, NY.
If Busch is sold to a Belgium company, I foresee a loss of some executive jobs in StL, but not a loss of any jobs on the brewery floor. Bud's suppply chain and its distribution network are vital to maintaining its market share and they are all a function of the StL brewery.
If the Belgians started brewing Industrial Light lagers in Belgium, the Trappist Monks would burn them at the stake. ;)
Dick
That may be, but InBev is not responsible for the beers that most people think of as representing the best qualities of Belgian beer.
As for saving the brewery, I'm not really sure A-B is in need of saving. While market share for standard North American lagers has been flat for many years, A-B has managed to take market share from Miller and Coors. Although, if I recall correctly (and I may very well not be), A-B's growth has slowed in recent years as well.
The reason InBev is looking at A-B is not because A-B is struggling. It's because A-B wants a strong foothold in the North American market, and A-B's the one takeover opportunity. And with the weakness of the dollar against the euro (1 euro is worth ~$1.55 today, compared to 1 euro being worth 85 cents seven years ago), InBev has very favorable economic conditions for such a deal.
Besides, an InBev acquisition would have a strong chance of increasing production at A-B breweries, as the company will likely seek to produce some of its brands in North America for North American consumption, rather than importing bottles/kegs/cans from Europe.
-Steve
Um, there aren't many fires around the Stella Artois brewery (owned by InBev, incidentally).
-Steve
However I am impressed that Dick knew about the Belgium Trappist Brewery. My knowledge came from the Trappistine nuns near by. (see link below) Trappistine nuns from Belgium opened up an American Monastery in Redwoods of Calf.
Arguably, but it certainly isn't produced by InBev. Moreover, InBev is a Brazilian company to me.
Not half. Lock, stock & barrel owned by Duvel-Moortgat
Absolutely not - it would only reinforce their aura of superiority.
On 5/31/2008 11:12 AM snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com ignored two million years of human evolution to write:
Dunno why. There are six of them, plus a seventh in the Netherlands. Their existences are hardly a secret, and beers from all except one of them are available in the USA.
berichtnews:g1rrk7$r8d$ snipped-for-privacy@reader2.panix.com...
--------------------------------
You can click on the other topics at the top of this page
It sort of amazes me that the monks still over-look the operations of the Brewery
On 5/31/2008 10:36 AM Steve Jackson ignored two million years of human evolution to write:
InBev is largely responsible for dumbing down the beer range from breweries they have taken over, ruining the Belle-Vue lambic range, making Hoegaarden Wit blander (and deleting some of Hoegaarden's former specialties from the range), and so on. Some of their bottom- line dominated decision making, like attempting to close the De Kluis brewery at Hoegaarden and move production to the lager factory at Jupille, proved to be unworkable, and they wound up re-opening the line at Hoegaarden. Once in a very great while, even brewing behemoths can be humbled by reality.
In product volume, yes, which is true across the board for the biggest of the corporate macrobreweries. A-B has done all right in holding the line on margins, but A-B still also dabbles in more potentially profitable business as well: repositioning and expanding the Michelob line to appeal to a market that's moved away from Bud/Bud Light/Busch, but still likes a bargain. A-B also owns substantial chunks of Widmer and Redhook, and has deals with Kona Brewing and Goose Island as well, bringing all those brands into its distribution portfolio. And of course, A-B is already the importer of record for InBev's Belgian beers; if A-B imported and distributed all InBev brands, it would control a sizeable share of the import market, what with Beck's, Spaten, Staropramen, Diebels, Bass, Labatt's, and so on. Wouldn't be at all surprised to see a massive consolidation of these brands' distribution networks should an AnBev (or is it InBusch?) merger take place, complete with lots of yelling and shouting and lawsuits galore.
The reason *who* wants a strong foothold? (Yeah, I know what you meant. PSYCH!)
On 5/31/2008 11:53 AM Joris Pattyn ignored two million years of human evolution to write:
Just come out and say it: "InBev is dead to me."
Which would be mildly amusing, coming from the brewers at Chimay. ("What shall we tell the poor dears?")
On 5/31/2008 8:42 AM Dick Adams ignored two million years of human evolution to write:
ObPetPeeve:
BELGIUM is the name of a country.
BELGIAN is the adjective used to describe things and people from BELGIUM.
Often, yes. Always, no. There are plenty of dumpy little dive pubs in Belgium with a limited range on offer.
A *BELGIAN* compay, Duvel-Moortgaat, owns both halves of Ommegang.
The talk is of a merger between A-B and a *BELGIAN* company.
A-B's distribution network also currently markets InBev's Belgian imports in the USA. It is possible that many other brands in InBev's range would get sucked in to that network, to the detriment of the existing importers. Kinda like what happened with Corona and Gambrinus Co. in Texas.
That would engender far more "Sturm und Drang" than the monks would ever want to endure. They would simply rest assured in smug contemplation that their beers are the best. Some are, some aren't what they were at one time, and at least one, while very good, is massively overhyped.
Flanders or Wallonia?
yd+yg+as wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net:
Sounds like what A-B does when they acquire or take stock in breweries. The sure dumbed down Red Hook. But I can't see any of the A-B brands being dumbed down any more than they already are.
Why be impressed by common knowledge?
I believe he Trappistine nuns make candies, not beer.
I didn't notice anything about nuns in the above link
Dick
Quibble: Beers from all of them are available in the States. One, of them, however, is not legally available.
-S
Nor would I. I'm sure that's one of the reasons InBev is eyeing the transaction. But I still think the things that are really lighting up their eyes are the entry into North America, and the ability to brew some of their core brands in the States, rather than in Europe (similar to how Guinness Extra Stout is brewed in Canada).
Yeah, got one too many A-Bs in there. InBev wants in NA. A-B is already quite established in NA.
-S
DrinksForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.