Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

  • Home
  • About
  • Editorial
  • Birthdays
  • Art & Beer

Socialize

  • Dribbble
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Flickr
  • GitHub
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
Powered by Head Quarters Built on WordPress
You are here: Home / Editorial / Bud & Bud: Now They’re Buds?

Bud & Bud: Now They’re Buds?

January 14, 2007 By Jay Brooks

+ = ?

I saw this last Monday but was too busy with deadlines for paying gigs to do anything more than drop my jaw in amazement at the news. To say I was surprised would be an understatement. The vigor with which these two companies have battled one another is legendary. For them to unceremoniously bury the hatchet — and not into each other’s back — even in just the U.S. market defies logic. I can see why Anheuser-Busch would want the deal. To have a Bud with flavor and another import that’s been selling well, with even greater potential, is a no brainer for them.

But why Budějovický Budvar would be so eager is an entirely different matter. I have a hard time fathoming that it was simply the profit motive and the tantalizing carrot of making a killing here in the U.S. that drove their decision. Not to mention all of the people this move — along with the earlier InBev agreement — have put on the unemployment line. The very people who built all of these brands into ones that A-B would be interested in poaching are now left out in the cold, all of their hard work for naught. Many of the ones I know personally are great people, too, so it seems remarkably unfair.

I guess I just don’t want to believe that the principles Budvar has been arguing for so vehemently could be set aside so easily just for a wad of cash. There are currently something like 100 lawsuits going on in 30 countries around the globe over the brand names Bud, Budvar and Budweiser. A-B just lost an appeal in Portugal, so the disputes between the two companies are far from over. And generally speaking A-B has been the aggressor in a majority of the cases, at least as far as I’ve seen.

Here in the U.S., and other countries where A-B has prevailed in court decisions, Budvar, Budweis and Budweiser are labeled Czechvar, conveying none of the heritage of a beer brewed in the town of České Budějovice, which in German is Budweis. A-B has publicly acknowledged countless times that it was their inspiration for the beer they named Budweiser in 1876. Disputes began a century ago and have not subsided up through the present time. Even A-B’s press release acknowledges as much.

After nearly a century of disagreements in certain parts of the world over rights to the Budweiser name for their beers, Anheuser-Busch and Czech brewer Budejovicky Budvar have formed a historic alliance in which Anheuser-Busch will become the U.S. importer of Czechvar Premium Czech Lager, the two brewers jointly announced today.

The agreement gives Czechvar, currently sold in 30 states, access to Anheuser-Busch’s marketing and sales expertise and wide-reaching U.S. distribution network. It gives Anheuser-Busch another European import as part of an aggressive push into high-end beer categories that has led to alliances with Grolsch, Tiger, Kirin and most recently InBev, which added Stella Artois, Beck’s, Bass Pale Ale and other beers to its import portfolio.

The agreement does not impact existing litigation or trademark disputes between the two brewers in other countries, and they have agreed the partnership cannot be used to support either side in any trademark cases.

“After years of differences, this is a meaningful step for two great brewers to form a relationship that is good for both of our businesses,” said August A. Busch IV, president and chief executive officer of Anheuser-Busch Cos. Inc. “For Anheuser-Busch, it also represents an opportunity to enhance our import portfolio with a super-premium Czech import. Working with our family of wholesalers, we look forward to introducing Czechvar to a new audience of beer lovers.”

“At the same time, the agreement represents a historical turning point between our companies. We have managed to move away from discussions between lawyers and toward a practical dialog, which is going to be beneficial to both sides. Our corporation has therefore gained the best importer in the USA,” added Budejovicky Budvar’s CEO, Jiří Boček.

The agreement was effective Jan. 5. Terms were not disclosed.

Hmm. When a brewery with so much reason to feel a deep-seated animosity toward the world’s largest beer company can make nice for a fistful of ducats, what does that mean for the rest of the world’s breweries trying to sell their products here. Between the InBev brands (like Stella Artois), Grolsch, Tiger, Kirin, and now what many people refer to as “the real Budweiser,” Czechvar, this will make it increasingly difficult for other imported beers — and especially the smaller brands — to find a willing distributor to carry their products. Certainly no Bud distributor who wants to stay in Augie’s good graces would carry a non-A-B import. And that clutters the remaining distributors, especially where there’s only one other house that carries both Coors and Miller. Few distributors can carry everything presented them and that means less diversity in their territories, more so in states where it’s difficult or impossible for companies to self-distribute.

As usual, the losers will be you and me when we try to find that obscure import like Westmalle Tripel or Urthel Hop-It. Every time the highly efficient behemoth A-B distribution network adds another “official” beer to its portfolio, the available beers across the country become increasingly the same. If it keeps up like this, the only remaining diversity you’ll see at the local grocery store will be completely illusory. They’ll all be owned or have exclusive distribution agreements with a very small number of companies. And that will make it nearly impossible for a newcomer, whether an imported brewery or a local craft brewer, to find a spot on the shelf.

Filed Under: Editorial, News Tagged With: Business, Europe, International, National, Strange But True



Comments

  1. Harry Schuhmacher says

    January 18, 2007 at 9:30 pm

    Not so fast, mon frere. Love the blog, but sometimes you connect dots which don’t always connect with reality. The top brass at A-B and Budvar have been friendly for over ten years. They know they must fight for their respective trademarks in each country, but in the end the global beer community is an exclusive club.

    As for diversity, this deal and others have no effect on access to market. If anything, the more imports A-B allows into its distributor network, the more motivated Miller/Coors distributors are to taken on more obscure beers. Also, I see no A-B distributors becoming more exclusive to A-B, even with InBev and Budvar, et al. These new brands don’t pay many bills. The A-B distributors I know, and I know a lot of them, are still actively looking for high growth, high margin beers for their portfolio.

    There’s always a lot of hand wringing about A-B whenever they do anything. But the fact remains that A-B, Miller, Coors, or any other brewer don’t force people at gunpoint to buy their brands. The consumer ultimately decides. If a small craft or imported brand can’t find distribution under this very democratic system, then they have options in the wine and spirits houses, or with independent craft distributors, or they can self-distribute (in most cases). The US has by far the most open access to markets for small beers of any country. And that’s the bottom line, regardless of what A-B does. -Harry

  2. Jim Dorsch says

    January 19, 2007 at 1:31 am

    What limits consumer choice is government intervention such as state-mandated exclusive territories and franchise laws written at the behest of wholesalers.

  3. RationalThought says

    January 19, 2007 at 5:04 am

    I agree with Harry. The whole AB Import discussion is really a discussion of supply and demand. If consumers demand more choice, market will adjust to supply more choice. In example is the AB funnel strategy itself. AB has adjusted its supply practices (approved imports) to meet consumer demand for choice. That really suggests that the fundamental laws of supply and demand are working well in the current beer market. -RT

  4. George Fisher says

    March 9, 2007 at 10:11 am

    Where to start – or more likely – where to end?

    Here’s the problem with Harry’s democratic hypothesis. Nearly every large volume grocer has a category captain (or some other nonsense nomenclature) that “sets” the available space for beer. This is suppossed to bestow some benefit that a multi billion/million $ retailer cannot come up with on their own “well of course this account needs 98 facings of every conceivable package size of our major brand). Guess what? When the category captain rolls out with some pseudo micro or new to the market import, those products get automatic distribution. There may be a locally sold micro or a more sought after import, but no matter. At one set I observed the “category captain” remarked “how does anybody drink this shit (in his mind shit=craft beer)? I had a Sam Adams once and then I had to drink 10 “light beers” to get the taste out of my mouth.” So the multi-billion $ retailer has this guy running the show???

    Reality is a major brand that has had 19 years of decreasing sales, yet somehow is still ubiquitous and often one of a couple of choices in major venues. The ability to manage the decline is really impressive.

    Educated, passionate consumers,retailers and on-premise owners make the difference.

Find Something

Northern California Breweries

Please consider purchasing my latest book, California Breweries North, available from Amazon, or ask for it at your local bookstore.

Beer Bulletin Email

Enter your email address to receive daily digests:

Recent Comments

  • Kendall Staggs on Beer In Ads #4341: Miss Rheingold 1955 Filling Yuletide Requests
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Robert Burns » Brookston Beer Bulletin on John Barleycorn
  • Susan Appel on Historic Beer Birthday: John Roehm
  • S. Pavelka on Beer Birthday: Rich Norgrove
  • Celebrating Texas History With Alamo Beer: An Iconic Taste Of The Lone Star State – SanctuaryBrewCo on Fictional Beer Brands

Recent Posts

  • Beer In Ads #4346: Something Is Brewing For 1956 February 8, 2023
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Andrew MacElhone February 8, 2023
  • Historic Beer Birthday: A.J. Houghton February 8, 2023
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Lüder Rutenberg February 8, 2023
  • Beer In Ads #4345: Miss Rheingold 1955 Visits San Bernardino February 7, 2023

Tag Cloud

Advertising Anheuser-Busch Announcements Bay Area Belgium Brewers Association Brewing Equipment Budweiser Business California Christmas Europe France Germany Guinness Health & Beer History Holidays Hops Humor Infographics Kegs Law Mainstream Coverage Miller Brewing Northern California Pabst Packaging Patent Pennsylvania Press Release Prohibitionists Rheingold San Francisco Schlitz Science Science of Brewing Sports Statistics The Netherlands UK Uncategorized United States Video Washington

The Sessions

session_logo_all_text_1500

Next Session: Dec. 7, 2018
#142: One More for the Road
Previous Sessions
  • #141: Future of Beer Blogging
  • #140: Pivo
  • #139: Beer & the Good Life
  • #138: The Good in Wood
  • #137: German Wheat
Archive, History & Hosting

Typology Tuesday

Typology-png
Next Typology:
On or Before March 29, 2016
#3: Irish-Style Dry Stout
Previous Typologies
  • #2: Bock Feb. 2016
  • #1: Barley Wine Jan. 2016
Archive & History

This month’s posts

February 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728  
« Jan    

BBB Archives