Intersting legal decision on Inbev/AB [Archive]

jesskidden

11-26-2008, 08:12 PM

Actually that Syracuse paper missed the most interesting aspect of the forced diversiture of Labatt USA (well, for me it was the most interesting...;) ). According to other reports, InBev/Labatt can only supply the new owner of Labatt USA with Labatt's beer for a period of three years. After that, they'll have to license the brand to another brewery.

"InBev said it will brew and supply Labatt-branded beer to the licensee who acquires Labatt USA for up to three years." Is how this Buffalo paper's article put it. (http://www.buffalonews.com/145/story/494321.html)

Another story I read said that A-B-InBev has already found a buyer, tho' no future brewer was noted. Seems that High Falls would be a natural- local and they sure have excess capacity (probably more to come when that PA. brewery of Boston Beer Co., really starts cranking. They've already canceled their contract with City's Latrobe brewery.) High Falls in already brewing a domestic version of the Monty Python "Holy Grail Ale" and supposedly (I haven't seen this one) a contract-brewed Steinlager as well (which they used to import).

As for Labatt, I was surprised that it was all over Michigan when I started visiting the Motor City (or DEE-troit, as we called in the auto industry) back in the late 1980's-early 1990's. Even tho' Stroh had by then closed it's original brewery, I was expecting to find Stroh's (and maybe Heileman) beers all over as the most common alternative to BMC, but it was far and away Labatt. (Well, Canada was just across the river....).

I had the bar in the hotel we used to stay in stock the Frankenmuth beers for me- they had 'em in the in-house Chinese restaurant for some reason, but not at the bar- go figure.