Anheuser-Busch rejects InBev bid as 'inadequate'

[Shogun]

Anheuser-Busch rejects InBev bid as 'inadequate'

US beer giant Anheuser-Busch on Thursday rejected a 46-billion-dollar takeover bid from Belgian-Brazilian rival InBev as "financially inadequate and not in the best interests" of shareholders.

"InBev's proposal significantly undervalues the unique assets and prospects of Anheuser-Busch," said Patrick Stokes, the chairman of Anheuser-Busch's board.

"The proposed price does not reflect the strength of Anheuser-Busch's global, iconic brands Bud Light and Budweiser, the top two selling beer brands in the world, with Budweiser selling in more than 80 countries today."

Stokes said the proposal "also undervalues the earnings growth actions that the company had already planned, which have significant potential for shareholder value creation; the company's market position in the United States, the most-profitable beer market in the world; and the high value of its existing strategic investments."

Anheuser-Busch rejects InBev bid as 'inadequate'

Wo0t!

 

[Toro]

Budweiser is one of the greatest marketing companies in America.

However, they will no longer remain an independent company, and will most likely be sold to InBev. InBev is offering a price higher than the stock has been. Ever. Plus, the stock has done nothing for the past five years.

The company has weak defenses and is rife with nepotism, considering that the the current CEO is a descendant of the founder even though the original family controls 4% of the stock.

BUD will eventually be sold, almost certainly to a foreign buyer and almost certainly to InBev, even if the Belgians have to throw a couple more bucks to get the deal done.

I'll be voting my shares for InBev.

 

[Shogun]

and we'll be boycotting your former American product. If you think AB is just about marketing you clearly have never been to St. Louis. Let inbev initiate a hostile take over.. Schlafly's stadium will work just the same. The consumer base of the very product your investment sells just isn't in the mood for a foreign buyout of the king of beers. Budweiser won't be the first company to learn that share holders and their greed can't maintain market dominance on the sake of their returns.





InBev to go hostile as Anheuser rejects bid

By Jonathan Birchall in New York

Published: June 26 2008 22:05 | Last updated: June 27 2008 00:59

InBev, the world’s largest brewer, said on Thursday it would launch a hostile bid for Anheuser-Busch as its US rival rejected its $46bn bid as “financially inadequate”.

In court documents filed in the Court of Chancery in Delaware, InBev said it was preparing to launch a proxy battle seeking the removal of Anheuser’s entire board, citing “delays and apparent plans to attempt to block the acquisition”.

Shortly after the filing, Anheuser formally rejected InBev’s offer. August Busch IV, Anheuser’s chief executive, suggested in a letter to Carlos Brito, InBev’s chief executive, that the Belgian-Brazilian group was seeking to take advantage of the low level of the dollar and subdued US stock markets with an offer that undervalued Anheuser’s earnings potential.

While InBev said it still wanted a “constructive dialogue” over its $65-a-share offer, the exchange set the stage for a high-profile international battle for control of Anheuser, which controls almost half of the US beer market.

The battle for control of the maker of Budweiser and Michelob beers will unfold during a presidential election campaign in which free trade and foreign investment in the US is likely to be a significant theme.

InBev’s court filing said that it had been told by Mr Busch before launching the bid that he was opposed to any offer, and that Anheuser was “not for sale”. Mr Busch, according to InBev, also said he and his board were committed to the company’s independence.

In its letter to InBev, Mr Busch said Anheuser had developed plans to increase targeted savings to more than $1bn by 2010, building on an existing programme aimed at cutting an initial $400m in costs. The brewer is to give further details of its cost savings and plans “for accelerated earnings growth” to investors today.

InBev, meanwhile, is asking the court for a declaratory ruling that would confirm the shareholders’ right to remove all 13 of Anheuser’s board members, without giving cause.

The brewer is asking for clarification of the legal status of five of the directors appointed in 2006, before changes were made that allow the removal of board directors by written consent.

John Coffee, a professor of corporate law at Columbia University, said the move to request the ruling from the Delaware courts was highly unusual, and characterised the filing as “an initial opening tactic” by InBev’s legal team.

FT.com / Companies / Consumer industries - InBev to go hostile as Anheuser rejects bid

 

[Toro]

and we'll be boycotting your former American product. If you think AB is just about marketing you clearly have never been to St. Louis. Let inbev initiate a hostile take over.. Schlafly's stadium will work just the same. The consumer base of the very product your investment sells just isn't in the mood for a foreign buyout of the king of beers. Budweiser won't be the first company to learn that share holders and their greed can't maintain market dominance on the sake of their returns.

Okay, what other company has learned this lesson?

InBev have bought national brands around the world. Nothing changed. Americans aren't any more nationalistic than any other people, so as long as Bud keeps spending on marketing, it won't change here either. Even if Bud lost a couple of points in share, who cares? InBev is buying a great brand with the dollar at rock bottom valuations. Even with a couple lost points, when the currencies normalize, they'll still do very well.

A bidding war may erupt, but the company will almost certainly be sold to a foreign buyer as there is no other brewery in America that could buy Bud without triggering anti-trust issues.

Its sort of ironic that MO voted for a President who did more to destroy the value of the dollar than any other President since LBJ, and now foreign companies are buying American companies on the cheap.

 

[Shogun]

Okay, what other company has learned this lesson?

InBev have bought national brands around the world. Nothing changed. Americans aren't any more nationalistic than any other people, so as long as Bud keeps spending on marketing, it won't change here either. Even if Bud lost a couple of points in share, who cares? InBev is buying a great brand with the dollar at rock bottom valuations. Even with a couple lost points, when the currencies normalize, they'll still do very well.

A bidding war may erupt, but the company will almost certainly be sold to a foreign buyer as there is no other brewery in America that could buy Bud without triggering anti-trust issues.

Its sort of ironic that MO voted for a President who did more to destroy the value of the dollar than any other President since LBJ, and now foreign companies are buying American companies on the cheap.

Again, you CLEARLY have never been to St. Louis. If you think Americans, the ENTIRE demographic that appeals to the marketing of AB, will just continue drinking bud then so be it. It's laughable that you'd think that nothing would change. You think Americans are LESS nationalistic than any random dude from France? I realize that capitalists with wealth on the brain tend to miss a lot of factors that are not colored green but Bud isn't impervious to a boycott in this era of American Micro brews and unresolved domestic bitterness regarding the hemorrhaging of AMERICAN products. It's terribly naive of you to ignore how deep AB is to St Louis. If you think some german dude will be buying as much beer as any random beer drinker from this state then I hope you invest deeply before the stock plummets following a take over.

You assume that Bud will remain the king of beers afterward.. THAT, hopefully, will be an expensive lesson to learn as the prevelance of American Micro brews like Sam Adams, Boulivard, Schlaflys, and the rest step in where Bud dies off.


You are right, it is ironic as hell. Part of the reason Obama will have an easy time this year is directly because of the hindsight of Bush. However, that won't cause Americans to swallow a foreign owned beer who relies on it's AMERICAN marketing strategy. But, don't be too quick to blame Bush when clearly your concern about an American company is about as brittle as his concern of the American economy. To me, and a LOT of beer drinkers, you are just as much to blame for shitting in your own pool as he is. Your motives, if not strategy, is exactly the same.

 

[Toro]

Again, you CLEARLY have never been to St. Louis. If you think Americans, the ENTIRE demographic that appeals to the marketing of AB, will just continue drinking bud then so be it. It's laughable that you'd think that nothing would change. You think Americans are LESS nationalistic than any random dude from France? I realize that capitalists with wealth on the brain tend to miss a lot of factors that are not colored green but Bud isn't impervious to a boycott in this era of American Micro brews and unresolved domestic bitterness regarding the hemorrhaging of AMERICAN products. It's terribly naive of you to ignore how deep AB is to St Louis. If you think some german dude will be buying as much beer as any random beer drinker from this state then I hope you invest deeply before the stock plummets following a take over.

I'm sure some people in MO will be upset. But why would anyone in California or Texas or Oregon care? MO isn't that important from an economic perspective. Its also hard to believe that everyone in MO would boycott it considering it would still be one of the largest employers in the state. Oh, as a counter proposal to fend off the InBev take-over, IV is offering to fire more workers than InBev said they will.

You assume that Bud will remain the king of beers afterward.. THAT, hopefully, will be an expensive lesson to learn as the prevelance of American Micro brews like Sam Adams, Boulivard, Schlaflys, and the rest step in where Bud dies off.

Frankly, I never touch the shit. I'm an unabashed beer snob and consumer of microbrews who thinks that injecting carbonation into a beer brewed with rice is a cardinal sin. I'm also a former beer salesman, so I know a bit about the business, and I can tell you that Bud will be the king of beers for a long, long time. It has an astonishing ~43% market share, 20+ points higher than its nearest rival. Your average beer drinker can't tell the difference in taste between typical mass produced beers. They identify with the brand. "I'm a Bud Man," king of beers, etc etc. They won't care much after its taken over and whomever is the new owner spends tens of millions of dollars plastering American flags all over the brand.

You are right, it is ironic as hell. Part of the reason Obama will have an easy time this year is directly because of the hindsight of Bush. However, that won't cause Americans to swallow a foreign owned beer who relies on it's AMERICAN marketing strategy. But, don't be too quick to blame Bush when clearly your concern about an American company is about as brittle as his concern of the American economy. To me, and a LOT of beer drinkers, you are just as much to blame for shitting in your own pool as he is. Your motives, if not strategy, is exactly the same.

Current management is poor and are not creating shareholder value. The purpose of a company is to make money and continue to grow the business. My institution owns a LOT of stock. InBev is offering cash. We will be voting for a sale to whomever pays the most.

 

[AllieBaba]

I'm in Oregon, and I care.

 

[Shogun]

I'm sure some people in MO will be upset. But why would anyone in California or Texas or Oregon care? MO isn't that important from an economic perspective. Its also hard to believe that everyone in MO would boycott it considering it would still be one of the largest employers in the state. Oh, as a counter proposal to fend off the InBev take-over, IV is offering to fire more workers than InBev said they will.


In the mid west it IS important though. People in oregon drink coors products anyway. Texas? Miller. California? the same. But, I'll give you an answer anyway: BECAUSE AMERICANS ARE TIRED OF WATCHING THEIR SHIT BE SOLD OFF AT YARDS SALE PRICES TO FOREIGNERS. Remember when a port was to be sold to Dubai? didn't work out too well, did it? I suggest you take a walk around the internet and browse the feedback to each story about this. Indeed, An Icon marketed on it's AMERICANISM sure WONT be pounded into dust by competition for running such farcical bullshit after being bought out by euros, eh?

Indeed, IV has to scramble to keep this lecherous european fuck from acting like the goddamn borg. SUPPORT DESPITE LAYOFFS SHOULD TELL YOU A THING OR TWO ABOUT HOW DEEP THIS ISSUE GOES.

and, please, let's not get all twinkle eyed about inbevs CRAFTED statements. You can no more predict the truth of their dangled carrot than, apparently, you can conceive the impending hemorrhage to microbrews.


Frankly, I never touch the shit. I'm an unabashed beer snob and consumer of microbrews who thinks that injecting carbonation into a beer brewed with rice is a cardinal sin. I'm also a former beer salesman, so I know a bit about the business, and I can tell you that Bud will be the king of beers for a long, long time. It has an astonishing ~43% market share, 20+ points higher than its nearest rival. Your average beer drinker can't tell the difference in taste between typical mass produced beers. They identify with the brand. "I'm a Bud Man," king of beers, etc etc. They won't care much after its taken over and whomever is the new owner spends tens of millions of dollars plastering American flags all over the brand.


Who is talking about taste? Of course BW is swill compared to hoegaarden. Of COURSE cardinals fans aren't sticking up a pinky at baseball games. Do you think they are like beer zombies running to the beer flame like a fucking moth? Yes, thats the share one gets from, as you said yourself, being MARKETED well. Inbev's ownership kills that whole beast in its tracks. Need evidence? Read the St Louis Post and ask yourself why Miller seems to be ready to pounce with claws extended. You seem to think this local branding is impervious to change after this hostile take over. I think you underestimate the class of people who drink BW by far.


Current management is poor and are not creating shareholder value. The purpose of a company is to make money and continue to grow the business. My institution owns a LOT of stock. InBev is offering cash. We will be voting for a sale to whomever pays the most.


share holder value doesn't increase production if the masses stop drinking their beer. Again, I hope you do have a lot of stock and I hope you invest a lot into this so you can learn a thing or two about consumer prerogative when it comes to the hijacking of a starkly American brand.

 

[Shogun]

[youtube]0UFko9KvIHU[/youtube]

 

[Shogun]

[youtube]wGDMJBk-Ivk[/yotube]


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wGDMJBk-Ivk&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wGDMJBk-Ivk&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


[ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=wGDMJBk-Ivk&feature=related[/ame]

 

[Toro]

share holder value doesn't increase production if the masses stop drinking their beer. Again, I hope you do have a lot of stock and I hope you invest a lot into this so you can learn a thing or two about consumer prerogative when it comes to the hijacking of a starkly American brand.

I know a fair amount about consumer behavior. That's why I'm not bothered by it.

I work for hundreds of thousands of people, most of them middle class. Somebody is coming and offering to increase their wealth substantially. I have a fiduciary duty under the law to act in their best interests, no one else's, and I don't see why I should make the people whom I work for poorer because some people get all bent out of shape about nationalism and a beer company.

Besides, its pretty simple, really. Had management been better, the stock price would be higher and there would be no bid. Why we should protect mediocrity is beyond me.

Plus, as someone who worked in the industry, and what I know about the executive suite at Anheuser Busch, BUD is a very arrogant company. I have no love loss for them whatsoever. Doesn't bother me for a second that they are getting taken out.

InBev is offering cash, not stock, so what happens to InBev's stock afterwards doesn't much interest me, though I imagine other than falling because of the takeover premium as it already has, there won't be much of an effect until the dollar starts strengthening again, and then the stock will benefit. If a private equity firm such as KKR or Thomas Lee or Blackstone came and offered $72, I'd vote for them. It doesn't matter to me. I couldn't care less if the company was taken over by InBev or an American company.

 

[Shogun]

CLEARLY you dont if you think BS drinkers will just fall back in line with their moth to a light zombie selves following this take over.

Regardless, your attitude is the DIRECT reason why free market capitalism is selling out America. Your only concern is the all mighty dollar instead of the American consumers and American businesses that you sacrifice on the alter of the free market. Indeed, sir, I implore you to invest MUCH into inbev. Hopefully, your clients have diversified portfolios. They may get their cash but Inbev will learn a thing or two about midwest loyalty.


While you are at it, make sure to tell them how Sam Adams will sell BETTER after being bought out by a russian company too. See how many snickers you hear.

We are not protecting mediocraty. We are protecting iconic AMERICAN branding. Don't give me this "they should have done better" crap after having admitted the amazing market share AB enjoys. Believe it or not, markets ARE finite. Unless you are busy selling brazillian snow to eskimos it's a tad bit retarded to assume that the largest seller of beer will have a 50% investment return each quarter. To use that as an excuse to sell out America is beyond laughable.


I don't care if anyone from the Busch line is arrogant. Do you think that vampire at Inbev is NOT? As someone who has LIVED WITHIN 100 MILES OF STL HIS ENTIRE LIFE I can tell you that your insider knowledge of the Busch personalities mean jack shit to a consumer base that will actively rebuke inbev's newly acquired asset. Again, make sure you spend as much money as you can investing in Inbev.


And, again, your attitude is exactly why free market capitalism doesn't benefit Americans at all. Take your money and run. It's ONLY America that you are using to wipe your ass with. You have no national loyalty to speak of and seem unable to fathom the travesty of an american company buying guinness, or soporro or red fucking stripe. Indeed, I hope a glass fragment falls into your next glass of hoegaarden while you pinky swirl the yeast into your glass..

 

[Gunny]

Okay, what other company has learned this lesson?

InBev have bought national brands around the world. Nothing changed. Americans aren't any more nationalistic than any other people, so as long as Bud keeps spending on marketing, it won't change here either. Even if Bud lost a couple of points in share, who cares? InBev is buying a great brand with the dollar at rock bottom valuations. Even with a couple lost points, when the currencies normalize, they'll still do very well.

A bidding war may erupt, but the company will almost certainly be sold to a foreign buyer as there is no other brewery in America that could buy Bud without triggering anti-trust issues.

Its sort of ironic that MO voted for a President who did more to destroy the value of the dollar than any other President since LBJ, and now foreign companies are buying American companies on the cheap.

Shogun has a point. Bud is "redneck" beer and rednecks ARE more nationalistic than the rest of the "other people." It might not destroy the company, but I guarantee there're a lot of rednecks out there that drive GMCs and Fords, wear Wrangler pants and shirts, Wolverine boots and drink American beer because it's American.

 

[Toro]

Shogun has a point. Bud is "redneck" beer and rednecks ARE more nationalistic than the rest of the "other people." It might not destroy the company, but I guarantee there're a lot of rednecks out there that drive GMCs and Fords, wear Wrangler pants and shirts, Wolverine boots and drink American beer because it's American.

No doubt, but Bud is massive. Nearly one out of every two beers sold in this country is a Budweiser. There aren't that many rednecks in America. Besides, Bud is first and foremost a marketing company.

Plus, Coors merged with Molsons. Miller is owned by South African Breweries. Where was the massive boycotts after those two transactions? Where was the dramatic drop in market share? There was none. Didn't happen.

So what are the rednecks all going to drink after the sale? Canadian Coors? South African Miller? Keystone? Pabst Blue Ribbon?

 

[Gunny]

No doubt, but Bud is massive. Nearly one out of every two beers sold in this country is a Budweiser. There aren't that many rednecks in America. Besides, Bud is first and foremost a marketing company.

Plus, Coors merged with Molsons. Miller is owned by South African Breweries. Where was the massive boycotts after those two transactions? Where was the dramatic drop in market share? There was none. Didn't happen.

So what are the rednecks all going to drink after the sale? Canadian Coors? South African Miller? Keystone? Pabst Blue Ribbon?

I don't recall even hearing of those mergers. Like I said, I doubt it will break the company. There are more people that identify with being rednecks than you think. They just don't identify with the definitions elitists put on them. The preferred beer for them is Bud. Miller drinkers are referred to as sorta feminine ...

 

[Toro]

Regardless, your attitude is the DIRECT reason why free market capitalism is selling out America. Your only concern is the all mighty dollar instead of the American consumers and American businesses that you sacrifice on the alter of the free market. Indeed, sir, I implore you to invest MUCH into inbev. Hopefully, your clients have diversified portfolios. They may get their cash but Inbev will learn a thing or two about midwest loyalty.

lol

If all of America had this attitude, the American economy would utterly collapse. This country is addicted to foreign capital. Without foreign capital, mortgages would be at 10% or higher, credit cards would be over 30% and you'd have 10%-15% unemployment.

Shop, shop, shop. Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. Its the American way. We live beyond our means because we deserve to have that new HDTV and pay less taxes NOW! Its our God given right!

And who funds all that spending beyond what this country saves? Those evil foreigners! This country imports $2 billion in foreign capital each and every day, equivalent to the annual GDP of Spain or California. But hey, let's live in a fantasy land, where money grows on trees, and where we can drive foreign capital out of this country.

Plus, why I should make all the people who own shares in BUD poorer? Why should I leave money on the table, hurting the people who hire me? Why should they suffer for your parochialism?

We are not protecting mediocraty. We are protecting iconic AMERICAN branding. Don't give me this "they should have done better" crap after having admitted the amazing market share AB enjoys. Believe it or not, markets ARE finite. Unless you are busy selling brazillian snow to eskimos it's a tad bit retarded to assume that the largest seller of beer will have a 50% investment return each quarter. To use that as an excuse to sell out America is beyond laughable.

Two problems. First, Bud had the same market share 20 years ago. The shares have done nothing over the past five while the stock market went up 80%. So, yes, Bud is a great brand with lousy management. Great brands make up for lousy management. You can get rid of lousy management.

Second, there ARE markets outside of the US you know, fast growing ones at that. Bud is doing a poor job expanding its share there. You know, its that bad management thing. Other firms are beating them. So, again, mediocrity. If they had done a much better job, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Mediocrity, and you are protecting it.

And, again, your attitude is exactly why free market capitalism doesn't benefit Americans at all. Take your money and run. It's ONLY America that you are using to wipe your ass with. You have no national loyalty to speak of and seem unable to fathom the travesty of an american company buying guinness, or soporro or red fucking stripe. Indeed, I hope a glass fragment falls into your next glass of hoegaarden while you pinky swirl the yeast into your glass..

Spare me the self-righteous and profane sanctimony. American companies are active investors around the world. AB owns half of Modelo and has a stake in Tsingtao.

 

[Toro]

I don't recall even hearing of those mergers. Like I said, I doubt it will break the company. There are more people that identify with being rednecks than you think. They just don't identify with the definitions elitists put on them. The preferred beer for them is Bud. Miller drinkers are referred to as sorta feminine ...

Like I said earlier, I'm a beer snob and will pay a whole lot more for a great microbrew. And as a former beer salesman who sold both mass produced and microbrewed product, I would love to see the small brewers whack the big guys. I just have a hard time believing that Bubba is going to crack open a Great Heron wheat ale as opposed to a Bud.

 

[doeton]

yeah but if bud is owned by some eurporean whatevers...bud sales will drop in the u.s.

remember this is nation that drove shitty ass domestic cars all through the eighties just because they were made in merica.

no kidding they won't crack upen a girlie fofo beer.

they'll open a miller or a coors.

 

[Shogun]

Miller ITSELF being ripped out of Milwaukee after becoming SABMiller.

Again, this is the product of capitalism.


way to go.




Brewers flowing away from the 'Beer Capital of the World'
By Todd C. Frankel
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
06/30/2008
STLtoday - Brewers flowing away from the 'Beer Capital of the World'


Six years ago, a foreign company, London-based South African Breweries, bought Miller. Now, as Miller looks to move its headquarters out of state, there is unease about the brewer's future in this city. The complicated relationship between Miller and Milwaukee offers clues about what could be in store for St. Louis, as Anheuser-Busch resists a takeover bid from Belgium-based brewer InBev.

In Milwaukee, civic leaders and beer analysts say the change has benefited the city in some ways. But there are fresh worries. On Tuesday, Miller will officially merge with Coors. The combined company is expected to announce in a few weeks the location of a new headquarters. One thing is certain: It will not be in Milwaukee.


AND, if that cocksucking vampire and his capitalist zombies do kill AB, hopefully Lemp Breweries will step into the sucking vacuum left by these pieces of shit.


Craft brewers ponder life without 'The King'

For several years, local entrepreneur Steve DeBellis and some partners have been reviving Lemp beer, the once-great St. Louis brew that rivaled A-B before Prohibition. They've been hiring other breweries to make it and sell about 8,000 cases a month in six states &#8212; "a drop in a drop in the bucket," compared to the big boys, as DeBellis put it.

But soon they'll start producing lager at the Stable in the old Lemp complex on Cherokee Street in south St. Louis, the first time Lemp will be made in the city since Prohibition. If things go well, they hope to expand brewing operations and bottle here, too.

"It's just a bizarre coincidence," he said. "But Lemp's coming home to St. Louis right when the eagle is threatening to fly to Belgium."
STLtoday - Craft brewers ponder life without 'The King'



BESIDES the fact of shitty Inbev Labor records..

Unions offer grim reports on InBev
By Philip Dine
POST-DISPATCH WASHINGTON BUREAU
06/22/2008

WASHINGTON &#8212; Union leaders representing InBev workers in Brazil, Canada and Europe have a simple message for Anheuser-Busch employees if InBev takes control of the St. Louis-based brewery:

Watch out.

"They should worry, because the production is going to be concentrated and the work force reduced," says Siderlei Oliveira, president of Brazil's 1.2 million-member food workers union, citing a reduction in Brazil's brewery workers to 13,000 from 23,000 since the 1990s. "This is the strategy that they have."

STLtoday - Unions offer grim reports on InBev




Imagine how many bars and vendors will actively boycott AB products. We saw the same type of boycott against AB products when AB lobbies against microbrews. How did THAT turn out?

 

[busara]

Like I said earlier, I'm a beer snob and will pay a whole lot more for a great microbrew. And as a former beer salesman who sold both mass produced and microbrewed product, I would love to see the small brewers whack the big guys. I just have a hard time believing that Bubba is going to crack open a Great Heron wheat ale as opposed to a Bud.

i'm the same way. if given the choice of a micro i will take it. course, i just have a hard time finding a beer up to my standards.

while bud might lose some sales, i would be surprised if they lose a significant amount. they are on tap everywhere, and often the only type of beer available (ballgames and such).