<sf> wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:33:03 -0400, "Nancy Young" >
> wrote:
>
> >At any rate, I opened rfc this morning and the old post it
> >opened was kili and sf talking about coors and whether
> >it's imported and kili said that to her Coors is domestic as
> >Bud.
> >
> >nancy (as always, easily amused by weird coincidences)
>
> Hey, Coors *was* imported into CA all the way from Colorado or
> whatever state it was at the time (so said the ads). Her version and
> my version of what imported meant were a little different, that's all.
>
> Still defending my POV!
> LOL


Yup...remember in the mid - 70's when President Ford was in CO for something
and it was reported that cases of Coor's were delivered to Air Force One to
take back to DC...also I knew college classmates that would take ski trips
out to CO and bring back cases of Coor's to sell (college was in IL) They'd
finance their trips that way...

This was all at the time of "Coor's Mania"...around the time of when mood
rings, Quiana, AMC Gremlins, _Kojak_, and Pioneer stereo receivers were
cool IIRC, c. '74 - '75.

In retrospect it was silly, it was just yer basic watery beer...


--
Best
Greg

James Silverton wrote:

> Steve wrote on Tue, 15 Jul 2008 02:20:09 +0000 (UTC):
>
> >> Yet InBev has said one of the main reasons they want AB is to
> >> take Bud international; they see that as a huge growth
> >> market.
>
> > Yes, cans of Bud are popular in Dublin and London. Because...
> > they're not any worse than Stella.
>
> > Despite being brewed partly from rice. (Maybe they have
> > an export formula that's better?)
>
> > IMO, etc. etc.
>
> I don't drink Budweiser unless nothing else is available. However,
> Budweiser used to be proud of the fact that they used rice and even
> advertised it! Why Stella Artois wanted Budweiser, I don't know, since
> they already make the Budweiser of Belgium but they probably want the
> factories (no error) and distribution network.


Plus which the dollar is C-H-E-A-P, James...they picked up A-B for a
relative "song"...


--
Best
Greg

notbob wrote:

> On 2008-07-14, sf <sf> wrote:
>
> > When I heard the news, my reaction was any change would be a good
> > change - not a bad one.
>
> So one might think. The bottom line is, more American workers are thrown
> out of work and our economy suffers one more hit.


Apropos of your comment I heard on NPR this morning that General Motors is
*less* capitalized (or whatever the term is) than the Bed, Bath, & Beyond
housewares retail chain....Holy US auto industry, Batman...!!!

:-|

--
Best
Greg

Steve Pope wrote:

> Dave Smith > wrote:
>
> >Oh come on Nancy2. You must have your head in the sand. American
companies have
> >bought up companies and property around the world. They and the
government have
> >supported corrupt and oppressive regimes in order to protect their
> >interests. They
> >have interfered in elections and had a hand in coups and even supported
> >tyrants like
> >Saddam Hussein. A lot of the goods now coming from third world countries
are
> >manufactured by American or other foreign owned companies who moved
> >their operations
> >there to take advantage of lower wages and lax employment and
> >environmental laws.
> >Saudis do own a lot of American business and American debt. You can thank
your
> >government for helping to keep the House of Saud in power.
>
> You're right. It's all dirty. The only fully ethical approach
> is to become an anarchist localvore dropout who does not
> participate in the economy.
>
> Since most people don't want to do this, the next best
> thing is to limit your consumption of evil-associated
> items like energy products and slave-labor manufactured goods.
>
> What doesn't add up is to be a mindless, prolific consumer and
> THEN complain about all the capitalist malfeasance around
> the world. And/or to assert that your own government is somehow
> less guilty of bad behavior than anyone else's.


Except that MORE people are living BETTER lives than at any time in history,
Steve...incomes are rising world - wide, and the number of people in poverty
is steadily declining (except in Hopeless Case Africa). This is all partly
a result of movement of capital and manufacturing cross - border..but
primarily because of the Triumph of Capitalism. Turns out that Reagan and
Thatcher and the Chicago School guys *were* right...

So it's a GREAT time to be alive...and even the UN says so. See:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...ed-866486.html

[excerpts]

"We've seen the future ... and we may not be doomed

UN report finds life is getting better for people worldwide - but that
governments are failing to grasp the opportunities offered at 'a unique
time'. Geoffrey Lean and Jonathan Owen report

Sunday, 13 July 2008

Humanity stands on the threshold of a peaceful and prosperous future, with
an unprecedented ability to extend lifespans and increase the power of
ordinary people - but is likely to blow it through inequality, violence and
environmental degradation. And governments are not equipped to ensure that
the opportunities are seized and disasters averted.

So says a massive new international report, due to be published late this
month, and obtained by The Independent on Sunday. Backed by organisations
ranging from Unesco to the US army, the World Bank to the Rockefeller
Foundation, the 2008 State of the Future report runs to 6,300 pages and
draws on contributions from 2,500 experts around the globe.

Its warning is all the more stark for eschewing doom and gloom. "The future
continues to get better for most of the world," it concludes, "but a series
of tipping points could drastically alter global prospects."

It goes on. "This is a unique time in history. Mobile phones, the internet,
international trade, language translation and jet planes are giving birth to
an interdependent humanity that can create and implement global strategies
to improve [its] prospects. It is increasingly clear that the world has the
resources to address our common challenges. Ours is the first generation
with the means for many to know the world as a whole, identify global
improvement systems, and seek to improve [them]."

What is more, say the authors of the report, produced by the Millennium
Project of the World Federation of the United Nations Associations, many
important things are already getting better. Life expectancy and literacy
rates are increasing worldwide, while infant mortality and the number of
armed conflicts have been falling fast. Per capita income has been growing
strongly enough to cut poverty by more than half by 2015 - except,
importantly, in Africa.

Even better, it says, "advances in science, technology, education, economics
and management seem capable of making the world work far better than it does
today".

Medical breakthroughs, for example, are offering the hope of defeating
inherited diseases, tailoring cures to individual patients, and even
creating replacement body parts. And computers are spreading even to remote
villages in developing countries and dramatically increasing in power to
provide "collective intelligence for just-in-time knowledge to inform
decisions".

The report reserves its greatest enthusiasm for the internet, which it says
is "already the most powerful force for globalisation, democratisation,
economic growth and education in history.

"The internet allows self-organisation around common ideals, independent of
conventional institutional controls and regardless of nationalities or
languages. Injustices in different parts of the world become the concern of
thousands or millions of people who then pressure local, regional or
international governing systems to find solutions.

"This unparalleled social power is reinventing citizens' roles in the
political process and changing institutions, policy-making and governance."

And this is happening in a world that is already becoming freer and more
democratic. Over the past 30 years, the number of free countries has more
than doubled from 43 to 90, it reports, while those that are partly free
increased from 46 to 60. Just over one-third of humanity still lives in the
43 countries with authoritarian regimes, but half of these people are in
China.

On the other hand, the report warns "half the world is vulnerable to social
instability and violence due to rising food and energy prices, failing
states, falling water tables, climate change, decreasing water-food-energy
supply per person, desertification and increasing migrations due to
political, environmental and economic conditions".

[...]

There are grounds for hope, however. The use of renewable energy is growing,
and China's largest car maker plans for half its cars to be hybrids within
two years. But the report's authors say that governments are not up to the
job: "Many of the world's decision-making processes are inefficient, slow
and ill-informed, especially when given the new demands from increasing
complexity [and] globalisation." They call on world leaders to do more
long-term planning, and to join in global approaches to the interlocking
crises. "Climate change cannot be turned around without a global strategy.
International organised crime cannot be stopped without a global strategy.
Individuals creating designer diseases and causing massive deaths cannot be
stopped without a global strategy. It is time for global strategic systems
to be upgraded."

Jerome Glenn, the report's main author added: "There seems to be an interest
in creating global strategies, but it needs a little push. There's more
within us now to collaborate in the face of shared problems."

Computer power

25 years until a computer's capacity equals the power of the human brain.
After another 25 years, everyone will be able to access processing power
greater than that of all the brains on Earth combined.

The great melt

5 years before the Arctic could be ice-free in summer. Sea-ice last year
shrank to 22 per cent below the previous record low, a level that had not
been expected to be reached until 2030-50, opening up the Northwest Passage.

Fossil fuel

850 coal-fired power stations are planned to go into operation across the
US, China and India over the next four years. Each station would operate for
about 20 years, greatly accelerating global warming.

Solar energy

25% of Europe's electricity could come from solar-powered stations in North
Africa by 2050. African leaders and aid organisations are to invest $10bn
(£5bn) a year in renewable energy over the next five years..."

</>

George wrote:

> Janet wrote:
> > "Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> >> Goodbye Budweiser!
> >>
> >> Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the
property
> >> of
> >> !Bev a Belgium company.
> >>
> >> There goes the neighborhood.
> >>
> >> I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
> >>
> >> Andy
> >
> > Is there any hope that the Belgians will turn Bud into a decent beer,
> > instead of the swill it is now?
> >
> >
> Not likely. If they wanted to sell a quality beer here it would make
> little sense to buy and spend a fortune trying to rebrand a brand
> associated with mediocrity. Imagine the marketing "Bud, now its real
> beer" or maybe "Bud, its new and improved, not the low quality
> industrial beer you remember"


The point about "high quality" Bud is moot, since there is *already* a
high - quality Budweiser, it's the original Budvar, made in the Czech
Republic. It's sold in the US under the "Czechvar" label:

http://www.czechvar.com/index.html

and:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud%C4%...k%C3%BD_Budvar

"Budejovický Budvar is a brewery in the Czech Republic that is best known
for brewing a beer known as Budweiser Budvar in European Union, Czechvar in
the United States and Canada[1], and either Budweiser Budvar or Budejovický
Budvar in the rest of the world

History and Trademark dispute

The original Budweiser Bier or Budweiser Bürgerbräu, had been founded in
1795 in Budweis, Bohemia, Holy Roman Empire and had started exports to the
US in 1871 . In the U.S., Anheuser-Busch started using the Budweiser brand
in 1876 and registered it two years later.

In Budweis, the new company (now named Budvar) was established in 1895 by
mainly Czech brewers, which also started exporting beer with the adjective
Budweiser ("Budejovický" in Czech). This led to the Budweiser trademark
dispute. Negotiations between the three companies, the two from the original
town and the American Anheuser-Busch, about using "Budweiser" reached an
agreement in 1911 that allowed Anheuser-Busch to use the brand "Budweiser"
only in North America...

As a result of World War I, the new state of Czechoslovakia also renamed the
cities of Budweis and Pilsen, and in 1945 expelled the remaining German
speaking population. After the fall of communism, both local breweries tried
to secure rights to traditional names.

Since three companies had or have trademarks for the name "Budweiser", they
have been party to many lawsuits in a number of countries. Because of such
disputes, Budvar is sold in the United States and Canada under the label
Czechvar.

In the European Union, Budejovický Budvar is recognized as a product with
Protected Geographical Indication. However, the trademark rights to the name
Budweiser for some products other than beer are owned by Anheuser-Busch...

In 2002, Budejovický Budvar set up a subsidiary company in the UK, Budweiser
Budvar UK Limited, and saw a dramatic rise in sales for Budweiser Budvar in
the UK, where the brand gained far wider distribution.....

In early 2007, Anheuser-Busch and Budvar reached an agreement that stated
that A-B would market Budvar/Czechvar in the United States and several other
countries for an undisclosed fee. However, both sides stated that this did
not affect their lawsuits..."

</>

Gregory wrote on Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:14:07 -0500:

> The point about "high quality" Bud is moot, since there is
> *already* a high - quality Budweiser, it's the original
> Budvar, made in the Czech Republic. It's sold in the US under
> the "Czechvar" label:

> http://www.czechvar.com/index.html

> and:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud%C4%...k%C3%BD_Budvar

>>>>Clipped accurate and interesting information.<<<<

The point may now be moot, since the Czechs may be able to get shysters
in Brussels to more easily attack a European company but there could be
problems like the situation with all Pilsner beer not being made in
Pilsen. The fact remains that Anheuser-Busch made "Budweiser" before
the present Czech company came into existence. The Czech product is
certainly better than the US, even IMHO!


--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Gregory Morrow said...

> The point about "high quality" Bud is moot, since there is *already* a
> high - quality Budweiser, it's the original Budvar, made in the Czech
> Republic. It's sold in the US under the "Czechvar" label:


I thought you were gonna say Michelob. I guess they take that label with
them.

Right after Consumer Reports declared Michelob Ultra "The Best Beer in
America!"

Andy

On Jul 15, 11:35*am, Nancy2 > wrote:
> On Jul 14, 2:24 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
>
> > Andy wrote:
> > > Goodbye Budweiser!
>
> > > Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the property of
> > > !Bev a Belgium company.
>
> > > There goes the neighborhood.
>
> > > I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
>
> > Funny, but that is what a lot of people think when American businesses take over
> > their local operations. At least the Belgians make good beer.
>
> Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking the Clydesdales are
> Belgian - are they?
>
> N.

The clue is Clyde as in the River Clyde . Think Glasgow.

I believe you were mixing up Clydesdales with Percherons which I
always think of as Belgian although a quick look at a wiki suggests
the name is from Northern France.

John Kane Kingston ON Canada

On 2008-07-15, James Silverton > wrote:

> Pilsen. The fact remains that Anheuser-Busch made "Budweiser" before
> the present Czech company came into existence. The Czech product is
> certainly better than the US, even IMHO!

But, the present company had rights to the original name from the original
company. Read the rest of it. In 2007, it's still up in the air. A-B has
gotten practical control by being dirtbags and scoundrels, just like M$ has
corrupted the ISO. Same ol' story of the golden rule, he who has the most
gold, rules. Besides, Pilsen-Urquell is better than either.

nb

notbob wrote on Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:00:02 GMT:

>> Pilsen. The fact remains that Anheuser-Busch made
>> "Budweiser" before the present Czech company came into
>> existence. The Czech product is certainly better than the US,
>> even IMHO!

> But, the present company had rights to the original name from
> the original company. Read the rest of it. In 2007, it's
> still up in the air. A-B has gotten practical control by
> being dirtbags and scoundrels, just like M$ has corrupted the
> ISO. Same ol' story of the golden rule, he who has the most
> gold, rules. Besides, Pilsen-Urquell is better than either.
>

As far as AB is concerned, "Thrice armed is he has his quarrel just/ But
ten times he who gets his blow in fust!"
--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On 2008-07-15, John Kane > wrote:

> I believe you were mixing up Clydesdales with Percherons which I
> always think of as Belgian although a quick look at a wiki suggests
> the name is from Northern France.

BINGO!!

Those Coors draft horses I saw at the rodeo WERE Percherons. I knew
"Belgian" didn't sound quite right. Googling for coors and horse and such,
it appears Coors did use Belgians primarily, but I know for a fact the one's
at the Livermore Rodeo were Percherons because the signs said so, all 2200
lbs of them. I've yet to see a horse that big, again. Wow.

nb

On 2008-07-15, James Silverton > wrote:

> ten times he who gets his blow in fust!"

Well, there can be no doubt A-B Budweiser blows.

n

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:33:42 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>In retrospect it was silly, it was just yer basic watery beer...

But, but, but it was *imported* from Colorado in the days before
micro-brewed beer was hot! We also had Anchor Steam beer, which was
an SF icon.

I wasn't much of a beer drinker, so I can only go by what others said.
Coors was the beer of ski trips as you mentioned - I suspect because
it didn't cost very much. Anchor was for grown ups, Coors was for
college kids. Actually, we didn't care what we ingested as long as we
got high.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

I live one street over from the NH Budweiser plant and am also a
shareholder. So far, the new buyers have told our small town that they
won't close any U.S. plants, including ours. About 500 local people
work there so it'll be a blow to our economy if they close it. We also
have the Clydesdales here full time. It's about the only tourist
attraction in Southern NH.

Denise

Nancy2 wrote:
>
> On Jul 14, 2:24 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
> > Andy wrote:
> > > Goodbye Budweiser!
> >
> > > Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the property of
> > > !Bev a Belgium company.
> >
> > > There goes the neighborhood.
> >
> > > I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
> >
> > Funny, but that is what a lot of people think when American businesses take over
> > their local operations. At least the Belgians make good beer.
>
> Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking the Clydesdales are
> Belgian - are they?
>
> N.

No, originally from Scotland.
Doubt the Belgian company would get rid of them...cheapest
advertising/marketing tools they can have. No expensive contracts for
fussy personnel

On 2008-07-15, sf <sf> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:33:42 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:
>
>>In retrospect it was silly, it was just yer basic watery beer...
>
> But, but, but it was *imported* from Colorado in the days before

OK, here's the deal with Coors. In pre-silver bullet (coors lite) days,
when coors only sold one beer, that beer was Coors Banquet. It was brewed
in Golden CO, only!, was unpasturized, and was shipped in refrigerated
trucks. It was not shipped East of CO(?). It was not shipped to OR, cuz OR
had a law barring unpasturized beer. Everyone else got unpasturized Coors
Banquet chilled from Golden CO to buyer, wherever that might be.

This brewing/shipping process was unique to Coors, as far as I know. Coors
would actually start going bad if not kept refrigerated, as many big chains
and supermarkets would do so on big holidays, stocking up and making Coors
beer forts/islands, etc. But, if you got if fresh and un-warmed, it was
pretty decent beer. Not what I would call great or worthy of big smuggling
road trips to get the stuff, but I wasn't much of a beer drinker back then.
I drank for a buzz. Most of the rest of the myth is just that. I just
happen to know about it back in the early/mid 70s cuz I lived in OR for
awhile and worked at a place that served it and it was deliverd cold, like
no other beer. End of story.

nb

notbob wrote:
>
> On 2008-07-15, Nancy Young > wrote:
>
> > There are work horses called Belgians. I don't know how they
> > differ from Clydesdales.
>
> They are a different breed of draft horse, but are essentially the same
> thing. In fact, at one time Coors maintained a stable of Belgians to pull
> its beer wagons, no doubt a flash in the pan promo to imitate Bud. I saw
> the whole team and rig at a local rodeo. Beautiful animals, palamino
> colored and all weighing in excess of 1 ton each.
>
> nb

A couple of the London brewers still maintain draught horses and wagons
as advertising tools. Used to see them brought out for special occasions
in town.

Nancy Young wrote:
>
> Nancy2 wrote:
> > On Jul 14, 2:24 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
> >> Andy wrote:
> >>> Goodbye Budweiser!
> >>
> >>> Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the
> >>> property of !Bev a Belgium company.
> >>
> >>> There goes the neighborhood.
> >>
> >>> I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
> >>
> >> Funny, but that is what a lot of people think when American
> >> businesses take over their local operations. At least the Belgians
> >> make good beer.
> >
> > Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking the Clydesdales are
> > Belgian - are they?
>
> There are work horses called Belgians. I don't know how they
> differ from Clydesdales.
>
> nancy

They are all large, solidly-built types. Meant to pull heavy wagons,
ploughs etc. Still used as work horses; cheaper to feed than tractors

notbob wrote:
>
> On 2008-07-15, Steve Pope > wrote:
>
> > There was a Sonoma winery that used Belgian draft horses to
> > work the vineyards, two decades ago before the biodynamic
> > trend was even beginning. Bellerose Vineyards. Made a lovely,
> > stylish cabernet in a soft, Margaux style. I think they have been
> > bought out but the label still exists.
>
> We may see a revival trend, now that deisel fuel is so insanely high. OTOH,
> can't be cheap feeding the biggest horses on the planet.
>
> nb

No, but at least their 'output' has some use LOL. Besides, when was the
last time you were friends with your car/truck?

notbob wrote:
>
> OK, here's the deal with Coors. In pre-silver bullet (coors lite) days,
> when coors only sold one beer, that beer was Coors Banquet. It was brewed
> in Golden CO, only!, was unpasturized, and was shipped in refrigerated
> trucks. It was not shipped East of CO(?). It was not shipped to OR, cuz OR
> had a law barring unpasturized beer. Everyone else got unpasturized Coors
> Banquet chilled from Golden CO to buyer, wherever that might be.
>
> This brewing/shipping process was unique to Coors, as far as I know. Coors
> would actually start going bad if not kept refrigerated, as many big chains
> and supermarkets would do so on big holidays, stocking up and making Coors
> beer forts/islands, etc. But, if you got if fresh and un-warmed, it was
> pretty decent beer. Not what I would call great or worthy of big smuggling
> road trips to get the stuff, but I wasn't much of a beer drinker back then.
> I drank for a buzz. Most of the rest of the myth is just that. I just
> happen to know about it back in the early/mid 70s cuz I lived in OR for
> awhile and worked at a place that served it and it was deliverd cold, like
> no other beer. End of story.

Back when I was a big beer drinker, I noticed a very
rare phenomenon. On three occasions, I got a can of
beer in which it seemed as though the bubbles were
smaller (not that I think that's really possible,
but that's what the mouthfeel was like) and the beer
had a slight citrus taste. I'm wondering if those
could have been cans that failed the pasteurization
process. If so, those were the best three cans out
of many thousands that I drank.

On 2008-07-15, Mark Thorson > wrote:

> Back when I was a big beer drinker, I noticed a very
> rare phenomenon. On three occasions, I got a can of
> beer in which it seemed as though the bubbles were
> smaller (not that I think that's really possible,
> but that's what the mouthfeel was like) and the beer
> had a slight citrus taste. I'm wondering if those
> could have been cans that failed the pasteurization
> process.

Not sure what you mean. Are you referring to Coors or just some beer? Coor
didn't pasturize and pasturizing is just a post brew warming/time process.
I don't pasturize and on a bad day, I can make a better beer than canoe
beers. OTOH, I used to notice that about Coors. It seemed to have smaller
bubbles than other beers. Might be due to the continuous refrigeration.
Cold beer holds more carbination at what feels like smaller bubbles than
warm beer.

BTW, warm beer is not a bad thing. And typically, warm is not warm like
sake, but usually at room temperature in cool countries like UK. My first
experience with warm beer was San Miguel, bottles that were cooled to night
temps. Very tasty and a big surprise. I really liked it, both light and
dark. US canoe beers taste horrible when not ice cold, cuz they actually
are horrible beer!

nb

On 2008-07-15, l, not -l > wrote:

> Taste, who cares about taste after the first two, its about "lookin' good".

A product approach canoe beer makers have been counting on for over half a
century.

nb

Arri London wrote:
>
> Nancy2 wrote:
>> On Jul 14, 2:24 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
>>> Andy wrote:
>>>> Goodbye Budweiser!
>>>> Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the property of
>>>> !Bev a Belgium company.
>>>> There goes the neighborhood.
>>>> I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
>>> Funny, but that is what a lot of people think when American businesses take over
>>> their local operations. At least the Belgians make good beer.
>> Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking the Clydesdales are
>> Belgian - are they?
>>
>> N.
>
> No, originally from Scotland.
> Doubt the Belgian company would get rid of them...cheapest
> advertising/marketing tools they can have. No expensive contracts for
> fussy personnel

Have you ever seen the stable in St. Louis? Many people would be
thrilled to have a home half as nice as that stable. A lot of the
buildings at the brewery in St. Louis are on the National Historic
Register, too. What happens when foreigners buy something on the
National Historic Register? Does anyone know?????

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

l, not -l said...

> And Rolling Rock was great because of the funky little.bottles; many bars
> sold them by the bucket - several 8 oz bottles in a bucket of ice.
> Taste, who cares about taste after the first two, its about "lookin' good".


l, not -L,

Rolling Rock is ****water! Might as well drink at the urinal. Save yourslf
the trouble.

Andy
Wino

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:02:41 -0400, (Denise in NH)
wrote:

>I live one street over from the NH Budweiser plant and am also a
>shareholder. So far, the new buyers have told our small town that they
>won't close any U.S. plants, including ours. About 500 local people
>work there so it'll be a blow to our economy if they close it. We also
>have the Clydesdales here full time. It's about the only tourist
>attraction in Southern NH.
>

Frankly, I don't think stabling a few horses is going to break the
bank for an international country.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

notbob wrote:
>
> On 2008-07-15, Mark Thorson > wrote:
>
> > Back when I was a big beer drinker, I noticed a very
> > rare phenomenon. On three occasions, I got a can of
> > beer in which it seemed as though the bubbles were
> > smaller (not that I think that's really possible,
> > but that's what the mouthfeel was like) and the beer
> > had a slight citrus taste. I'm wondering if those
> > could have been cans that failed the pasteurization
> > process.
>
> Not sure what you mean. Are you referring to Coors or just some beer? Coor

I believe the first can I encountered was Coor Light,
and the subsequent two were Keystone Light. This would
probably have been in the 1990's.

> didn't pasturize and pasturizing is just a post brew warming/time process.
> I don't pasturize and on a bad day, I can make a better beer than canoe
> beers. OTOH, I used to notice that about Coors. It seemed to have smaller
> bubbles than other beers. Might be due to the continuous refrigeration.
> Cold beer holds more carbination at what feels like smaller bubbles than
> warm beer.

I forgot to mention that these three cans of unusual
beer were cloudy. (I always pour beer into a glass.)
That's another reason I thought they might be unsterile.

> BTW, warm beer is not a bad thing. And typically, warm is not warm like
> sake, but usually at room temperature in cool countries like UK. My first
> experience with warm beer was San Miguel, bottles that were cooled to night
> temps. Very tasty and a big surprise. I really liked it, both light and
> dark. US canoe beers taste horrible when not ice cold, cuz they actually
> are horrible beer!

I had to Google that term:

Why is American beer like having sex in a canoe?
It's ****ing close to water.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:29:09 -0500, Andy <q> wrote:

>l, not -l said...
>
>> And Rolling Rock was great because of the funky little.bottles; many bars
>> sold them by the bucket - several 8 oz bottles in a bucket of ice.
>> Taste, who cares about taste after the first two, its about "lookin' good".
>
>
>l, not -L,
>
>Rolling Rock is ****water! Might as well drink at the urinal. Save yourslf
>the trouble.
>
I think l, not l was talking about college. In those days, price
mattered and a cheap high was much better than no high at all.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

Sqwertz wrote:
> sf wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>
>>> Budweiser is for losers. I suspect you'll switch to Miller, right?
>>> <snork>
>> Now we have beer snobs? What next?

No. we have jerks.

>
> We have bitches like you.
>
> -sw

Case in point. I'd much prefer the beer snobs.

James Silverton wrote:
> Steve wrote on Tue, 15 Jul 2008 02:20:09 +0000 (UTC):
>
>>> Yet InBev has said one of the main reasons they want AB is to
>>> take Bud international; they see that as a huge growth
>>> market.
>
>> Yes, cans of Bud are popular in Dublin and London. Because...
>> they're not any worse than Stella.
>
>> Despite being brewed partly from rice. (Maybe they have
>> an export formula that's better?)
>
>> IMO, etc. etc.
>
> I don't drink Budweiser unless nothing else is available. However,
> Budweiser used to be proud of the fact that they used rice and even
> advertised it! Why Stella Artois wanted Budweiser, I don't know, since
> they already make the Budweiser of Belgium but they probably want the
> factories (no error) and distribution network.
>

They didn't want the factories or the distribution network per say. They
wanted to temporarily boost their profits by adding the profits of the
acquired company to their accounting books. They can amortize the
purchase cost, so in the short term it makes the company look very good
on paper.

I know: I work for a private company that was just bought in February of
this year by a publicly-traded company for exactly that same reason.

Long-term plans by InBev probably do take into account AB's tangible
(factories, equipment, etc.) and intangible (distribution network, brand
loyalty, customer base) assets.

Janet wrote:
> "Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
>> Goodbye Budweiser!
>>
>> Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the property
>> of
>> !Bev a Belgium company.
>>
>> There goes the neighborhood.
>>
>> I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
>>
>> Andy
>
> Is there any hope that the Belgians will turn Bud into a decent beer,
> instead of the swill it is now?
>
>

I doubt it.

Although I don't particularly care for most Belgian beers, the vast
majority of what's considered good beer in Belgium comes from the
smaller breweries, especially those owned by monasteries. InBev cranks
out Euro-swill that's equally as bad as Bud.

Nancy2 wrote:
> On Jul 14, 2:24 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
>> Andy wrote:
>>> Goodbye Budweiser!
>>> Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the property of
>>> !Bev a Belgium company.
>>> There goes the neighborhood.
>>> I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
>> Funny, but that is what a lot of people think when American businesses take over
>> their local operations. At least the Belgians make good beer.
>
> Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking the Clydesdales are
> Belgian - are they?

No. Scottish. Named for the region of Scotland where the breed originated.

notbob wrote:
> On 2008-07-15, Steve Pope > wrote:
>
>> There was a Sonoma winery that used Belgian draft horses to
>> work the vineyards, two decades ago before the biodynamic
>> trend was even beginning. Bellerose Vineyards. Made a lovely,
>> stylish cabernet in a soft, Margaux style. I think they have been
>> bought out but the label still exists.
>
> We may see a revival trend, now that deisel fuel is so insanely high. OTOH,
> can't be cheap feeding the biggest horses on the planet.

Good point. At least hay and grain for the horses are renewal resources.
And the waste product can be used to grow more.

Mark Thorson wrote:
> notbob wrote:
>> OK, here's the deal with Coors. In pre-silver bullet (coors lite) days,
>> when coors only sold one beer, that beer was Coors Banquet. It was brewed
>> in Golden CO, only!, was unpasturized, and was shipped in refrigerated
>> trucks. It was not shipped East of CO(?). It was not shipped to OR, cuz OR
>> had a law barring unpasturized beer. Everyone else got unpasturized Coors
>> Banquet chilled from Golden CO to buyer, wherever that might be.
>>
>> This brewing/shipping process was unique to Coors, as far as I know. Coors
>> would actually start going bad if not kept refrigerated, as many big chains
>> and supermarkets would do so on big holidays, stocking up and making Coors
>> beer forts/islands, etc. But, if you got if fresh and un-warmed, it was
>> pretty decent beer. Not what I would call great or worthy of big smuggling
>> road trips to get the stuff, but I wasn't much of a beer drinker back then.
>> I drank for a buzz. Most of the rest of the myth is just that. I just
>> happen to know about it back in the early/mid 70s cuz I lived in OR for
>> awhile and worked at a place that served it and it was deliverd cold, like
>> no other beer. End of story.
>
> Back when I was a big beer drinker, I noticed a very
> rare phenomenon. On three occasions, I got a can of
> beer in which it seemed as though the bubbles were
> smaller (not that I think that's really possible,
> but that's what the mouthfeel was like) and the beer
> had a slight citrus taste. I'm wondering if those
> could have been cans that failed the pasteurization
> process. If so, those were the best three cans out
> of many thousands that I drank.

Before it's pasteurized, beer is a living thing. The yeast in it can
change over time, and the kinds of hops, water, barley malt, and yeast
all contribute to the overall flavor. And the flavor will change.
Chemically, beer is more complex than wine or coffee.

Try doing a batch of homebrew to see what happens.

It's conceivable that you did experience a few cans that didn't quite
finish the pasteurization process and did indeed continue to age (and
improve) in the can on their way to you. Not all beer styles improve
with age, but most do.

Janet Wilder wrote:
> Arri London wrote:
>>
>> Nancy2 wrote:
>>> On Jul 14, 2:24 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
>>>> Andy wrote:
>>>>> Goodbye Budweiser!
>>>>> Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the
>>>>> property of
>>>>> !Bev a Belgium company.
>>>>> There goes the neighborhood.
>>>>> I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
>>>> Funny, but that is what a lot of people think when American
>>>> businesses take over
>>>> their local operations. At least the Belgians make good beer.
>>> Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking the Clydesdales are
>>> Belgian - are they?
>>>
>>> N.
>>
>> No, originally from Scotland. Doubt the Belgian company would get rid
>> of them...cheapest
>> advertising/marketing tools they can have. No expensive contracts for
>> fussy personnel
>
> Have you ever seen the stable in St. Louis? Many people would be
> thrilled to have a home half as nice as that stable. A lot of the
> buildings at the brewery in St. Louis are on the National Historic
> Register, too. What happens when foreigners buy something on the
> National Historic Register? Does anyone know?????
>

All it means is that the place has been deemed worthy of keeping around.
There are tax incentives to maintain them, so ownership isn't really a
determining factor.

Mark Thorson wrote:
> notbob wrote:
>> On 2008-07-15, Mark Thorson > wrote:
>>
>>> Back when I was a big beer drinker, I noticed a very
>>> rare phenomenon. On three occasions, I got a can of
>>> beer in which it seemed as though the bubbles were
>>> smaller (not that I think that's really possible,
>>> but that's what the mouthfeel was like) and the beer
>>> had a slight citrus taste. I'm wondering if those
>>> could have been cans that failed the pasteurization
>>> process.
>> Not sure what you mean. Are you referring to Coors or just some beer? Coor
>
> I believe the first can I encountered was Coor Light,
> and the subsequent two were Keystone Light. This would
> probably have been in the 1990's.
>
>> didn't pasturize and pasturizing is just a post brew warming/time process.
>> I don't pasturize and on a bad day, I can make a better beer than canoe
>> beers. OTOH, I used to notice that about Coors. It seemed to have smaller
>> bubbles than other beers. Might be due to the continuous refrigeration.
>> Cold beer holds more carbination at what feels like smaller bubbles than
>> warm beer.
>
> I forgot to mention that these three cans of unusual
> beer were cloudy. (I always pour beer into a glass.)
> That's another reason I thought they might be unsterile.
>

Real beer isn't sterile, nor is it made in sterile surroundings. It is
made in sanitized surroundings. Look up the difference.

If the beer was cloudy, two possibilities: One is "chill haze"--this is
protein that was not settled out of the beer during brewing or lagering
and it becomes apparent when the beer is cold. The other possibility is
active yeast that continued to grow in the can (i.e., it wasn't
pasteurized correctly).

Either way, it's perfectly okay to drink.

anonymousNetUser wrote:
> Mark Thorson wrote:
>> notbob wrote:
>>> On 2008-07-15, Mark Thorson > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Back when I was a big beer drinker, I noticed a very
>>>> rare phenomenon. On three occasions, I got a can of
>>>> beer in which it seemed as though the bubbles were
>>>> smaller (not that I think that's really possible,
>>>> but that's what the mouthfeel was like) and the beer
>>>> had a slight citrus taste. I'm wondering if those
>>>> could have been cans that failed the pasteurization
>>>> process.
>>> Not sure what you mean. Are you referring to Coors or just some
>>> beer? Coor
>>
>> I believe the first can I encountered was Coor Light,
>> and the subsequent two were Keystone Light. This would
>> probably have been in the 1990's.
>>
>>> didn't pasturize and pasturizing is just a post brew warming/time
>>> process.
>>> I don't pasteurize and on a bad day, I can make a better beer than canoe
>>> beers. OTOH, I used to notice that about Coors. It seemed to have
>>> smaller
>>> bubbles than other beers. Might be due to the continuous refrigeration.
>>> Cold beer holds more carbination at what feels like smaller bubbles than
>>> warm beer.
>>
>> I forgot to mention that these three cans of unusual
>> beer were cloudy. (I always pour beer into a glass.)
>> That's another reason I thought they might be unsterile.
>>
>
> Real beer isn't sterile, nor is it made in sterile surroundings. It is
> made in sanitized surroundings. Look up the difference.
>
> If the beer was cloudy, two possibilities: One is "chill haze"--this is
> protein that was not settled out of the beer during brewing or lagering
> and it becomes apparent when the beer is cold. The other possibility is
> active yeast that continued to grow in the can (i.e., it wasn't
> pasteurized correctly).
>
> Either way, it's perfectly okay to drink.

If it was pasteurized, cloudy, and sour (citrus), it was probably
infected. Not deadly, just unpleasant.

anonymousNetUser wrote:
>
> It's conceivable that you did experience a few cans that didn't quite
> finish the pasteurization process and did indeed continue to age (and
> improve) in the can on their way to you. Not all beer styles improve
> with age, but most do.

I wonder why they don't make it that way delibrately.
It was good enough for me to notice and remember
for years.

anonymousNetUser wrote:
> Janet Wilder wrote:
>> Arri London wrote:
>>>
>>> Nancy2 wrote:
>>>> On Jul 14, 2:24 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
>>>>> Andy wrote:
>>>>>> Goodbye Budweiser!
>>>>>> Depending on the shareholder vote, Anheiser Busch will become the
>>>>>> property of
>>>>>> !Bev a Belgium company.
>>>>>> There goes the neighborhood.
>>>>>> I shall not be drinking Bud Light any longer.
>>>>> Funny, but that is what a lot of people think when American
>>>>> businesses take over
>>>>> their local operations. At least the Belgians make good beer.
>>>> Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking the Clydesdales are
>>>> Belgian - are they?
>>>>
>>>> N.
>>>
>>> No, originally from Scotland. Doubt the Belgian company would get rid
>>> of them...cheapest
>>> advertising/marketing tools they can have. No expensive contracts for
>>> fussy personnel
>>
>> Have you ever seen the stable in St. Louis? Many people would be
>> thrilled to have a home half as nice as that stable. A lot of the
>> buildings at the brewery in St. Louis are on the National Historic
>> Register, too. What happens when foreigners buy something on the
>> National Historic Register? Does anyone know?????
>>
>
> All it means is that the place has been deemed worthy of keeping around.
> There are tax incentives to maintain them, so ownership isn't really a
> determining factor.

Thanks. I like old buildings, even the gaudy, heavy-handed German styled
ones at the brewery. I'd hate to see them come down. There is a lot of
history and culture in those buildings.

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

On 2008-07-16, Shanghai McCoy > wrote:

> If it was pasteurized, cloudy, and sour (citrus).....

Whoa whoa whoa! Citrous flavor is not synonymous with sour. A good
CA-style or American-style pale ale should have citrous overtones to it by
design. Both the type of hops and the type of yeast can be manipulated to
produce everything from a very sweet orange flavor to a dry graprefruit.
With hops, it's usually a citrous aroma and with the yeast a citrus flavor.

I was pleasantly surprised to learn this from my brewing mentor, as adding a
citrus slice, usually lemon, to weissbier (wheat beer) is a common in many
West Coast taverns. It was a pleasure to drink beer that needed no added
fruit slice to get the same effect and was usually better.

nb

Shanghai McCoy wrote:
>
> If it was pasteurized, cloudy, and sour (citrus), it was probably
> infected. Not deadly, just unpleasant.

It wasn't unpleasant at all. It was much better
than the norm.