For a company that prides itsself and being “American Owned”, it would sure be a shame to see them sold to a foreign company.

With the weak dollar, all US companies are subject to this kind of takeover. I hope it doesn’t happen. If it does will they call Budweiser, “The Great Belgian Lager”?

Well, it’s good to see that forum trolls are out en masse (SLUGGER). If you want to point fingers, I remember I.T. outsourcing was all the rage back during the Clinton-Era, so don’t go there. Even in the late 70’s, industry jobs were being sent overseas, and the U.S. could not compete internationally because of the high cost of domestic production.
As someone who has seen first hand what a merger does, it is not a fun process, but they can be survived. I’ve been through two buyouts (General American & A.G. Edwards) and the best thing to do is avoid rumors and make yourself indispensable. There are many facets to a buyout, and the stock ownership makes all the difference. The company can still “poison pill” if they felt it was in their best interest. AB still has some fight left in her is the point, so don’t count the fight as being over yet.

Everything is for sale, 24/7/365. That is a reality.

The management and directors of A-B have a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders of the company, the majority of whom are neither family nor employers.

If a suitor presents a large offer, it could happen.

One would hope the “base of U S operations” of such an entity would remain here. Even if it did, however, it is not likely to mean to this area what Anheuser Busch did.

That is certainly unfortunate, as A-B is a one-of-a-kind company and employer. But that, also, is reality.

Let’s use some common sense and compare this to other similar mergers, ones that take place with a foreign interest acquiring a local organization. One that everyone in this dicussion has ignored is Nestle and Purina. Did Nestle pull all jobs out of St. Louis? No, that makes no sense. Why manage an established business unit from an overseas location? To everyone speculating mass job loss, please use some sense and at least site some examples of what jobs could possible be done better thousands of miles away. Comparing this to May Company or A.G. Edwards is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

US HQ would remain in STL. STL would still remain a huge player in the US markets.

Cause for alarm is a 1 on a 1-10 scale.

Does anyone know who owns a majority of Anheisher-Busch stock? Biggest holders are fund management corps like Barclays Global Investments and Berkshire-Hathaway. Busch Family is the 17th largest holder of stock. The institutions are going to take the money and run. They own BUD.

Welcome to the New World Order!

rached11, practically any job at the HQ corporate level can be done elsewhere. Anyone with a computer can do accounting whether they’re at an office in St. Louis, Belgium, or the International Space Station. Anyone that does any job on a computer can do that job anywhere in the world thanks to this lovely invention by Al Gore called the internets. I’m sure the people making and distributing the beer in St. Louis will probably still have their jobs to do, but many of the corporate positions can and probably will be streamlined/downsized, which is EXACTLY what happened to May Company and AG Edwards.

b-you think just because of the internet and a computer that you can manage a company located in St. Louis from Belgium? I don’t deny working virtualy isn’t reality but cultural and physical location considerations need to apply. I don’t understand how you can compare A.G Edwards and May to this potential merger. Those were acquisitions with domestic buyers and can’t be compared. Why not consider my previous comparison with Nestle/Ralston? Why is it that Ralston is still has a large presence in St. Louis when it was acquired by Nestle? In fact why hasn’t anyonne made that comparison. Seems to be more applicable than comparing A.G. Edwards or May Co.