Corporations come and go; change is inevitable. I wonder if there will be a rallying cry if Breadco is bought by Pepsico, or something like that. Moreover, how many bakeries do you think Panera ran out of business?

And the attitude that pervades here is defeatist. Is St Louis a one-Clydesdale town? Is AB all that there is here?

agree mike. I left st. louis quite a few years ago. I have lived in several metropolitan areas since, all job related moves. When I come back to visit relatives, I am always amazed at the the serious decline in St.Louis. Areas I used haunt are now scary in the daytime, let alone at night. Downtown, where i used to work, is like a ghost town. Leadership is either lacking or corrupt, all the people seem to care about is baseball and beer, no pride in neighborhoods like the old days. North County has went to hell, St. Charles looks like they have no zoning laws at all. I am nearing retirement and always thought I would move back home, but guess I won’t. I have always been a big city guy, but I have seen other cities, and they just offer more, less crime and not so dirty and gritty as the old home place. I think you have to see it from the outside looking in to realize the decline. It didn’t happen overnight, just little by little. Sad but true.

I’m biased…my wife works at AB and will probably lose her job with this purchase.

However, for over 25 years I have been drinking Bud products. My mom designed a Budweiser distributorship when it was family-owned and one of the top distributors in the country. I remember the way they kept their trucks impeccably clean and rims polished. Mom required our family to drink Budweiser because they were responsible for her paycheck…and we gladly did so. It became a source of pride and we wholeheartedly embraced the Budweiser family of beers.

After college, I spent time in different cities for different jobs..but was always loyal to AB and was proud it was an American beer. I was proud to wear my Bud Light hat wherever I went and always turned my label out when I was drinking one..whether it was in Coors country or Miller country. For me, it was bragging rights that I was drinking the King of Beers. I’ve always been proud of my country and believed that I was contributing to the greater good in some very, very small way by drinking this American beer.

Bud Light and Budweiser have been there through all the trials and tribulations that each of us have. They’ve comforted me after losing a job and have helped celebrate the birth of my boys. Champagne was never popped for celebrations like the Rams winning the Super Bowl or Cardinals winning the World Championship….it was a bottle of Bud Light. When I went to Mexico last year, I ordered Bud Light at the pool bar…checking the born on date to see how fresh it was…and it was fresher than some of the fruits in the fancy drinks I saw people drinking.

As I’ve seen American beers being bought by foreign conglomerates, I’ve developed an arrogance with my drinking because I was “drinking American” and have become an avid supporter of “buying American”. Drinking Bud Light has become my “GO USA” cheer.

The purchase of AB by INBEV was something I could never forsee. I drank a Budweiser last night and it just didn’t seem the same…and never will.

Sappy? Sure. Melodramatic? You bet. I make no apologies for loving my AB beer. It’s been a friend for a long time. Will the world end? Nah. Will St. Louis survive? Yep. It’s just hard to see old friends say goodbye.

Casey,

The market rewards profits whether they are gained in the short term or the long term or through higher revenue or lower costs.

Billions wouldn’t be flowing into things like pharmaceuticals or alternative energy technologies that take years to develop if that weren’t the case.

What’s the easiest way for a company to cut costs? Scale. Getting bigger. The deal isn’t about cutting revenue and cost–it’s about making the same amount of revenue and cutting out some of the costs. Your comments do not reflect this reality. Companies are out there looking to get smaller unless they have a very good reason for doing so (like the automakers or the airlines).

InBev has done a pretty good job keeping their brands. Their revenue is not going down. They’re struggling in the UK, but they are doing fine just about everywhere else.

Shares are ownership. That’s why people purchase them. Money managers are now less likely to sit back and let management do whatever they want–I agree with that. That is what has changed.

Is that really a bad thing? If investors want to expect a company they own to increase its profitability, that is their prerogative. Companies are in business TO MAKE MONEY. This is not a new idea. They aren’t there just to give employees a warm and fuzzy feeling; corporations, by their nature, are designed to be profit making machines for their owners.

It’s naive to suggest that companies and investors never consider the impact their decisions have on consumers and employees. For example, InBev wouldn’t have bought A-B if it thought the workers were all going to quit or if it thought no one would buy their beer in the future.

Please don’t boycott A-B. Not only is that reaction rather juvenille, but it won’t help our A-B neighbors/employees. Did we boycott Chrysler when Daimler-Benz (a German company) owned it? No, because that would have affected the Fenton employees. How many A-B “boycotters” are union? What would the Teamsters say about you boycotting a product their members are making? Granted, this cut is deep and it’s fresh, so it hurts right now. If we as a community simply ignore it, it will fester and become worse. If we accept it, deal with it, and begin to “heal” as a community, we’ll move forward. Lest we all forget, there used to be a McDonnell-Douglas, an A.G. Edwards, and other breweries like Lemp and Griesedieck. Times change, businesses change. Sometimes they stay. Sometimes they leave. Sometimes they change hands, and many continue to employ St. Louisans.

July 14, 2008

My friends –

I am, for lack of a better word, stunned.

As many of you know, my loyalty to Budweiser predates my legal age of drinking. As one of Anheuser-Busch’s most loyal customers and for many years a modest stockholder in the company, I am all but devastated.

To me, and I would hope millions like me, Budweiser was not just a beer. It was more than the delicious fruit of a St. Louis brewing dynasty spanning over three centuries of American history. A dynasty headed by the members of the Anheuser and Busch families for six generations. Born on the banks of the Mississippi River in St. Louis in 1876, Budweiser soon conquered the American palate. It was the American beer. It was the creamy collared frosty glass of gratitude for the work ethic of this country. It was the loyal and trusted brand. It was the same every time and everywhere. The famous Budweiser beer was available worldwide. Literal legions of loyal employees made certain that an ice cold Bud in St. Louis tasted the same in New York, Los Angeles, Tokyo, Rome, and London. It was the universal “gold standard” of brewing. It was, dare I say, nectar of the Gods.

But it wasn’t just good to drink Budweiser… It was AMERICAN to drink Budweiser. Around the globe a cold Budweiser was always available to a thirsty traveler. It was not a fashion statement to drink a Bud in a foreign land. It was an American’s patriotic duty! It said, “I am here in your country. I am drinking an American beer”. Befitting of the libation the truly American toast of, “Up yours!” was a way to remind all of those of supreme American power and sovereignty. Even the label was patriotic. In its classic red, white, and blue garb, it told all who saw it, “You are looking at an American original”. It even had the words “Genuine” in gold letters on each side to further thrust America into the face of all who gazed upon it. Now, sad to say, it is all gone.

So is this what we have come to? Are we willing to simply sell out America’s beer to the Europeans? Are we willing to give up all that is holy? The last true bastion of all that is American? What our forefathers risked life, fortunes, and their sacred honor for? To liberate and free themselves from the chains of European domination! Have we conceded that the great leviathan of a marketing machine on Pestalozzi Street that is Anheuser-Busch owes nothing to the form of government and country that allowed it to exist in the first place? The company motto of “Making Friends is Our Business” seems to have been replaced with “Making Money is Our Business”. Sad to say, it has come to this.

What is next? Melting down the Liberty Bell for scrap metal? Selling off the treasures of the Smithsonian in a national garage sale? Changing the name of our country from the United States of America to the “50 Loosely Held Together Republics For Sale to the Highest Bidder”? My God! When the love of money overwhelms the patriotism and loyalty to our country, it is nothing shy of TREASON!

And today, with the news that a foreign interest, headquartered in Belgium with a CEO from Brazil, has purchased the whole Anheuser-Busch company, we must say farewell to an old and loyal friend.

Today, I enjoyed last “real” Budweiser that I will ever share with my son August A. Yurgec. Together, with our photo of August A. Busch, Jr. and my genuine 1890’s Anheuser-Busch beer glass, we toast to the memories.

So - here’s to you Gussie. I know you must be spinning in your grave! I can hear you now in that gravelly voice, “Over my dead body!”

We had fun while it lasted. Budweiser – 1876-2008.

I don’t believe it is a good deal. I’m holding out hope that enough of my fellow shareholders feel the same and will vote NO! I’m not willing to sell our icon. This is a company that has been financially, socially, and environmentally responsible.

Paul, you state:

< There are real consequences from globalization that we have to deal
< with, but that doesn’t mean we can stick our head in the sand and
< pretend it’s the 1950’s again. European countries have tried to do it,
< and they’ve not benefited for doing so.

Yes we must now deal with the fact that we are now global, and the fact that this globalization took place while we the people were all trusting our leaders and not really knowing what was going on until we were in over our heads. Yes, we are now forced not only to deal with it but, ACCEPT IT and attempt to elect leaders who now are willing to pass laws that able us to be more competitive in the way of education instead of all the political ideology that we have been victim of that have hurt the citizens of this country because our politicians went global without its citizens knowledge or our citizens being prepared. This was the responsibility of government, and they failed in their duty to include the citizens in on what was happening and the need to get serious about preparation. It was all orchestrated over a period of time knowing that this country was not prepared for such globalization and knowing that it would be devastating to our society.

Paul, you state:

< Setting up barriers just means that (a) we sell less overseas
< (eliminating US jobs) and (b) we have to pay more for everything. Those < are not good outcomes for.

We sell less overseas because we have never offered a better product that people overseas wanted except for aircraft. We also sell less overseas because we have NEVER manufactured anything that was known as a product in demand overseas.

Paul, you state:

< I’m not arguing there isn’t pain associated with globalization.
< Globalization tends to centralize pain (job losses, etc.) while the
< benefits are spread among everyone. As we’ve seen over the last 100
< years, when we add up all the gains we’ve make incredible advances as
< both a nation and as a globe.

Yes there is pain, lots of it for citizens. Please explain what benefits and great gains you are speaking about that our citizens are all gaining from globalization? Why are you not speaking about the pain that have not even begun because our government went head first into globalization without its citizens being prepared to compete. They were just plain stupid because they did not care and was stupidly consumed with self-interests, not the interests of the citizens and society.

Paul, you state:

< We get to benefit when a Japanese company makes a car that uses less oil.

This is the craziest thing that I have ever heard. Shouldn’t we be benefiting from a American developed product that uses less oil? Why isn’t our government and corporations interested in the little talent that we do have in this country. There are presently college kids successfully experimenting with converting automobiles into ones that use very little gasoline and it works! The talent in this area goes ignored, would you care to expound on why? Could it be because there was and is no real interest in developing automobiles to use less gasoline? I think so, all evidence points to just this.

Paul, you state:

< It’s not an easy world for the blue- collar worker–I recognize that.
< Think about what we offer as a society in terms of education, benefits, < infrastructure, etc. That all has a cost. Places like China cannot
< afford to have the things that we have.

When I think in terms of what the U.S. offer in terms of education compared to the foreigner’s countries who are being handed all the high tech jobs through the HB1 visas, (NAFTA), it shows a bleak picture for U.S. citizens not the picture that you are envisioning. The sad truth, even Americas who are high tech qualified are being replaced by foreigners because of cheaper labor instead of offering the American less pay. American’s high-tech qualified are being forced into temporary contract jobs offering no benefits. Benefits are being lost to Americans daily at frightening rates. Infrastructure, you are speaking about as if we are okay in that area? Our infrastructure is in desperate need of repair. It is in frightening condition.

Paul, you state:

< These benefits don’t exist if we didn’t have globalization. We would not < have as developed an economy and our standard of living would be lower.

I don’t know what country you are living in, but it sounds like you are speaking as a citizen of China or India Saudi Arabia etc.., countries who are actually experiencing the benefits that you are speaking about.

Paul, you state:

< The difference is that our work products add more value than theirs do. < That’s how we’re able to afford all of this.

What work products of the U.S. are you speaking about that add more value? And who are theirs?

Paul, you state:

< It’s much easier to add that value by taking advantage of our education
< system and providing a service. It’s a fact of life. As our standard of < living increases, we have to shift more and more away from manual labor < in order to continue to differentiate ourselves from countries with
< labor but without the intellectual capital.

Are you saying that a service industry is more valuable than having and production industry? Taking advantage of our education system in what way, advertising, business, degrees, all those interests of study that are non-technical? This is what it sounds like you are stating, and if it is I question your common sense, and you are too text-book orientated on many of your other thoughts.

Lastly, those who truly think as you do as our leaders with this political iodiology are the true traitors of America.

I was at Sea World orlando last week, standing in the barn watching the clydesdales and wondering what will happen to them if this deal goes thru. The idea of an American company that has always been a proud American tradition being sold to Inbev is nauseating. While I would like to think a boycott of the products would make a point, it will just result in the loss of jobs for Americans and more financial hardship. I wish our government would start blocking these overseas companies from the purchase of the few remaining American companies. My little brother works for Anheuser / Sea World….and the tension there is running really high as no one has any idea what is going to happen to the parks, animals or staff.

Also Paul

One other big thing here. You say:

< the dollar’s decline is due to the TRADE deficit, not the BUDGET deficit.

You are incorrect here also. You sound like those ones who are attempting to spin that it is a great thing that our dollar’s value is dropping because foreigners are spending so much money in the U.S. now. I have been hearing crazy financial analysis’ that holds this belief.

From the Cato Institute:

Some argue our large trade deficit (or current account deficit) is responsible for the fall in the dollar’s value. They have it backward. It is the flow of foreign investment dollars (the capital account) into the U.S. economy that drives the trade deficit. The U.S. economy’s higher return on capital than Europe or Japan for the last 20 years caused private foreign investors to buy U.S. stocks and bonds and other assets. In addition, foreign governments, particularly of China, Japan and other Asian states, have steadily increased their purchases of U.S. dollars as reserve backing for their own currencies.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2483