Ryan: Let's suppose the deal goes through at the proposed 65 dollar per share figure. Would InBev be expected to keep AB's headquarters here in St. Louis?

Could they change the brewing formula of Budweiser?

Going forward would you expect this joint venture to be more or less profitable? How would you compare the abilities of InBev management versus current AB management?

Jeremiah McWilliams: It's a good question, and a hard one to answer. If InBev took over A-B, the new company would presumably need a big North American headquarters. St. Louis might fit the bill -- or it might not. The St. Louis brewery is A-B's biggest, and sends beer throughout the Midwest. So it would not be easy to part with, despite InBev's legendary cost-cutting. In terms of changing the Budweiser formulation, this could certainly be done. The question would be, would a new owner want to do this. The brand has a lot of goodwill and heritage built up, despite having struggled to grow in the U.S. for about 20 years.

winston: what does it mean for the city?

Jeremiah McWilliams: What impact a deal would have on St. Louis remains to be seen, especially since the deal is not officially on the table. The local impact would depend on the level of autonomy InBev would give A-B, and whether A-B would be run as as a somewhat independent entity. The company has about 6,000 local employees, pays millions in tax revenue and contracts with a number of local advertising agencies. It's one of St. Louis' most profitable companies. Plus, it contributes to groups like the Red Cross and the United Way.

In the long term, the psychological effect of having the city's most iconic company bought out could be just as serious as the economic impact. A-B has been wrapped up with the history of the city for more than a century and a half.

Dan: For long time holders of A-B the quick price pop of a sale has to be weighed against making it a taxable event now (on your entire gain since you bought the stock) rather than in the future. It also matters whether you think there is a stronger possible gain by A-B going on a nice growth run on its own over the next few years. Warren Buffett has been a buyer in the last 2 years because it is very undervalued, why not stay as a shareholder of A-B and continue to get the nice payoff over time. I do not work for A-B and do not own shares myself.

dnicklaus: Dan, we don't know whether Inbev will offer cash, stock, or a combination of both. In a cash deal, as you say, shareholders would owe taxes on their gains. But keep in mind that the top capital gains rate rises from 15% to 20% on Dec. 31, 2010. So that may be an argument for doing a deal sooner rather than later. If the offer is all stock, it would be tax-free, but only if you continued to hold the InBev shares. In a lot of deals, that turns out not to be a good idea. Just ask the A.G. Edwards shareholders who received Wachovia shares as part of their buyout.

kdunlap: I may not be a Warren Buffet, but it seems to me that when you see these mega mergers/buyouts like this they never seem to work out like the buyer thinks they will.
1. They inquire a significant amount of debt to pull the deal off, which has to be paid off. This then affects the bottom line.
2. They have to cut costs all over the place to recoup their costs which in turn seems to affect the sales of the company not to mention employee morale of those who are left, which shrinks the bottom line even further.

I can see this exact same scenerio happening here. AB did not get to where they are because they DO NOT know how to sell/market beer. I see Inbev cutting marketing/sales and in the long run the "new" company if worse off than before the buy out.
Is my thinking out of wack?

Jeremiah McWilliams: Your thinking is in line with a number of different folks who watch the beer industry for a living. The fear is that InBev would pay such a high price -- and take on so much debt to pull off the deal -- that they will have to cut like crazy to make the deal worthwhile. A-B is not profligate with its spending, but executives are certainly not shy about spending on marketing, promotions and other things to grow sales. If InBev takes over, that culture could be ripped out by the roots (or at least that's what the skeptics fear).

A-B has been putting more "boots on the ground" -- extra salespeople to get Budweiser and other brands into key accounts like urban clubs and restaurants. The company has been boasting of some success. Would InBev value that effort and continue to support A-B's sales infrastructure (600 wholesalers), or would it cut to the bone? I don't know. But it does appear that InBev's main strength is cost-cutting, rather than the brand-building that A-B is known for.