DOGTOWNB&R wrote:i love stella but the hangover is just awful.
Try Hoegarden. It is one of InBev's better products. Haven't had a hangover yet. Don't forget the orange either.
Do you have scurvy? Why else put fruit in your beer?
- 284
Do you have scurvy? Why else put fruit in your beer?
- 729
- 2,940
Yikes, ease down man. I wasn't calling you out, just checking to see if you work with my friend Tom.innov8ion wrote:An analyst is anyone that analyzes. I am an analyst as I have studied business, investing, read voraciously, and create analysis on the knowledge and wisdom that exists within me. I am not an investment analyst at a firm, so what?
Don't let the interwebs break you.
That could be supercool if done right.MattnSTL wrote:Charles Jaco talked to a business professor from WashU last week, and he said something to that effect. He thinks that AB will turn down an offer at $65 a share. INBEV will come back with an offer above $70, offer the world headquarters to be in St. Louis, and keep the AB name for the whole company, and AB will accept the buyout. Whether any of this will happen, I don't know. However, that actually does sound like a good deal if it were to happen.
My hope would be that they maintain the corporate culture that AB has instilled across itself.
My fear is that, if they came aggressively at $70, then they'd have to slash and burn operations and incentives.
Good luck to all those on Pestalozzi as this goes through.
Boeing too.DeBaliviere wrote:Nestle promised a large presence in St. Louis and delivered on that promise.
Of all the recent mergers involving St. Louis firms, this is one I don't want to happen the most. Talk about civic pride. In my opinion, this would inflict a major dent in it.
Americans rally round Anheuser-Busch after takeover bid
Jun 12 04:49 PM US/Eastern
InBev woos Anheuser-Busch as takeover concerns mount
A movement to fend off a proposed takeover of US beermaker Anheuser-Busch by Belgian-Brazilian InBev gained momentum Thursday as Missouri's governor voiced concern and opponents launched online petitions.
Governor Matt Blunt said in a statement late Wednesday that he found the news of the 46-billion-dollar bid "deeply troubling."
"Anheuser-Busch is a great Missouri company, a great employer, a great corporate citizen and the maker of great products that are enjoyed in Missouri and around the world," he said. "I am strongly opposed to the sale of Anheuser-Busch."
Blunt noted that "there is no immediate tool available at the state level" to block the sale.
But he ordered the state's Department of Economic Development "to explore every option and any opportunity we may have at the state level to help keep Anheuser-Busch where it belongs -- in St. Louis, Missouri."
Meanwhile a website, SaveBudweiser.com, was collecting signatures in an online petition opposing the sale of the maker of Budweiser, Michelob and other beers to the Belgian-based firm.
"We will need to scream now more than ever to make sure that the board of directors and others involved hear our voices and that we don't want them to accept the offer," said a notice on the website, the operators of which were not identified.
"In addition to great tasting beer, this company has provided thousands of domestic jobs as well as millions of dollars in charitable donations to nonprofit organizations, disaster relief and has a long history of environmental awareness."
As of Thursday, more than 34,000 people had signed the online petition.
Another website, SaveAB.com, collected over 12,000 signatures.
"With your help we can fight the foreign invasion of A-B. We will fight to protect this American treasure. We will take to the Internet, to the streets, to the marble halls of our capitals, whatever it takes to stop the invasion," a statement on the site said.
InBev launched its own site, globalbeerleader.com, to provide information defending a tie-up.
"InBev envisions making St. Louis the headquarters for the North American region and the global home of the flagship Budweiser brand," the company stated.
"In addition, InBev has proposed to name the combined company to evoke Anheuser-Busch's heritage, reflecting the strong history of Anheuser-Busch's key brands."
InBev also pledged to "maintain all of Anheuser-Busch's US breweries."
The top US beermaker acknowledged Wednesday "an unsolicited, non-binding" takeover bid from world leader Inbev and said it would "review the merits" of the offer.
The US firm based in St. Louis, Missouri said the offer was 65 dollars per share in cash, amounting to an estimated 46 billion dollars.
more
Jun 12 04:49 PM US/Eastern
InBev woos Anheuser-Busch as takeover concerns mount
A movement to fend off a proposed takeover of US beermaker Anheuser-Busch by Belgian-Brazilian InBev gained momentum Thursday as Missouri's governor voiced concern and opponents launched online petitions.
Governor Matt Blunt said in a statement late Wednesday that he found the news of the 46-billion-dollar bid "deeply troubling."
"Anheuser-Busch is a great Missouri company, a great employer, a great corporate citizen and the maker of great products that are enjoyed in Missouri and around the world," he said. "I am strongly opposed to the sale of Anheuser-Busch."
Blunt noted that "there is no immediate tool available at the state level" to block the sale.
But he ordered the state's Department of Economic Development "to explore every option and any opportunity we may have at the state level to help keep Anheuser-Busch where it belongs -- in St. Louis, Missouri."
Meanwhile a website, SaveBudweiser.com, was collecting signatures in an online petition opposing the sale of the maker of Budweiser, Michelob and other beers to the Belgian-based firm.
"We will need to scream now more than ever to make sure that the board of directors and others involved hear our voices and that we don't want them to accept the offer," said a notice on the website, the operators of which were not identified.
"In addition to great tasting beer, this company has provided thousands of domestic jobs as well as millions of dollars in charitable donations to nonprofit organizations, disaster relief and has a long history of environmental awareness."
As of Thursday, more than 34,000 people had signed the online petition.
Another website, SaveAB.com, collected over 12,000 signatures.
"With your help we can fight the foreign invasion of A-B. We will fight to protect this American treasure. We will take to the Internet, to the streets, to the marble halls of our capitals, whatever it takes to stop the invasion," a statement on the site said.
InBev launched its own site, globalbeerleader.com, to provide information defending a tie-up.
"InBev envisions making St. Louis the headquarters for the North American region and the global home of the flagship Budweiser brand," the company stated.
"In addition, InBev has proposed to name the combined company to evoke Anheuser-Busch's heritage, reflecting the strong history of Anheuser-Busch's key brands."
InBev also pledged to "maintain all of Anheuser-Busch's US breweries."
The top US beermaker acknowledged Wednesday "an unsolicited, non-binding" takeover bid from world leader Inbev and said it would "review the merits" of the offer.
The US firm based in St. Louis, Missouri said the offer was 65 dollars per share in cash, amounting to an estimated 46 billion dollars.
more
Moorlander wrote:goat314 wrote: I see St. Louis pulling off the North American HQ, but I think Leuven, Belgium will remain the World HQ.
DUH!
How is that a duh? I was simply responding to other people who say that Busch should negotiate to get the world headquarters located in St. Louis. Wassup with the predatory behavior?
- 8,922
Why on earth would StL become the world headquarters? Why would the InBev execs ever offer that? Why would they want to uproot their families to move to a foreign country? No way that happens.
Or Maybe I'm just not understanding this whole thing...?
Or Maybe I'm just not understanding this whole thing...?
Sorry dude. That's the unfortunate prob with the internets. It's hard to know what someone is getting at sometimes.Gone Corporate wrote:Yikes, ease down man. I wasn't calling you out, just checking to see if you work with my friend Tom.innov8ion wrote:An analyst is anyone that analyzes. I am an analyst as I have studied business, investing, read voraciously, and create analysis on the knowledge and wisdom that exists within me. I am not an investment analyst at a firm, so what?
The A-B talks with Modelo were expected. It would be nice if it were a strategic acquisition, but it's not. It seems to be moreso a defensive maneuver than anything. Nonetheless, it won't affect the outcome much.
Gone Corporate is right. This move will push InBev up into the $70 range and the shareholders will approve of the sale to InBev.
The Matt Blunt, nationalist, flag-waving stuff won't amount to much save for giving us extra consideration in the structure of the deal. The World HQ will not be here. The North American or the Americas HQ will be. The new name will incorporate Anheuser-Busch somehow. How generic is the InBev name anyway? A couple of the Busch's will rise to the new board. St. Louis and St. Louisans will be ok.
Oh, and InBev has said they would sell off non-core A-B properties to help finance the deal. I'm guessing Busch Entertainment Corp and Busch Properties Inc? Perhaps even the Michelob family of beers.
These are my predictions. What a fun game.
Moorlander wrote:Why on earth would StL become the world headquarters? Why would the InBev execs ever offer that? Why would they want to uproot their families to move to a foreign country? No way that happens.
Or Maybe I'm just not understanding this whole thing...?
exactly what I was saying, read my original post.
From what I've read, if AB can pull off the Modelo purchase, it will add $11 billion to InBev's purchase price. I believe AB would have to borrow that $11 billion.
So, would that $11 billion affect InBev's offer per share or just force InBev to borrow more to assume AB's new additional debt?
So, would that $11 billion affect InBev's offer per share or just force InBev to borrow more to assume AB's new additional debt?
^ The A-B / Modelo deal will never happen. It's just a ploy to raise InBev's bid to the $70 level.
- InBev's communication on the deal: http://www.globalbeerleader.com/home.php
- InBev's Webcast on the deal: http://w.on24.com/r.htm?e=112573&s=1&k= ... CBCA1CD822
InBev Proposes Combination with Anheuser-Busch, Creating the Global Leader in Beer with Budweiser as its Flagship Brand
InBev announced that it has made a proposal to the Board of Directors of Anheuser-Busch, Inc. to combine the two companies, forming the world's leading global brewer and one of the world's top five consumer products companies. The proposal to acquire all outstanding common shares of Anheuser-Busch for $65 per-share in cash represents an immediate premium of 35% over Anheuser-Busch's 30-day average share price prior to recent market speculation and an 18% premium over Anheuser-Busch's previous all-time high of $54.97 achieved in October 2002.
As part of its proposal, InBev envisions making St. Louis, MO the headquarters for the North American region and the global home of the flagship Budweiser brand. In addition, InBev has proposed to name the combined company to evoke Anheuser-Busch's heritage, reflecting the strong history of Anheuser-Busch's key brands. Given the limited geographical overlap between the two businesses and the efficiency of Anheuser-Busch's brewery footprint in the United States, InBev would maintain all of Anheuser-Busch's U.S. breweries.
The combined company would be geographically diversified, with leading positions in key countries around the world and balanced exposure to developed and developing markets. A combination of Anheuser-Busch and InBev would result in significant growth opportunities from leveraging the companies' combined brand portfolio, including the global flagship Budweiser brand and international market leaders such as Stella Artois and Beck's, maximizing the combination's unparalleled global distribution network, and applying best practices across the new organization.
InBev believes that this transaction is in the best interest of both companies' employees, wholesalers, consumers, business partners, communities, and shareholders.
"We have the highest respect for Anheuser-Busch, its employees and its leadership, who have built the leading brewer in the U.S. and grown the iconic Budweiser brand. Together, we would draw on the collective expertise of both companies' management and employees. We also recognize the great contribution of Anheuser-Busch's wholesalers to the company's success and would work closely with them, under the three-tier system, to create even greater excitement in the marketplace around the brands of both companies. The combination will create a stronger, more competitive, sustainable global company which will benefit all stakeholders."
- Carlos Brito, Chief Executive Officer of InBev
- InBev's communication on the deal: http://www.globalbeerleader.com/home.php
- InBev's Webcast on the deal: http://w.on24.com/r.htm?e=112573&s=1&k= ... CBCA1CD822
InBev Proposes Combination with Anheuser-Busch, Creating the Global Leader in Beer with Budweiser as its Flagship Brand
InBev announced that it has made a proposal to the Board of Directors of Anheuser-Busch, Inc. to combine the two companies, forming the world's leading global brewer and one of the world's top five consumer products companies. The proposal to acquire all outstanding common shares of Anheuser-Busch for $65 per-share in cash represents an immediate premium of 35% over Anheuser-Busch's 30-day average share price prior to recent market speculation and an 18% premium over Anheuser-Busch's previous all-time high of $54.97 achieved in October 2002.
As part of its proposal, InBev envisions making St. Louis, MO the headquarters for the North American region and the global home of the flagship Budweiser brand. In addition, InBev has proposed to name the combined company to evoke Anheuser-Busch's heritage, reflecting the strong history of Anheuser-Busch's key brands. Given the limited geographical overlap between the two businesses and the efficiency of Anheuser-Busch's brewery footprint in the United States, InBev would maintain all of Anheuser-Busch's U.S. breweries.
The combined company would be geographically diversified, with leading positions in key countries around the world and balanced exposure to developed and developing markets. A combination of Anheuser-Busch and InBev would result in significant growth opportunities from leveraging the companies' combined brand portfolio, including the global flagship Budweiser brand and international market leaders such as Stella Artois and Beck's, maximizing the combination's unparalleled global distribution network, and applying best practices across the new organization.
InBev believes that this transaction is in the best interest of both companies' employees, wholesalers, consumers, business partners, communities, and shareholders.
"We have the highest respect for Anheuser-Busch, its employees and its leadership, who have built the leading brewer in the U.S. and grown the iconic Budweiser brand. Together, we would draw on the collective expertise of both companies' management and employees. We also recognize the great contribution of Anheuser-Busch's wholesalers to the company's success and would work closely with them, under the three-tier system, to create even greater excitement in the marketplace around the brands of both companies. The combination will create a stronger, more competitive, sustainable global company which will benefit all stakeholders."
- Carlos Brito, Chief Executive Officer of InBev
Don't know the answer to my AB/Modelo question analyst innov8ion?
Anyone else know, analyst or otherwise?
Anyone else know, analyst or otherwise?
- 5,433
innov8ion wrote: The Matt Blunt, nationalist, flag-waving stuff won't amount to much save for giving us extra consideration in the structure of the deal.
Maybe not, but I prefer Governor Blunt's legitimate concern for A-B's future and how Missouri may be affected to Senator Bond's indifference.
I'm glad you've convinced yourself what a great deal this will be, but I can't get too excited. I know companies like Boeing and Nestle have delivered for St. Louis overall, but there have been many more disappointments after mergers and acquisitions.
Don't get me started on American Airlines, for example. DaimlerChrysler barely lasted a decade, with the latter company left in shambles, and its St. Louis presence (the Fenton assembly plant) on perpetually shaky ground. Macy's, Inc. (then Federated Department Stores) boasted of its commitment to the community, only to eliminate the divisional headquarters and hundreds of jobs just two years later. And who knows how long Wachovia Securities will be "with" St. Louis?
Oh well, in another decade it will all be part of McWalAT&ToyotaMart anyway.
Random Thoughts:
1) How about co-headquarters? An Eastern Hemisphere HQ and Western Hemisphere HQ? It wouldn't be the first company to have multiple HQs. There really isn't any particular reason for a company to declare a country it's "home country" anymore, other than tax or liability benefits, which I don't believe would be much of an issue here. Nor is there any particular reason that all C_Os have to live on the same continent. Sure, it would cost a bit more, but it would go along way to silencing critics of the "merger", and more importanty, if done correctly, it might help reduce the inevitable culture clash. A truly global company should be able to pull this off....of course if their intention is to simply cut costs to the bone, long term consequences be damned, then they won't. But if that is really the case, wouldn't Brazil be the cheapest place for the HQ?
2) a) InBev is a cost-cutter, er a cost slash-and-burner. b) They don't spend anywhere near as much on advertising as A-B. c) I don't think anyone would argue with the idea that A-B has dominated the U.S. market primarily because of their lavish marketing budget, and the creative campaigns that budget has produced. What will happen to A-B's U.S. market share with a significantly reduced ad budget???
1) How about co-headquarters? An Eastern Hemisphere HQ and Western Hemisphere HQ? It wouldn't be the first company to have multiple HQs. There really isn't any particular reason for a company to declare a country it's "home country" anymore, other than tax or liability benefits, which I don't believe would be much of an issue here. Nor is there any particular reason that all C_Os have to live on the same continent. Sure, it would cost a bit more, but it would go along way to silencing critics of the "merger", and more importanty, if done correctly, it might help reduce the inevitable culture clash. A truly global company should be able to pull this off....of course if their intention is to simply cut costs to the bone, long term consequences be damned, then they won't. But if that is really the case, wouldn't Brazil be the cheapest place for the HQ?
2) a) InBev is a cost-cutter, er a cost slash-and-burner. b) They don't spend anywhere near as much on advertising as A-B. c) I don't think anyone would argue with the idea that A-B has dominated the U.S. market primarily because of their lavish marketing budget, and the creative campaigns that budget has produced. What will happen to A-B's U.S. market share with a significantly reduced ad budget???
Moorlander wrote:Why on earth would StL become the world headquarters? Why would the InBev execs ever offer that? Why would they want to uproot their families to move to a foreign country? No way that happens.
Or Maybe I'm just not understanding this whole thing...?
Remember that when AmBev (Brazilian) merged with Interbrew (Belgian), while the HQ remained in Belgium the management team is made up of mostly Brazilians now, so they were willing to move to a foreign country as part of the deal. The reason they would offer it is to defuse the flag-waiving we have seen thus far over the deal, ensure that it gets done, and reduce any blow back there might be that would hurt the AB brands (no reason to offer $65 a share if the deal will hurt AB's market share). I think InBev is underestimating the damage of perceived foreign ownership on the Bud image.
Besides, as we have seen with local companies like Panera and Smurfit-Stone, the management team can often be in one city while another retains the title as the "official" HQ. For Smurfit, the management team is in Creve Coeur but the HQ is Chicago. For Panera, the HQ is St. Louis, but the management team is in Boston. In other words, there is no reason that Carlos Brito and company couldn't run the combined InBev-AB from São Paulo (or even Belgum if they wanted to) while allowing St. Louis to be the "Official" HQ for political and marketing reasons. In fact, the reason you are seeing a growing number of such arrangements is because of the very reason you state the new management team doesn't want to uproot their families, but title of the official HQ is valuable bargaining chip and modern technology frees management teams from the need to be in the same location as the official HQ.
- 2,093
I'm not a fan of Matt Blunt, but I applaud his "flag waving" for a St. Louis, Missouri, and American institution. Even if InBev buys out AB if they can be pressured to move their HQ here the flag waving will have been a success. If InBev buys them out and guts A-B, expect to see Schlafly sales spike!
I had hoe garden last night. Got some dirt on my shoes, but they really like the lilies!
I would rather see Modello and AB Merge personally. Negro Modello is a far better beer than any InBev products.
I would rather see Modello and AB Merge personally. Negro Modello is a far better beer than any InBev products.
- 6,775
SoulardX wrote:From what I've read, if AB can pull off the Modelo purchase, it will add $11 billion to InBev's purchase price. I believe AB would have to borrow that $11 billion.
So, would that $11 billion affect InBev's offer per share or just force InBev to borrow more to assume AB's new additional debt?
I am an analyst, so I will answer this.
Since it is an all cash offer, they would have to borrow more order to cover an increased offer price.
ThreeOneFour wrote:DaimlerChrysler barely lasted a decade, with the latter company left in shambles, and its St. Louis presence (the Fenton assembly plant) on perpetually shaky ground.
Chrysler was in shambles before Daimler bought them. Which is why the deal was a disaster. They overpaid, big time.
Doug wrote:I had hoe garden last night. Got some dirt on my shoes, but they really like the lilies!
I would rather see Modello and AB Merge personally. Negro Modello is a far better beer than any InBev products.
Of course, Bohemia is the best Mexican import.
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Doug wrote:I had hoe garden last night. Got some dirt on my shoes, but they really like the lilies!
I would rather see Modello and AB Merge personally. Negro Modello is a far better beer than any InBev products.
Of course, Bohemia is the best Mexican import.
Prove it.
- 10K
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Of course, Bohemia is the best Mexican import.
I prefer Salma Hayek.
In my time, I was more of an Acupulco Gold fan. I especially enjoyed its '70s advertising campaign. 
- 6,775
phoaddict wrote:The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Doug wrote:I had hoe garden last night. Got some dirt on my shoes, but they really like the lilies!
I would rather see Modello and AB Merge personally. Negro Modello is a far better beer than any InBev products.
Of course, Bohemia is the best Mexican import.
Prove it.
I already did.
DeBaliviere wrote:The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Of course, Bohemia is the best Mexican import.
I prefer Salma Hayek.
Well played.