Share
8,922
Life MemberLife Member
8,922

PostJun 13, 2008#201


06.13.2008 4:26 pm

Employees own 5.7% of BUD

By David Nicklaus

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Much has been made of the fact that the Busch family owns less than 4 percent of the brewing company that bears the family name. Few pundits, however, have said much about another influential group: Anheuser-Busch employees. A-B’s employee stock purchase plan has long been a staple investment for most brewery workers, and its most recent Form 11-K shows workers with a stake worth $2.05 billion on March 31, 2007.



That translates into 40.5 million shares, or 5.7 percent of the company — more than the Busch family has, and even more than Warren Buffett owns.



Employees, of course, don’t vote as a bloc, but generally they’re loyal to management. Should Anheuser-Busch decide to fight the takeover bid from InBev, the owners of those 40.5 million shares may play an important role.






http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/mound- ... 57-of-bud/
523
Senior MemberSenior Member
523

PostJun 14, 2008#202

Bonwich, excellent points on the responsibility of the board and the freedom of markets. Still, in regard to InBev, some of those points ring a little hollow as in 1999 it looks like the Brazilian government basically intervened to thwart AB. So, to me, it'd be a little fitting if public/government intervention stopped an AB buyout by the the direct successor to those that benefited from what happened in Brazil in 1999. (note: I can't say I know/understand the FULL backstory here, but from what I've read, the Brazilian government intervened as a protectionist.)



From the story on foiled aquisitions that Innov8ion linked:



Back in 1999, Anheuser-Busch had designs on Brazil and the broader South American beer market. The company had a minority stake in Antarctica Paulista, Brazil's No. 2 brewer, and hoped to take majority control. It was not be.



Brahma, Brazil's biggest beermaker, convinced governing authorities to let it merge with Antarctica, forming a new company called AmBev. Anheuser-Busch sold its stake, and ended up without a path or strategy in Brazil. AmBev later merged with Belgian brewer Interbrew to become InBev.



There's more backgroud here:



http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/61/45/34305995.pdf
12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostJun 15, 2008#203

InBev seems to change their name as often as Sean Combs.
8,922
Life MemberLife Member
8,922

PostJun 15, 2008#204

Check out this spoof of inbev's possible takeover.





http://www.kmox.com/topic/play_window.p ... Id=2672485

PostJun 16, 2008#205

With the InBev offer of $65 on the table and the possibility/probability of an offer at or near $70, why has the stock price not risen closer to the 65 mark? Is this because the market is still not convinced this take over is going to happen, or have I just not given it enough time?



FYI, at the current moment BUD stock is Down $.37 on the day.



Can one of the "analysts" on this board help explain this?

Thanks.
2,190
Life MemberLife Member
2,190

PostJun 16, 2008#206

You pretty much answered your own question -- the market is unsure that this transaction will actually happen. (A-B not agreeing to the deal is one cause of said uncertainty.)



The difference between the current trade price and the deal price is called a spread; theoretically that spread approaches zero with the certainty of the deal. (But even if and when a deal is agreed upon, you'll still probably see BUD at no higher than $64 or so until the day the tender takes effect because of transaction costs -- you gotta pay a commission to buy the stock -- and basic cost of money -- you can always stash your cash and earn a tiny amount of daily interest.)
10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJun 16, 2008#207

Say A-B is actually successful in acquiring the remaining 50% of Grupo Modelo, thwarting the InBev takeover (I'm skeptical that this will actually happen). Will A-B then be poised to compete against InBev and SAB on a global scale, or will it just prolong the brewery's decline?



And, if Inbev were to acquire A-B even after it acquired the remaining 50% of Grupo Modelo, wouldn't that necessitate even more cost-cutting on InBev's part, potentially resulting in more job losses in St. Louis than originally anticipated?
2,940
Life MemberLife Member
2,940

PostJun 16, 2008#208

Want more of a sense of scale?

Story on the proposed structuring of the deal from emii.com:


Eight Banks To Lead InBev’s $40B Bid

Jun-16-2008 | Source: EuroWeek



Belgian brewer InBev has mandated eight banks to arrange a syndicated loan of at least $40 billion to back its unsolicited bid for American brewer Anheuser-Busch.



Barclays Capital, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, Fortis Bank, ING, JP Morgan, Royal Bank of Scotland and Santander have underwritten the facility.



InBev, whose brands include Beck’s, Stella Artois and Staropramen, has made a cash offer of $65 a share, valuing the maker of Budweiser at $46 billion. That price is an 11.4% premium to Anheuser-Busch’s closing price of $58.35 on Wednesday, and a 35% premium to its 30-day average share price before rumors of a bid circulated.



The combined company would be the world’s biggest brewing firm by market capitalization and revenues.



The loan is the world’s biggest to be mandated this year and, if launched in 2008, will be the second biggest to come to the market after Anglo-Australian miner BHP Billiton’s $55 billion facility.



Senior syndication of that deal, which backs the borrower’s hostile bid for rival Rio Tinto, was launched in February. About nine banks are thought to have joined the loan’s seven bookrunners as sub-underwriters.



Bankers close to InBev’s deal would not disclose any details about the loan, saying that the takeover bid was at a very early stage.



But several bankers away from the facility said that while there was enough liquidity in western Europe’s market for it to be syndicated, the pricing and maturity would be crucial.



"Say hello once again to tickets of $2 billion-$3 billion," said one loans banker. "This can work, but everything depends on the margins and the amount of short term paper."



Another official said: "I’m assuming they will have to price this extremely attractively. They’ll also have to make sure the loan has a bridge to equity, a bridge to bonds, or both, so that it can be repaid quickly.



"There are not many banks now willing to hold over $1 billion of a single company on their balance sheet for a long time."



Price it to the last dollar



The senior phase of syndication would also be vital. Many bankers away from the deal said that regardless of its structure, the bookrunners would struggle to raise big amounts in a general syndication.



Recent retail phases of investment grade jumbo loans have struggled, such as the general syndication of the $40 billion loan for Anglo-Australian miner Rio Tinto earlier this year — even though the response in the senior phase was strong.



Rumours broke last month that InBev was seeking financing of up to $50 billion for an Anheuser-Busch bid. Press reports said that the loan would include an equity bridge, to be taken out by a rights issue within a year of a takeover.



Loans bankers reacted with excitement to speculation about the loan. One said at the time that it would have to be priced to the "last dollar", meaning it would need margins that attracted lenders driven primarily by yield.



"With these big deals you can no longer rely solely on relationship lenders," he said.



Jumbo investment grade loans have become increasingly difficult to syndicate this year. French distiller Pernod Ricard’s €12 billion deal, the biggest launched into general syndication in western Europe this year, had to have its margins flexed up by 30bp about six weeks after it was launched.



Many bankers away from the loan for the Baa3/BB+/BB+ borrower, whose five year tranches were initially priced at 125bp over Euribor, said the margins were too tight before the flex. But though pricing was the main problem, it was not the only one — many lenders were said to be reluctant, due to capital constraints, to commit up to the €500 million asked for as the top ticket.



InBev would, however, benefit from its investment grade profile, which it plans to maintain even if the acquisition goes ahead.



A loan of $40 billion would be the sixth biggest ever mandated, according to data provider Dealogic.



Anheuser-Busch has made no comment beyond stating that it will "evaluate [Inbev’s] proposal carefully". Some bankers away from the $40 billion loan said that few banks would commit to it in syndication if the bid became hostile.


Source: www.emii.com/articleprint.aspx?ArticleID=1946216#



The need to go to eight different banks for a financing deal for $65, the increased amount of loanable assets necessary for a $70+ aggressive buyout (as well as potential sourcing), and the potential impacts of the Modelo acquisition contemplated by BUD are all very fluid and dynamic variables. As well, could JPM (or any of the others listed) bail if they decide to go for LEH themselves instead of helping InBev get BUD?



Also, from KMOX earlier (or CNBC, can't remember which): A number of Belgians are wondering why InBev wants to buy BUD, as the European beer drinkers hate US beer. Many are scared that, in the name of cost-cutting (which InBev is notorious for), they'll sacrifice the quality of European beers in favor of more Budweiser-esque mass quantity.
1,355
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,355

PostJun 16, 2008#209

I don't necessarily agree with the argument that business is business.



The models and practices are changing rapidly. Maybe this one is a good example of beer shifting to more of a global soft drink model? There isn't yet a single global beer.



What could be a more intersting discussion is the erosion of tradtional (national) American assets into globally held and traded assets.
7,836
Life MemberLife Member
7,836

PostJun 16, 2008#210

I have some feeling that this could ned up like the Daimler Benz & Chrysler "merger". It will last for about 10 years and end with the two companies parting ways: both weaker than before.
8,922
Life MemberLife Member
8,922

PostJun 16, 2008#211

A-B plus Modelo would threaten InBev’s credit rating



Deal Journal has some intelligent analysis today on why InBev has reacted so negatively to Anheuser-Busch’s possible Mexican defense. If A-B buys the 50 percent of Grupo Modelo that it doesn’t already own, InBev said Sunday, it may be jeopardizing the $65 a share offer that’s on the table for A-B shareholders.



It’s a matter of debt load, Deal Journal correspondent Heidi N. Moore writes:



Banc of America Securities analyst Todd Duvick noted today that if A-B’s offer for Modelo is financed entirely by debt, it would increase A-B’s leverage to 3.6 times Ebitda from its current level of 2.4 times. That would make it even harder for InBev to maintain an investment-grade credit rating, which it has sworn to do.



Ponying up for both A-B and Modelo might also require InBev to tap its Brazilian AmBev subsidiary, which has a separately traded stock. In a conference call with analysts last week, InBev executives promised that AmBev wouldn’t take on any of the debt associated with an A-B deal. Deal Journal quotes Carlos Laboy, a Credit Suisse analyst, as saying AmBev shareholders still face “some risk that they may get stuck with the Busch family friendly-deal premium and with Modelo related debt.”



As my colleague Jeremiah McWilliams wrote over the weekend, there’s a good chance that Modelo’s controlling shareholders don’t want to sell anyway. But InBev, at least, is taking the rumors of a St. Louis-Mexico City deal seriously.


SOURCE









Some interesting conversations on this topic popped up over Dad's day dinner on Sunday. Two of my family members, who happen to be financial planners, both agreed on one sentiment regarding AB employees. They pointed out that their AB clients of age 50+ were excited about the $65 offer as it had the possibility of allowing them either a substantially higher standard of living or an early retirement. They also went into another condition of the buyout (something called a 3for3 or 5for5 or something like that) Basically, it was my understanding that the AB employees would/could become eligible for benefits beyond their years of service.

On the other hand the 30-40 somethings are very worried about the buyout because many of them have "cushy" jobs with 6 figure salaries and substantial bonus packages. These guys were all but convinced that their jobs will be cut, leaving them with little options in the StL market.





It looks like it all could come down to Warren Buffet...


Warren Buffett, Busch IV to speak about InBev takeover offer





"Mr. Buffett, who holds a 5 percent stake in Anheuser-Busch Inc., has a notable reputation for assisting in matters where family ownership is at stake," said Adolphus Busch IV, an uncle to August Busch IV and a company shareholder, in a statement. "His participation in the recent merger of Wrigley and Mars Inc. is evidence of his integrity. Should Mr. Buffett see this merger as a positive action for all shareholders involved, the likelihood of a deal will increase enormously."



Research firm Gimme Credit issued a note Monday morning that said, "If Mr. Buffett makes any public statement in support of InBev's bid, it's game over for the Busch family's takeover defense efforts."




SOURCE
3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostJun 17, 2008#212

totally Daimler Benz/ Chrysler part II.
5,433
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
5,433

PostJun 17, 2008#213

dweebe wrote:I have some feeling that this could ned up like the Daimler Benz & Chrysler "merger". It will last for about 10 years and end with the two companies parting ways: both weaker than before.


That makes at least three of us then, because I feel the same way as you and JCity.



There are many reasons why the DaimlerChrysler marriage was doomed from the beginning, but perhaps the biggest was the culture clash between Auburn Hills and Stuttgart. No matter what you read in the latest InBev release or David Nicklaus column, you can rest assured that InBev will strip away as much of Anheuser-Busch as possible, leaving the "core brands" and not much else.



And on a side note, what in the hell is this "Gimme Credit" place that I keep reading about? It sounds less like a respectable research firm and more like one of those sleazy used car dealers you'd find on South Kingshighway. :)
5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostJun 17, 2008#214

If A-B buying Modelo is such a smart, strategic move, why didn't they act on it before? If A-B does not take an honest look at the InBev offer and instead go on the defensive, the stock market will punish them severely. Hell hath no fury like a scorned market. The board just runs the company, the shareholders own them.



Leaving the core brands and not much else? InBev would sell off the amusement parks. What do amusement parks have to do with beer? Not a lot.



Buffett is an unassuming everyman, but his intelligence and wisdom lend otherwise. The only reason he would not support the InBev buyout of BUD is if he were to have amnesia. Listen up. Most of A-B's profit comes from America. This is bad. Why? Buffett believes that the US dollar will lose value in the long run. He's said he's looking to make acquisitions of companies which derive a substantial portion of their revenues from outside the United States. This is the main reason he'll support the deal. Does he care about blind nationalism? No.
10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJun 17, 2008#215

ThreeOneFour wrote:And on a side note, what in the hell is this "Gimme Credit" place that I keep reading about?


Wasn't that a Rolling Stones song? :)
1,355
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,355

PostJun 17, 2008#216

Business isn't just business anymore. I'd suggest that the measures of a good deal or success generally are changing. For example, using stock price and financial return on investment are no longer adequate measures of economic success in a community or nation. They really are of limited value even for the individual.



I'd like to hear a lot more news about InBev's expertise and capacity to manage AB assets. Frankly, I don't know anything about the beliefs and values. Next, do they understand consumer behavior in the U.S.? Isn't this their first purchase of a traditional American product? Can they handle it? AB is largely a market presence and force. Do they have a deep and wide understanding of the science?



And contrary to my earlier comment about a soft drink model---that's very limiting. The psychology of beer is very different from the same consumer response to Coke.
2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJun 17, 2008#217

Buffett backs InBev bid, Belgian newspaper says

By Doug Wong

St. Louis Post-Dispatch



Belgian newspaper De Standard this morning is reporting that Warren Buffett is supporting InBev’s $47.5 billion takeover offer for Anheuser-Busch Cos.



Quoting sources, the paper says Buffett is willing to sell his A-B shares to the Belgian brewer. Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway owns a 5 percent stake in the St. Louis-based brewer.



A spokeswoman at Berkshire Hathaway would not provide comment to De Standard for its story.



Buffett’s support for the deal could smooth the way for InBev’s effort to buy the St. Louis-based brewer. InBev is offering $65 a share for A-B.


Read More
5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostJun 17, 2008#218

Matt wrote:Business isn't just business anymore. I'd suggest that the measures of a good deal or success generally are changing. For example, using stock price and financial return on investment are no longer adequate measures of economic success in a community or nation. They really are of limited value even for the individual.
Business isn't business anymore? How is it changing then? Not being snippy, just curious.



I'd suggest that economic success of a nation is primarily measured in gross domestic product (GDP.) Other measures are listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measures_o ... and_output. What about the value of a government's currency, especially as compared to other currencies?



As for a company, isn't success measured by stock price and its appreciation over time? What about market capitalization and its change over time? How do you feel the success of a company is measured?


Matt wrote:
I'd like to hear a lot more news about InBev's expertise and capacity to manage AB assets. Frankly, I don't know anything about the beliefs and values. Next, do they understand consumer behavior in the U.S.? Isn't this their first purchase of a traditional American product? Can they handle it? AB is largely a market presence and force. Do they have a deep and wide understanding of the science?
Can InBev handle it? They're masters of strategic buyout and international integration. They don't change the essence of what makes a company successful. They're the 2nd largest brewer, ahead of Anheuser-Busch. They will soon overtake SABMiller, because InBev is manned by superior businessmen with hunger. In fact, they will handle it better than Anheuser-Busch.



The detractors of this deal are right. This is what InBev will do after buying out A-B. First and foremost, they will destroy A-B's market domestically. Why, you ask? Because their goal is to reduce profit drastically. Anything you like about A-B, to include the Clydesdales, they will destroy. I heard they will even maim cute, harmless puppies! Why? Because they know that if they piss people off, profit will be reduced. Then they will destroy A-B's international market (which isn't very strong anyway.) Any opportunity that A-B had in China, they will destroy. InBev will be happy and we will be sad. Makes sense, right?



For those that think that InBev is really targeting SABMiller in the near term, you're pretty much wrong. InBev wants A-B now because it's the smartest business decision. The buyout is inevitable. It's reported that the potential A-B buyout of Modelo only makes the pot sweeter for InBev. InBev would just tap extra resources from their Brazilian AmBev subsidiary. No problemo, amigo! And if A-B continues to act like a stubborn child (and a private company vice the public company it portends to be), then they will lose in a proxy fight. And whatever goodwill there could have been for St. Louis will have been seriously damaged. So think long and hard about that, Four Sticks.



As for SABMiller, this is what is likely: ``We assume that in three years' time InBev/Anheuser-Busch, Heineken and Carlsberg will break up SABMiller,'' Rijk wrote. Such a deal would give InBev expansion potential in Africa, Rijk said. Heineken and Carlsberg are the largest brewers in the Netherlands and Denmark, respectively, and recently completed the purchase of Britain's Scottish & Newcastle Plc.



Good article discussing this stuffs: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... fer=europe
3,796
Life MemberLife Member
3,796

PostJun 17, 2008#219

NYTIMES article:



http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/busin ... a5DPQxyHeg
523
Senior MemberSenior Member
523

PostJun 17, 2008#220

Questions for innov8ion, InBev lover :wink:



(Again) How did "superior businessmen with hunger" do so horribly in Q1 08, save their exports to America via AB?



How did these masters of "international integration" do at making their Brazilian beer Brahma a global brand?



What is the best selling beer in London?



Who has a better position in China--InBev or AB?
8,922
Life MemberLife Member
8,922

PostJun 17, 2008#221

SoulardX wrote:Questions for innov8ion, InBev lover :wink:


No kidding, I think it's safe to say that Inno is in bed with InBev. 8)

PostJun 17, 2008#222

It sounds like a little meeting between our state elected official and the Ceo of Innov8ion errrr, InBev didn't go so well. 8)




Speaking to reporters after, McCaskill blasted the proposal as a "premium profit for hedge fund investors" and said A-B is a strong company that has provided thousands of good middle class American jobs.

"We do not have a ‘For Sale’ sign on our front lawn in America," she said.

Still, McCaskill conceded that "it’s very unclear that any of us can do anything" to stop the deal.

She said she hoped A-B would "take a long hard look at what this means to the company and the culture" and reject InBev’s offer.

She said she has not talked to A-B officials about the deal. "The company has been very tight-lipped," she said, and "appropriately cautious."

Afterward, McCaskill's spokeswoman Adrianne Marsh said the senator would be sending a letter to A-B's board of directors asking them to reject InBev's offer.




SOURCE
5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostJun 17, 2008#223

^ McCaskill and the other politicians are just posturing in reaction to constituent polling data. Her rhetoric on this issue, other than to soothe some, is utterly meaningless.



Questions for innov8ion, InBev lover Wink



(Again) How did "superior businessmen with hunger" do so horribly in Q1 08, save their exports to America via AB?
Ah, so you admit there is a strong market for InBev products in America. Good show! A-B played too conservatively IMHO. Instead of partnering with InBev, they should have bought strong import and/or craft brands.



Just look at the stock performance of InBev as compared to Budweiser in the last five years. InBev bested BUD's performance seven-fold. http://snipurl.com/2k356. If the reverse occurred, BUD would likely be buying InBev.



Regarding 1Q performance, this was the statement from MarketWatch: "Brewer InBev (INB.BT) Thursday reported a worse-than-expected 11% fall in first-quarter net profit, as lower beer sales in Brazil and higher raw material costs pinched the company's margins."


How did these masters of "international integration" do at making their Brazilian beer Brahma a global brand?
Name a successful global beer brand. I'm not confident that there are any as the local beers will normally dominate. InBev thinks they can make Budweiser a successful global beer brand but I think it's a bit overstated. Bet it'd do better than Brahma, though. This article discusses the "global beer" topic: http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/art ... RTUNE5.htm


What is the best selling beer in London?
It could be a Bud product for all I know. Tell me why 86% of A-B's profits are domestic. Doesn't that seem too high?


Who has a better position in China--InBev or AB?
It could be somewhat comparable and that's one reason why A-B is so desirable.



Look, Anheuser-Busch is a great brand. Based upon recent decisionmaking and performance within the last five years, my confidence in A-B leadership to take the company to the next level has lessened.



What this comes down to is a battle for shareholder support. InBev appears to have a great PR strategy. They make it very clear how the A-B acquisition will improve shareholder value for both companies. And the market believes it, because A-B stock has risen greatly since the rumors came out.



But how effective has A-B's PR response been thus far? We've heard gads of nationalist rhetoric from those loyal to them. We've seen what appears to be a defensive response in a potential Modelo buyout. These are both weak positions to take. Other than that, A-B has been tight-lipped. This is a mistake. In my opinion, A-B looks like a scared fighter backed into a corner. Why isn't A-B delivering a solid message to shareholders that they will see better results under their staid than with InBev? Acknowledge that the stock has seen better days, but that they have a solid plan to take A-B to the next level. Outline a plan that addresses major shareholder concerns. Somehow their message is going to have to be strong enough to convince shareholders to forego a 30% premium. Up till now, it hasn't looked very convincing at all -- especially since they reportedly failed to convince the Oracle of Omaha. If they can convince shareholders to reject the deal, it would be an impressive turning of the tables. But even if they can do it in this instance, how can they stave off future buyouts given the falling dollar?





To be clear, I sure as hell wish A-B were buying InBev out. It's just not the case.
2,940
Life MemberLife Member
2,940

PostJun 17, 2008#224

While I've been commenting on the stock and the opportunities for buyout, the nature of acquisitions, the fair valuation of the stock, the reflection of earnings, strategic initiatives, and international expansion options, there's one thing that stays in my head:



Corporate Culture.



BUD has a warm culture, which allows people to tour their plant, hosts theme parks, spends tons on fun advertising, includes much product placement, and makes sure that the employees are happy. Even the simplest things as well-manicured grounds along their HQ and fostering corporate goodwill throughout their communities, not just StL but wherever their presence can best be felt. They're a corporate citizen in the truest senses of the word.



InBev, meanwhile, is known for cost-cutting and bare-bones operations. Their focus is more on the financial statements than on the livelihood of its employees. Their offices are daft of color, and they would never think to have flowers planted at their HQ. It's all very drab, and it reflects onto the people that work there.



Now, I'm a capitalist and a major fan of free markets & global operations, with integration into multiple markets & economies being in my mind why we fought and won the Cold War. However, that aside, I don't want to see this deal go through not for protectionist means, but for what a takeover by InBev could do to the total livelihood of BUD, to the quality of the product all the way to the quality of the employees' lives.



Shareholders: I truly believe that, with increased integration into the Chinese markets, and the rapidity of expansion of the Budweiser, Harbin, and Tsing Tao brands into the homes of the Chinese consumers, the stock price of BUD will rise to the current levels that the stock is around within ten years, with no loss to quality or dividend levels. With consideration to my previous points and the general consensus around, I humbly ask that you consider these points when determining whether or not to accept the buyout.



Taking into consideration the broader impact in the StL economy, I'm very much in favor of BUD staying BUD.
523
Senior MemberSenior Member
523

PostJun 18, 2008#225

Well played, Innov8tion. I appreciate the jostling.



Some comments on your comments:



I too agree that AB should have been more aggresive in purchasing it's own imports--why not Budvar, Grolsch? Instead, they just served as importers for other company's beers. If they survive this, I'd hope that they'd pursue more imports. Hell, wouldn't that be easier than these ridiculous lawsuits with the original Czech Bud?







Like you said, AB's relative strength in China is a reason InBev wants them.



http://www.clusterstock.com/2008/6/anhe ... attractive



From Credit Suisse:



A-B has been patiently building a position in China since 1993 and we believe the company's efforts are now bearing fruit. We believe China is wrongly overlooked as an A-B growth driver in what will be over time the world's most important beer market.



(Reading that gives me hope that AB has a brighter future if it can survive InBev.)









InBev's says they want to make Bud an even better Global brand. Well, I hope they've learned from past mistakes.



From that same cnnmoney story you linked to:



A previous effort to turn Brahma, a top-selling Brazilian beer, into a "global brand" has faltered, prompting InBev to recast it as merely an "international brand."



And despite success stories in the U.K. and the U.S., InBev's efforts to turn Stella and Beck's into global brands haven't been wildly successful, said Brian Sudano, managing director of Beverage Marketing Corporation in New York



"Despite all the rhetoric, there hasn't been enormous amount of success in marketing these brands," Sudano said.



"I think they're overplaying the potential for Budweiser," he added.



(Reading this makes me think that AB can sell BUD globally better than InBev.)







While you are unimpressed with AB's lack of public comment, I am impressed with InBev's Brito's PR efforts. The man is certainly going out of his way to communicate with STL, saying everything he can to give a positive spin. In all the other STL corporate takeovers (McDonnel-Douglas, May, AGE, etc.), I'm not sure I remember the new company trying so hard to win over the city. It would be incredibly naive to fully believe his commitment to STL, but it's still good to hear.







No matter, AB IV will go down fighting, hard.



If you were AB IV and read this, would it make you quit or fight more fiercely:



http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/busin ... ref=slogin



I think this'll drag on for months.
Read more posts (836 remaining)
Share