|
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On 2/27/13 12:48 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/27/2013 12:25 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent analysis. I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents was pennies to them anyway I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S. brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings. It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a beer, and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever had one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in that country. Cool story bro! However, it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You should buy some bottle caps for your paranoia. |
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On 2/27/2013 12:50 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/27/13 12:48 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/27/2013 12:25 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent analysis. I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents was pennies to them anyway I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S. brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings. It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a beer, and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever had one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in that country. Cool story bro! However, it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You should buy some bottle caps for your paranoia. Nice insult (well, not really) but it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. |
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On 2/27/13 12:54 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/27/2013 12:50 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:48 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/27/2013 12:25 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent analysis. I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents was pennies to them anyway I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S. brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings. It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a beer, and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever had one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in that country. Cool story bro! However, it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You should buy some bottle caps for your paranoia. Nice insult (well, not really) but it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You have no knowledge of the particulars of the situation in the brewery. |
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On 2/27/2013 1:02 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/27/13 12:54 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/27/2013 12:50 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:48 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/27/2013 12:25 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent analysis. I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents was pennies to them anyway I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S. brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings. It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a beer, and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever had one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in that country. Cool story bro! However, it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You should buy some bottle caps for your paranoia. Nice insult (well, not really) but it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You have no knowledge of the particulars of the situation in the brewery. I have as much if not more than you do... And this reeks of a union action... |
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On 2/27/13 1:12 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:25:02 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent analysis. I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents was pennies to them anyway I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S. brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings. It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a beer, and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever had one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in that country. I am drinking PBR these days but if I want a Mexican beer I will go for Modelo or Dos Equis. The best beer I ever had was Gallo in Guatemala but we had been walking in the rain forest for a couple hours when we stumbled into a little store. That may have shaded my opinion. I have no idea how much two cost because I only had a 5 (US) and they did not have enough money in the store to make change. I told them to keep the 5. They gave us 2 more for the road. I saved a bottle as a souvenirs and it is in my tiki bar Hmmm. I've enjoyed a Pabst from time to time. I understand from friends who have been to Cuba recently that the Cuban beers are "tasty." Dos Equis is one of my favorites. I like Corona, too, and Peroni from Italy, but the reality is I probably only have a six pack and a half of beer a year. |
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On Wednesday, 27 February 2013 13:25:02 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent analysis. I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents was pennies to them anyway I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S. brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings. It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a beer, and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever had one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in that country. Funny...way back in the day we used to laugh at the little yanke sailors who'd get buzzed off a few of our beers. At that time 'merican beer was ****y and ours... a man's ale supposidly a couple percent more alcohol. |
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On Feb 27, 9:38*am, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
Budweiser waters down its beer, lawsuit alleges Beer lovers across the U.S. have accused Anheuser-Busch of watering down its Budweiser, Michelob and other brands, in class-action suits seeking millions in damages. The suits, filed in Pennsylvania, California and other states, claim consumers have been cheated out of the alcohol content stated on labels. Budweiser and Michelob each boast of being 5 percent alcohol, while some "light" versions are said to be just over 4 percent. The lawsuits are based on information from former employees at the company's 13 U.S. breweries, some in high-level plant positions, according to lead lawyer Josh Boxer of San Rafael, Calif. "Our information comes from former employees at Anheuser-Busch, who have informed us that as a matter of corporate practice, all of their products mentioned (in the lawsuit) are watered down," Boxer said. "It's a simple cost-saving measure, and it's very significant." The excess water is added just before bottling and cuts the stated alcohol content by 3 percent to 8 percent, he said. Anheuser-Busch InBev called the claims "groundless" and said its beers fully comply with labeling laws. "Our beers are in full compliance with all alcohol labeling laws. We proudly adhere to the highest standards in brewing our beers, which have made them the best-selling in the U.S. and the world," Peter Kraemer, vice president of brewing and supply, said in a statement. The suit involves 10 Anheuser-Busch products: Budweiser, Bud Ice, Bud Light Platinum, Michelob, Michelob Ultra, Hurricane High Gravity Lager, King Cobra, Busch Ice, Natural Ice and Bud Light Lime. Anheuser-Busch, based in St. Louis, Mo., merged with InBev in 2008 to form the world's largest alcohol producer, headquartered in Belgium. In 2011, the company produced 10 billion gallons of malt beverages, 3 billion of them in the U.S., and reported $22 billion in profits from that category, the lawsuit said. AB InBev, the maker of Budweiser and Stella Artois, controls 39 percent of the U.S. beer market. According to the lawsuit, the company has sophisticated equipment that measures the alcohol content throughout the brewing process and is accurate to within one-hundredth of a percent. But after the merger, the company increasingly chose to dilute its popular brands of beer, the lawsuit alleged. "Following the merger, AB vigorously accelerated the deceptive practices described below, sacrificing the quality products once produced by Anheuser-Busch in order to reduce costs," said the lead lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court in San Francisco on behalf of consumers in the lower 48 states. Companion suits are being filed this week in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and elsewhere. Each seeks at least $5 million in damages. The named Pennsylvania plaintiffs, Thomas and Gerald Greenberg of Ambler, said they buy six cases of the affected Anheuser-Busch products a month. They did not immediately return a message Tuesday, and Boxer would not elaborate on their purchases except to say the consumer-protection suit does not involve retailers or bar owners. One of the California plaintiffs, Nina Giampaoli of Sonoma County, said she bought a six-pack of Budweiser every week for the past four years. "I think it's wrong for huge corporations to lie to their loyal customers — I really feel cheated. No matter what the product is, people should be able to rely on the information companies put on their labels," Giampaoli said in a news release issued by Boxer's law firm. Bloomberg News first reported Tuesday on the lawsuits. In a telephone interview with The Associated Press, Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. "AB (Anheuser-Busch) never intends for the malt beverage to possess the amount of alcohol that is stated on the label. As a result, AB's customers are overcharged for watered-down beer and AB is unjustly enriched by the additional volume it can sell," the lawsuit said. - - - Probably didn't happen when the Bud brand was a proud American brand owned by the Busch family. Never liked the brands, but I know a lot of people did. Clip and Paste...it's all Harry has in his little troll world.... |
Union job action?
On Feb 27, 10:37*am, True North wrote:
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:29:04 AM UTC-4, True North wrote: On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:21:01 AM UTC-4, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote: On 2/27/2013 9:38 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: Budweiser waters down its beer, lawsuit alleges Beer lovers across the U.S. have accused Anheuser-Busch of watering down its Budweiser, Michelob and other brands, in class-action suits seeking millions in damages. The suits, filed in Pennsylvania, California and other states, claim consumers have been cheated out of the alcohol content stated on labels. Budweiser and Michelob each boast of being 5 percent alcohol, while some "light" versions are said to be just over 4 percent. The lawsuits are based on information from former employees at the company's 13 U.S. breweries, some in high-level plant positions, according to lead lawyer Josh Boxer of San Rafael, Calif. "Our information comes from former employees at Anheuser-Busch, who have informed us that as a matter of corporate practice, all of their products mentioned (in the lawsuit) are watered down," Boxer said. "It's a simple cost-saving measure, and it's very significant." The excess water is added just before bottling and cuts the stated alcohol content by 3 percent to 8 percent, he said. Anheuser-Busch InBev called the claims "groundless" and said its beers fully comply with labeling laws. "Our beers are in full compliance with all alcohol labeling laws. We proudly adhere to the highest standards in brewing our beers, which have made them the best-selling in the U.S. and the world," Peter Kraemer, vice president of brewing and supply, said in a statement. The suit involves 10 Anheuser-Busch products: Budweiser, Bud Ice, Bud Light Platinum, Michelob, Michelob Ultra, Hurricane High Gravity Lager, King Cobra, Busch Ice, Natural Ice and Bud Light Lime. Anheuser-Busch, based in St. Louis, Mo., merged with InBev in 2008 to form the world's largest alcohol producer, headquartered in Belgium.. In 2011, the company produced 10 billion gallons of malt beverages, 3 billion of them in the U.S., and reported $22 billion in profits from that category, the lawsuit said. AB InBev, the maker of Budweiser and Stella Artois, controls 39 percent of the U.S. beer market. According to the lawsuit, the company has sophisticated equipment that measures the alcohol content throughout the brewing process and is accurate to within one-hundredth of a percent. But after the merger, the company increasingly chose to dilute its popular brands of beer, the lawsuit alleged. "Following the merger, AB vigorously accelerated the deceptive practices described below, sacrificing the quality products once produced by Anheuser-Busch in order to reduce costs," said the lead lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court in San Francisco on behalf of consumers in the lower 48 states. Companion suits are being filed this week in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and elsewhere. Each seeks at least $5 million in damages. The named Pennsylvania plaintiffs, Thomas and Gerald Greenberg of Ambler, said they buy six cases of the affected Anheuser-Busch products a month. They did not immediately return a message Tuesday, and Boxer would not elaborate on their purchases except to say the consumer-protection suit does not involve retailers or bar owners. One of the California plaintiffs, Nina Giampaoli of Sonoma County, said she bought a six-pack of Budweiser every week for the past four years. "I think it's wrong for huge corporations to lie to their loyal customers I really feel cheated. No matter what the product is, people should be able to rely on the information companies put on their labels," Giampaoli said in a news release issued by Boxer's law firm. Bloomberg News first reported Tuesday on the lawsuits. In a telephone interview with The Associated Press, Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. "AB (Anheuser-Busch) never intends for the malt beverage to possess the amount of alcohol that is stated on the label. As a result, AB's customers are overcharged for watered-down beer and AB is unjustly enriched by the additional volume it can sell," the lawsuit said. - - - Probably didn't happen when the Bud brand was a proud American brand owned by the Busch family. Never liked the brands, but I know a lot of people did. Probably some kind of wildcat action by the union... You, my...you couldn't sound any stupider than you do. It must come naturally, as you're not known for working hard at anything. D'oh......that should be 'my, my' Gumby shows his stupidity...AGAIN..... |
Pissy Beer Gets...Pissier?
On Feb 27, 1:02*pm, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/27/13 12:54 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/27/2013 12:50 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:48 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/27/2013 12:25 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Boxer said he has evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but stopped short of saying the beers had been independently tested. That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent analysis. I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents was pennies to them anyway I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S. brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings. It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a beer, and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever had one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in that country. Cool story bro! However, it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You should buy some bottle caps for your paranoia. Nice insult (well, not really) but it doesn't answer the question why they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting. You have no knowledge of the particulars of the situation in the brewery. Neither do you, ****stick. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com