In article ,
says...

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...

That's got to be the stupidest thing you've said here, and you've said
some insane, stupid things.

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....

On 2/27/2013 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


This reeks of union stench... Must be Budweiser wanted the folks who
pick the beer off of the pallets to stop putting them on other pallets,
there is another man for that and the handoff needs to be properly
documented... which of course takes another guy or gal

On 2/27/13 12:20 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/27/2013 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


This reeks of union stench... Must be Budweiser wanted the folks who
pick the beer off of the pallets to stop putting them on other pallets,
there is another man for that and the handoff needs to be properly
documented... which of course takes another guy or gal


PsychoScotty gets paranoid for Budweiser.

In article ,
says...

On 2/27/2013 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


This reeks of union stench... Must be Budweiser wanted the folks who
pick the beer off of the pallets to stop putting them on other pallets,
there is another man for that and the handoff needs to be properly
documented... which of course takes another guy or gal

You insane stupid fool!!!! Please do show us how this has ANYTHING to do
with ANY union. What a dumb ass!!!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.