Oh, as a low info simpleton, I finally see what AB is talking about when it said in its ad the price of beer would go up. An 18 pack priced at $14.00 would become $15.89. There would be no more $2-2.50 beer by the bottle in Stillwater bars. So make the tax on 6 point beer the same as 3.2 beer. Oh, that is too much to ask for in this revenue starved state. Republicans realize a well amped up source of revenue. So divert it to education, and forget about a 1 cent rise in state sales tax.

But! They set their own price. Which is quite higher vs other mass produced beers like pabst, lone star, or hamms. They're making up extra profits where they're not paying taxes.

We should tax 3.2 beer the same as liquor, although it's not some revenue bonanza some would hope for. 3.2 beer is taxed at $.36 per gallon, or about 20 cents per six pack. Higher alcohol beer, wine, and liquor are taxed at rates between one-half and two cents per ounce. Liquor tax revenues are less than $100 million a year. While the money is nice, it's a relative drop in the bucket to the state revenue.

I doubt InBev cares about the taxes as those would just be added to the price of the product. What they do care about is merchandizing and display of their products. 3.2 beer, since it's not liquor, doesn't fall under the rules which don't allow shelf space agreements, nor for brewers to set up displays, or for special or volume pricing (all Oklahoma retailers pay the same price for liquor products regardless of size).

InBev works with about 500 distributors nationwide, so their claims that they need to be able to self distribute in Oklahoma are bunk. And they're so eager to keep the craft market from taking over, they'd take a hit in Oklahoma just to keep from ceding this state to its competitors.

And, considering how many InBev products ARE distributed to liquor stores via the traditional tiered system, that just puts the lie to further rest that InBev couldn't function in that system.

So Im hearing that Jolley's bill will further consolidate wholesalers? Is this true? If so, why and how would it allow less competition for wholesalers? This wouldnt be good for consumers and pricing and this may be one big issue with this bill. Maybe someone can explain.

Oklahoma liquor store owners start push for state question on alcohol laws | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-liquor-store-owners-start-push-for-state-question-on-alcohol-laws/article/5480912)

Highlights include:
* Cold, strong beer sold in every outlet that currently sells any strength of beer, including grocery and convenience stores.
* Grocery store wine licenses to allow both locally-owned and chain grocery stores to sell wine.
* Oklahoma breweries could distribute their products directly to Oklahoma retail package stores.
* Oklahoma breweries could serve and sell their product at their own facilities, regardless of ABV.
* Liquor stores could hold tastings inside their store.
* Retail package stores could sell any and all items sold in a grocery store with some restriction.

I haven't seen the actual language, so I'm taking info from the RLAO PR and talking points. However, the things I like and felt were missing from the other proposal...

1. Oklahoma breweries distributing products directly to liquor stores. YAY!
2. Oklahoma breweries serving and selling their products at their own facilities. YAY!

These two would immensely help our craft brew industry, as well as invite more brewpub creation, and levels the field with Oklahoma wineries.

3. Liquor store tastings. YAY! Another good benefit. I have questions about logistics, but still, this could be good.

Still wish either proposal addressed children in liquor stores, hours, Sundays and Holidays, but none of those are personal "critical" issues for me. I'd also like to have out of state products shipped directly to the consumer.

Still wish either proposal addressed children in liquor stores, hours, Sundays and Holidays, but none of those are personal "critical" issues for me. I'd also like to have out of state products shipped directly to the consumer.
Yeah, but it will help to be able to grab beer/wine at the grocery store when I've got the kids.

Will liquor stores have the petition to sign when it's released? Otherwise, how are people going to sign it?

I should clarify that I only agreed with this part of jerrywall's last post



I took that as meaning not local brewers but many of the out of state ones we clamor for.

The current laws inhibit both local craft expansion as well as other breweries expanding into our market. At the very least it offers them an excuse to choose not to come to OK until they are good and ready.


I recall them saying (number of years ago) that if one more state did away with 3.2 beer--they would stop producing it. Those 6-8 states that sell it would be out of luck.


I don't recall AB saying this but I do recall an article last year discussing how the other states where watching what OK was doing with its 3.2 law and that if one state were to do away with it and go to single-strength chances were probable the other 3.2 states would follow suite.



I haven't seen the actual language, so I'm taking info from the RLAO PR and talking points. However, the things I like and felt were missing from the other proposal...

1. Oklahoma breweries distributing products directly to liquor stores. YAY!
2. Oklahoma breweries serving and selling their products at their own facilities. YAY!

These two would immensely help our craft brew industry, as well as invite more brewpub creation, and levels the field with Oklahoma wineries.

3. Liquor store tastings. YAY! Another good benefit. I have questions about logistics, but still, this could be good.

Still wish either proposal addressed children in liquor stores, hours, Sundays and Holidays, but none of those are personal "critical" issues for me. I'd also like to have out of state products shipped directly to the consumer.

I'm pretty sure 1 and 2 are covered in the SJR.

Are they? Maybe 1, although I'm not sure and if so it seems to be limited, and I don't see #2 at all. Maybe I'm missing something?

... other breweries expanding into our market. At the very least it offers them an excuse to choose not to come to OK until they are good and ready.


And they are BS excuses. People don't come into the market because of capacity, finances, or such. Nothing at all to do with a law. There is not a single law in Oklahoma that's unique that would deter expansion into this market.

If any beer brewer wants to blame refrigeration, that just tells me they make crappy, pissy, beer.

Are they? Maybe 1, although I'm not sure and if so it seems to be limited, and I don't see #2 at all. Maybe I'm missing something?

I'll be honest, I haven't bothered with trying to decipher it in going based off of what's been presented and told to me. As soon as I can find where the sources I trust have distinguished this I'll post it here (if you care).

If any beer brewer wants to blame refrigeration, that just tells me they make crappy, pissy, beer.

Here's where I'll disagree with you until the end of time. Refrigeration absolutely matters and if you were a brewer or familiar with how beer is brewed and how it ages you'd understand this too.

Here's where I'll disagree with you until the end of time. Refrigeration absolutely matters and if you were a brewer or familiar with how beer is brewed and how it ages you'd understand this too.

I am a brewer (albeit amateur) of 15 years and also owned a liquor store for a decade, and I still maintain it doesn't. Light kills beer, and extreme temperatures kills beer. If refrigeration mattered we'd be screwed because there isn't a single beer that remains refrigerated from brewing to consumption.

Refrigeration matters for certain beers for long term storage. But even New Belgium, who tries to claim refrigeration is that important, sells beer in Utah... where.. guess what? If a retailer has inventory sitting around long enough for refrigeration to matter, that's a problem, but most likely they'll have skunking from the light first.

Now some beers lose their flavor and such in 3-6 months, and refrigeration can extend that, but again, no retailer should be sitting on product for anywhere near that long (nor a distributor/wholesaler).

And then there are crappy watered down domestic lagers which have no resistance to temperature. They're also the ones they want you to drink "ice cold" so you don't taste how bad they are. Hence "crappy, pissy, beer."

Here's where I'll disagree with you until the end of time. Refrigeration absolutely matters and if you were a brewer or familiar with how beer is brewed and how it ages you'd understand this too.

Bille,
Do you consider 56-57 degree beer "refrigerated"? Well, that's a trick question because some of the best beer I have enjoyed sits in pubs in Great Britain. It's called cask ale and is pumped/drawn (physically) into your glass. Generally, it's 56 degrees, but it varies because the beer is kept below ground. It doesn't have any refrigeration but is cooler (some incorrectly call it warm beer, but 56 degrees is not warm) due to being kept below ground level. I have always heard that American beer needs to be very cold because of the taste, and I will admit, I have taken a swallow of a "domestic" beer that was a long way from ice cold and I spit it out because it didn't taste very good.
C. T.

I had to go back to page 4 to find where I addressed refrigeration and beer staling, it's here if you want to read it: Another Oklahoma liquor law Thread 2010. http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/23702-another-oklahoma-liquor-law-thread-2010-a.html#post701934

cliffnotes: beer stales/oxidizes at a rate twice as fast for every 18 degrees F. "cellar" temps at 50-55F would stale twice as fast as being stored near freezing and room temp would stale at ~4 times as fast. I agree some beers react much differently to temperatures but it cannot be denied that it has an affect, ESPECIALLY for the most popular beer style, IPA.

Bille,
If I read your comment about IPA correctly, you are saying heat has more impact on them than others. If I misunderstood, I apologize, but IPAs came about because beer moved between Great Britain and India tended to go bad due to the distance and temperature since they didn't have refrigeration then, so more hops were added, creating the IPA that was able to survive the distance/time/temperature while being shipped from Great Britain to India. I'm no beer expert, so I don't have a clue about a lot of the processes but that's what I was told when I was in Great Britain. It may not be fact, but that's how I understand it.
C. T.

I am definitely not an expert, I have heard things, especially in England, but who knows whether they knew what they were talking about or not. Just enjoying a conversation about one of my favorite subjects.

Bille,
If I read your comment about IPA correctly, you are saying heat has more impact on them than others. If I misunderstood, I apologize, but IPAs came about because beer moved between Great Britain and India tended to go bad due to the distance and temperature since they didn't have refrigeration then, so more hops were added, creating the IPA that was able to survive the distance/time/temperature while being shipped from Great Britain to India. I'm no beer expert, so I don't have a clue about a lot of the processes but that's what I was told when I was in Great Britain. It may not be fact, but that's how I understand it.
C. T.

I am definitely not an expert, I have heard things, especially in England, but who knows whether they knew what they were talking about or not. Just enjoying a conversation about one of my favorite subjects.

I also spend a lot of time in UK and the temperature of beer stays low because it's always cold there. It doesn't sit in a 72 degree liquor store. It sits in a climate controlled 50 degree "cellar." Since the 70's pubs have had refridgeration to keep that "cellar" temperature. And in even more cases modern systems (in the classic pubs) keep beer "ice" cold and actually use heat exchanger in the hand pumps to warm the ales when they hit the glass so the more popular lagers can stay cold.

The ales stay fresh because the rate of consumption in that country is INSANE. Once a 20 liter cask ale is tapped it's almost always gone within 3 days. A cask ale exposed to atmosphere has 4-5 days maximum, and only if kept at "cellar" temperature.

And as to IPA's it's definitely cool in the Indian oceans down in the cargo hold. So the temp wasn't a factor. The hops were added as a preservative.

I had to go back to page 4 to find where I addressed refrigeration and beer staling, it's here if you want to read it: Another Oklahoma liquor law Thread 2010. http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/23702-another-oklahoma-liquor-law-thread-2010-a.html#post701934

cliffnotes: beer stales/oxidizes at a rate twice as fast for every 18 degrees F. "cellar" temps at 50-55F would stale twice as fast as being stored near freezing and room temp would stale at ~4 times as fast. I agree some beers react much differently to temperatures but it cannot be denied that it has an affect, ESPECIALLY for the most popular beer style, IPA.

But you're talking about long term storage. I'm talking about refrigeration as an effect on the retail side (and it's use as an excuse to not distribute here). Cellaring, yeah, temperature makes a difference as it affects the life span (as I mentioned as well).

Bille,
If I read your comment about IPA correctly, you are saying heat has more impact on them than others. If I misunderstood, I apologize, but IPAs came about because beer moved between Great Britain and India tended to go bad due to the distance and temperature since they didn't have refrigeration then, so more hops were added, creating the IPA that was able to survive the distance/time/temperature while being shipped from Great Britain to India. I'm no beer expert, so I don't have a clue about a lot of the processes but that's what I was told when I was in Great Britain. It may not be fact, but that's how I understand it.
C. T.

I am definitely not an expert, I have heard things, especially in England, but who knows whether they knew what they were talking about or not. Just enjoying a conversation about one of my favorite subjects.


I also spend a lot of time in UK and the temperature of beer stays low because it's always cold there. It doesn't sit in a 72 degree liquor store. It sits in a climate controlled 50 degree "cellar." Since the 70's pubs have had refridgeration to keep that "cellar" temperature. And in even more cases modern systems (in the classic pubs) keep beer "ice" cold and actually use heat exchanger in the hand pumps to warm the ales when they hit the glass so the more popular lagers can stay cold.

The ales stay fresh because the rate of consumption in that country is INSANE. Once a 20 liter cask ale is tapped it's almost always gone within 3 days. A cask ale exposed to atmosphere has 4-5 days maximum, and only if kept at "cellar" temperature.

And as to IPA's it's definitely cool in the Indian oceans down in the cargo hold. So the temp wasn't a factor. The hops were added as a preservative.

I should have put emphasis on American IPA, a wildly different animal than the English varieties. We could have a great discussion on IPA history, I learned a lot about the style, it's history, as well as debunking some old myths.


But you're talking about long term storage. I'm talking about refrigeration as an effect on the retail side (and it's use as an excuse to not distribute here). Cellaring, yeah, temperature makes a difference as it affects the life span (as I mentioned as well).

No sir, I'm talking in general...I'm talking cold storage immediately after packaging. I'm talking about a beer changing significantly at a months age in package, not just long-term.

It's no coincidence that all of the best IPAs coming from smaller breweries are only available at the brewery or in a very limited number of retail stores. Freshness is *everything* with these beers. A Julius that went through the current Oklahoma distribution system would def not be the same

Tony is the co-owner/head brewer at Roughtail. This quote was in regards to a discussion about popular IPAs.

Yet amazing we sell tons of IPA's in Oklahoma. And I know of way to many distributors (in so called cold states) and wholesalers who do not store packaged beer cold. Kegs yes, but not the cans and bottles beer. And talk to a swamper some time and find out how warm that beer gets.

At a liquor store, the turn for most beers is 3-5 days, if proper inventory management is followed. The exception being special buys. The amount of time the beer is sitting at liquor stores is too short to have any discernible effect.

Refrigeration isn't the reason a certain beer isn't in Oklahoma. It's money, production capacity, lack of a distribution agreement, or lack of demand. If there's money to be made here, a brewer will sell here. And when they claim it's about refrigeration, that's bunk, because they all sell into pipelines where the beer doesn't stay cold. The only way to avoid that is to self distribute like AB, but even those you see beer in stacks at the retail level outside of the cooler.

And on the extreme cases where freshness is so important, it's as much about geography. I can't see a brewer in Oklahoma who produces such a fragile IPA selling it in say NYC just because of the transport time. The same reason many of the fine small batch beers wouldn't want to ship their beers oversees.

Tony is the co-owner/head brewer at Roughtail. This quote was in regards to a discussion about popular IPAs.

How could they even be in the limited number of retail stores then? It seems the problem is at the distribution level, not the retail level.

This link takes you to the initiative petition that's been filed by the liquor retailers association...

Http://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/questions/785.pdf

On a side note (cause this isn't really a law issue)... Rahr & Sons expands into Oklahoma next week. For those who've never had them, they're one of the larger craft brewers in Texas, and have won quite a few awards. A bunch of places will be doing launch events next week (the usual suspects - The Patriarch, Skinny Slims, Oak and Oar, etc).

And in even more cases modern systems (in the classic pubs) keep beer "ice" cold and actually use heat exchanger in the hand pumps to warm the ales when they hit the glass so the more popular lagers can stay cold.

Uptowner,
There are eleven pubs within one mile of my friends house, and the cask ale is subterranean and the other beers are refrigerated like any normal American bar and they are not subterranean. I have been all over England, Scotland, Wales, and Cornwall (as well as Ireland, but little or no cask ale there), and If you spend some time in London, most pubs do not have cask ale because they were not built with the subterranean facility. I believe that's because of their proximity to the Thames, but I might be wrong. I have also enjoyed cask ale at pubs that have the "casks" or kegs lying on their sides on a shelf above bar level, they are not as cool as those that are in the cellar, but still quite good. I don't remember seeing any pubs in London that used this method. I suspect that the term "warm beer" came from this style of storing the kegs. One of should start another thread to talk about various styles of beer since this one was meant to be about Oklahoma's liquor laws. Oh well, if somebody tells me to shut up, I will.
C. T.

I just talked to my friend in London and she corrected me about cask ales in London, typically, pubs very near the Thames don't have cask ale because they seldom have cellars (due to flooding). Away from the Thames (which would be the majority of pubs), it's not and issue, they often have cask ales.
C. T.

Uptowner,
There are eleven pubs within one mile of my friends house, and the cask ale is subterranean and the other beers are refrigerated like any normal American bar and they are not subterranean. I have been all over England, Scotland, Wales, and Cornwall (as well as Ireland, but little or no cask ale there), and If you spend some time in London, most pubs do not have cask ale because they were not built with the subterranean facility. I believe that's because of their proximity to the Thames, but I might be wrong. I have also enjoyed cask ale at pubs that have the "casks" or kegs lying on their sides on a shelf above bar level, they are not as cool as those that are in the cellar, but still quite good. I don't remember seeing any pubs in London that used this method. I suspect that the term "warm beer" came from this style of storing the kegs. One of should start another thread to talk about various styles of beer since this one was meant to be about Oklahoma's liquor laws. Oh well, if somebody tells me to shut up, I will.
C. T.

They're getting very high tech over there. My good friend is a free-trade contractor to big breweries in Bristol. The breweries all pay to have their beers installed in pubs. But in most cases they OWN the pubs. A few visits ago he showed me a system he installed in a free house that had casks behind the bar on shelves like you described, but spring loaded so they start at an angle when full then gradually tipped up to tell you how much beer was left. They also had blankets wrapped around them lined with chilled water piped through a cooler/pump to keep the beer exactly 53 degrees. Best beer I ever had.

I wonder what the landscape in OK would look like if breweries were allowed to own bars?

Anheuser Busch (AB) obviously wants to hang on to those five or six states that sell 3.2 beer in the grocery stores.

Don't know how they actually brew the 3.2 beer; however, if it's as simple as a watered down product in which AB can distribute--why would they want to promote the stronger stuff in Oklahoma?

They're getting very high tech over there. My good friend is a free-trade contractor to big breweries in Bristol. The breweries all pay to have their beers installed in pubs. But in most cases they OWN the pubs. A few visits ago he showed me a system he installed in a free house that had casks behind the bar on shelves like you described, but spring loaded so they start at an angle when full then gradually tipped up to tell you how much beer was left. They also had blankets wrapped around them lined with chilled water piped through a cooler/pump to keep the beer exactly 53 degrees. Best beer I ever had.

I wonder what the landscape in OK would look like if breweries were allowed to own bars?

Uptowner,
The "Free Houses" (I thought that meant "free beer"! Ok, not really, I guess I just hoped.) seem to be more of the norm now. Of the eleven pubs within a mile of my friends home, only one is brewer owned, it's the Greyhound and it is owned by Youngs brewerey. It's located in Carshalton. The difference today about a brewery owned pub is that most of them offer other brands. For years, they only sold their beers and nothing else.
C. T.

Anheuser Busch (AB) obviously wants to hang on to those five or six states that sell 3.2 beer in the grocery stores.

Don't know how they actually brew the 3.2 beer; however, if it's as simple as a watered down product in which AB can distribute--why would they want to promote the stronger stuff in Oklahoma?

Laramie,
I have heard the term "watered down" for years, but in reality, doesn't the alcohol level have more to do with the amount of sugar used in the brewing process? I have done the home brew thing and if I'm not mistaken, a teaspoon of sugar per bottle will result in the higher alcohol beer and less sugar will result in lower alcohol content. What do you think?
C. T.

Laramie,
I have heard the term "watered down" for years, but in reality, doesn't the alcohol level have more to do with the amount of sugar used in the brewing process? I have done the home brew thing and if I'm not mistaken, a teaspoon of sugar per bottle will result in the higher alcohol beer and less sugar will result in lower alcohol content. What do you think?'
C. T.

You're probably correct CT. My knowledge of this wouldn't get me past the fifth grade. ;) I would love to do the home brew thing; they make it sound so inviting. Knew a friend at UCO who use to brew his own beer and bottle it. Many times he invited me to his car for a cold one between many classes (we shared an open hour in between). Myself, I'd be afraid to attempt anything like this for fear that I might just poison a group of people--myself included.

Recall attending a funeral in Texas where everyone was invited to a dinner following the funeral. Someone didn't know the canning process (botulism)--several people got sick (one died). Had to return the next week for another funeral.

Just wish I had time to do more research. It's more complicated than most of us think--at least I can point this finger at myself.

^^^^^^^^
Nope. It's as simple as it sounds. They dilute it by adding water to it. They also bake off some of the alcohol by adding heat to the process. 3.2 is an ABW measurement rather than ABV, which is closer to 4.0 on those beers.

Considering most of the product in question is watery low-point lager to begin with, the 3.2 product is not THAT far from full-strength. Evaporate some alcohol, add some water, and *presto*, 3.2 beer.

Some beers instead use reverse osmosis, where beers are run through filters that only allow water and alcohol to pass, the alcohol is removed, and the water is re-introduced. Essentially a dehydration/rehydration process. But most 3.2 beers are in fact...literally watered down.

AB doesn't sell their regular products in Oklahoma but I don't think it has anything to do with refrigeration. I believe it has more to do with them not wanting to go through the distribution system. They can be their own distributor of 3.2 beer, which is why they are opposing this law. They don't want to play by the same rules as other brewers in this state have to.

It's New Belgium that doesn't sell in Oklahoma due to refrigeration but word is that's about to change.

The weight vs. volume and strong beer vs. the 3.2 probably isn't that big of an issue.

bchris02, got to give it up to you--beginning to see your point.

Yet amazing we sell tons of IPA's in Oklahoma. And I know of way to many distributors (in so called cold states) and wholesalers who do not store packaged beer cold. Kegs yes, but not the cans and bottles beer. And talk to a swamper some time and find out how warm that beer gets.

At a liquor store, the turn for most beers is 3-5 days, if proper inventory management is followed. The exception being special buys. The amount of time the beer is sitting at liquor stores is too short to have any discernible effect.

Refrigeration isn't the reason a certain beer isn't in Oklahoma. It's money, production capacity, lack of a distribution agreement, or lack of demand. If there's money to be made here, a brewer will sell here. And when they claim it's about refrigeration, that's bunk, because they all sell into pipelines where the beer doesn't stay cold. The only way to avoid that is to self distribute like AB, but even those you see beer in stacks at the retail level outside of the cooler.

And on the extreme cases where freshness is so important, it's as much about geography. I can't see a brewer in Oklahoma who produces such a fragile IPA selling it in say NYC just because of the transport time. The same reason many of the fine small batch beers wouldn't want to ship their beers oversees.
The reason we sell tons of IPA is because it's the number one style and that is the demand, however it doesn't change the fact that the beer isn't as fresh as it could be. IPA isn't the only beer style that will benefit greatly from refrigeration, just the style that will benefit the most.


^^^^^^^^
Nope. It's as simple as it sounds. They dilute it by adding water to it. They also bake off some of the alcohol by adding heat to the process. 3.2 is an ABW measurement rather than ABV, which is closer to 4.0 on those beers.

Considering most of the product in question is watery low-point lager to begin with, the 3.2 product is not THAT far from full-strength. Evaporate some alcohol, add some water, and *presto*, 3.2 beer.

Some beers instead use reverse osmosis, where beers are run through filters that only allow water and alcohol to pass, the alcohol is removed, and the water is re-introduced. Essentially a dehydration/rehydration process. But most 3.2 beers are in fact...literally watered down.

That's pretty interesting, I've never heard the process described that way before. The way I've heard they (the macro brewers) brew their beer is that they make a high gravity (higher alcohol) beer, say 7ish percent, and then dilute it down to the strength they need. This method allows them to make more beer as well being able to be more consistent. The process you described seems overly complex which is why I tend to believe for repeatability they are more likely to use a process like I mentioned.

As far as brewing beer at home it's really not that hard at all. There are things to keep in mind and the incidences with botulism although important (and scary) it's not really a concern if you practice common sense in your brewing. If anybody here is interested in learning homebrewing feel free to post up or send me a pm. I've taught several classes (did a briefing at the south okc library this past week actually) and many of my friends are teaching classes either at Learn to Brew in Moore or over at The Brew Shop in okc. It's an extremely fun and addicting hobby but at the same time it's not for everybody.

Looks like AB will quit their propaganda campaign against SJR68.

Anheuser-Busch warms up to Oklahoma liquor reforms proposal (http://newsok.com/anheuser-busch-warms-up-to-oklahoma-liquor-reforms-proposal/article/5482028)

Forget AB, this seems to be this biggest problem with Jolley's bill. Why does it have to have any new language on the regular liquor distributors? Is this to appease the big 2 distributors in this state and prevent them from campaigning against this? History tells us that if we have less competition, we will see price increases. Im sure thats what will happen when there are only 2 distributors left in this state.

BOTTLED UP | News OK (http://newsok.com/smaller-liquor-distributors-say-proposed-state-question-would-give-unfair-advantage-to-larger-businesses/article/5482030)

I think part of the incentive (or pretty much all of it) is to help out Wal-Mart and other large retail chains. They don't want to have to order from 7 distributors to get the volume of products they'll need, so with this one or two distributors could have control of the more popular products (such as Yellow Tail, Sutter Home, etc). It would also make it easier for them to buy up all the supply of limited availability products.

I am not real familiar with how the distribution system works, but why should anyone be forced to sell their product to a distributor? Especially if that distributor only serves one retail store, like Byron's?

There's not a distributor that serves a single store. Byron's is Sterling's largest customer, but any other liquor store or bar can purchase from them. We did quite regularly when we had our shop.

But think about if they did? So Distributor A signs an exclusive distribution agreement on a certain beer or wine, and then only sells it to a single retailer. Nice way to control prices.

Double post.

I am not real familiar with how the distribution system works, but why should anyone be forced to sell their product to a distributor? Especially if that distributor only serves one retail store, like Byron's?

For some reason that is how alcohol distribution works nationwide: Three-tier system (alcohol distribution) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-tier_system_(alcohol_distribution)). Why? I dunno, but this isn't something Jolley's bill is specifically making up just for Oklahoma.

In related news: https://twitter.com/briOKC/status/704776817119350789


SJR68 clears senate floor , 28 to 16 must still go to House

I think part of the incentive (or pretty much all of it) is to help out Wal-Mart and other large retail chains. They don't want to have to order from 7 distributors to get the volume of products they'll need, so with this one or two distributors could have control of the more popular products (such as Yellow Tail, Sutter Home, etc). It would also make it easier for them to buy up all the supply of limited availability products.

I know you're not advocating for it, wanted to head that off at the pass. :)

Too damn bad for Wal-Mart, whhhhaaaaaaa, what regular citizen would even care if it makes it easier for Wal-Mart to do what they do... Screw Wal-Mart (and other large retail chains), let them fill out 7 forms instead of 1 or 2, just hire another low-wage worker to do it.

For some reason that is how alcohol distribution works nationwide: Three-tier system (alcohol distribution) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-tier_system_(alcohol_distribution)). Why? I dunno, but this isn't something Jolley's bill is specifically making up just for Oklahoma.

In related news: https://twitter.com/briOKC/status/704776817119350789

Retail association said senators just voted to put 100s of people out of work. Interesting.

Lol

Retail association said senators just voted to put 100s of people out of work. Interesting.

They claim that an unlimited number of grocer and convenience stores carrying single-strength beer and wine will push many stores out of business and that's certainly going to happen. RLAO wants to curb as much of the small shops going under by capping licenses that allows wine sales. IIRC everybody would have ability to carry beer but wine would be sold on a limited license basis.

There's evidence to support their claims of significant numbers of stores going under. I look forward to having to drive an extra ten miles to find the beer I want. But in exchange I can buy crap wine at the grocery. I love that trade off!

There's evidence to support their claims of significant numbers of stores going under. I look forward to having to drive an extra ten miles to find the beer I want. But in exchange I can buy crap wine at the grocery. I love that trade off!

Don't know how it's going to work here, but in IL and WA (from 1996-2009), I was able to find almost any beer I wanted (Dogfish Head, New Belgium, Pyramid, other small/craft brewers, etc., I wasn't into the small-batch, case-at-a-time brewers that only released stuff at one store for one day, and still am really not too much into that whole super-limited thing, just too much trouble most of the time) at almost any place I went to. Anecdotal, yeah, and their systems had already been in place a while, so they may have already had "significant numbers of stores going under" and recovered from that, but I didn't have any problems in the almost 15 years I was buying beer and wine out of OK.

Most of the stores that will go under likely are the crap places anyway that likely don't have the selection most want. I already pass two closer liqour stores in my 2.5 mile drive to my place of choice.

But there's no upside compared to the proposal the RLAO has put out, and their bill doesn't have the hidden gifts to Walmart and Budweiser in it.

Most of the stores that will go under likely are the crap places anyway that likely don't have the selection most want. I already pass two closer liqour stores in my 2.5 mile drive to my place of choice.

And when that one goes away?

There's evidence to support their claims of significant numbers of stores going under. I look forward to having to drive an extra ten miles to find the beer I want. But in exchange I can buy crap wine at the grocery. I love that trade off!

This is just red herring. Of course a lot of crappy little bottle shops are going to close. Good riddance. You've obviously never been a quality grocer like winco, HEB, hell even kroger has a better wine and beer selection than %99 of liquor stores in OK. If there's a store like freeman's on western that goes to painstaking ends to stock all the hard to find beers. They're going to be fine. They're going to be more than fine because all the crappy little bottle shops will be fewer and far between and they will see increased liquor sales.

People keep using buzz words phrases: dollars for walmart and people are going to lose their jobs. It's called a free market. It changes shape and conforms to what the consumer wants. And you asking the Govt. to keep stepping on everyone's toes to preserve the status quo which supports hundreds of pitiful liquor stores that would be crushed by someone who has their act together and can give the consumer what they want.

You obviously know nothing about the liquor retail business. Stores like Freeman's will go out of business and if you can't recognize that, you have no idea what you're talking about.

You seem to celebrate in glee at the idea of driving local retailers out of business, which makes me question your motives. Especially when there are good alternatives being offered. Wal-Mart investor?

You're going a bit Trump-ey on me here man. You obviously know nothing about the retail business as a whole. All the while clinging to an ancient good-ole-boy system. Former failed liquor store owner?

Nope. I do know about the retail system. You obviously don't. What do you have against the other proposals, besides corporate investment? Have you even read them, or are you speaking from ignorance? Feel free to lay out facts. It would be a nice change.

I am fairly confident that my go to store will not close, it's the best liqour store on the NW side.

I am fairly confident that my go to store will not close, it's the best liqour store on the NW side.

The only stores I confident won't close are Byron's, the cellar, and Pancho's. Every other store is one bad week from closing. The liquor retail business is a very slim margin/profit business.

There are four liquor stores in Edmond I frequent, and which are great shops with amazing selection and service. One is across the street from Crest, one in front of a Walmart neighborhood market, one in a target parking lot, and one by sprouts. The one by Sprouts has the best chance.

If we can reform our laws and still protect local businesses and not reduce availability and creates monopolies, why shouldn't we? What's the motive of certain folks and posters?

I never get combative on this site but Jerrywall your fallacy is overwhelming. Have you not been to another state with regular liquor laws? Even in states like Arizona where liquor is sold freely in any gas stations (Hell I bought a bottle of wild turkey in a Kansas City Walgreens). All those cities still have specialty wine, liquor, and beer shops that do just fine. And guess what bubba? They have lots of cool little bodegas, neighborhood markets, and delis that sell specialty food items BECAUSE they can bolster their sales and frequency of customers by selling alcohol.

Business is a game of adapt and survive. No one should get to have the government protect them against competitors. I operate 3 different businesses and am invested in several others, including bars and restaurants. I know the laws, I know the distribution process, I know the brokers, yes the margins are slim, that's retail.

Retail should be all about giving the customer the experience they want. Sears is dying, jcpenny is dying, homeland is dying. These retailers can't keep up with newer and better competitors giving the customer more appealing products and shopping experiences. The government doesn't get to step in and make rules so they keep a monopoly.

The sky is not falling Sir. It's just business.

The only stores I confident won't close are Byron's, the cellar, and Pancho's. Every other store is one bad week from closing. The liquor retail business is a very slim margin/profit business.

When I discuss the new laws with the owner of Wild Turkey who I have come to know over the years, he doesn't seem to be too worried and is welcoming some change. Now, it's been a while since we've talked specifically about changes, but they don't seem too worried.

When I discuss the new laws with the owner of Wild Turkey who I have come to know over the years, he doesn't seem to be too worried and is welcoming some change. Now, it's been a while since we've talked specifically about changes, but they don't seem too worried.

Ask him which bill he prefers. I'll bet you a cold one.