Oklahoma liquor laws

[Urbanized]

I know it's not very fashionable here to fully read and attempt to comprehend the full meaning of someone's post before spouting off in disagreement, but....if you'll read my post more carefully you'll see that I said "...I'm pretty certain they are the first to can them in state to market at grocery and convenience stores..." I said this because I was familiar with both the (brewed and bottled out-of-state) BB growlers AND the (brewed and bottled out-of-state) 3.2 Mustang. I also think Mustang's were re-formulations of existing strong beers, but can't speak to that 100%.

That said, I do think on further review that Choc had 3.2 beers in stores for a while before COOP did.

[jerrywall]

Wow. That escalated quickly. I honestly had no idea where BB was bottled PR canned. I thought it might have been in state.

[Bunty]

A fair trade off would be to allow grocery stores to sell wine. If that requires a referendum, so be it. Let's vote and see what people want.

Okay, but where is the money coming from to hire signature takers to get at least 133,000 signatures as required? Petition requirements will be lowered if one or both proposed bills to do that are passed. One bill drops number of signatures required. The other bill allows more time to get them.

[bchris02]

Mustang Session '33 was the low point beer Urbanized is thinking of. It was alright and is what I usually went with if I had to drink low point beer but like he says, it tasted a lot more like a watered down version of a stronger beer than something that was brewed to be that strength. COOPs beers are good because they are intended to be 4.0 ABV. It looks like that also is what Choc is going for.

[bille]

I know it's not very fashionable here to fully read and attempt to comprehend the full meaning of someone's post before spouting off in disagreement, but....if you'll read my post more carefully you'll see that I said "...I'm pretty certain they are the first to can them in state to market at grocery and convenience stores..." I said this because I was familiar with both the (brewed and bottled out-of-state) BB growlers AND the (brewed and bottled out-of-state) 3.2 Mustang. I also think Mustang's were re-formulations of existing strong beers, but can't speak to that 100%.

That said, I do think on further review that Choc had 3.2 beers in stores for a while before COOP did.

You're right, my oversight. I thought you were focusing on the marketing at convenience of grocers/convenience (I was). My apologies. And yes, Choc did can one or two of their beers but have abandoned it. IIRC the sales couldn't justify adding a canning line (on top of already having a bottling line), a substantial cost/space inhibitor as you could imagine. Although I haven't checked, I'm fairly certain they still brew those beers. Perhaps they've increased the ABV to sell them along with their other beers in anticipation of their latest project, a full on brewery idea of beers brewed specifically low point. I believe it's called "Born Free".

Unless I misunderstood Gary (mustang brewmaster) the '33 beer is a homebrew kolsch recipe (many of their recipes are old homebrew recipes of his that have been tweaked/scaled to commercial sizes FYI) that was dropped from 4.5% to 4%.

[Urbanized]

No problem, sorry if I jumped off on you a little bit harshly. Makes sense about Choc finding it to be too expensive in light of already having a bottling line. COOP ended up benefiting in that regard having already committed to a canning line for their 16oz product.

[warreng88]

From the JR:

Budweiser campaign highlights rift between ‘big beer,’ craft

By: Michael Felberbaum February 6, 2015

RICHMOND, Va. – Attention die-hard craft beer drinkers: This Bud’s not for you.

After several years of losing ground to craft brewers, Anheuser-Busch, the country’s biggest brewery, seems to be conceding that its flagship brew may not fly with fans of fancy suds.

Rather than try to woo them to toss back a Budweiser, Anheuser-Busch is aiming its latest marketing at its core consumers, the folks who likely wouldn’t reach for a craft beer in any case. And they’re doing it with a playful wink and nod that says, “We didn’t want their fancy-schmancy beer anyway.”

That was Anheuser-Busch’s playbook for the Super Bowl, when they ran an ad that calls Budweiser a “macro beer” – a reference to the microbrews of the craft market – that “isn’t brewed to be fussed over.” Relaunched this week in wider play, the ad shows a mustachioed man drinking beer from a fancy glass and mocks, “Let them sip their pumpkin peach ale. We’ll be brewing us some golden suds.”

“A prevailing misperception in beer is that small must be good, and big must be bad. This spot, if you like, is us saying we categorically don’t accept that,” Brian Perkins, Budweiser’s vice president of marketing, said in an interview. “This is about us owning who we are without apology.”

The ad left a sour taste with some in the craft beer world, who took to social media with parodies and taunts, including a video in which members of Ninkasi Brewing in Oregon chugged Budweiser and asked: “If you aren’t drinking a beer for taste, what are you drinking it for?”

But Perkins called the ad a “gentle poke” and said, “The only people who misread the spot, frankly, probably weren’t drinking Budweiser anyway … I’ve lost them already. They’re not my consumer.”

And he is right – they’re not.

Budweiser remains the No. 3 beer in the U.S. and Bud Light ranks at the top. Still, Budweiser’s volume fell more than 6 percent annually between 2008 and 2013, according to market research firm Euromonitor International. Meanwhile, craft brewers such as Colorado’s New Belgium, California’s Sierra Nevada and Sam Adams maker the Boston Beer Co. grew more than 7 percent annually over the same period.

Overall sales of craft beer rose about 17 percent to hold a 14-percent dollar share of the $100 billion U.S. beer market in 2013 despite a nearly 2-percent drop in overall beer sales, according to the Brewers Association, a Colorado-based trade group that represents most of the nation’s 3,200 breweries. Big beer also is losing ground to hard liquor.

Drawing a line in the sand between Budweiser and the craft beer market makes sense, says Euromonitor analyst Eric Penicka.

“They’re acknowledging that the typical craft beer consumer is definitely not going to go out of their way to buy Budweiser,” he said. “The product itself is hard for (Budweiser) to push outside of the core group who is already consuming it. And I think it makes sense for them to do that. … For them to try to push Budweiser into the craft consuming market, which would be primarily younger, more educated, financially more well-off, is not really going to strike a chord.”

Not that it’s a complete surrender. The U.S. arm of Anheuser-Busch InBev SA, a Belgian company that is the world’s largest brewer, has bought several smaller craft brewers, including Chicago’s Goose Island and Seattle’s Elysian Brewing, the latter of which also makes a peach pumpkin ale and includes the tagline “Corporate Beer Still Sucks” on one of its labels.

The beer giants also have been bulking up “craft-like” brands, such as Anheuser-Busch’s Shock Top, which has its own seasonal pumpkin beer, as noted by many who took offense to Budweiser’s ad.

Anheuser-Busch’s biggest competitor, MillerCoors – maker of Coors Light, Miller Lite and Blue Moon – has taken a similar approach with a portfolio of both craft and mass market beers, and isn’t ready to write off dedicated craft beer drinkers. MillerCoors spokesman Jonathan Stern says his company sees plenty crossover with consumers happily drinking both styles of beer.

The issue, he says, is that big beer’s core consumer just isn’t choosing mass market beers as often as they used to, and smart marketing to millennials is needed to turn that around.

Budweiser’s campaign isn’t about “running scared,” as some have implied, but simply owning its place as a big beer brand that’s enjoyed by many, Perkins said.

“In order to talk about who we are, sometimes you juxtapose it with what you’re not,” he said. “Kudos to the brewers of peach pumpkin ale and other flavor variations. That’s their thing and they’re great at it, but meanwhile, we’ll stick to who we always have been.”

[ljbab728]

I'm glad I rarely drink beer. I don't have to hurt my head thinking about all of that.

[bille]

I'm glad I rarely drink beer. I don't have to hurt my head thinking about all of that.

To each their own, I certainly can respect that.

That said I think you're missing out.

[bchris02]

Any updates on the bill to allow cold beer in liquor stores?

Edit: I just checked the status of SB 383 and it has not been voted on yet.

[loveOKC]

I’m glad you asked!

Follow Senator Bice

Follow LOCAL

Contact your state reps and voice your support for both of these bills!

If you go to LOCAL’s website they even have talking points and the hyperlink to finding your rep, it doesn’t get much easier than that.
What to say when you contact your reps about SB 383 and SB 424





I also agree Fat Tire is overhyped but I’m fine with it if it continues to be a gateway into craft that it has been over the years. Many say the same for Boston Lager and Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. The fact is little has changed about these beers over their time; it’s our palates that have evolved as our craft beer journey continues. For the record the only thing that Fat Tire and Native Amber is that they are both ‘amber’ beers, other than that they are very different imo (Native Amber is WAY better). I will drink Fat Tire but don’t seek it out and wouldn’t even if it were available here. The same can be said for the majority of New Belgium’s core lineup, HOWEVER, I love their sour beers and once we get distro on their beers and people start getting access to more “mainstream” sour beer their lives will be forever changed. It’s akin to discovering you’re a fan of hoppy beers, an entire realm of beer and a multitude of beer categories are yet to be discovered in our state. At this stage we’re barely scraping the surface of this monster that’s building, which is why it’s paramount that we start updating our laws now.

How many have done this? We need to get behind these bills so that we can get it passed.

[bille]

How many have done this? We need to get behind these bills so that we can get it passed.

Great question, everybody reading this call/email now!

SB383 and SB424 will be heard at committee!

Both SBs are slated for Thursday’s Business and Commerce committee meeting. These bills have some support. Additionally, we clearly have state senators–Bice and Crain–who are willing to advocate to modernize our laws. However, these state senators need your help for these bills to pass. The sides that oppose both bills have a lot more money, but we have the votes. We need to keep the pressure going to get these bills out of committee and to the floor. Contact the following legislators as soon as you can about these bills and kindly articulate your support:

Senator Dan Newberry – Chair – (405) 521-5600 newberry@oksenate.gov
Senator Stephanie Bice – Vice Chair – (405) 521-5592 bice@oksenate.gov
Senator Nathan Dahm – (405) 521-5551 Dahm@oksenate.gov
Senator Jim Halligan – (405) 521-5572 halligan@oksenate.gov
Senator Anastasia Pittman – (405) 521-5531 pittman@oksenate.gov
Senator Ron Sharp – (405) 521-5539 sharp@oksenate.gov
Senator Joseph Silk – (405) 521-5614 silk@oksenate.gov
Senator Roger Thompson – (405) 521-5588 thompson@oksenate.gov
Senator Charles Wyrick – (405) 521-5561 wyrick@oksenate.gov
Senator Ervin Yen – (405) 521-5543 yen@oksenate.gov

[bille]

This is happening today!
URGENT ACTION ALERT

The good news is that both SB383 (refrigeration at liquor stores) and SB424 (brewery sells at point of production) will be heard on Thursday. However, we need your support to make sure it survives committee and makes it to the floor. We are asking that all LOCAL supporters and those who support the bills contact the following state senators*tomorrow*(Wednesday) at noon. The goal is to tie up their phone lines in support of modernizing our liquor laws. It's a tactic proven to work.

Senator Dan Newberry – Chair –*(405) 521-5600*
Senator Stephanie Bice – Vice Chair –*(405) 521-5592*
Senator Nathan Dahm –*(405) 521-5551*
Senator Jim Halligan –*(405) 521-5572*
Senator Anastasia Pittman –*(405) 521-5531*
Senator Ron Sharp –*(405) 521-5539*
Senator Joseph*Silk –*(405) 521-5614*
Senator Roger Thompson –*(405) 521-5588*
Senator Charles Wyrick –*(405) 521-5561*
Senator Ervin Yen –*(405) 521-5543*

Here's what to say when calling:

"Hello, my name is ______ and my zip code is ______. I would like for the senator to vote yes on SB 383 (Refrigeration) and SB 424 (brewery point of production sales). Thank you for your time."

We also ask that you email these state senators at your earliest*convenience. You can find their email addresses and a template of what to say at our website.*
SB383 and SB424 will be heard at committee!

Thank you for your support,
Kevin Hall
Director of LOCAL

[Bunty]

I've called all the numbers. One of their voice mail boxes is full. That should be a good sign. Since the anti AP bill was pulled from the result of heavy response, it inspired me to pick up the phone and do something.

Surely, liquor store owners won't be against selling cold beer.

[jerrywall]

Surely, liquor store owners won't be against selling cold beer.

At least the smart ones.

[bille]

At least the smart ones.

Correct!

I'm not expecting walk-ins (like some of my favorite spots in other states) as I know it'll take time/money and some places just don't have that space but if you want my business you'd better have my IPAs refrigerated!

[Bunty]

Republicans, it seems, like to say how they stand for smaller government and how regulations stifle business. It's time for them to take a break from lip service and take action on that by voting YES! Unlike the house, I'm glad the senate isn't trying as hard to govern like its got its head stuck up its ass.

[bille]

Both bills passed unanimously, on to the next round!

[bchris02]

Awesome news. Will be interested to see how it does before the full house. Does anybody know where Mary Fallin stands on this as she will probably have the final say?

[jerrywall]

Another bill that's not getting talked about much is HJR1002. It passed committee 6-4, and if it passes will add a ballot vote for amending the state constitution to allow direct ship to consumers for wine. I think it has a harder road getting passed, but I'm hopeful.

[bille]

Not talked much about here but I've certainly let them all know how ludicrous it is, that is the lack of parity between wine and beer our state. Actually I'm sure I've ranted about it here too.

[jerrywall]

Not talked much about here but I've certainly let them all know how ludicrous it is, that is the lack of parity between wine and beer our state. Actually I'm sure I've ranted about it here too.

I'm not sure why everything has to come down to beer vs wine. Sometimes I link the liquor industry in the state (and folks who want change) eats its own young by focusing on this disparity too much.

[bille]

I'm not sure why everything has to come down to beer vs wine. Sometimes I link the liquor industry in the state (and folks who want change) eats its own young by focusing on this disparity too much.

To me it's as simple as if it's good for them than its good for us. For the beer related bills to get beaten to death with drunk driving talk, morals, etc and then a wine bill passes immediately after makes no sense. The disparity isn't just here either, as you surely know. Actually the average person has no idea the disparity across the board in this state or otherwise. It makes no sense to anybody, well, except those that stand to lose money if something changes.

[Bunty]

Convenience stores are against it, since they fear loss of beer business to the liquor stores. Why not simplify and level the playing field by abolishing 3.2% beer?
Cold high point beer could be coming to a liquor store near you | KFOR.com

[bchris02]

Convenience stores are against it, since they fear loss of beer business to the liquor stores. Why not simplify and level the playing field by abolishing 3.2% beer?
Cold high point beer could be coming to a liquor store near you | KFOR.com

Baby steps.

I am not 100% sure, but I think doing away with 3.2 beer will require an amendment to the state constitution and cannot be done by the legislature. I know that the constitution distinguishes between low-point and high-point beer, but is the 3.2% ABW number specifically in the constitution?