And we wonder why a longneck costs $5 at a bar

[mike8170]

Sin Taxes are federal, does not matter who collects it, we don't get to keep it, or would you rather just pay it at the end of the year on April 15th. There are thousands of taxes done this way.

I think you have lost what I have said, the 3 tier system is intact throughout the business world, it has been for eon's, there is no perfect world.

Want to do away with it, lobby for it, then you can think of the thousands and millions of people you put out of a job. Geez You sound just like a OWS'r.

What business do you work at, come on let us know. Set up on a tee and I'll drive it home for you.

I think I said it all, your job is nothing but suppression of the free market and a money making racket for the state. I don't understand your thinking, claiming I sound like an OWS'r, when YOUR job depends on regulation of a product, handily provided to you by the government.

FYI, I don't work at any business, but I do try to keep my VFW Post operating, and the biggest hindrance is the state.

 

[hornadylnl]

If the three tier system and $450,000 liquor licenses don't add cost to the consumer, why don't we make it a 5 tiered or even a 10 tiered system? Think of all the jobs that will create. And the state can charge a million or even 10 million for the license and reduce our income taxes!

Who's the OWS'r again?

 

[hornadylnl]

I think I said it all, your job is nothing but suppression of the free market and a money making racket for the state. I don't understand your thinking, claiming I sound like an OWS'r, when YOUR job depends on regulation of a product, handily provided to you by the government.

FYI, I don't work at any business, but I do try to keep my VFW Post operating, and the biggest hindrance is the state.

If it weren't for the state, you'd be letting infants belly up to the bar and drink a longneck with a nipple.

 

[hornadylnl]

BTW, I work industrial maintenance for a factory who happens to sell factory direct. I have zero qualms stating that I add zero value to the end consumer and I'm an overhead to the company.

 

[level.eleven]

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0945999887/reasonmagazineA/[/ame]

Here is a book that will explain the monopoly on beer, wine, and liquor.

Glen Whitman explains the origins of the antiquated system. It was put in place largely to appease temperance activists, who still held sway in some parts of the country. Angsty prohibitionists feared what they called "tied houses," bars that were owned by liquor producers. Before prohibition, tied houses, they said, had lured blue-collar workers in with free salted pork sandwiches on their lunch breaks. The salty meal would make the laborers thirsty, at which point they’d purchase alcohol from the bar—leading, the temperance activists said, to decreased production, drunkardness, and all-around moral decay. (According to Whitman, this is also the origin of the phrase, “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.”) A state-mandated middleman, the thinking went, would prevent these devious marketing practices.

The "wholesale" industry adds 18%-25% cost to each bottle of beer. They add nothing else. State sanctioned middlemen who lobby hard to get quite rich in the process. Meanwhile, you pay more. It gets uglier from here.

Many states have placed further restrictions within this already artificial market. Some states, for example, give wholesalers exclusive rights to distribute alcohol in a particular region, effectively creating government-enforced monopolies. Other states (including Arizona) have enacted “franchise termination laws,” which make it more difficult for retailers and/or producers to switch distributors once they’ve started doing business with one. Producers and/or retailers get locked in. If they feel their existing distributor is taking too much of a markup, isn’t offering a wide enough variety, or is otherwise performing poorly, there's little they can do. The effect is to squeeze out the upstarts and the competitors. According to Whitman, the number of alcohol wholesalers nationwide has shrunk by 90 percent since the 1950s.

90% of your competition gets legislated out of existence. That is a heck of gig. Anyone calling this "free market" and anything other than a monopoly needs their heads examined. Its time to end the welfare.

How Your Beer Bought John McCain's $500 Loafers - Reason Magazine

That article also does a nice job of knocking down the strawmen the industry has set up and that we have seen trotted out in this thread.

 

[level.eleven]

We haven't even touched on the wholesalers and distributors doing everything they can to prevent Sunday sales or internet sales. Luckily, for those of us not in the cartels, the courts are beginning to dismantle the antiquated system. Some small wineries, like most protection schemes the small businesses get screwed, have won in court allowing them to ship bottles of wine directly to consumers.

Three tier or free trade?

Three Tier or Free Trade

 

[level.eleven]

Lastly, to say that costs aren't passed on to the consumer is false. If that were true, there wouldn't be a need for law firms that do nothing but help guide business through the process of becoming "legal" to sell alcohol. You can hire these guys to consult you.

About Compliance Service of America

 

[level.eleven]

The above is just to name a few that you can ONLY buy from one distributor. The three tier system is throughout the business world and not limited to alcohol products.

It does not affect prices at all like you think, competitive products keep the prices down. Distributor A who sells purple thing a ma jigs is not going to raise his prices above Distributor B who sells blue thing a ma jigs, because if he does, he commits business suicide.

As a example, in the late 60's Pabst Blue Ribbon was one of the more dominate beers on the market and even outsold the infamous Budweiser.

They got a wild hair up their butts and decided that because of this they was going to start selling Pabst at a premium price comparable to Michelob. You know what, Pabst NEVER recovered from that, and because of it, it's business fell to the point that Miller Brewing bought Pabst in the mid 90's and rescued the brand, it still sells, but it's a economy beer.

That license they bought will not cause them to raise there prices one bit, because the mom and pop liquor stores will still be alive and kicking and they will flock there to purchase products if prices get out of hand.

If they want to open another store and want to shell out that much for the license, then it's the price they have to pay to do it. Me, you, Joe the Plumber and State of Indiana did not hold a gun to their head and tell them to buy it. They could have just sit there in their chair and remained quite.

Instead they and maybe one or two other corps decided to get into a pissing match and drove it out of sight. It's a auction, if you want it bad enough, you'll pay the price.

I bet on at least on occasion you might have been in the same position at a auction and either paid too much or was smart enough to stand down and not pay the piper.


Also if you think that they would have reduced the prices if they had not bought that license, then either you are more naive than you think are, or living in a fantasy world.

Also in case you don't know it, the state has been auctioning off new licenses for about 10 years I think, and have become a rather hot item because there are just only so many licenses available because they are tied to the population base where the license is.

Is is right, maybe, maybe not, the liquor store business is becoming big business if you own more than 1.

Heck I have to have a IABC license to just sign my name on a invoice and it cost $25 every 2 years to get, just like bartenders/waitress/cashiers or anyone else is involved in a sales transaction involving alcohol has to.

Heck I'll tell you what, you run for state office and if you can get the masses moved enough to vote you in on the pretense that you can get every license fee dropped, taxes will not be raised because of the revenue loss and income taxes lowered, I'll vote for you.

I'm not going to hold my breath though, and I know I won't have to vote for you because if those license fees that the state collects across the board is lost, I can guarantee we'll all suffer because of a sales tax increase of monumental proportions.

As to auctioning off LTCH's, apple and oranges.

p.s. you still have not let us know what business you work@ or for, sit it up on that tee and I'll drive it home on fee and licenses that are involved and we'll compare.

This is an excellent description of a state sponsored monopoly. "Pay the piper"...limited licenses available...free market distortion at its peak. End result, higher prices with profits directed to those who lobby the hardest. That is economic reality.

 

[steveh_131]

It's so weird that the guy who profits from extorted tax dollars is here defending the extortion.

 

[steveh_131]

The government is auctioning off our liberties to the highest bidder. I won't be giving that a thumbs up. But don't let the facts get in your way.

 

[rambone]

Just like a Marsh, Miejer or Kroger in Indianapolis can only buy from Coca-Cola in Indy and not from Anderson.

Crony Capitalism is a term describing a capitalist economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, and so forth.
​

Are your against the free market?

Are you for the free market?

 

[88GT]

Is the liquor license in any way related to the distributor/wholesale issue? Would the latter exist without the licensing scheme?

Who does everyone think is paying for that business's $450,000 liquor license? The consumer is.

So what?

Why should consumers pay $450,000 to the state for a f'n license that shouldn't exist in the first place?

They want the beer. It apparently hasn't hit a price point that affects their pocket book yet. And until it does, don't expect anything to change on that end.

 

[hornadylnl]

The government is auctioning off our liberties to the highest bidder. I won't be giving that a thumbs up. But don't let the facts get in your way.

Crony Capitalism is a term describing a capitalist economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, and so forth.
​

Are you for the free market?

Why are you against the free market, OWS'rs?

 

[level.eleven]

Some people are also confusing the producer/distributor/retailer model with the three tier system. They are leaving out the crux of the issue though. If I wanted to produce or distribute cola in a Coke "territory", I can. Too many wrong assertions and strawmen to deal with. Meh. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[hornadylnl]

Some people are also confusing the producer/distributor/retailer model with the three tier system. They are leaving out the crux of the issue though. If I wanted to produce or distribute cola in a Coke "territory", I can. Too many wrong assertions and strawmen to deal with. Meh. Ignorance is bliss.

My issue isn't so much with the three tier system as it is with the licensing scheme. I fully understand the need of distributors. No big Coca Cola bottler is going to want to have a workforce on hand to drive to every little retailer and restaraunt accross the country. It works much like a postal route or UPS. I don't agree with limiting a retailer to only one distributor though. If I own a liquor store and my delivery guy is a jerk, shows up late, doesn't bring me what I order, etc and the distributor doesn't rectify the situation, why shouldn't I be able to find a different distributor?

I have a gun dealer friend who has multiple distributor catalogs that he can order from. He's not limited to X brand through Y distributor.

 

[level.eleven]

My issue isn't so much with the three tier system as it is with the licensing scheme. I fully understand the need of distributors. No big Coca Cola bottler is going to want to have a workforce on hand to drive to every little retailer and restaraunt accross the country. It works much like a postal route or UPS. I don't agree with limiting a retailer to only one distributor though. If I own a liquor store and my delivery guy is a jerk, shows up late, doesn't bring me what I order, etc and the distributor doesn't rectify the situation, why shouldn't I be able to find a different distributor?

I have a gun dealer friend who has multiple distributor catalogs that he can order from. He's not limited to X brand through Y distributor.

Exactly what I was getting at. Comparing the 3 Tier system to Mike Sells potato chips shows a failure to grasp the situation at hand. Yes, the physical structure may be similar, producer/distributor/retailer, but those similarities end there. Same with Indy Marsh buying form Indy Coke distributors instead of from Anderson. The 3 tier system purposely limits competition, with force, favoring those who are connected. Suppose you brewed beer and had a fleet of trucks ready to take it around to local stores and eateries. No go. The most ludicrous example I have read involved a brewpub that had a resturant next door who wished to sell thier product. Instead of carrying a few cases across the street each morning, the beer had to go through a distributor, be loaded onto a truck, etc. But hey, its only a bad thing when someone else is doing it.

How many beer distributors service Indiana? Wine and Spirits? What is it 3-4? I don't know off the top of my head. I read earlier today that 2 distributors cover 99% of the state of Texas.

Olinger, National for booze and Monarch for beer?

 

[hornadylnl]

Exactly what I was getting at. Comparing the 3 Tier system to Mike Sells potato chips shows a failure to grasp the situation at hand. Yes, the physical structure may be similar, producer/distributor/retailer, but those similarities end there. The 3 tier system purposely limits competition, with force, favoring those who are connected. Suppose you brewed beer and had a fleet of trucks ready to take it around to local stores and eateries. No go.

I don't begrudge anyone making a decent living. But how many people would continue shopping at Walmart if they announced they were going to raise employee wages to $15 an hour and their prices were going up 5-10 percent to reflect the wage increase?

Same goes for the beer delivery guy who delivers the beer to my local liquor store. The more he makes, the more my end product costs.

In my factory, there are those who have a direct hand in manufacturing our product. Laborers, welders, press operaters, etc. Then you have the people like myself (maintenance), quality assurance, supervision, salesmen, HR, and the multitude of other administrators. The company keeps track of what percentage of their workforce actually has a hand in making the product vs those who don't. The larger percentage of non producing employees adds cost to the product. Obviously, my factory wouldn't be able to produce with maintenance, QA, salesmen to actually sell what they build etc. But those are still costs that need to be managed to stay competitive with the free market.

Beer delivery drivers are a necessary part of moving the product from the factory to the end consumer. The more efficient you can make that process, the more competitive you can be with your competition. So we can add 100 tiers to the distributorship system if you want. But laws of economics can't be avoided. The more complex the system, the more expensive the product becomes.

I believe in laissez faire economics. A truly free market is a producer and a consumer getting together to work out an exchange with zero outside interference. The more you license or regulate that process, the less free it becomes.

 

[level.eleven]

I don't begrudge anyone making a decent living. But how many people would continue shopping at Walmart if they announced they were going to raise employee wages to $15 an hour and their prices were going up 5-10 percent to reflect the wage increase?

Same goes for the beer delivery guy who delivers the beer to my local liquor store. The more he makes, the more my end product costs. Luckily, we aren't an ABC state.

In my factory, there are those who have a direct hand in manufacturing our product. Laborers, welders, press operaters, etc. Then you have the people like myself (maintenance), quality assurance, supervision, salesmen, HR, and the multitude of other administrators. The company keeps track of what percentage of their workforce actually has a hand in making the product vs those who don't. The larger percentage of non producing employees adds cost to the product. Obviously, my factory wouldn't be able to produce with maintenance, QA, salesmen to actually sell what they build etc. But those are still costs that need to be managed to stay competitive with the free market.

Beer delivery drivers are a necessary part of moving the product from the factory to the end consumer. The more efficient you can make that process, the more competitive you can be with your competition. So we can add 100 tiers to the distributorship system if you want. But laws of economics can't be avoided. The more complex the system, the more expensive the product becomes.

I believe in laissez faire economics. A truly free market is a producer and a consumer getting together to work out an exchange with zero outside interference. The more you license or regulate that process, the less free it becomes.

Agree. The 3 Tier system is about as free from the free market as you can get. They don't even hid the fact either. Check out their trade group website.

Wine and Spirits Distributors of Indiana (WSDI) represents Olinger and National Wine & Spirits, two leading distributors of fine wine and spirits in Indiana. WSDI also partners with other distributors, including Monarch Beverage, a leading Indiana beer and wine distributor. Although competitors, these organizations have joined forces to meet common goals and promote aligned interests.



About Us : Wine and Spirits Distributors of Indiana

 

[level.eleven]

Liquor distributors rank only behind law firms, Oil, and homebuilders in lobbying dollars spent.

Fermentation: The Daily Wine Blog: The Three-Tier System and Consumer Access To Wine

 

[IndyBeerman]

If it weren't for the state, you'd be letting infants belly up to the bar and drink a longneck with a nipple.

You know NOTHING about me, 21 means 21, I see you or anyone else driving drunk, I make the call. Go ahead, let me see you or another drive drunk and Ill make sure they do appropriate time that they are sentenced to.

I may deliver it, but I don't promote or would allow underage drinking. In my years as a driver and salesman I have on many occasions made the call after leaving a account to make sure action is taken.

While I have never drank a drop of an alcoholic product, I don't put it in your, the guy next to you, the person across the street or anyone else's hand.

Using that psychosocial approach, I guess we as gun owners are morally responsible for each and every suicide. Geez get a life.