<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Goose Island is not a Anheuser Busch product</title>
	<atom:link href="http://outofkey.com/beer/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://outofkey.com/beer/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:22:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://outofkey.com/beer/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/comment-page-1/#comment-16252</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 00:45:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dryfly.org/beer/brewing/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/#comment-16252</guid>
		<description>Jim Bob, if you like their beer drink it.  If not then don&#039;t drink it.  

I honestly hope that the beer does not change with the purchase by AB (not the topic of this post), time will tell.  Personally I am willing to wait and see.

Regarding changing the title, I don&#039;t make a habit of changing the title of posts from 4 years ago or for anytime in the past.  When it was posted it was accurate and I stand by that.   Given that AB did end up buying it I thought it was worthwhile to make an update to the post.  To state that I am intentionally trying to mislead anybody reading is a little heavy handed in my book.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim Bob, if you like their beer drink it.  If not then don&#8217;t drink it.  </p>
<p>I honestly hope that the beer does not change with the purchase by AB (not the topic of this post), time will tell.  Personally I am willing to wait and see.</p>
<p>Regarding changing the title, I don&#8217;t make a habit of changing the title of posts from 4 years ago or for anytime in the past.  When it was posted it was accurate and I stand by that.   Given that AB did end up buying it I thought it was worthwhile to make an update to the post.  To state that I am intentionally trying to mislead anybody reading is a little heavy handed in my book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jim bob</title>
		<link>http://outofkey.com/beer/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/comment-page-1/#comment-15860</link>
		<dc:creator>jim bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 22:54:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dryfly.org/beer/brewing/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/#comment-15860</guid>
		<description>Yes.  Yes, it does matter.

Goose Island is distributed by AB.  AB owns a stake in Widmer, and Widmer has a stake in Goose Island.

So why should anyone buy Goose Island?

Part of the profits go straight to AB, through distribution agreements or through Widmer.  

AB did nothing to build the recipes, open up the craft brewing market, or build up Goose Island as a business.  AB just wants a cut of the business even though they&#039;ve done no work to earn it.

I don&#039;t want any of my beer money to go to AB -- not through subsidaries, and not through distributors.  AB is anti-free market, anti-capitalist and anti-democracy.  Politically they don&#039;t really understand America or believe in it, and they sure hate to have to compete on a level playing field as much as they hate good beer.

This move was a major mistake by Goose Island.  Same for Red Hook, also a brand that at one point had a little integrity.

BTW -- saw your update up at the top.  If the headline &quot;should&quot; read &#039;Goose Island IS an Anheuser Busch product&#039;  then CHANGE THE HEADLINE.  Otherwise you are obviously intentionally misleading your readers.  Which, I guess that was the original point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes.  Yes, it does matter.</p>
<p>Goose Island is distributed by AB.  AB owns a stake in Widmer, and Widmer has a stake in Goose Island.</p>
<p>So why should anyone buy Goose Island?</p>
<p>Part of the profits go straight to AB, through distribution agreements or through Widmer.  </p>
<p>AB did nothing to build the recipes, open up the craft brewing market, or build up Goose Island as a business.  AB just wants a cut of the business even though they&#8217;ve done no work to earn it.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t want any of my beer money to go to AB &#8212; not through subsidaries, and not through distributors.  AB is anti-free market, anti-capitalist and anti-democracy.  Politically they don&#8217;t really understand America or believe in it, and they sure hate to have to compete on a level playing field as much as they hate good beer.</p>
<p>This move was a major mistake by Goose Island.  Same for Red Hook, also a brand that at one point had a little integrity.</p>
<p>BTW &#8212; saw your update up at the top.  If the headline &#8220;should&#8221; read &#8216;Goose Island IS an Anheuser Busch product&#8217;  then CHANGE THE HEADLINE.  Otherwise you are obviously intentionally misleading your readers.  Which, I guess that was the original point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Out Of Key Brewing &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Goose Island To Be an Anheuser Busch Product</title>
		<link>http://outofkey.com/beer/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/comment-page-1/#comment-11657</link>
		<dc:creator>Out Of Key Brewing &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Goose Island To Be an Anheuser Busch Product</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:08:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dryfly.org/beer/brewing/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/#comment-11657</guid>
		<description>[...] in GI and partnered with them to do distribution.   At the time I honked my horn(pun intended) saying that Goose as not a AB product.   Since then, that post has been one of my biggest search terms (sad I know).   It seems that [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] in GI and partnered with them to do distribution.   At the time I honked my horn(pun intended) saying that Goose as not a AB product.   Since then, that post has been one of my biggest search terms (sad I know).   It seems that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: I did it at ionia ales</title>
		<link>http://outofkey.com/beer/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>I did it at ionia ales</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 17:04:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dryfly.org/beer/brewing/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/#comment-11</guid>
		<description>[...] CORRECTION:  DRYFLY put me as the first of many, links regarding a popular mis-conception.  AB doesn&#8217;t directly own G.Island.  But does own distributing rights, and widmer did buy a portion of GI, and AB owns some of Widmer, who owns some of GI. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] CORRECTION:  DRYFLY put me as the first of many, links regarding a popular mis-conception.  AB doesn&#8217;t directly own G.Island.  But does own distributing rights, and widmer did buy a portion of GI, and AB owns some of Widmer, who owns some of GI. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brendan</title>
		<link>http://outofkey.com/beer/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Brendan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:52:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dryfly.org/beer/brewing/goose-island-is-not-a-anheuser-busch-product/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>MR. DRYFLY 

thanks to technology, I noticed your link to my blog.  Your references are very helpful, and thanks for the info!   I will correct both my brain and my blog.  Two things, 1. How did you come across my blog, and 2. Did you try to comment? if not, Would you? - I am trying to see if I can have comments/discussion on my site, with out insane amts of spam.  
Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MR. DRYFLY </p>
<p>thanks to technology, I noticed your link to my blog.  Your references are very helpful, and thanks for the info!   I will correct both my brain and my blog.  Two things, 1. How did you come across my blog, and 2. Did you try to comment? if not, Would you? &#8211; I am trying to see if I can have comments/discussion on my site, with out insane amts of spam.<br />
Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

