Tho many believed .08 BAC mandate was dead as federal issue—at least for several years-- after bitter 98 battle, prime sponsor Sen Frank Lautenberg didn’t give up. Just attached mandate to pending Senate Transportation Appropriation bill on Jun 13. Here’s the trick: Lautenberg’s amendment doesn’t change current law which merely creates incentives for states to pass .08; mandate (which penalizes states that don't adopt .08) won’t take effect until 2004. House bill, passed in May, doesn’t have .08 provision. Opposing sides got into high gear immediately, MADD and its allies on pro side; NBWA, brewers, American Bev Inst against. While bill with mandate expected to pass Senate, it has to go to conference committee with House (mandate died in conference in 98). Stay tuned.

"In beer, you just don’t really have this kind of tension that I experienced sitting up at the table," NBWA prexy David Rehr said directly following DISCUS speech at NCSLA (see above). He said "state franchise laws for beer allow for an efficient marketplace.... The elimination of state franchise laws would destabilize the industry and create tremendous free-rider problems." Turning to other 3-tier threats, like direct-shipping, David said NBWA will do "everything in our power to insure that the 21st amendment remains strong and that the states continue to have the primary regulatory role with regards to our products." Since "our adversaries are looking to the courts to change laws that they cannot change in the state legislature," David said, "we are ready to assist you and our state beer wholesaler associations in the courts. We will be more aggressive about this in the future." AB distrib Ross Hollander of Hartford, Conn echoed David: "Because of franchise laws, we do have a stable business." Ross said he faces "very stiff competition" from other beer distribs in his market. Yes he does have "exclusive territory," Ross told regulators, but "monopoly, not by any stretch of the imagination." Ross also detailed good that a distrib can do locally, including hospital board, chair of economic development commission, etc. Coors atty Terry Micek also differed with DISCUS: "There should be good cause," Terry said and "due process." Noting that getting rid of distribs will "impact wine and spirits more than it does beer," Terry added that "for beer, 3-tier system is "primary" because "it works" and it’s "locally oriented."

Dale of DISCUS closed his remarks: "We do work well with our wholesaler partners.... We want to work together with our wholesalers" but "this issue is worth fighting for." Similarly, last mo at WSWA (Wine and Spirits distrib assn) mtg, Brown Forman Ceo Michael Cheek said that "continued viability of 3-tier system" in US is "critical to our success" but noted "corrosive environment of our current relationships" and "onerous franchise legislation." Michael told distribs "the level of mistrust and suspicion between our tiers is accelerating." Who could disagree? Let’s hope it never happens in beer.

DISCUS veep Dale Szyndrowski fired salvos at wine and spirits distribs and warnings to regulators about franchise laws at recent meeting of NCSLA (National Conference of State Liquor Administrators) on a panel entitled "Franchise Protection or Monopoly Agreements." In a sharply-worded attack, Dale used words "monopoly protection" literally dozens of times to describe franchise laws, focusing on nasty battle in Ill. "This situation has caused so much strife for our industry and creates a great amount of ill will between suppliers and wholesalers," he opined. He was none too subtle warning regulators, "if it does happen in your state, you will unfortunately be pulled into this debate.... Whether you like it or not." So Dale said DISCUS would like to "brief you on the issue to...see for yourself the kind of chaos that can ensue." He detailed Illinois situation (where spirits distribs passed franchise law last year that led to "knockdown dragout battle" that’s still in court) and bad publicity there including dozens of newspaper editorials against law. He added: "It is not a battle we look forward to ever having to go through again. And I hope you don’t ever have to become involved in it.... It’s certainly taken a toll on our industry." He noted that "you’ll probably hear the wholesalers tell you they need this protection because foreign-owned conglomerates are pushing them out of business." At this point, Tuck Duncan, a speaker on panel and lawyer for wine and spirits distribs, shot back: "You got that right." Earlier Tuck had defended franchise laws because they "even up bargaining power." "Greater and greater consolidation at the supplier level," he said, means "greater disparity" of "bargaining power." A franchise law "benefits consumers and regulators" as it defines what constitutes "just cause" and "protects the interests of both parties."

Following Coors June 6 meeting with Wall St, lotsa bullish reports: Coors told analysts that its volume and pricing remain strong. At presstime, Coors trading at 65, its 52-week high, up more than 2/3 from low earlier this yr. (Bud stock over 80, also up almost 40% from low in 2000.) Coors sr veep Rob Klugman briefed analysts on benefits for both Coors and Miller of trend towards Coors/Miller distribs. In top 5 states with highest % of Coors volume in shared houses (Del, HI, Vt, Mont and Ind), Coors gained share in 4 of 5 and Miller lost share in only 1 of those states, he pointed out. In 9 states where Coors has over 15 share (and has avg share of 19), Miller has avg share of 14. In Miller’s 7 highest-share mkts (where it’s over 25), Coors avg share is only 7. Currently 37% of Coors distribs carry Miller brands, or about 26% of Coors volume. This is up from 30% and 20% just 18 mos ago. Despite what Rob said, several analysts viewed Coors as principal beneficiary. "Profit-maximizing distributors will likely choose to put more focus on the faster-growing and higher-margin Coors volume, rather than Miller brands," wrote John Faucher at JP Morgan. Shared houses are "letting the Fox into the Hen House," sez George Thompson of Pru Bache. One analyst even speculated Coors might buy Miller down road. "We believe Coors has a genuine interest in managing a significantly larger US business and could bring a great deal to the table.... We are not convinced that Philip Morris is committed to the beer business longterm," said Caroline Levy of UBS Warburg. PM has repeatedly said Miller not for sale. PM chairman Geoff Bible said at Mar 2000 Miller sales convention: "I cannot make this statement strongly enough. Miller belongs in Philip Morris." One other issue: Coors told analysts inventories down to 17 days, from 20 last yr. INSIGHTS has heard increased grumbling, especially from rural and/or low share areas that Coors ain't able to get distribs all the beer they can sell as Coors grows faster than anticipated. More next issue.

Here’s more evidence that moderate drinking may help older women maintain stronger bones. In fact, the authors found that alcohol consumption among women was more beneficial in this regard than a diet with lots of fruits, vegetables and cereal. Women classified in the "alcohol" food group (because alcohol represented a relatively higher percentage of their diet compared to other women in the study), "tended to have higher BMD (bone mineral density) than did other dietary food groups." Women in the "fruit, vegetables, and cereal" group also had high BMD compared with women in other food groups, but still slightly lower than those in the alcohol group. However, this benefit was limited to women in this study. Men with a diet high in fruit, vegetables and cereal had "significantly greater BMD than did men with other dietary patterns," but men in the "alcohol" group received no apparent BMD benefit. Among men and women, those with a high intake of candy and other sweets had the lowest BMD. Any benefit to women’s bone density is important because women have an over-40% lifetime risk of bone fracture compared to a 13% risk for men, according to the authors, and "osteoporosis is well recognized as a major public health problem."

Why does alcohol help maintain bone density? "This positive association has been hypothesized to be caused by the effects of alcohol on adrenal androgens or estrogen concentrations," the authors wrote. They suggested two possible reasons a positive association between alcohol and BMD exists for women, but not men: 1) "because of the importance of the estrogen boost from alcohol in these postmenopausal women"; 2) because of the "lower levels of alcohol consumption among women in the alcohol cluster than among men in that cluster." So once again, moderation appears to be the key. These results support another recent study that found women who consumed alcohol had "significantly fewer fractures than non-drinkers." However, the authors also pointed out that another study found that consumption of 14 or more drinks per week was associated with greater risk of bone fractures. Ref 5