Owners Blog

I got a call from my Mother of all people the other day who told me that the Rubicon and Rachael Soules were quoted in an article on the front page of the  Wall Street Journal here is a link for the full article http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052702303601504575154340630127712-lMyQjAxMTAwMDAwMjEwNDIyWj.html

Here is a news clip that sums up taxes and the craft breweries of America

http://cbs4denver.com/video/?id=67298@kcnc.dayport.com

Here is an article I enjoyed about a recent group that visited the Rubicon. I think I will do the opposite and go to the Bay soon to see Breweries in the Bay Area

http://lazybrewer.com/2010/01/21/exploratory-amtrak-pub-crawl/

Hello all check out the following video link;

Below is the speech I gave to the Assembly Health Committee on April 22nd. If you would like to become a beer activist go to http://www.supportyourlocalbrewery.org/

Chair and Members of Assembly Health Committee. My name is Glynn Phillips and I am the owner of the Rubicon Brewing Company, which is six blocks from here, the President of the Northern California Brewers Guild 65 breweries strong, and a past Board member of the California Small Brewers Association 75 breweries strong. I am here to day in opposition of AB1019. I oppose this bill for three reasons, 1) it would put more stress on a difficult beer market, 2) taxing the beer manufactures is flawed in a three-tier system, and 3) I do not like the idea of the BOE (Board of Equalization) having the power to increase fees without a vote.

First if the BOE were to impose the fees proposed, my tax basis would increase from $9048.90 in 2008 to $57,460.51 in 2009 given the same production levels. This extra cost would have to be passed to the consumer in order for me to stay in business. I also submit to you the incredible increases in the costs of commodities last year alone pushed the limits of the consumer’s pocket book, and the ability of small beer manufactures to stay competitive. These increased costs included a 20 percent increase in malted barley and wheat; a 1000 percent increase in hops, a 15 percent increase in fuel, increased wages, an increase in sale tax, and increases General Liability and Workman’s Compensation. When you add all these incredible costs in such a short time we the craft brewers of California find it difficult to keep competitive in a very competitive market. Many manufactures find themselves taking fewer margins than wholesalers or retailers.

Second if the BOE were to impose the fees proposed on the manufactures of California the consumer would see a much greater cost once our products make it to the shelf given the three tier system in place. The proposed $1.07 fee per gallon would start at the manufacture who takes his appropriate price increases, then it is sold to a licensed distributor who takes on average a 30 percent increase to make their margin increasing the fee to $1.40 per gallon, then the licensed retailer takes another 30 percent on average to make their margin increasing the fee to $1.82 per gallon. There are 1.13 gallons in a six-pack of beer, which would leave the consumer paying an extra $2.06 per six-pack just to cover the fees proposed.

Third if the manufactures were to see yearly increases of the fee proposed as described by the bill the costs would increase exponentially as described above. This unchecked increase would severely burden all of the beer manufactures of California, and deter new businesses from opening in our great state.

It is my contention that this bill would have the opposite affect intended. The consumer has a level at which they are willing to spend. To add the extra costs would send a six-pack of hand crafted quality ale into the $15 range. I believe that the market would see a decrease in sales that would decrease the tax revenue generated, not to mention hurt a thriving California industry. I personally employ 35 people that live and work in this area. The fees proposed would make it increasingly difficult to keep them all employed as I believe the consumer would be less inclined to spend at the price levels I would have to charge to keep in business.

Last I invite all of you to stroll to my pub on the corner of 20th and Capitol to share a pint and discuss in depth the true costs of the fee proposed.

Thank you for your time.

Guys,

Here is a cool video for you tho check out;

Click on the link below to view this video.

If the link doesn’t launch the video, copy and paste the link into your browser’s address bar and hit “enter.”

http://www.comcast.net/data/fan/html/popup.html?v=962050544

CROSSING THE RUBICON
When Julius Caesar and his army crossed the Rubicon in 49 B.C., they violated an ancient Roman law which forbade any general with a standing army from crossing the Rubicon River and entering Italy proper. Caesar is said to have considered at length whether to cross, for he knew that by crossing the Rubicon he was committing an act of war and there would be no turning back. The act of crossing the Rubicon did lead to civil war, and Caesar emerged as ruler of Rome.

The phrase “Crossing the Rubicon” has survived to refer to any step that commits a person or people irrevocably to a risky and revolutionary course of action – similar to the current phrase “passing the point of no return.”

So cross the Rubicon and come in for pint and some great pub grub.