Bells Brewery Sues Classic Wines Ltd. Distributor

Here's a little beer tidbit to follow as it progresses:

Bell's Brewery Files suit against Classic Wines in Lansing

Bell's Brewery has filed a lawsuit in Kalamazoo County Circuit Court against its Lansing-based distributor, Classic Wines Ltd., seeking to stop the sale of distribution rights.

Classic Wines is trying to sell its distribution rights to M&M Distributors Inc., which is also an Anheuser-Busch InBev distributor, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit claims that M&M's loyalties to A-B will not allow M&M to fairly promote and sell Bell's brands. Bell's, the largest beer producer in the state, refuses to consent to the proposal by Classic Wines to sell the distribution rights because it "does not meet the material and reasonable qualifications and standards required by Bell's."

The eight-page complaint addresses Anheuser-Busch's control of the U.S. beer market and its efforts to "stifle competition" from other Big Beer companies and craft brewers.

Classic Wines is the fourth-largest distributor of Bell's in the state, selling about 55,000 cases a year, Bell's president Larry Bell said. Sixty-five percent of Classic Wines sales are of Bell's brands, according to the lawsuit.

Bell's pulled out of Chicago in December 2006, after a public dispute with its distributor, Indianapolis-based National Wine & Spirits Inc., which sold distribution rights to another distributor, Chicago Beverage Systems. Just last July, a new distributor for Bell's was found, allowing the brand to be sold in Chicago for the first time in almost two years.

About MyBeer Buzz

Founder, owner, author, graphic designer, CEO, CFO, webmaster, president, mechanic and janitor for mybeerbuzz.com. Producer and Co-host of the WILK Friday BeerBuzz live weekly craft beer radio show. Small craft-brewer of the craft beer news sites and one-man-band with way too many instruments to play........Copyright 2007-2024 mybeerbuzz.com All Rights Reserved: Use of this content on ANY site without written permission is not allowed.

3 comments (click to read or post):

tazio14 May, 2009 12:38
Seems like Bell's didn't have something in their contract to the effect that distribution rights were non-assignable. In a way, I like something about the mystery of the beer distributorship, as it harkens back to another earlier and better time, but it can leave consumers wishing for more in some cases.
mybeerbuzz14 May, 2009 13:03
It would be ashame if InBev/AB owned the distribution rights to Bells beers. Seems like a tremendous conflict of interest to me. I'd bet Bells had no idea how large they may get back when they signed that contract.
tazio14 May, 2009 16:11
Agreed.

Please leave a comment...I do moderate each comment so it may not appear immediately...and please be nice! You can also comment using Disqus (below) or even comment directly on Facebook (bottom).