IBJNews

Craft brewers stay neutral on Sunday alcohol sales

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Russ Chargualaf watched in awe on Super Bowl Sunday as 600 growlers were filled in just five hours at Indianapolis' Thr3e Wise Men Brewing Co.

Thirsty football fans were buying something they could purchase at few other locations in the state.

Indiana's craft breweries account for only a tiny percentage of annual statewide beer sales, but they've enjoyed a sweet spot on Sundays for the past two-plus years. Along with wineries, microbreweries are allowed to sell their products to carryout customers on that day.

As the debate in the Statehouse about whether to expand alcohol sales intensifies, that sweet spot might be nearing its end.

For Indiana's growing craft beer fan base, it has been a chance to enjoy the hoppy creations of nearby breweries at home. On Super Bowl Sunday, it's a different story.

"It's the one day out of the year that carryout is just mind-blowing," Chargualaf, assistant general manager of Thr3e Wise Men, told the Journal & Courier of Lafayette. "But our numbers continue to increase every year for Sunday sales. People want alcohol on Sundays. We pour it fresh."

Lawmakers are considering whether to relax the state's liquor laws, which ban the sales of beer, wine and alcohol at most retail outlets on Sundays.

Indiana law allows Sunday alcohol sales in restaurants, bars, wineries and breweries, as well as at some special events.

Though they lobbied for the right to join that group in 2010, breweries aren't taking an official position in the debate about whether to expand Sunday alcohol sales to grocery and liquor stores.

"We are not taking a stance on the issue of broad-based Sunday alcohol sales," said Lee Smith, executive director of the Brewers of Indiana Guild. "We're interested in promoting our breweries and what is good for our breweries, but we're not for or against it."

The ability to sell carryout beer has made an impact on the state's rapidly growing number of craft breweries, a right the state's wineries have enjoyed for about three decades.

"Our customers love the fact they can ... leave with a six-pack or a growler on Sundays," said Chris Johnson, owner of People's Brewing Co. in Lafayette. "The other thing that Sunday carryout sales does is bring someone in that hasn't had our product. A lot of times, we can make customers out of them."

Has it helped the bottom line of the brewery known for its Farmer's Daughter wheat ale?

Johnson says "yes," but breweries weren't lobbying for Sunday carryout sales back in 2010 to compete with liquor stores.

"We've absolutely done better with carryout sales," he said. "But the basis behind trying to get the law changed (in 2010) wasn't to isolate ourselves."

And besides enjoying that he's one of the only options for those who wish to enjoy Sunday-purchased hops at home, he doesn't think an expansion of Indiana's liquor sales laws would harm his business.

"For the business, I like us having the ability and them not, but personally I really don't see it as a big deal," Johnson said. "I'm not worried about our sales decreasing."

Lafayette Brewing Co. owner Greg Emig agreed.

"It is what it is," Emig said. "Our product is a bit of a niche market."

Craft beer across the state accounted for just 2 percent of total Indiana beer sales, according to the guild. Smith said she anticipates that figure will rise along with the popularity of craft beer.

Though they're not taking a stand, brewers are watching the debate closely from the sidelines.

"I see both sides of the issue," Emig said. "It's a piece of legislation where somebody will ultimately feel wounded from it. It could have a very real economic impact."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT