IBJNews

Craft brewers stay neutral on Sunday alcohol sales

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT