Free Essays on Anheuiser Busch Vs. Budvar

Anheiser Bush Vs Budvar Introduction Anheuser-Busch has been the nation’s largest brewer for more than 40 years. In the mid-1800’s Adolphus Busch became familiar with the beers of a small Bohemian town called Budweis. After emigrating into the United States he married into the Anheuser brewing family. In the 1870’s Adolphus Busch registered Budweiser as a trademark in the U.S. Adolphus Busch dubbed his company’s Budweiser â€Å"the king of beers.† Budweiser is a registered trademark of the St. Louis-based Anheuser-Busch, which is the world’s largest brewing company. In recent years Anhauser-Busch has faced increased competition in the U.S. market. As a result of this increased competition the company has been looking overseas for growth and increased profits. Budweis is a small brewing town in the Czech republic. The town has a 700-year-old history of beer brewing. The brewing company Budvar of Budejovice registered Budweiser as a trademark i n Europe in 1895. Budvar’s Budweiser is considered by beer experts to be a greater beer than the American Budweiser. Czechs are very proud of the Budvar brewery and considers its beer to be a national treasure. In the days before a global marketplace, the American Budweiser and the Czech Budweiser have never really competed with each other. However, in the 1990’s with increased global competition in the beer market, this dispute over who actually owns the Budweiser name takes on increased importance. According to a 1958 agreement signed by the Czech government, brand names that denote geographic origin are protected. So the Czech government which owns Budweiser believes that they should be the only ones allowed to carry that name in Europe. However the United States did not sign that treaty in 1958, so they do not agree with this. They have decided that it was no longer necessary for them to have a trademark settlement to develop the American Budweiser business in Euro pe. They decided t... Free Essays on Anheuiser Busch Vs. Budvar Free Essays on Anheuiser Busch Vs. Budvar Anheiser Bush Vs Budvar Introduction Anheuser-Busch has been the nation’s largest brewer for more than 40 years. In the mid-1800’s Adolphus Busch became familiar with the beers of a small Bohemian town called Budweis. After emigrating into the United States he married into the Anheuser brewing family. In the 1870’s Adolphus Busch registered Budweiser as a trademark in the U.S. Adolphus Busch dubbed his company’s Budweiser â€Å"the king of beers.† Budweiser is a registered trademark of the St. Louis-based Anheuser-Busch, which is the world’s largest brewing company. In recent years Anhauser-Busch has faced increased competition in the U.S. market. As a result of this increased competition the company has been looking overseas for growth and increased profits. Budweis is a small brewing town in the Czech republic. The town has a 700-year-old history of beer brewing. The brewing company Budvar of Budejovice registered Budweiser as a trademark i n Europe in 1895. Budvar’s Budweiser is considered by beer experts to be a greater beer than the American Budweiser. Czechs are very proud of the Budvar brewery and considers its beer to be a national treasure. In the days before a global marketplace, the American Budweiser and the Czech Budweiser have never really competed with each other. However, in the 1990’s with increased global competition in the beer market, this dispute over who actually owns the Budweiser name takes on increased importance. According to a 1958 agreement signed by the Czech government, brand names that denote geographic origin are protected. So the Czech government which owns Budweiser believes that they should be the only ones allowed to carry that name in Europe. However the United States did not sign that treaty in 1958, so they do not agree with this. They have decided that it was no longer necessary for them to have a trademark settlement to develop the American Budweiser business in Euro pe. They decided t...

Political Party Ads - Who Pays for Them

Political Party Ads - Who Pays for Them Finding out who pays for political party ads in election season can be tricky. Candidates and committees who purchase political party ads on television and in print are required to disclose their identities. But often times those committees have vague names such as Americans for Prosperity or Americans for a Better Future. Understanding who contributes money to those committees so they can buy political ads is an important function of democracy because the ads play such a large role in elections. Are they conservative or liberal in political philosophy? Do they have a special interest or issue they are trying to influence? It is sometimes difficult to discern what a committees motives are just by watching or reading political ads. Who Pays for Political Party Ads Generally speaking, there are several types of groups that pay for political advertising. They are individual candidate election campaigns such as those for President Barack Obama or 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney; political parties such as the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee; and political action committees or super PACs funded by industries and special interests. Some of the largest special interests in American politics are abortion and gun-control opponents, energy companies and senior citizens. In recent years, though, super PACs have emerged has powerhouses in the electoral process. So have 527 groups and other organizations who seek to exploit weak disclosure laws and spend so-called dark money. How to Tell Who Pays for Political Ads It is easy to tell when an individual political candidate or political party buys airtime for ads. They will disclose their identities, often at the end of the ad. Typically, the wording is This ad was paid for by the committee to re-elect Barack Obama or I am Mitt Romney and I approved this message. Political action committees and super PACs are required to do the same, but they are not required to provide a list of major contributors or identify their special interests on the air. Such information is available only through the committees own websites or through Federal Election Commission records. Those records, called campaign finance reports, include details about how much a political candidate or political party is spending on political ads. Disclosure Controversy Political action committees and super PACs are required by law to list their contributors in disclosures filed regularly in Washington, D.C. Such information can shed light on whether those super PACs are conservative or liberal in nature. But some super PACs exploit a loophole in reporting laws not addressed in the legal case that led to their creation, Citizens United v. the FEC. Super PACs are permitted to accept contributions from nonprofit groups classified as 501[c][4] or social welfare organizations under the Internal Revenue Service tax code. The problem is that under that tax code, 501[c][4] groups are not required to disclose their own contributors. That means they can make contributions to super PACs in the name of the social welfare entity without having to disclose where they themselves got the money. Attempts to close that loophole in Congress have failed. Greater Transparency The Federal Communications Commission requires television stations that get paid to broadcast political ads to keep a record of who bought airtime. Those records are required to be made available for inspection to the public at the stations. The contracts show the which candidates, political committees or special interests are buying political ads, the length and target audience, how much they paid, and when the ads aired. Beginning in August 2012, the FCC also required television stations to post online all contracts with candidates, super PACs and other committees buying airtime for political ads. Those contracts are available at https://stations.fcc.gov.