Let’s be civil. The Flathead Beacon encourages vigorous discussion and lively debate, but we will delete comments that attack other readers, make accusations we can’t verify, stray too far off topic, criticize local businesses (call them if you have a problem), convict someone of a crime, use profanity or are simply judged to be in bad taste. We don’t always have someone moderating comments, so we ask for your help: If you see a comment that violates these ground rules, or you simply deem it offensive, please e-mail editor [at] flatheadbeacon.com. The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.
By Firebeam on 11-15-09
Somebody or a group of somebody’s should be talking with a lawyer. If your descriptions are accurate, I smell anti-trust or some similar behavior which might be sucessfully challenged in court. The old saying “you can’t fight city hall” or in this case state capitol, isn’t necessarily true anymore.
The longer laws have been in the books the more ripe they may be for challenge.
If the State limits licenses, yet is aware that these licenses are being sold at astronomical amounts in a secondary market, that constitutes anti-trust (as I understand it—-I’m not a lawyer.) In any case it seems very wrong and inappropriate for the State to be engaged in such activity. If I were a businessman I’d be looking for others in the same boat and sharing the cost of some preliminary legal investigations.
Beacon Readers Rated This Comment:
By Mark Riffey on 11-15-09
Add to the story the inability of Montana’s wine producers to take part in ecommerce - as wineries in other states have done for over a decade. And that doesnt count the wineries that were able to get a direct mail based constituency prior to the widespread use of ecommerce.
As you noted, what they say and what they do seldom add up.
Beacon Readers Rated This Comment:
By woody on 11-15-09
it’s a cartel basically, and historically speaking I believe that the law was pushed by the religious community in the name of temperence….
the problem is that by restricting these licenses we get the lowest common denominator….like a casino in a gas station…..
and these laws are family unfriendly…...
and small business unfriendly….
exactly what the law was intended to be.
Beacon Readers Rated This Comment:
By redhawk on 11-15-09
As a former bar owner…I speak from experience. You were SO lucky to escape being enmeshed in the state liquor system! Licenses went from value to no value in the county, application forms were returned for not answering a question hidden under a staple so the state could trumpet about how many applications were not complete, then you get to deal with the Justice dept. for gaming, which is another nightmare altogether. Different forms, duplicate investigations, adversarial agents, all because you were stupid enough to buy a business in Montana! Add the fact that the liquor board can add any stipulation they choose and you hve to follow it. Add that to the rising cost of liquor, state provided of course, and a depressed economy and you have a recipe for losing your butt!
Beacon Readers Rated This Comment:
By chefjim on 11-18-09
Once again, my thanks to all who wrote. This is not the end of the story. My column for the next few weeks will deal with other subjects. But we’ll revisit this ridiculous situation with the beverage laws and regulations in Montana again.
Beacon Readers Rated This Comment:
By Missedyourmark on 11-18-09
Thanks to you chefjim! I knew something was up and have always heard about the issues about beverage licenses but it appears as if this is so deeply rooted that we might never see change. Isn’t there a way we can let the voters decide and force the state to change? Get a petition going? Something!
Beacon Readers Rated This Comment:
In order to post comments you must register once with the Beacon and be logged in. Log in below or register now.
Hilliard Rises from Practice Squad to NFL Backup
Celebrating the Centennial on Screen
For Valley’s Young Professionals, a Recovery in Fits and Starts
FEATURE PHOTO: Kalispell St. Patrick’s Day Parade
County Commission Race Gets Crowded
Comments on: Dine and Whine
Let’s be civil. The Flathead Beacon encourages vigorous discussion and lively debate, but we will delete comments that attack other readers, make accusations we can’t verify, stray too far off topic, criticize local businesses (call them if you have a problem), convict someone of a crime, use profanity or are simply judged to be in bad taste. We don’t always have someone moderating comments, so we ask for your help: If you see a comment that violates these ground rules, or you simply deem it offensive, please e-mail editor [at] flatheadbeacon.com. The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.
By Firebeam on 11-15-09
Somebody or a group of somebody’s should be talking with a lawyer. If your descriptions are accurate, I smell anti-trust or some similar behavior which might be sucessfully challenged in court. The old saying “you can’t fight city hall” or in this case state capitol, isn’t necessarily true anymore.
The longer laws have been in the books the more ripe they may be for challenge.
If the State limits licenses, yet is aware that these licenses are being sold at astronomical amounts in a secondary market, that constitutes anti-trust (as I understand it—-I’m not a lawyer.) In any case it seems very wrong and inappropriate for the State to be engaged in such activity. If I were a businessman I’d be looking for others in the same boat and sharing the cost of some preliminary legal investigations.
By Mark Riffey on 11-15-09
Add to the story the inability of Montana’s wine producers to take part in ecommerce - as wineries in other states have done for over a decade. And that doesnt count the wineries that were able to get a direct mail based constituency prior to the widespread use of ecommerce.
As you noted, what they say and what they do seldom add up.
By woody on 11-15-09
it’s a cartel basically, and historically speaking I believe that the law was pushed by the religious community in the name of temperence….
the problem is that by restricting these licenses we get the lowest common denominator….like a casino in a gas station…..
and these laws are family unfriendly…...
and small business unfriendly….
exactly what the law was intended to be.
By redhawk on 11-15-09
As a former bar owner…I speak from experience. You were SO lucky to escape being enmeshed in the state liquor system! Licenses went from value to no value in the county, application forms were returned for not answering a question hidden under a staple so the state could trumpet about how many applications were not complete, then you get to deal with the Justice dept. for gaming, which is another nightmare altogether. Different forms, duplicate investigations, adversarial agents, all because you were stupid enough to buy a business in Montana! Add the fact that the liquor board can add any stipulation they choose and you hve to follow it. Add that to the rising cost of liquor, state provided of course, and a depressed economy and you have a recipe for losing your butt!
By chefjim on 11-18-09
Once again, my thanks to all who wrote. This is not the end of the story. My column for the next few weeks will deal with other subjects. But we’ll revisit this ridiculous situation with the beverage laws and regulations in Montana again.
By Missedyourmark on 11-18-09
Thanks to you chefjim! I knew something was up and have always heard about the issues about beverage licenses but it appears as if this is so deeply rooted that we might never see change. Isn’t there a way we can let the voters decide and force the state to change? Get a petition going? Something!