When we talk about someone’s livelihood – beer-related or otherwise – passions run high and opinions strong.

When the discussion does involve the vast and varied beer industry, with its thousands of players in all three tiers of the Texas system, it’s understandable and to be expected that not everyone will agree on every single decision that affects the industry.

Consensus building is difficult, even in the easiest of times. I get that.

That’s why it comes as no surprise that the brewers are not all in favor of part of an agreement reached this week by the stakeholders in legislation that would affect the industry on various fronts.

The negotiations did include reps for the Texas Craft Brewers Guild, such as the hard-working Scott Metzger of Freetail Brewing who has put in countless hours on behalf of breweries and brew pubs, and a cross-section of Texas distributors who believe, without question, that their own success rises with the success of the craft brews as well. And that adherence to the three-tier system that protects them from monopolies has to be an underpinning of any law affecting the alcoholic beverage industry.

No one with a stake in beer legislation was left out of the room, but they emerged believing that everyone got something, and everyone gave up something in order to get it.

With that in mind, I have a few thoughts on the issue they’re splitting over – the selling of particular brands to distributors.

There has been confusion in the industry over whether it’s acceptable or legal, in the spirit of the law if not the letter, for a brewer to sell a particular brand to a distributor.

Many of them have, in fact, been told previously by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission that such transactions likely violate tied-house statutes, and so they didn’t do it. Now some breweries want to do it, which could cause a market imbalance because a distributor has “invested” in one brand and not another.

Craft brewers benefit from an independent distribution tier which has not invested in one brand over another. Because of this, they stand on equal footing with big beers like Budweiser and Miller, enjoying the exact same access to the market without the influence of money and power muddying that water.

Getting that access right out of the gate is a cost-efficiency advantage available to no other “start up” commodities.

Having said all that, again, it’s not unexpected that some brewers take issue with the part of the agreement reached earlier this week that includes codifying a ban on payment for brands.

However, this shouldn’t overshadow the major victories achieved by the brewers in the negotiations – concessions made by independent distributors in an effort to support the crafts in their success, which in turn benefits everyone.

When these pass, it will be a new day in the Texas beer industry, major changes ahead for a lot of brewers, and they should be celebrated.

1. The ability to have on-premise sales or “tap rooms” at a brewery, meaning you can go to your favorite brewery, watch the beer being made, take a tour and then hang out and buy some brews in their tap room on site.
2. The brand new ability of brewpubs to introduce their beer to a wider market by making their beers available to retailers through distributors.

Was it everything they wanted? Of course not. Nobody in the negotiations got 100 percent of what they wanted – that’s the darker side of compromise, the part that allows everyone to get a little of what they need without anyone being thrown under the bus.

As Sen. John Carona put it at the conclusion of the testimony a couple weeks ago, every change to the law affects the entire industry, and everyone who has a stake in the industry has done their part, over the decades, to build it into the successful one in Texas.

They all should benefit.