Its my understanding that ownership by a BMC does come with a price. I'm not saying that it will immediately reduce quality, but if a brewery stumbles financially they can expect to receive guidance on how to reduce costs and increse the bottom line.
This happened to Pierre Celis: http://www.beer-pages.com/stories/celis.htm
. And I don't think you have to stumble financially, you just need to not produce as much of a profit as analysts think you can. I remember back in the early 00's there used to be Warner Brothers stores in the malls that would sell any and all things Looney Tunes. When AOL merged with Time Warner, they closed all those stores to show investors that after the merger they were committed to cutting down the bottom line, even though those stores were profitable. It sounds like the same thing was done after InBev bought Hoegaarden. Correct me if I am wrong, but it wasn't as if Hoegaarden was losing money, but that they weren't making enough money and it looked good to Wall Street to close them.
Based on the article gymrat posted, http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/forum/index.php?topic=14144.msg180088#msg180088
, it is a pretty good bet that it will keep happening.