InBev, the Belgian brewer, today hiked its unsolicited bid for Anheuser-Busch Cos. (NYSE: BUD) by a whopping $5 a share, making it all but certain that the King of Beers will sell -- unless members of the board of directors have spent too much time sampling their own product.

The $50 billion offer represents a substantial premium over where Anheuser-Busch has recently traded. InBev clearly wants to avoid the hostile takeover it's threatened. It has vowed to keep its U.S. operations based in the company's hometown of St. Louis. The average drinker of Budweiser probably will not notice a difference in the taste of their favorite brew, which may or may not be a good thing depending on one's beer snobbery.

Shareholders, including Warren Buffett, are ready to head to the exits. The stock, which is up 17% this year, is trading up in pre-market trading. The company has little choice but to take the bid. No other logical buyers exist and I would be surprised if private equity players would be willing to top InBev's offer.

About the only potential losers in this acquisition may be media companies.

Many investors use moving averages, and more specifically, moving average "crossovers," where one suddenly starts trading above or below the other, to try and gauge which way a market may be headed.

Among technical analysts, one combination has often been seen as a good pointer to prospective long-term trends.

The bullish version is called a "golden cross." That is when the price of a security rises above its short-term average (traditionally, the 50-day moving average), which is also above its long-term average (traditionally, the 200-day moving average).

Yesterday, Brian White reported on the Belgian court ruling for Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG). He disagreed with the ruling, saying that a) European countries tend to not adapt to trends, and b) Google only aggregates content and, as such, acts as a marketer.

Well, I must disagree with Brian. As for the first point, I wonder what made him decide that European countries aren't trend followers? Perhaps, it would be more accurate to say that European countries don't adapt to American-set trends but may have no problem with those of European origin. As for the second point, Google might very well act as a marketer, but if a site doesn't wish to be marketed, shouldn't it have that choice? Heck, if I I can ask for an unlisted phone number, why can't they?

So that was the initial ruling. But Google refused to adhere to part of it, the part that ordered Google to post a copy of the court order and all accompanying text on its website. Like a whining baby, Google called it "unnecessary and disproportionate." Brian White claims there is no law that should make Google post the ruling. My understanding is that anytime there is a court ruling, it becomes binding.