Deletion of Mike's Hard Lemonade Co.

Comment: the above arguemnts amount to . It's not enough to deduce they're out there somewhere. The sources have to be identified and cited. The ones offered so far are general articles about the beverage business that mention Mike's Hard Lemonade alongside several other brands. Or they are superficial routine coverage, such as https://web.archive.org/web/20150824044458/http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-mikes-hard-lemonade-8-ounce-cans-20140617-story.html "Mike's Hard Lemonade introduces 8-ounce cans", clocking in at all of 243 words.  Those sources fail  and . This is a |run-of-the-mill company that, minus the breathless boosterism the fluff reporting, basically does business the same as any other brand in the same niche. What facts we do have about it can be placed in an article like Malt drink, since what we have here is a typical example of a company that makes a niche beverage. I'd flip, and support keeping it I were shown sources (non-trival) that met all of the minimum criteria at . Right now this company's claim to fame is that they have grown to a certain size
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:MUSTBESOURCES||WP:CORP||WP:GNG||WP:ROTM||WP:ORGCRIT)