OllyK

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4769474.stm

pslewis

Non Smokers should have a mass 'stay-away' from companies like this - backtracking - it would make them carry out the wishes of the majority pretty sharpish!!

Pete

OllyK

If they'd done that in the first place, the ban wouldn't have been necessary.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

The delay makes good commercial sense IMHO. There is evidence that if an individual pub introduces a smoking ban, then their sales do tend to decline - it's inevitable if a group of friends includes one or two smokers who insist on dragging everyone to a pub where smoking is allowed.

By delaying the introduction of the smoking ban in their own pubs, Whetherspoons ensure that their pubs are not at a commercial disadvantage compared to their neighbours. Introduce the ban early and some people will get out of the habit of drinking there, and may not return when the blanket ban comes into force. Introduce it at the same time as everywhere else and there's no problem. It's just good business sense.

TheBigMan

"It is clear from our experience and from the evidence of other areas, such as Ireland, California and New York, that the initial effect of a smoking ban can result in sales and margin declines," said company chairman Tim Martin.

"However, we believe that sales and margins can recover over time, once customers adjust to the non-smoking environment."





Say's it all.

Much like ManU fans and the Glazers - they'll get over it!!

OllyK

Well it does and it doesn't. I recall an article about the ban in Eire where they pubs that were still open had recovered their profits to pre-ban levels, however over 200 pubs (mostly rural) have closed due to a drop in profits, which means that rather than the non-smokers now having a smoke free local, they no longer have one at all. So much for choice.

TheBigMan

Yes, you are correct.

Somewhat unlikely though. You have a very positive and idealistic view of human nature - a view that I wish I could share however in the real world people quite simply are not like this (on the grand scheme of things). Granted, you may get a few that rebel and don't go to the pub because of smoke but not enough to provoke any sort of reaction.

At which point government step in with the mandate to govern.

Democracy in progress dear Watson.



EDITTED - Those 200 pubs. Not a particularly ideal scenario and yes, proof that with every positive decision comes the inevitable negatives. Though, being strictly cold in my response.....200 on the grand scale of the country is minimal. The good of the many outway the good of the few. I accept this response is somewhat heartless - and for that I apologise.

Dracoro

We don't know the whole story regarding the 200 pubs. Pubs close all the time due to poor management, general decline in drinking and so on. What's to say these pubs were gonna close anyway and instead of blaming poor pub management they blame the smoking ban. That's not to say the ban didn't hurry things along and contributed, however how come there are many pubs in the country that DIDN'T close? How are they still running? Maybe they have better run pubs!

OllyK

Quite the contrary, I just don't see things as black and white. You seem to say, people won't do it voulantarily so ban it. I say, give it a try first and then if people don't do it voulantarily, find ways to encourage them, with a ban being an absolute last resort. The options were not explored.

200 pubs plus country wide loss of jobs due to falls in profits. So much of the argument has been that a compromise couldn't be reached in this country because so many village only have 1 pub. So if those pubs go the same way as the Irish ones and close. Do the people in that village, smokers or not, now have more of a choice or less?

All I can say to the whining non-smokers who supported the ban is "you better get out there and start spending more money in the pubs to compensate otherwise you'll lose them"

OllyK

I agree to an extent and the ban hasn't been in place long in Eire. It has been in place longer in the US and there have been significant drops in profit, loss of jobs and bar closures:
http://www.davehitt.com/facts/badforbiz.html
Many bars saw overnight drops in profit which suggests that it isn't down to management.

DazW

iTrader: (1)

200 pubs in Ireland must be about 0.001% of the total number ...Every village i went to last year had at least 3!

TheBigMan

No, I say ask the question and get a democratic answer.

The question has now been asked, and we have a democratic answer.

A blunt response, but I fail to see the problem as in a democracy majority rules. Sometimes it works for you/sometimes it doesn't.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Hey WAIT a minute...........it's only recently that pubs and brewers were telling us that there was no profit on drink

Must be a bit like the "no profit" on petrol then?

Alcazar

davegtt

not forgetting paying 5Euros a beer in Dublin no wonder the buggers close down

As said earlier, a group of people with one or 2 smokers will always choose and drag the none smokers to the smoking pub.... Wouldnt work IMO

OllyK

My problem is that given a choice of:
a) Would you like an extra 50,000 people to be killed on the roads each year
b) Would you like to ban all cars

Pick 1 - you'd have to be pretty hard hearted to pick choice a.

The chocies were NOT presented or explored, the question was loaded from the start and that's my problem, the government do it all the time, you can have what they want or something worse, but you can't have what you want or any other options. That's not democracy in action, that's a cunningly disguised dictatorship.

OllyK

I think this shows the problem, the majority non-smoking group have no backbone. If the majority of the group say - we're going to this non-smoking pub, then the smokers have to make a choice, you seem to be suggesting that the 2 smokers are so important to the group, that the group would cave in if they weren't present.

davegtt

No, but as a group of friends somebody has to give and from my experience of people in general most are as stuborn as each other. Its all about compromise but either way somebody will lose out on the decision.

And we all know how selfish smokers are dont we

Richard_P

I'm in scotland, can't wait for the ban. Nothing worse than someone smoking near you, some of my friends do it as well. They see the ban as positive, it gives them a chance to give up.

Currently my throat and eyes are irritated from the smoke last night.

Leslie

Money and profits are king of course. To hell with people's health!

Les

OllyK

I only have 1 friend that smokes and he is quite happy to go in the non-smoking part of my local when he comes to visit and he smokes outside at my house without being asked, so in my limited experience, no smokers aren't selfish. Many non-smokers on the other hand...

Leslie

He is obviously a responsible bloke which is good. Not everyone is like that though. I was at a Christmas do once when a man who had been asked not to smoke indoors deliberately did so even though there was a chap with cystic fibrosis present and he knew it!

Les

TheBigMan

Smokers, non smokers......all fall under the category of people.

As such, some are ok, some are tossers.

Can't generalise with this.

oik

LOL!

Current situation: Non smokers have no choice, inhale smoke or stay away from Pub.

OllyK =

New Situation: Smokers have no choice, smoke outside or stay away from Pub.

OllyK =

Giving people the option not to smoke in a Pub ... that's an interesting one.

"Hey guys, it would be really nice if you didn't smoke in here!"

If you attempted that in some of the Pubs I have frequented your face would be used to clean the ash trays!

Maybe all the Pubs which have turned into open all hours drunken thug pits and have turned England into a war zone since the new licencing laws will close due to lost revenue then!

TheBigMan

Olly lives in a part of England where people are nice, have respect for one another, cooperate and live in harmony.

The remaining 80% this isn't the case - unfortunately.

Dream Weaver

Here we go again then

I'm not getting involved, but I will just say this.

Went to a lovely village pub yesterday (in the village where they film Born & Bred ) and they had signs up saying the following:

"In anticipdation of new gov't legislation in 2007 we have now made the pub NO SMOKING throughout. In summer ashtrays will be provided outside and in winter and inclement weather anybody who wants to smoke should ask staff and they will show you to a room where you can smoke."

I thought that was great, and this is the idea that should've been adpoted from next year if/where possible.

TheBigMan

Sounds good to me.

OllyK

Just goes to show it isn't just my "idyllic part of the world" where landlords have half a brain and can cater for both groups without completely excluding either.

now another part of the world offers the service I have been on about for ages and suddenly it's a good idea.

Dream Weaver

I know you've been slated for your views Olly, but I agree with you - where I live we do respect each other and all live fairly happily together from what i've seen - maybe thats village life for you though

TheBigMan

They are not offering what you had previously suggested - they are stating that you cannot smoke in the pub. If the weather is crappy you can be put in a little room where you can do this. The new approach has been adopted as a direct result of the impending ban and would NOT have been done so if the ban had not been introduced - another example of law having to dictate to the people what is/is not the "right" thing to do.

My comments regarding where you live was not a dig btw, quite the opposite. I wish I lived somewhere like that.