Are you concerned about our pubs ?
Discussion
Bill said:
This is nonsense IMO, it might not have helped some of the crap pubs but allowed vast numbers to diversify (ie do half decent food).
The recession and general lifestyle changes had a far greater effect.
You are totally wrong, and thats not an opinion, its a fact. The recession and general lifestyle changes had a far greater effect.
A similar smoking ban was applied in Ireland prior to the one in the UK . The effect was dramatic. Footfall into pubs declined massively over night , cannot recall the actual figures, but it was huge, something akin to 40% . So yes, the smoking ban most definitiely was and has been a huge factor in the decline of pubs in general, pub owners knew what was coming when Blair and co initiated the ban, they knew, from the happenings in Ireland.
It does bother me. I think they're important community hubs, or can be. .
I moved to a large village in the eighties, didn't know anyone, lived on my own. In the pub people got talking and I met people who are friends today, as well as being a good place to find local trades people.
As well as has already been said, I think the one bar concept hasn't helped. It's a one size fits all, and usually the lowest common denominator. The other Sunday evening I called into a pub which used to be my first choice locally. It has a horseshoe shaped bar around the serving area. Both side now have a TV with the football on, so all the pub was dominated by shouting, track suit wearing men, already on the outside of a good few pints. One side, great, enjoy the game with your mates, but why the whole pub? I won't be back in a rush and the friend I was with won't ever - she said it was intimidating.
A former pub landlord told me that all day opening had a negative impact too. When Sunday lunch was 12- 2 only, everyone would meet up, have a couple, off home again by 2. Now, one person comes in at 12, another at 1.30 another at 3 etc etc, they find there's no one there much, so don't bother. That was his experience anyway - maybe local rather than town centre pubs.
Add that to disinterested managers and large holding companies, ridiculously cheap beer from supermarkets and even local authorities killing local music and it's only ever going one way.
The few pubs left near me doing well do affordable food (not pre packed/frozen) and appeal to a wide range of groups - old, young, families, women, and engage with the community.
O/t a bit but have you ever wondered what pubs would have been like if owners had spent as much accommodating non smokers as they have on smokers since the ban?
I moved to a large village in the eighties, didn't know anyone, lived on my own. In the pub people got talking and I met people who are friends today, as well as being a good place to find local trades people.
As well as has already been said, I think the one bar concept hasn't helped. It's a one size fits all, and usually the lowest common denominator. The other Sunday evening I called into a pub which used to be my first choice locally. It has a horseshoe shaped bar around the serving area. Both side now have a TV with the football on, so all the pub was dominated by shouting, track suit wearing men, already on the outside of a good few pints. One side, great, enjoy the game with your mates, but why the whole pub? I won't be back in a rush and the friend I was with won't ever - she said it was intimidating.
A former pub landlord told me that all day opening had a negative impact too. When Sunday lunch was 12- 2 only, everyone would meet up, have a couple, off home again by 2. Now, one person comes in at 12, another at 1.30 another at 3 etc etc, they find there's no one there much, so don't bother. That was his experience anyway - maybe local rather than town centre pubs.
Add that to disinterested managers and large holding companies, ridiculously cheap beer from supermarkets and even local authorities killing local music and it's only ever going one way.
The few pubs left near me doing well do affordable food (not pre packed/frozen) and appeal to a wide range of groups - old, young, families, women, and engage with the community.
O/t a bit but have you ever wondered what pubs would have been like if owners had spent as much accommodating non smokers as they have on smokers since the ban?
Cheese Mechanic said:
You are totally wrong, and thats not an opinion, its a fact.
A similar smoking ban was applied in Ireland prior to the one in the UK . The effect was dramatic. Footfall into pubs declined massively over night , cannot recall the actual figures, but it was huge, something akin to 40% . So yes, the smoking ban most definitiely was and has been a huge factor in the decline of pubs in general, pub owners knew what was coming when Blair and co initiated the ban, they knew, from the happenings in Ireland.
I'll just leave this here then: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/smoking-ban-b...A similar smoking ban was applied in Ireland prior to the one in the UK . The effect was dramatic. Footfall into pubs declined massively over night , cannot recall the actual figures, but it was huge, something akin to 40% . So yes, the smoking ban most definitiely was and has been a huge factor in the decline of pubs in general, pub owners knew what was coming when Blair and co initiated the ban, they knew, from the happenings in Ireland.
Bill said:
I'll just leave this here then: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/smoking-ban-b...
Claiming such as the link you supply does not alter the fact that hundreds of pubs closed because of the smoking ban : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/3633860/A...The smoking ban WAS a huge factor in the demise of many pubs, no matter what excuses you make.
"There are some 50,000 pubs in England and Wales. Experience from Scotland, where smoking in public places was banned last year, suggests takings from alcohol sales will suffer, at least initially. The Scottish Licensed Trade Association cited a 15 per cent drop.
In Ireland, which pioneered the smoking ban, the effects were far worse. Hundreds of pubs closed, particularly in rural areas. Melanie Haynes, spokesman for the publicans' professional body, the BII, believes that experience will not be repeated in England and Wales."
No opinion there. Except the last sentence. Melanie Haynes has been proven totally wrong. There were 50,000 pubs in England and wales in 2007, how many are there now, I wonder.
In Ireland, which pioneered the smoking ban, the effects were far worse. Hundreds of pubs closed, particularly in rural areas. Melanie Haynes, spokesman for the publicans' professional body, the BII, believes that experience will not be repeated in England and Wales."
No opinion there. Except the last sentence. Melanie Haynes has been proven totally wrong. There were 50,000 pubs in England and wales in 2007, how many are there now, I wonder.
"It is far too early to tell what impact the smoking ban has had. However, we believe in the long term the smoking ban will have a positive impact on our industry as non-smokers and families return to pubs as part of their leisure activity. The onus is on the publicans and pub companies to make their businesses welcoming."
You clearly feel strongly about this, but that is all still opinion.
You clearly feel strongly about this, but that is all still opinion.
Brother D said:
There are so many factors that have killed the country pubs, not limited to the following:
1. Tied to breweries (as mentioned) - Pub HAS to pay 120 a barrel - you can buy the same barrel from the same brewery at a wholesalers for 80 (Pubs often fitted with flow meters to prevent landlords purchasing the brewery's beer from a wholesaler).
2. No smoking ban. People who didn't smoke and didn't visit pubs because of the smoking had it banned. And they still don't go to the pubs.
3. Supermarkets cutting prices as you can imagine.
4. Modern life/General lack of time - people don't work locally and spend the night in the pub - poeple work longer hours and commute further especially in villages
5. Pubs providing crap service and crap food.
6. Massive rent increases.
7. Minimum wage costs.
8. Health and safety cost of compliance.
9. Red tape costs.
10. Business Taxes increasing
All of which means running a quiet country pub is just not viable nowadays.
11. The internet.1. Tied to breweries (as mentioned) - Pub HAS to pay 120 a barrel - you can buy the same barrel from the same brewery at a wholesalers for 80 (Pubs often fitted with flow meters to prevent landlords purchasing the brewery's beer from a wholesaler).
2. No smoking ban. People who didn't smoke and didn't visit pubs because of the smoking had it banned. And they still don't go to the pubs.
3. Supermarkets cutting prices as you can imagine.
4. Modern life/General lack of time - people don't work locally and spend the night in the pub - poeple work longer hours and commute further especially in villages
5. Pubs providing crap service and crap food.
6. Massive rent increases.
7. Minimum wage costs.
8. Health and safety cost of compliance.
9. Red tape costs.
10. Business Taxes increasing
All of which means running a quiet country pub is just not viable nowadays.
I am afterall, sat here at home conversing with The World with a glass of wine, I don't need to go down to the pub to have a chat anymore.
Does anyone know of a smoker who stopped going to the pub when the smoking ban came??
I know of a few who were annoyed at the time, but now even every smoker I know agrees the ban is a good thing.
Granted it's a slim basis and limited demographic, but nevertheless zero evidence it should have anything to do with pub closures. If anything the opposite seems to be true.
I know of a few who were annoyed at the time, but now even every smoker I know agrees the ban is a good thing.
Granted it's a slim basis and limited demographic, but nevertheless zero evidence it should have anything to do with pub closures. If anything the opposite seems to be true.
fredt said:
Does anyone know of a smoker who stopped going to the pub when the smoking ban came??
I know of a few who were annoyed at the time, but now even every smoker I know agrees the ban is a good thing.
Granted it's a slim basis and limited demographic, but nevertheless zero evidence it should have anything to do with pub closures. If anything the opposite seems to be true.
I am an occasional smoker and much prefer the ban on smoking. My mum used to only ever go to the pub in the summer if she could sit in the garden as she really can't stand the smell of smoke, now I usually meet her and my dad for a couple of drinks every Thursday evening. So that's a very small range that I've selected data from, but I think it has been a good thing. I know of a few who were annoyed at the time, but now even every smoker I know agrees the ban is a good thing.
Granted it's a slim basis and limited demographic, but nevertheless zero evidence it should have anything to do with pub closures. If anything the opposite seems to be true.
Brother D said:
4. Modern life/General lack of time - people don't work locally and spend the night in the pub - poeple work longer hours and commute further especially in villages
Fathers also apparently average 7 times as much time with their kids now compared to the 70s, and even that was a big increase on the generation before. Smoking ban, not really. Smoking has been in massive decline since the 70s, both from people giving up and the older end dying with younger people less likely to smoke. It's about 18% of the over-18 population now.
Less demand will mean smaller supply to match. The pubs that are viable will continue, many won't. Anyone who bemoans pubs closing should also declare how much they actually spend in them.
Edited by sjg on Monday 24th November 14:34
The smoking ban is great for pubs. It means you can enjoy a oibte and taste the beer, rather than the vile smokey clouds that previously filled pubs and bars. And if you want to smoke, you can always bugger off outside and do it.
My village has four pubs, and is a popular stop on cross country tours. Indeed, two of the pubs do very well indeed and one of them has garnered many CAMRA awards for the best pub in the county. That said, I believe four pubs in a small village is overkill, and two have typically struggled. One is a bit of a sad story, in that it's trade was flagging and locals avoided it. It was frequented by rough sorts who travelled in on a Friday and Saturday night to drink there and was dead the rest of the week. A new landlord took over, quickly established that the old clientele weren't welcome and redecorated at cobsidrablr expense, revitalising the look of the place. He hired a chef, wrote up a menu and tried getting some ales on draught. Sadly, the chef quit within a week and was never replaced, the locals never really took to the place and the landlord packed in after about six months. I really wondered if he made any money at all, I suspect he didn't. It was worst just before he quit. It was back to karaoke on a Friday night with the old set of punters back drinking Fosters, a miserable sight and exactly the sort of thing the landlord had wanted to move away from.
Pubs are a fickle thing alright. Next door to that one is another pub which is rammed weekend. Like, people would go pack into that pub with standing room only, when next door was deserted! Although that pub has exclusivity on the local brewery's ale, which can't hurt.
The other pub has been through the wringer of the brewery squeezing it. It seemed ever more apparent that the brewery just wanted rid of the landlady. The property can't really be redeveloped into anything else commercial, but it could be a nice property so I guess they thought someone would buy it to turn into a B&B or small hotel. Things got worse, year in year as the brewery tightened the noose on the landlady. The price for the barrels was up and their upkeep of the property dwindled. After several years of this, the landlady packed in mid-term in a contract and left. There is a new landlady in there now with her son, and they seem intent on making a go of it. Oddly, it's still owned by the same brewery/leisure interest so I cannot fathom why they wanted rid of the old landlady (who had done s good job there for years).
I prefer drinking at the first place, which generally deserves it's CAMRA plaudits. I still maintain though, that four pubs is too much for this village to maintain on local trade alone, especially since most locals pack into the two more popular pubs.
My village has four pubs, and is a popular stop on cross country tours. Indeed, two of the pubs do very well indeed and one of them has garnered many CAMRA awards for the best pub in the county. That said, I believe four pubs in a small village is overkill, and two have typically struggled. One is a bit of a sad story, in that it's trade was flagging and locals avoided it. It was frequented by rough sorts who travelled in on a Friday and Saturday night to drink there and was dead the rest of the week. A new landlord took over, quickly established that the old clientele weren't welcome and redecorated at cobsidrablr expense, revitalising the look of the place. He hired a chef, wrote up a menu and tried getting some ales on draught. Sadly, the chef quit within a week and was never replaced, the locals never really took to the place and the landlord packed in after about six months. I really wondered if he made any money at all, I suspect he didn't. It was worst just before he quit. It was back to karaoke on a Friday night with the old set of punters back drinking Fosters, a miserable sight and exactly the sort of thing the landlord had wanted to move away from.
Pubs are a fickle thing alright. Next door to that one is another pub which is rammed weekend. Like, people would go pack into that pub with standing room only, when next door was deserted! Although that pub has exclusivity on the local brewery's ale, which can't hurt.
The other pub has been through the wringer of the brewery squeezing it. It seemed ever more apparent that the brewery just wanted rid of the landlady. The property can't really be redeveloped into anything else commercial, but it could be a nice property so I guess they thought someone would buy it to turn into a B&B or small hotel. Things got worse, year in year as the brewery tightened the noose on the landlady. The price for the barrels was up and their upkeep of the property dwindled. After several years of this, the landlady packed in mid-term in a contract and left. There is a new landlady in there now with her son, and they seem intent on making a go of it. Oddly, it's still owned by the same brewery/leisure interest so I cannot fathom why they wanted rid of the old landlady (who had done s good job there for years).
I prefer drinking at the first place, which generally deserves it's CAMRA plaudits. I still maintain though, that four pubs is too much for this village to maintain on local trade alone, especially since most locals pack into the two more popular pubs.
Baryonyx said:
A new landlord took over, quickly established that the old clientele weren't welcome and redecorated at cobsidrablr expense, revitalising the look of the place. He hired a chef, wrote up a menu and tried getting some ales on draught. Sadly, the chef quit within a week and was never replaced, the locals never really took to the place and the landlord packed in after about six months.
I've watched loads of pubs try and reinvent themselves and rule no. 1 is that if you want to change the pub's customers, you don't start by getting rid of the old ones. Especially in a village where everyone knows each other (though I understand this doesn't apply so much in your case).
Our local pub's most recent tenants did this - tried to become all foodie. But instead of making the food better, they started by trying to get rid of what they perceived to be the young troublemakers in the public bar. Being a village, the troublemakers were all the sons and nephews of the kind of people they wanted to attract in to eat.
Gassing Station | Food, Drink & Restaurants | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff