Coronavirus - the killer flu that will wipe us out? (Vol. 7)

[anonymous-user]

sherbertdip said:

The Spruce Goose said:

loafer123 said:

I’m afraid that he does have a fair point.

It is bizarre to be so obsessed by the risks of the disease and then act in such a way as to markedly increase your risk of catching it.

It is bizarre that you seem to spend so much time trying to pick details with my posts, it is the same posters over and over again, maybe if you are the rest of your cronies spent a bit more time interacting outside you wouldn't spend you time posting to try and make you look big and clever to your internet friends.

Edited by The Spruce Goose on Monday 6th July 00:24

Goosey, you really are coming across as an arse!

I’m also guessing the 4 visit thing is a complete fabrication.

[hotchy]

Beer gardens are finally open and who'd have thought it? The sun is shining today! Cant believe I'm working until 6.. when the only town pub with an outside space closes... and I'm off tomorrow so could have enjoyed it. Typical.

[markyb_lcy]

hotchy said:

Beer gardens are finally open and who'd have thought it? The sun is shining today! Cant believe I'm working until 6.. when the only town pub with an outside space closes... and I'm off tomorrow so could have enjoyed it. Typical.

The pub closes at 6? They’re doing it wrong.

[Robertj21a]

markyb_lcy said:

hotchy said:

Beer gardens are finally open and who'd have thought it? The sun is shining today! Cant believe I'm working until 6.. when the only town pub with an outside space closes... and I'm off tomorrow so could have enjoyed it. Typical.

The pub closes at 6? They’re doing it wrong.

For the time being it might be more sensible to open something like 12-3 and 5-8 ?. Some are determined to avoid the all day drinkers who may cause problems later in the day.

[Robertj21a]

markyb_lcy said:

hotchy said:

Beer gardens are finally open and who'd have thought it? The sun is shining today! Cant believe I'm working until 6.. when the only town pub with an outside space closes... and I'm off tomorrow so could have enjoyed it. Typical.

The pub closes at 6? They’re doing it wrong.

For the time being it might be more sensible to open something like 12-3 and 5-8 ?. Some are determined to avoid the all day drinkers who may cause problems later in the day.

[markyb_lcy]

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

hotchy said:

Beer gardens are finally open and who'd have thought it? The sun is shining today! Cant believe I'm working until 6.. when the only town pub with an outside space closes... and I'm off tomorrow so could have enjoyed it. Typical.

The pub closes at 6? They’re doing it wrong.

For the time being it might be more sensible to open something like 12-3 and 5-8 ?. Some are determined to avoid the all day drinkers who may cause problems later in the day.

I don’t quite understand the concept of turning away their best customers for a reason that existed entirely before the pandemic and isn’t particularly affected by it.

The way ministers and police and A&E staff had been going on in the days running up to Super Saturday would have us believe no British person has ever been to a pub before. As it turns out, the paranoia was misguided... yet again, we didn’t “overwhelm” the NHS because people were able to drink in a pub instead of home for the first time in 3 months.

[Robertj21a]

markyb_lcy said:

I don’t quite understand the concept of turning away their best customers for a reason that existed entirely before the pandemic and isn’t particularly affected by it.

The way ministers and police and A&E staff had been going on in the days running up to Super Saturday would have us believe no British person has ever been to a pub before. As it turns out, the paranoia was misguided... yet again, we didn’t “overwhelm” the NHS because people were able to drink in a pub instead of home for the first time in 3 months.

It's the inability for drunks to socially distance that is the problem, as confirmed by the police yesterday. Why should others have to run any increased risks just because some people can't drink in moderation ?

[markyb_lcy]

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

I don’t quite understand the concept of turning away their best customers for a reason that existed entirely before the pandemic and isn’t particularly affected by it.

The way ministers and police and A&E staff had been going on in the days running up to Super Saturday would have us believe no British person has ever been to a pub before. As it turns out, the paranoia was misguided... yet again, we didn’t “overwhelm” the NHS because people were able to drink in a pub instead of home for the first time in 3 months.

It's the inability for drunks to socially distance that is the problem, as confirmed by the police yesterday. Why should others have to run any increased risks just because some people can't drink in moderation ?

Maybe then gyms should have been opened before pubs?

And "the police" didn't "confirm" anything ... one member of police staff asserted as such.There are far more anecdotal reports (and that's what they all are) of it being far less of a "big bang" than was predicted. As ever though, some will focus on the negative reports of a small minority.

[grumbledoak]

Robertj21a said:

It's the inability for drunks to socially distance that is the problem, as confirmed by the police yesterday. Why should others have to run any increased risks just because some people can't drink in moderation ?

So we should save the pubs for those who do not drink much? This sounds rather reminiscent of the smoking ban.

[Carrot]

I went to a country pub for lunch yesterday, apart from some signs for the toilet one way system and some perspex guards at the bar, wouldnt know there was an issue.

Certainly was not asked for any details.

[markyb_lcy]

grumbledoak said:

Robertj21a said:

It's the inability for drunks to socially distance that is the problem, as confirmed by the police yesterday. Why should others have to run any increased risks just because some people can't drink in moderation ?

So we should save the pubs for those who do not drink much? This sounds rather reminiscent of the smoking ban.

Didn't you get the memo? We're going to save the economy by pushing out the most profitable customers for the benefit of the casual ones

[Robertj21a]

markyb_lcy said:

Didn't you get the memo? We're going to save the economy by pushing out the most profitable customers for the benefit of the casual ones

So, a pub needs drunks in order to be profitable ?. You must go to some very strange pubs. My family will spend far more in a pub that has a pleasant atmosphere - and eject drunks.

[markyb_lcy]

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

Didn't you get the memo? We're going to save the economy by pushing out the most profitable customers for the benefit of the casual ones

So, a pub needs drunks in order to be profitable ?. You must go to some very strange pubs. My family will spend far more in a pub that has a pleasant atmosphere - and eject drunks.

Did I say that? I don't believe I did, did I?

What I implied is that those who drink more in pubs are more profitable customers. Do you dispute this?

[Alucidnation]

markyb_lcy said:

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

Didn't you get the memo? We're going to save the economy by pushing out the most profitable customers for the benefit of the casual ones

So, a pub needs drunks in order to be profitable ?. You must go to some very strange pubs. My family will spend far more in a pub that has a pleasant atmosphere - and eject drunks.

Did I say that? I don't believe I did, did I?

What I implied is that those who drink more in pubs are more profitable customers. Do you dispute this?

Looking at it from a different perspective, how many customers would that pub lose with unpredictable piss heads frequenting it?

[markyb_lcy]

Alucidnation said:

markyb_lcy said:

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

Didn't you get the memo? We're going to save the economy by pushing out the most profitable customers for the benefit of the casual ones

So, a pub needs drunks in order to be profitable ?. You must go to some very strange pubs. My family will spend far more in a pub that has a pleasant atmosphere - and eject drunks.

Did I say that? I don't believe I did, did I?

What I implied is that those who drink more in pubs are more profitable customers. Do you dispute this?

Looking at it from a different perspective, how many customers would that pub lose with unpredictable piss heads frequenting it?

I think really this isn't a "reasonable" question because there are many different types of pubs. There are pubs which without "piss heads" would not make money at all, and there are pubs who barely have any piss heads at all. It very much depends on location and local demographic as well as pricing, marketing etc.

I also prefer quiet pubs more generally, and I would expect most pubs to kick people out who are being rowdy, aggressive or upsetting other customers. That said, I think ejecting someone because they came within 1m of another person might be a little heavy handed.

What I originally disagreed with is the idea that cutting down opening hours and excluding what would normally be prime time (for both casual AND regular drinkers and drunks) is a good idea.

Edited by markyb_lcy on Monday 6th July 12:44

[vaud]

markyb_lcy said:

Did I say that? I don't believe I did, did I?

What I implied is that those who drink more in pubs are more profitable customers. Do you dispute this?

I thought the money was in food and soft drinks (with families). Margin on coke and a kids nugget & chips must be better than someone drinking 5 pints?

[Robertj21a]

markyb_lcy said:

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

Didn't you get the memo? We're going to save the economy by pushing out the most profitable customers for the benefit of the casual ones

So, a pub needs drunks in order to be profitable ?. You must go to some very strange pubs. My family will spend far more in a pub that has a pleasant atmosphere - and eject drunks.

Did I say that? I don't believe I did, did I?

What I implied is that those who drink more in pubs are more profitable customers. Do you dispute this?

No idea. If I was the landlord I would rather have a family who drank, and ate, steadily for a couple of hours than some idiots who can't handle their drink and tend to act as if they are clever (rather than immature). Pubs that allow/encourage that deserve to go to the wall, and the sooner the better in my view.

[markyb_lcy]

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

Robertj21a said:

markyb_lcy said:

Didn't you get the memo? We're going to save the economy by pushing out the most profitable customers for the benefit of the casual ones

So, a pub needs drunks in order to be profitable ?. You must go to some very strange pubs. My family will spend far more in a pub that has a pleasant atmosphere - and eject drunks.

Did I say that? I don't believe I did, did I?

What I implied is that those who drink more in pubs are more profitable customers. Do you dispute this?

No idea. If I was the landlord I would rather have a family who drank, and ate, steadily for a couple of hours than some idiots who can't handle their drink and tend to act as if they are clever (rather than immature). Pubs that allow/encourage that deserve to go to the wall, and the sooner the better in my view.

This is all about what you prefer and what you want. Which is understandable and I agree with you, but there always has been and always will be pubs that fit your needs and wants. Similarly there will be pub that won't.

The simple and basic fact is that if your main product is alcoholic drinks, that the more people buy, the more money you make.

If your main product is gastro food, this will be somewhat different.

[rover 623gsi]

For anyone who is interested in local data, the Govt stats site https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/ now has deaths/cases/hospital admissions by area over time.

[anonymous-user]

rover 623gsi said:

For anyone who is interested in local data, the Govt stats site https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/ now has deaths/cases/hospital admissions by area over time.

Great site.

Still amazing seeing this.(from my region but seems similar everywhere)



Exactly as predicted at the start. Amazing the economic damage done and extra and hidden deaths from lockdowns when such a small group of the population was affected.

No country seemed to protect care homes properly but there must be better ways to protect that part of the population than trashing the economy.

Seems pretty certain now that second waves etc won’t lead to the same kind of blanket lockdowns again as we can’t afford it.