Fibbers & the smoking ban

Fudger

Just in the news

"The Galway pub at the centre of the smoking row is to reinforce the ban.

Just after 4.30pm, the Taoiseach Bertie Ahern confirmed the move which follows written correspondence from the Attorney General - the Government's legal adviser.

The Taoiseach spoke to reporters on his way into Dublin Castle and said the decision had been made following an exchange of correspondence between the Attorney General and solicitors representing the pub in Galway.

The Taoiseach said that this was effectively the end of the matter, but he made it clear that the Government will not tolerate publicans who attempt to flout the law."

So much for the pub owners having balls........ they should still be shut down for wasting our time

fragile

Originally posted by Fudger
So much for the pub owners having balls........

He got his pub on every major newspaper / newsite in Ireland and it cost him nothing! the guy is a very smart business man

they should still be shut down for wasting our time

The only person responsible for wasting your time is YOU

Sleepy

So how much do ye reckon Bertie offered them to behave?

flogen

Originally posted by Sleepy
So how much do ye reckon Bertie offered them to behave?

lol... I know the government like to spend money, often on stupid things, but I think it may have been the High Court injunction that did it.

The guy was smarter than I thought. He knew he was going to lose out if he didnt give in, and he got a few days on the front pages. He might not have to drop his prices now, what with all the free ad's he's gotten.

flogen

Sleepy

Eh, did you see the news coverage? They showed the place up for the knackers dump it is...

giftgrub

somehow i dont feel sorry for the publican...who owns 5 pubs and drives an 03 merc to his own press conference.

he wants more business...drop prices!

simu

I, for one, am never going into any of his pubs again (not that I used to go there before but now I have a special reason to stay away).

zt

Flogen

I think we are switching initial positions.

I now think that the guy was hugely foolish. We could have all guessed that the government would take action of some description.

He appears to have folded at even the threat of injunction. He could have easily gone to court to object to the injunction and other actions.

To me he seemed ill prepared to take on the government. Foolish would be an understatement.

Without trying to discuss the various views of the smoking ban, I'm intrigued by the ease at which the ban was adopted by publicans given the dire warning about loss in revenue. I suspect one of three 'theories':

If the publicans were required to prove 15 - 25% revenue drop would it cause investigation by other government departments ...

Does the smoking ban somehow indemnify bar owners against future legal action for passive smoking?

Are the bars planning a future action against the government for loss of revenue (remember taxi drivers tried this)?

Originally posted by flogen
lol... I know the government like to spend money, often on stupid things, but I think it may have been the High Court injunction that did it.

The guy was smarter than I thought. He knew he was going to lose out if he didnt give in, and he got a few days on the front pages. He might not have to drop his prices now, what with all the free ad's he's gotten.

flogen

Big Ears

Thats not foolish its smart , he probably never intended to fight any action by the health board or other government areas , he just got some free advertising , all over the nationel media )

I dont like people trying to fight the smoking law , but I get the feeking that wasnt really his intention .

flogen

Originally posted by Big Ears
Thats not foolish its smart , he probably never intended to fight any action by the health board or other government areas , he just got some free advertising , all over the nationel media )

I dont like people trying to fight the smoking law , but I get the feeking that wasnt really his intention .

exactly, big ears.
His fight was likely to be in vein from the get-go, and once the VFI backed away he must have known he was truely boned. This way he got free publicity, a bit of noteriety, and didn't get prosecuted (although I wonder if he will still get the regular fines, and hope so too).

Sleepy, I know the place was a dump, but better to be a well known dump than an unknown dump. If he escapes fines, and gets 1 extra regular customer (who goes just because they agree with what he did and want to support him) his tactics worked.

flogen

zt

But the bar is closed now until further notice .... This would make the marketing / advertising argument redundant.

I suspect he hoped for other bars to follow his example .... This would have put both the government and the VFI in a tight spot.

flogen

Is it really? Since when, exactly? According to reports he just agreed to comply with the ban, where did you hear about it being shut?

And a mass protest wouldn't put the VFI in a tight spot, I'd say they'd love it (but couldn't show public support for it... more just say 'I told you so'). The government would have a hard time stopping it, but hopefully ban supporters would boycott, I know I would boycott any pub that let people smoke.
No pubs are willing to stick their necks out tho, because they might end up isolated like this guy, and they all know deep down that any drop in trade is cos of high prices, or in this case road works/being a kip.

I haven't seen any figures to suggest a general drop in trade, have you?

flogen

dahamsta

Everyone was trying to drag me into the latest lawbreakers, Paddy the Farmers (you're welcome, manager) in Cork, tonight for beer and fags, but tbh I didn't fancy spending the night with a bunch of rebels without a (real) cause. Now if it was December things might be different...

Be interesting to see how things pan out, especially when it starts getting colder...

adam

zt

It appears that the pub didn't open today as expected and it was reported on a news programme eariler that the pub would be closed until further notice. Maybe it has opened since?

The VFI and even the publicans seem very fragmented on this issue. They are certainly playing a very weak PR job on this matter. I must say, that if any other industry group were suffering a 15 - 25% loss of business, then you would expect much more resistance and not 99% compliance.

Do you think that anybody (and I mean anybody) will ever see the real figures for loss of trade? These figures would be closely guarded by the pub trade ...

My own view is that daytime trade has certainly taken a serious hit, particular for that 11:00 coffee and cig break. My local is opening later since the ban. Bars with beer gardens have a summer time advantage (but they always did).

My view is that real evidence of a 15 - 25% loss in business would be liquidations. For most small businesses this would be a huge hit in revenue that could not be supported for more that 6 - 12 months. Time will tell.

Originally posted by flogen
Is it really? Since when, exactly? According to reports he just agreed to comply with the ban, where did you hear about it being shut?

And a mass protest wouldn't put the VFI in a tight spot, I'd say they'd love it (but couldn't show public support for it... more just say 'I told you so'). The government would have a hard time stopping it, but hopefully ban supporters would boycott, I know I would boycott any pub that let people smoke.
No pubs are willing to stick their necks out tho, because they might end up isolated like this guy, and they all know deep down that any drop in trade is cos of high prices, or in this case road works/being a kip.

I haven't seen any figures to suggest a general drop in trade, have you?

flogen

flogen

Originally posted by zt
It appears that the pub didn't open today as expected and it was reported on a news programme eariler that the pub would be closed until further notice. Maybe it has opened since?

I haven't seen anything to say it didn't open

The VFI and even the publicans seem very fragmented on this issue. They are certainly playing a very weak PR job on this matter. I must say, that if any other industry group were suffering a 15 - 25% loss of business, then you would expect much more resistance and not 99% compliance.

Where do you get 15 - 25% from? And as far as fragmentation goes, I'm sure some pubs support the ban, and some don't. The VFI have always opposed the ban, and still want it re-written, however they cannot support a pub when it is breaking the law, which is why it didn't support fibbers.

Do you think that anybody (and I mean anybody) will ever see the real figures for loss of trade? These figures would be closely guarded by the pub trade ...

What on earth makes you think the pub industry would want to hide figures which show a drop in sales? Given the VFI and other groups have shown opposition to the ban, saying it will effect trade, they would jump at the chance to be proven right. The government, on the other hand will jump at the chance to prove them wrong, so if figures show a rise, or no change, they'll still get publicity. Either way, we will find out the effects of the ban.

My own view is that daytime trade has certainly taken a serious hit, particular for that 11:00 coffee and cig break. My local is opening later since the ban. Bars with beer gardens have a summer time advantage (but they always did).

I'm not a day-drinker, so I can't comment on that. I would assume, though, that pubs offering a luch menu would see a rise in customers, as even many smokers found it hard to eat in a smokey room.

My view is that real evidence of a 15 - 25% loss in business would be liquidations. For most small businesses this would be a huge hit in revenue that could not be supported for more that 6 - 12 months. Time will tell.

again, where do you get 15-25% from? Do you not think that there are other issues in any income drop? A survey in yesterdays Indo stated that pub goers have steadily declined over the last 5 years. Obviously its nothing to do with the smoking ban, so what is to blame? I think the only rational explanation is the constant price rises which make going out less possible. What people used to spend over the space of 7 nights in a pub is now being spend in 2 or 3, and they can't afford to spend anymore.

I'm going to voice an aspect of my opinion that is not going to be popular, and it is somewhat cruel, but I feel valid none the less. So what if less people are drinking during the day? Is this a bad thing? Pubs should adapt to this and start to offer food for lunches (even pre pack sandwhiches would do). They should lower soft drink prices, because people on their lunch generally dont want beer, but would have a coke with a meal. If they are unwilling to adapt to demand, then let them open late. The nature of business is, basically, survival of the fittest, if you cant supply to the demands of the public, you wont last long.
Also, in my area, there are at least 5 (off the top of my head) pubs that are within a short walking distance. Now, any under industry, and they would have halved in numbers very quickly. I know its not good to see anyone lose their business, but again its a matter of adaption. If they are facing a drop in customers, what are they going to do about it? If a video shop sees a downturn in trade, do they moan about legislation that stops them from selling 18's DVD's to kids, or do they do something about it? If publicans are facing a crisis, they better take effective action now, or else their failure will be their own fault. Prices need to be dropped, and certain pubs need to adapt to the needs of its customers. Breaking the law is no way solve a problem, and neither is blaming everything you can without doing anything. Did publicans really think they could rise prices year in and year out and still we'd trod in and drink the same amount and come back the next week for the same?
When an industry takes its customers for granted like that, it wont last long, they better realise that the people their screwing are the people that keep them going, and cop on, or else deal with the consequences of greed and ignorance.

flogen

Doodee

just to get this straight

Is it not the brewerys and drinks suppliers that decide how much a pint will cost?

My parents own a pub in Galway and as good as they try to keep the prices down, its kind of hard to let em go for next to nothing if your not a busy pub like fibbers.

I only hope ming can change things!

zt

Originally posted by flogen
I haven't seen anything to say it didn't open

RTE News / Sky News earlier in the statement from the owner.

Also see
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2004/0709/1086274535095.html

The last paragraph "The pub was closed yesterday, and the owners said it would remain so "until further notice"."

Where do you get 15 - 25% from? And as far as fragmentation goes, I'm sure some pubs support the ban, and some don't. The VFI have always opposed the ban, and still want it re-written, however they cannot support a pub when it is breaking the law, which is why it didn't support fibbers.

15 - 25% is the figure generally used by VFI. I've also seen higher and lower estimates.

See http://u.tv/newsroom/indepth.asp?id=47752&pt=n

I wasn't suggesting this figure was correct. In fact, I would question this figure. I clearly pointed out that the real evidence of a 15 - 25% loss in business would be liquidations. To my knowledge, no pubs have gone into liquidation.

What on earth makes you think the pub industry would want to hide figures which show a drop in sales?

Er, the revenue commissioners. This is why I made the statement that nobody would ever see the real figures ....

Do you not think that there are other issues in any income drop? A survey in yesterdays Indo stated that pub goers have steadily declined over the last 5 years. Obviously its nothing to do with the smoking ban, so what is to blame? I think the only rational explanation is the constant price rises which make going out less possible. What people used to spend over the space of 7 nights in a pub is now being spend in 2 or 3, and they can't afford to spend anymore.

I think that several reasons exist for the drop in trade. However, the smoking ban to my mind is having a significant impact on pubs.

I'm going to voice an aspect of my opinion that is not going to be popular, and it is somewhat cruel, but I feel valid none the less. So what if less people are drinking during the day? Is this a bad thing?

I never mentioned daytime drinking. I suggested that from my experience, daytime trade was down. In particular, I've noticed that coffee breaks that were taken in the local pub are no longer happening.

However, are you now suggesting a ban on daytime drinking?

The nature of business is, basically, survival of the fittest, if you cant supply to the demands of the public, you wont last long.

Totally agree. This is the absolute crux of the argument. If 10%, 20%, 30% of the public want to smoke in the pub, why not allow the market demand speak for itself.

According to Sky News Ireland tonight 53% of the public support smoking facilities in pubs.

Also, in my area, there are at least 5 (off the top of my head) pubs that are within a short walking distance. Now, any under industry, and they would have halved in numbers very quickly. I know its not good to see anyone lose their business, but again its a matter of adaption. If they are facing a drop in customers, what are they going to do about it? If a video shop sees a downturn in trade, do they moan about legislation that stops them from selling 18's DVD's to kids, or do they do something about it? If publicans are facing a crisis, they better take effective action now, or else their failure will be their own fault. Prices need to be dropped, and certain pubs need to adapt to the needs of its customers. Breaking the law is no way solve a problem, and neither is blaming everything you can without doing anything. Did publicans really think they could rise prices year in and year out and still we'd trod in and drink the same amount and come back the next week for the same?
When an industry takes its customers for granted like that, it wont last long, they better realise that the people their screwing are the people that keep them going, and cop on, or else deal with the consequences of greed and ignorance.
flogen

I totally agree with the majority of your points on publicans. For years I've wondered why pubs in Paris, London, Amsterdam and New York could give a much wider service with significantly less customers and still make a profit. I have long thought of Irish publicans as profiteers. I always thought that a motivation behind the smoking ban an attempt to slow inflation caused by greedy publicans.

I'm also very much against the government stance on this ban for numerous reasons. I don't agree that Ireland should be leading the way with this type of experiment and it is a real experiment. This country is hugely dependent on foreign visitors and no consideration to the impact on tourism was considered.

I also think that their is a large difference between the city and country on this issue. City pubs can develop lunchtime and breakfast trade. Country pubs are very dependent on night time local trade and tourism.

Interesting to hear Sky mention a possible cabinent reshuffle and "Michael Martin" in the same sentence. If he is reshuffled it is a clear acknowledgement that political mistakes were made in the implementation of the ban.

Deadwing

For years now publicans have been ripping us off with price hike after price hike. So they're losing a little business because of the smoking ban, huh? Boo fucking hoo. Ill break open my piggy bank right now and send the contents to the struggling publicans till theyre back on thier feet. *


*Sarcasm.
If they want money, let them take it from the big pile they probably sleep on that theyve accumulated from ripping us off.

Tommy Vercetti

If I'm short a few quid this month, is it ok for me to go break the law to make up for it?

Oh wait, I lack a powerful lobby group

sceptre

Originally posted by zt
Interesting to hear Sky mention a possible cabinent reshuffle and "Michael Martin" in the same sentence. If he is reshuffled it is a clear acknowledgement that political mistakes were made in the implementation of the ban.

Unless he gets a promotion. Health has a big budget but it isn't all that high on the cabinet ladder.

dudara

Mr Martin has earned himself kudos with this one and if he is going to be reshuffled, it will be for a promotion, perhaps even finance.

Fudger

He got his pub on every major newspaper / newsite in Ireland and it cost him nothing! the guy is a very smart business man

No he isn't, he is an irresponsible money pinching prat who has no regard for other peoples health and the law...... I mean he is a typical publican
Smart business men make money, he didn't he just made himself look like an idiot.

The only person responsible for wasting your time is YOU

that may apply to playing solitaire in work but I pay for a TV licence and buy a paper and he wasted time,energy and my money with his crappy attempt to be a smart ass which he ended up backing out off........

what a businessman, hope shares in that kip are never floated

giftgrub

reports now say that fibbers are going to fight the moking ban on the grounds that it goes against their constitutional right to make a living.

i think it would be a great shame if the ban was overturned...i'm no fianna failler but i think it was a brave move for any politician to make

hopefully in the future the money saved on dealing with smoking related illnesses can be used to make things a little elasier for all of us...not just publicans with 5 bars and mercedes coupes

scargill

Recent reports tell us that the Irish are one of the heaviest consumers of alcohol in the EU. If consumption has dropped a little maybe it's a good thing ?
I'm not a teetotaller (sp) - I enjoy my half-dozen pints of black on most Fri/Sat nights!

It's just a bit confusing that the publicans are complaining about falling business - and the EU is complaining that we drink too much ?!?

After the celtic-tiger years most businesses are experiencing a drop in sales - why do the publicans expect to be any different ? Most businesses react by improving service and/or pricing goods competitively. Pubs have had it too easy - we are all to blame. There was a thread on these boards (i think) recently about boycotting certain petrol stations in an attempt to trigger a price war - maybe the same should happen with pubs. Start by boycotting Lawless' five pubs !!!

__________________________________________________________
extract from this article:

Ireland tops EU alcohol consumption table
09 March 2004
New data from Brussels indicates that Ireland has by far the highest proportion of regular drinkers of alcohol in the European Union.

The research by Eurostat, the EU statistical agency, shows that Irish people are twice as likely to be regular drinkers of alcohol compared with the European average.

The figures also show a dramatic rise in alcohol consumption by young Irish women.

flogen

exactly, scargill. I dont want day time drinking banned, but a drop in it isn't that much of a bad thing in my mind. I'm sure a lot of people have seen drunks stumble around the city at 1 o clock. It really depresses me to see queues outside pubs waiting for them to open, I mean, thats just really sad, and it says alot about us too.

cheers for the links zt, although i also doubt the 15-25% downturn, I dont think this would result in liquidation even if it did happen.

If the ban is a significant reason for lower income, how can you explain the constant drop in trade for the last 5 or so years?

Also, please dont push sky news Ireland figures as reason to re-introduce the ban. If a referendum was to be held on the ban, I have no doubt that it would get in. Why hasnt any political party supported anti-ban groups? Because they know the majority of the people want the ban. and if 10, 20 or 30% want to smoke in a pub, what about the 90, 80, 70% that want to enjoy a drink without smoke, and more importantly the workers (supported by all workers Unions) who want to work withouth smoke?

It is now up to the pubs to adapt to the needs of its customers. Introduce breakfast and lunch menus, drop soft drink prices (in know beer etc is taxed, but soft drinks arent). You cited Parisien pubs etc, all offering wider services, well that should happen here too.

also, doodee, I do understand that alcohol is taxed, I'm not sure by how much, but I am sure its a fair amount. When I say I want to see prices go down, I mean in soft drinks, or in very busy pubs that can afford to do it. Bars are the only trade that dont seem to compete with each other, they just exist side by side. It doesnt bother me if they have to have a price war to attract customers now, all the better.

flogen

daveg

I have to say I lost a lot of sleep the last few nights when I heard on the news that publicans profits are down. As previously stated perhaps when they stop ripping us off they might see an increase in custom. It appears more and more people are drinking at home. Is that cause of the smoking ban? I fúcking doubt it... it's cause of the price of drink and endless price increases (imo).

BTW fibbers is a hole. Anyone from Galway knows the typical "cliental" frequenting the place. Were they doing it to oppose the smoking ban? Personally I don’t think so. I think it was for publicity (and Jesus did they succeed). And there custom is down 68%? Perhaps this has to do with the fact Eyre Square looks like Baghdad at the moment.

scargill

....and the fact that all the students have gone home for the summer. Fibbers trade always drops in June !

leeroybrown

Having lived in Galway for years I'll agree that Fibers is a hole and add that in my experience the pints have always been poor there. My first reaction to hearing Ronan Lawless complaining about reduced profits was that half of his drop off in business was probably related to the fact that Eyre Square looks like a giant building site and the redevelopment work makes Fibbers reasonably awkward to get to despite it's central location. The students are gone and all the tourists see is a dug up road beside a building site. He was just grandstanding for support for his anti-ban rant and ultimately some publican had to challange the ban just so the government could shoot them down.

On the issue of no parties going against the ban. It was obvious that the ban would receive popular support with a small percentage (20% or so) feeling rathe put out. The best approach for the opposition was to quietly support it and allow the bulk of the ill feeling to register against the Government. Micheál Martin pulled a political master stroke over the last 12 months by using the smoking ban as a straw man to deflect focus away from any other problems he was having in Health. All he had was to hold firm on a popularly supported policy and at worst he'd have to resign as a martyr for Health if it were shelved.