Food or smoking?

That experiment was tried, albeit some years ago, by Jack Showers (New In Appletreewick) and he lost a considerable amount of money throughout that trial of many years. There were two pubs in the village, both similar (although I smoked then, I preferred the New Inn) and most customers chose not to go to Jack's. Most non-smokers have friends who smoke, and give way (generally) to the drug ridden, who must have their hourly fix.

Smokers thought they had the right to smoke in most office space a few years ago.

Following up to PeterE

but violence towards others is illegal, while causing passive smoking isn't, remember when the attitude of smokers was "OK if I smoke"? followed by indignation if you said no?

This gets to one of the key points that is rarely mentioned - under existing health and safety law employers have a duty of care for their staff health and wellbeing. Regardless of 'volunteers', eventually the risk of being used by staff at a later date will become such that a public smoking ban everywhere will probably be applied by businesses with or without legislation.

M.

health and safety

become such that a

I meant of course to say 'sued' by staff

I have every sympathy for your views, but I also have sympathy for the underpaid staff who are supposed to confront aggressive smokers/drinkers/arguers etc etc and get them to change their behaviour. I wouldn't like to have to do it. KeithS

In fact, the general experience is that custom decreases approximately

30 percent in non-food venues. The average increase in the custom of food venues is generally two to five percent within a year of the ban. The better the food venue, the higher the increase. (Greasy spoons generally suffered a decrease in custom, ranging from the negligable to bankrupting.) A nine percent increase is not outside statistical variance. On the other hand, if the bar owner had an non-food venue, the variance is radical. What was the context of the increase?

Funny how they find staff to confront customers when it's 11.05pm.

Paul

The comment came from the owner of Kelham Island brewery and referred to his US premises. He said he saw no problem with a ban on this side of the pond, but then the Fat Cat already has a non-smoking bar which tends to be rather full.

[Snip]

The point is that if they have a smoke room and a non-smoke room then they can do the old fashioned idea of charging more in one of those rooms. Since the expense you're talking about is generated by the smokers then the price in that bar is higher.

As to why the pubcos et al should do anything to clean up the problem produced by those customers then the answer is obvious - they invite them in.

[Snip]

That seems to be one of the well worn items of complete tosh.

Check with the police about the groups of people that cause trouble after they've been to the pub and ask how many of them cause trouble at times when they haven't been anywhere near a source of alcohol.

The truth is some people are just trouble and it has little or no connection with anything other than them being congenital pains in the ass. "Oh it woz the beer wot made me do it" - common refrain from the dock after tutoring from some kind of legal counsel...

Hmm. Just curious, but has he had the New York bar long? Was his business flat in previous periods (months, quarters, years)?

In other words, was he speaking of an eight percent increase on top of previous increases, or an eight percent increase following 10 or 20 or

30 percent increases in the same periods before the ban?

The usual practice nowadays is to have smoking and non-smoking areas in the one room/bar so it would be impracticable to have differential pricing.

The only need for such discrimination is because smokers affect the non-smokers, not the other way round. Who has to pay for this discrimination? All of us... :-(

I can't answer the rest of the questions, but I do know that Dave Wicketts has had a bar in New York for nearly 20 years.

And the context of this is?

I thought it was an answer to your question!

In message , Sue wrote

Yep, this has happened in the rest of British industry where no smoking in the workplace is already widespread.

Look at the spoof on the last page of today's Times T2 section.

Brian

Is this on line?

--

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of civilisation in any country." (Winston Churchill)