The Most Dangerous Man That Ever Lived....

ILW

FTBFun wrote: »

Yes, !!!! ones.

I miss some of the old "traditional" places. They were a good place to meet up. Like Wetherspoons only smaller and not corporate.

People will never know what it was like to go for a game of darts etc now.

princeofpounds

High property prices are a bit like high fuel prices. They push prices for everything dependent (which is most things) on property up

This is a very profound statement, which many people forget. Makes us a very uncompetitive economy. That's the main reason why the government has been trying to loosen the deadweight of our planning laws, to only limited success.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Wookster wrote: »

I'd have to say the smoking ban.

That has made a huge difference to eating & drinking out.

The smoking ban has been an unmitigated disaster.

One of the worst pieces of legislation ever for both the licensed trade and it's customers.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

FTBFun wrote: »

It's not really high property prices in themselves though, rather a general shortage of property which means converting other premises - including pubs - into residential property has become more attractive.

That, but also that the smoking ban made a lot of pubs financially nonviable.

The evidence is clear....

Analysing the data, researchers found the number of pub losses demonstrate a close statistical relationship between the introduction of smoking bans and the acceleration of the decline of the British pub.

This relationship, says the report, is stronger than those that could be attributed to other factors such as the recession, alcohol duty or supermarket competition.

Researchers found a striking similarity in the rate of closures in Scotland, England and Wales following the introduction of smoking bans in each country.

Analysis of statistics from CGA Strategy showing the net figure of pubs closing revealed losses accelerating after the first year of the ban in each country — from between 0.5% and 1.2% in the first year to between 3.8% and 4.4% in the second year.

Almost three years after the introduction of smoking bans in the three countries, Scotland had lost 7.1% of its pub estate (467 pubs), Wales 7.3% (274), and England 7.6% (4,148). Scotland, which introduced a smoking ban a year earlier lost a further 4% of its pub estate in the fourth year after the ban, mirroring a similar decline in Ireland (11%) which banned smoking in pubs in 2004.

Total pub losses in England, Scotland and Wales since the introduction of smoking bans in all three countries are in excess of 5,500.

Researchers said: “While there is significant variation in the trajectories of pub closures before the ban, there is an almost total
correlation between the three countries after the ban.

“This indicates that they are affected by a strong common factor – the smoking ban. The correlation is in fact so close that the trend line for the three countries is identical.”

Oliver Griffiths, director of CR Consulting, said: “The decline of the British pub had started before the smoking ban but at a low level. The ban had a sudden and marked impact, accelerating the rate of decline.

“While it is not the only factor in the closure of pubs, the smoking ban is demonstrably the most significant cause of pub closures.”

http://retailtimes.co.uk/smoking-ban-to-blame-for-pub-decline-in-uk/

purch

PaulF81 wrote: »

Glass-Steagall

Which one ?

The Glass-Steagall Act of 1932, or the 1933 Banking Act sponsored by Carter Glass and Henry Steagall ?

StevieJ

Wookster wrote: »

I'd have to say the smoking ban.

That has made a huge difference to eating & drinking out.

An absolute winner :T although it hasn't done much for that pension shortfall.

StevieJ

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That, but also that the smoking ban made a lot of pubs financially nonviable.

The evidence is clear....

http://retailtimes.co.uk/smoking-ban-to-blame-for-pub-decline-in-uk/

Well retail would say that wouldn't they? Closures are obviously nothing to do with this

Tesco has been criticised for selling beer for less than 70p a pint - days after its chief executive backed calls for an end to cheap drinks promotions.
The country's biggest supermarket has cut prices on alcohol in the run-up to the World Cup with Carlsberg selling at 69p a pint, a quarter of the typical price in a pub.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1280704/A-barrel-hypocrisy-Tesco-sells-beer-69p-pint-boss-backs-cheap-booze-crackdown.html

ILW

Now I am worried. Hamish and I seem to agree on something.
Just going for a lie down.

Joe_Bloggs

Generali wrote:-

This led me to thinking today, what are the most effective laws that the British Government has passed since World War II? For the definition I wanted to think about cheapness, low negative impact on the economy and/or on people's enjoyment, lack of limiting freedoms, a generally high level of compliance with the law and a huge positive impact on many lives.

Consider the National Health Service Act 1946. The National Health Service has saved my life twice.
J_B.

nearlynew

The large pubcos are essentially property companies.

And their business model over the last 15 years has been reliant on aspiring landlords being able to remortgage their house in order to take over tenancies. And then screw them with increasing rents and beer ties.

This worked well while house prices were rising but has now fallen apart.

It is no coincidence that pubs have gone downhill at the same time as HPI stopped.

There is no longer the queue of people waiting to take over, because they can no longer afford to pay for the tenancy.

No HPI, no money.

And the same applies to the pubcos themselves. They are mortgaged up to the eyeballs and borrowed against buildings which are not worth what they have borrowed against them. which is why a lot of freeholds are coming up for sale at knock-down prices.