Extremely Lovely Individuals Talking Excessively

aau1

i really wish someone at Mr T would read the freaking Scottish licencing laws :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

If they sell individual cans of beer then the price of a case of 12 has to be equal to the price of 12 individual cans. A case of 24 has to be the cost of 24 single cans

BUT if they don't sell single cans they can do whatever they want with case prices!! Have a 4 pack for £6 (£1.50 a can), a 6 pack for £7.50 (£1.25 a can) and an 8 pack for £8 (£1 a can)

Similarly these glitching cases of beer can be sold at £15 each/3 for £22 so long as they don't sell those particular size cans singly!

if they want to offer single cans then sell 330ml and do 440ml in cases. Simples

Don't believe me?

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/06/8949/2

PRICING OF ALCOHOL

Minimum price of packages containing more than one alcoholic product

2.1 Section 2 of the Alcohol Act makes provision in respect of the minimum price of a package containing two or more alcoholic products. Section 2 amends the 2005 Act to insert a mandatory licence condition into premises and occasional licences. The licence condition prevents retailers from selling alcoholic products packaged together at a lower price than the customer could buy the same products individually. The intention behind this is to ensure that customers are not encouraged to purchase alcoholic products packaged together because it is cheaper than purchasing the products individually.

2.2 The provision only applies where each alcoholic product in the package is available for sale on the premises separately. So if the retailer does not sell single cans of beer, then the price of an 8-pack of beer does not have to be double the price of a 4-pack of the same beer (with the cans being of the same size).

2.3 The provision also only applies to a package containing more than one alcoholic product. So if an alcoholic drink is packaged with a non-alcoholic product, cheese for instance, then this provision does not apply. For example, the provision does not apply to a bottle of wine packaged with cheese.

FloFlo

davemorton wrote: »

Go on then, you go first

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

davemorton

Sunshinemummy wrote: »

My problem is that I have a defiant nature... I am not sure which is the strongest urge to defy MSE or to defy the competition... it tends to make me ineffective!

Ahh, but I see you as very competitive, and thus unable to resist the competitiveness!

Sunshinemummy

frequent wrote: »

Yes, and if you could teach her to cook, you'd save me a small fortune in pans :rotfl:

See the thing with the dumpy jock is this, although he has moobs, we are not moobist on here, not jockist or paddiest, there are some welshists that get on my tit from time to time, but I know it's only because the sheep had a headache ,

Back to the said ppr'd jock, he is one of us, a proven trier, and banning him is just MSE stupidity.

I would love to be able to teach her how to cook, but I have no idea myself!

I will dream of SFSB with moobs tonight. He was solid.

FloFlo

Mildred1970 wrote: »

In my last job we installed a footbridge in Glasgow, the contracts manager up there used to say that all the time

To you :eek:

zippydooda

Sunshinemummy wrote: »

Beggers can't be choosers!

:p:p:p:p:p

are you the chosen one then.:)

Sunshinemummy

davemorton wrote: »

Ahh, but I see you as very competitive, and thus unable to resist the competitiveness!

Tis true I am in a dilemma!

aau1

So they could even do 25% off a case of wine if they want, so long as they don't sell the wine singly!!

davemorton

aau1 wrote: »

i really wish someone at Mr T would read the freaking Scottish licencing laws :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

You twisting again????

Sunshinemummy

zippydooda wrote: »

are you the chosen one then.:)

In my dreams.. yes... but then again in my dreams I am 16, slim and gorgeous! Strange I think in my OH dreams I also slim and gorgeous.. :D