Fine Gael to ban below cost selling of alcohol

hatrickpatrick

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

That's not what I meant. People here seem to be under the impression that all alcohol is sold below cost and that this proposal would cause all alcohol to be increased in price. I meant that no business sells all their alcohol below cost, to do so would be madness.

No, but it does mean being able to bulk buy crates at supermarkets for parties and such will be banned, and this is primarily what I have an issue with. Banning below cost selling effectively outlaws special offers.

I assume it would also screw nightclubs which open midweek with cheap drinks promos as well.

Namlub

Well this will solve everything...

Cool Mo D

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

No, but it does mean being able to bulk buy crates at supermarkets for parties and such will be banned, and this is primarily what I have an issue with. Banning below cost selling effectively outlaws special offers.

I assume it would also screw nightclubs which open midweek with cheap drinks promos as well.

No it doesn't. You are assuming all special offers are below cost - not necessarily true.

And it doesn't prevent supermarkets bulk buying larger-than-usual orders from suppliers at a discount, and selling them on at a discount.

rubadub

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

"Extra VAT yield from banning below cost selling of alcohol"

sdonn wrote: »

On a purely economic tangent - this goes back to the groceries order from years ago.....

2. There is a serious risk that by allowing alcohol to be sold extremely cheaply, smaller businesses could go out of business - especially independent off licences, resteraunts, vintners, publicans, and others.

So why not ban all below cost selling? -oh right because politicians do not own corner shops and are not mates with such retailers, protect themselves and fuck the rest.

What will interest me is how low they will continue to sell drink, publicans have come on here always claiming supermarkets are below cost selling, yet whenever I questioned them they could never back it up with proof. They quoted ridiculously high prices that they (the publicans) pay -I believe those prices, and I believe they are utter idiots to pay it. Other publicans in the past have said nothing can stop them buying from supermarkets. A publican can buy lidl brand beer and sell it in his pub.

I also pointed out a local centra was selling 20 heineken bottles for €15 (far lower than publican wholesale prices) yet I did not hear of any of my mates buy anything else there, not even a bar, let alone a weekly shop. So I do not believe they were selling below cost. This could be an eye opening situation, and leave the publicans unable to moan about the allegeded below cost selling -their pitiful excuse for some of their ridiculous prices.

sdonn wrote: »

just look at the mess that is the taxi situation.

Mess? I can get taxis easily these days, the way it should be.

ICE HOUSE

Disgraceful...... the curruption continues :mad:

Duckworth_Luas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

No, but it does mean being able to bulk buy crates at supermarkets for parties and such will be banned, and this is primarily what I have an issue with. Banning below cost selling effectively outlaws special offers.

No it doesn't. It just means that retailers will have to charge more for beer than what they pay for it wholesale. I bought 15 bottles last night for €15, the off-license made a profit on this as it wasn't sold below cost. That's pretty damn cheap.

phasers

rubadub wrote: »

Mess? I can get taxis easily these days, the way it should be.

I think you know the OP doesn't mean it like that.

The industry needs a total overhaul, both from a driver's perspective and a passengers.


But that's for a different thread.

Morag

phasers wrote: »

I wonder if we'll ever see the emergence of "chain pubs" like Weatherspoons in the UK? It'd be interesting to see how publicans react to that!

Weatherspoons were looking to come in here and were going to put in 3 large pubs in dublin city centre but when they saw how it's all one big quango and circle jerk they changed their plans.

The vat on drink is shocking and the reason why people over here drink such muck and not the nicer tasting beer/wines/spirits. They don't want you drinking 2/3 5 to 7% beers or one really nice bottle of wine which is 5 euro in france/italy and fecking damn near 30 euro here, they want people drinking lost of nasty tasteless muck and there is only reason to do that and it's to get hammered.

Lower the vat and the prices and the prices in the pubs and get people drinking tasty beer and enjoying instead of skulling pints of piss water. Yes you will have a % of the population who end up being arseholes and ****ing up their lives but it's their choice.

El Siglo

sdonn wrote: »

I am somewhere between shocked, appalled, and wanting to break into a fit of laughter at some of the idiots in this thread who want to NOT vote for FG - not for any particular educated or economic reason, but purely because it'll mean their booze is a tad more expensive. The drink culture in this country SICKENS me so much I actually find it hard to put into words.

There's not a whole to do in this country, apart from playing football and having a few jars. Whether drinking or not is inherently wrong, that's the choice of the individual, the alternative is fascism... Which I'm sure FG are completely comfortable with...

On a purely economic tangent - this goes back to the groceries order from years ago - below cost selling of alcohol was a huge thing back then and it was eventually done away with when the groceries order was abolished; however it makes sense to ban it. For two main reasons:

1. If the likes of Tesco, Dunnes, Aldi, Lidl can sell alcohol extremely cheaply it will directly affect the propensity of the public to buy it in higher quantites, and thus to binge drink. Binge drinking has so many negative effects that this can only be best avoided.

Economies of scale is one thing, but people will actually buy more or less the same as they have always done since things went bad (i.e. since "staying in was the new going out", possibly less even) with the various taxes and reductions in social welfare. Which the blue-shirts will probably increase and reduce further, once they're in power. So saying that because of the activities of large retail outlets, we the consumer should bear the burden of the uncompetitiveness of smaller retail outlets is farcical.

2. There is a serious risk that by allowing alcohol to be sold extremely cheaply, smaller businesses could go out of business - especially independent off licences, resteraunts, vintners, publicans, and others. While this should ideally be regulated by the picture perfect idea of a free market economy, Irish people have proved that we are incapable of 100% self regulation in terms of competition - just look at the mess that is the taxi situation.

It shouldn't be regulated and vintners shouldn't be given the time of day by any government. They're private citizens like the rest of us. Besides, necessity is the mother of invention as Ester Boserup put it, perhaps by not shoring up the vintners, offies etc... that these retailers might then improve their services etc... in order to attract customers and stay competitive, and the ones that don't, deserve bankruptcy. It was all well and good for them to take the mickey of consumers during the boom years, when real business acumen is required they need government intervention. Pathetic.

In a perfect world, it should be allowed, the smaller off licences would have to compete or go out of business and that would be hunky dory. However the focus at present should be on protecting jobs - and given that our booze industry is so ridiculously dominant, it would be socially irresponsible to let so many small businesses and their associated jobs teter on the edge of liquidation. If we did, someone would only complain in a years' time that there are no jobs and FG did nothing about it.

I'd hardly think that the number of people being let go by publicans going out of business would even register as a blip on the radar. Especially when a 1,000 people per week are emigrating. If this were something like propping up Eircom or the ESB there would be some (not a lot either) justification, but it's not. Why should one group be protected and not another?

Without wanting to sound too Lenihan-esque, Government sometimes has to make unpopular decisions. Yes they do stand to gain VAT, but it hardly lines their own pockets - it pays for things we take for granted like FREE universal healthcare.

Taxing drink isn't going to pay for much, especially with the bailout. This is a petty little tax, like the one they proposed back in the 1990s on childrens shoes. Lenihan is an idiot, proven by his complete incompetence as Minister for Finance, I wouldn't want to sound like him in any sense of the word.

Sorry bout ye, but there's more to life than bloody drink. Some of you disgust me.

Well to be honest, you can come down off that fucking high horse. If people want to drink etc... That's their choice. We had people tell us what to do before and they were called the Catholic Church and look how that went. It's this mentality that people are inherently stupid and need to be coerced into doing things by one ridiculous government after another that really annoys me.

ScumLord

The cheapest place I've found for drink is my local Eurospar. I don't find the bid chains all that cheap at all, Eurospar is around a Euro cheaper then Tescos for a six pack of Guinness.

Tight margins and large bulk are the large chains bread and butter, that's how they do business, they are at war with the small local shop and it goes beyond alcohol. Why should the publican get a free pass when the butcher and shop keeper still have to scrape by?

sdanseo

El Siglo wrote: »

There's not a whole to do in this country, apart from playing football and having a few jars. Whether drinking or not is inherently wrong, that's the choice of the individual, the alternative is fascism... Which I'm sure FG are completely comfortable with...

That's a sorry excuse to be honest...the's plenty to do. Use a little creativity rather than going out getting bollocksed.

El Siglo wrote: »

Economies of scale is one thing, but people will actually buy more or less the same as they have always done since things went bad (i.e. since "staying in was the new going out", possibly less even) with the various taxes and reductions in social welfare. Which the blue-shirts will probably increase and reduce further, once they're in power. So saying that because of the activities of large retail outlets, we the consumer should bear the burden of the uncompetitiveness of smaller retail outlets is farcical.

I'm not saying we should be propping up little businesses, only that we should refuse to condemn them to annihalation by the big corporations. Look at America for an example of how a totally unregulated free market has turned their country into a total social basket case.

El Siglo wrote: »

It shouldn't be regulated and vintners shouldn't be given the time of day by any government. They're private citizens like the rest of us. Besides, necessity is the mother of invention as Ester Boserup put it, perhaps by not shoring up the vintners, offies etc... that these retailers might then improve their services etc... in order to attract customers and stay competitive, and the ones that don't, deserve bankruptcy. It was all well and good for them to take the mickey of consumers during the boom years, when real business acumen is required they need government intervention. Pathetic.

You're right, government should not have to shore up individual businesses and I strongly believe that individual entities should of course have to be responsible for their own destiny. However by allowing huge, multinational corporations like Tesco to flood the market with cheap booze, you condemn the little guys because there's absolutely no way they can compete. The drink industry has an awful lot wrong with it, but we still can't afford to let it go down the tubes in one go.

Tesco sell other products, which they clearly make enough profit on to keep them very much in the black despite beign able to sell booze at a loss - that is not something someone who sells only alcohol can do and thus they wioll suffer through no lack of effort on their part.

El Siglo wrote: »

I'd hardly think that the number of people being let go by publicans going out of business would even register as a blip on the radar. Especially when a 1,000 people per week are emigrating. If this were something like propping up Eircom or the ESB there would be some (not a lot either) justification, but it's not. Why should one group be protected and not another?

The 1,000 people a week might not be emigrating if they could get jobs in places like local businesses - which will be scarcer if you don't at least attempt to protect them.

El Siglo wrote: »

Taxing drink isn't going to pay for much, especially with the bailout. This is a petty little tax, like the one they proposed back in the 1990s on childrens shoes. Lenihan is an idiot, proven by his complete incompetence as Minister for Finance, I wouldn't want to sound like him in any sense of the word.

Taxing drink will pay for quite a lot. People will still drink, but perhaps more in moderation. You'll always get people with the argument "ah they'll buy as much anyway and just take the money out of their kids' mouths" - as one poster said in this thread - but that is simply irresponsible. If you spend more than you can afford on drink - which let's admit it, is a luxury good - then you have a problem not covered by the scope of this conversation.

I agree with you on one point however - Lenihan is a damn fool.

El Siglo wrote: »

Well to be honest, you can come down off that fucking high horse. If people want to drink etc... That's their choice. We had people tell us what to do before and they were called the Catholic Church and look how that went. It's this mentality that people are inherently stupid and need to be coerced into doing things by one ridiculous government after another that really annoys me.

What high horse? I've said it before and I'll say it again - I am not anti-drink. I am against people getting off their rocker and then behaving like total twats. If someone wants to binge drink themselves into a stupour in the privacy of their own home, go right ahead. But if you're going to spill out onto the street and behave like an a mindless twat, then learn to hold your drink or don't take it. I socialise at night with all my friends, I just don't happen to drink. I see people puking, pissing, fighting, vandalising, shoving, wandering into the path of oncoming cars including mine and causing accidents, the list is endless - and at times it seems like society is punishing me for making that quite concious choice not to partake in this. It's bedlam. Ask any Garda, for a start.

I have every right to complain that I can't go about my business without being adversely afffected by drunken yobbery again and again, just because it's in the early hours. Let me put it like this - if someone takes heroin, and becomes addicted to it, and the effects of that cause them to commit crime, vandalise things and puke on your car, it'd be a total abhorrence. If someone who's had a few jars does the same, the overwhelming majority of people either shrug it off with the typical Irish "ah it'll be grand" or are too blind drunk themselves to even notice.

What I do think, on a slightly new tangent, is that licensing hours should be abolished. Let all the clubs spill otu at different times, at the very least, and get rid of the crowds of people flooding the streets in a drunken mess, while at the same time allowing the cabs to flow freely and not park in the middle of the road looking for a fare. Then, at least, people might stop complaining about it, all would be fairer, and I;d be able to drive down Camden Street at 3am whenever I like without crashing into a taxi or running over an intoxitacted, puking hooligan who wants to moon my car. Not to mention we might get rid of the holy hour too - seriously, the Catholic Church should have no involvement in alcohol licensing any more whatsoever.

UglyBolloxFace

sdonn wrote: »

FREE universal healthcare

Pull the other one, would you.


**** off.

Degsy

If these **** want to do something about excessive drinking they'd do well to start looking at why people drink so much....a lot of people drink because the country is a shiithole,the prospects are terrible and the reality,for many is too much to bear.

Politicians are the ones to blame and they know it.. try to survive on 200 quid a week and of course you're gonna drink.

Its a disgusting cover-up job..FG are no better than Fianna Failure..they've been in and out of power for decades and its always been a shiithole.

Zebra3

FAO:Inda Kenny, spare us the anti-drink stuff.

One of your TDs was caught trying to drive out of the Dail car park not too long ago out of his bin and then abused a guard who possibly stopped him from killing someone.

You never called for the guards to prosecute the scumbag involved and you were happy enough for him to continue to serve as a Fine Gael TD.

Kenny, just another two-faced hypocrite.

Degsy

141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »

Meh. Im brewing Nettle Beer this spring. Corona from the countryside ftw.

:cool:

Good man

RichieC

Fk Fine Gael.

Einhard

Completely free markets and economic Darwinism are great in theory, but if a society fully follows them in practice, a situation prevails where all the small retailers eventually go out of business and shut down. This destroys villages and towns and, because only a few large retailers survive, distorts the market and ends up being entirely anti-competitive in the long run. I was off drink for January, and woud have supped a pint off a tramp's leg by last weekend, so I'm far from anti-drink. I do think though that, of we want to live in a society in which smaller, independent retailers still have a chance, then some amount of free market regulation has to take place. I've been to a number of towns in England where the only chemists was a Boots, the only book store WH Smith, and the butcher, the fishmonger, the veg shop, and the offie all consolidated in a single Tesco or Waitrose. Each High ST was practically identical, and it really destroyed the individuality of each town. I know some people, especially in AH it seems, have a fetish for the free market (it really worked out brilliantly for Ireland!!), but being human isn't all about economics, and I think a small amount of regulation is a small price to pay for vibrant town centres.

Now, where's that bottle of Absinthe...:p

Einhard

Sharrow wrote: »

Weatherspoons were looking to come in here and were going to put in 3 large pubs in dublin city centre but when they saw how it's all one big quango and circle jerk they changed their plans.

English chain pubs are the most characterless, bland, and depressing drinking venues known to man. They achieve the almost impossible and make Oirish bars abroad look inviting. Why would anyone lament their absence from the Irish market?

Sergeant

Einhard wrote: »

English chain pubs are the most characterless, bland, and depressing drinking venues known to man. They achieve the almost impossible and make Oirish bars abroad look inviting. Why would anyone lament their absence from the Irish market?

Weatherspoons are the most depressing drinking dens I've ever had the misfortune of coming across. The price of a pint isn't the only factor to be considered. I would rather spend 20 or 30 cent extra and get a pint of beer brewed by one of the many microbreweries that are springing up around Ireland. Enjoy a premium product, created by people who care about what they produce, and which hasn't been frozen to .1 of a degree above freezing.

Lidl don't do below cost selling, but you can buy a can of tasteless lager there for less than a quid. Grand if you want to get off your rocker. That won't change.

RichieC

Einhard wrote: »

English chain pubs are the most characterless, bland, and depressing drinking venues known to man. They achieve the almost impossible and make Oirish bars abroad look inviting. Why would anyone lament their absence from the Irish market?

I found english pubs in general desperate... those fking poker machines and blingy slots just make the places seem so dingy.

sdonn

sdonn wrote: »

I am somewhere between shocked, appalled, and wanting to break into a fit of laughter at some of the idiots in this thread who want to NOT vote for FG - not for any particular educated or economic reason, but purely because it'll mean their booze is a tad more expensive.

Protectionism IS an economic reason.
I don't even drink but giving in to the publicans moaning 'we jacked up the prices and we're rude and nobody comes to us so ban competition' is not on

syklops wrote: »

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Anti-drink lobby has landed.

DOnt lump me in with them

Mark200

TheZohan wrote: »

We either have a f**king free market or we don't.

Silly thing to say to be fair... I doubt you'd support a purely free market, where there is no regulation.

It's not one or the other. There's plenty of space in between.

Gotta laugh at all the people who seem like they're having an out of control fit of anger over the idea that alcohol in the supermarkets may be a euro more expensive. I don't agree with the policy, but cop on like. Things like claiming they've been bribed into making this policy are embarrassing for those who come out with that crap.

Lumen

FG: I am disappoint.

I had vainly pinned my hopes for this country on the idea that the next executive would be less economically clueless than the current one.

Optimism fail.

Capt'n Midnight

phasers wrote: »

What is below cost? I assume cheap booze from lidl/aldi wouldn't be affected by this, as surely they sell at some kind of a profit. Is it the special offers that supermarkets have? Either way it's crappy, just wondering what will actually be affected.

True.

Also the excise duty on Beer hasn't gone up since 1994 , in fact for stuff below 2.8% it's actually been halved.
Pub prices are so high that most of the tax take is actually VAT

Beer is cheap (Barley sells for ~ €100 a tonne), I'd be surprised if the main cost for the brand names here was actually in production rather than Advertising and promotion.

Blame Diageo & co. if you think prices are too high.

Lawrence1895

Zebra3 wrote: »

FAO:Inda Kenny, spare us the anti-drink stuff.

One of your TDs was caught trying to drive out of the Dail car park not too long ago out of his bin and then abused a guard who possibly stopped him from killing someone.

You never called for the guards to prosecute the scumbag involved and you were happy enough for him to continue to serve as a Fine Gael TD.

Kenny, just another two-faced hypocrite.

Just out of curiosity...who was that TD?

Eric Cartman

maybee the pubs should engage in a little below cost selling

ejmaztec

Eric Cartman wrote: »

maybee the pubs should engage in a little below cost selling

They'd rather close down than knock 1 cent off the price of anything, the stupid feckers.

Mark200

Also, I don't see how this policy would be a favour to pubs in any sense. Alcohol at cost price would still significantly out-compete with pubs and most off licences.

Eric Cartman

its still going to wreck my buzz - 5 euro for 6 cans of tuborg in tescos has been a lifesaver, and the occasional deals like 15 cans of carling for a 10er too

ScumLord

Einhard wrote: »

Completely free markets and economic Darwinism are great in theory, but if a society fully follows them in practice, a situation prevails where all the small retailers eventually go out of business and shut down. This destroys villages and towns and, because only a few large retailers survive, distorts the market and ends up being entirely anti-competitive in the long run. I was off drink for January, and woud have supped a pint off a tramp's leg by last weekend, so I'm far from anti-drink. I do think though that, of we want to live in a society in which smaller, independent retailers still have a chance, then some amount of free market regulation has to take place. I've been to a number of towns in England where the only chemists was a Boots, the only book store WH Smith, and the butcher, the fishmonger, the veg shop, and the offie all consolidated in a single Tesco or Waitrose. Each High ST was practically identical, and it really destroyed the individuality of each town. I know some people, especially in AH it seems, have a fetish for the free market (it really worked out brilliantly for Ireland!!), but being human isn't all about economics, and I think a small amount of regulation is a small price to pay for vibrant town centres.

Now, where's that bottle of Absinthe...:p

I'd agree to a certain extent, I don't like big chains in the slightest and don't shop at Tescos because I don't like them as a company. But we either live in the crude monetary economy or we don't. It would be one thing if the small Irish business was the model of honesty and value but they weren't even close to that. We can't go back and we don't like where it's going but tilting the system to suit one business model like the pub isn't fair on anyone. If pubs can't survive as a business then that's the end of it.

Fixing the price of drink won't help the pubs anyway. The pubs face more problems than just the price.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Beer is cheap (Barley sells for ~ €100 a tonne), I'd be surprised if the main cost for the brand names here was actually in production rather than Advertising and promotion.

I'd be very surprised too, there's absolutely no way in hell they spend more on manufacturing than they do on advertising.

Liberal Ireland

What we need are lower taxes on alcohol and tobacco, making them comparable to international prices. As a note, there must be a twenty-four hour sale licence available. It is not the obligation of government to prohibit or intrude in the sale of these commodities.

Einhard

ScumLord wrote: »

I'd agree to a certain extent, I don't like big chains in the slightest and don't shop at Tescos because I don't like them as a company. But we either live in the crude monetary economy or we don't.

I disagree with this entirely. It's not an either/or scenario. We can temper the free market, and make it work in a more holistic method through proper regulation. Frankly, it's living in such a "crude monetary economy" that has gotten us into the mess we're currently in. Entirely is a terrible economic system, and leads to boom after bust after boom after bust. It ends up distorting markets, and is entirely anti-competitive in the long run. How people can laud such a system after the devestation it has wrecked across the globe in the past few years is beyond me. Just as with free speech, a free market should never be entirely free.

PaulKK

I can't believe people are going on about this in the way they are.

From reading some peoples posts you'd swear we are a nation of alcoholics. Don't get me wrong, I drink too, but as pointed out earlier this is just on BELOW COST selling.

People wake up ffs. The country is bollixed, we are going to have to pay more taxes in the next few years. Things like petrol, fags and tax is just going to have to be increased to get us out of this mess.

Things like the VAT rate going up were already agreed in the bailout deal, there is nothing FG can realistically do to change that. The fact is they are probably the only party with the right people to get us through this crap.

If you are changing your voting preference because of supermarket deals on drink being stopped, you really need to re-asses your priorities. This knee jerk reaction to things like this smacks of immaturity.

A lot of people here need to grow up.

maglite

PaulKK wrote: »

this is just on BELOW COST selling.

Its not really. It is showing that the new government will be the same as the last, bowing to special interest groups and interfering with a free market to make personal benefit.

Einhard

maglite wrote: »

Its not really. It is showing that the new government will be the same as the last, bowing to special interest groups and interfering with a free market to make personal benefit.

How many publicans exactly do you think there are in Ireland? What personal benefit is there in it for FG? Surely any publican lobby would easily be cancelled out by the lobby representing the biggest retailers in the land, and the largest retailer in the world?

PaulKK

maglite wrote: »

Its not really. It is showing that the new government will be the same as the last, bowing to special interest groups and interfering with a free market to make personal benefit.

So there is a personal benefit for the government in preserving jobs in small independent retailers and independent off-licences?

Or what personal benefit are you referring to?

Would that special interest group be the PAYE workers in these establishments that the government is trying to protect perhaps?

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/excise/duties/excise-duty-rates.html

Beer Exceeding 0.5% volume but not exceeding 1.2% volume 0.00

Exceeding 1.2% volume but not exceeding 2.8% volume 7.85 per hectolitre per cent of alcohol in the beer

Exceeding 2.8% volume 15.71 per hectolitre per cent of alcohol in the beer

Less than 40c of the price of a 500ml can of 5% beer is excise.
It that pint costs more than €2.57 the VAT is more than the Excise duty.


For the Tesco Tuborg 6x500ml at 4% for €5
VAT is 87c
Excise duty is €1.885
So still €2.44 over to produce the beer and profit. Milk has a short shelf life, and you have keep it refrigerated, and almost certainly costs more to produce because it's far more labour intensive. And you can buy 2L of milk for €2. On that basis prices here are still way above below cost selling unless the distributors are taking the píss.


For a pint of 5% excise it's 44.616c
If the pint is a fiver then VAT is 87c
so the publican's gross income is €3.68 split between them, the bills and the distributors.

rubadub

Eric Cartman wrote: »

its still going to wreck my buzz - 5 euro for 6 cans of tuborg in tescos has been a lifesaver,

I doubt this selling price is below cost, so will be the same price.

The publicans all scream about this below cost selling yet can give no evidence of it. People keep going on about the big bad retailers and the poor little guys. But many small offies have these deals too. I said before a centra near me had 20 heineken for €15, since people do not do a full shop in centra there is no reason why they would take part in below cost selling practises. So I wouldn't worry too much as I reckon very little is being sold below cost.

Capt'n Midnight

Liberal Ireland wrote: »

What we need are lower taxes on alcohol and tobacco, making them comparable to international prices. As a note, there must be a twenty-four hour sale licence available. It is not the obligation of government to prohibit or intrude in the sale of these commodities.

How low ?

We haven't increased prices on beer since 1994

What is the point in reducing excise duty when it's 40c on a can costing €2.15 - so if the duty was 0 ( not likely ) then the can (if the full excise and VAT reduction was passed on, and remember they didn't pass on the 1% when VAT was reduced in the past ) would be €1.67 - Still way more than the cost of a can of non-alcoholic drinks on the same VAT rate

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The taxes on tobacco are a balancing act because charging more will lead to people moving to black market smuggled stuff.

ScumLord

Einhard wrote: »

I disagree with this entirely. It's not an either/or scenario. We can temper the free market, and make it work in a more holistic method through proper regulation.

That's very much open to abuse going on past example. Your tipping the scales in someones favour for no good reason. Publicans don't make such a contribution to Irish society that we should tweak the system to prevent competition. This is how price driven markets breed evolution and change supposedly.

Just as with free speech, a free market should never be entirely free.

There should always be free speech if they don't like it everyone has the right not to listen.

TheZohanS

Mark200 wrote: »

Silly thing to say to be fair... I doubt you'd support a purely free market, where there is no regulation.

It's not one or the other. There's plenty of space in between.

Gotta laugh at all the people who seem like they're having an out of control fit of anger over the idea that alcohol in the supermarkets may be a euro more expensive. I don't agree with the policy, but cop on like. Things like claiming they've been bribed into making this policy are embarrassing for those who come out with that crap.

Not as silly as the bullshìt you've posted above. :rolleyes:

Einhard

ScumLord wrote: »

That's very much open to abuse going on past example. Your tipping the scales in someones favour for no good reason. Publicans don't make such a contribution to Irish society that we should tweak the system to prevent competition. This is how price driven markets breed evolution and change supposedly.

I'm tipping the scales in everyone's favour. The problem with the market is that it's entirely myopic when it comes to defining success. Humans are too. So, incredibly cheap food and other commodities are jumped upon and welcomed wholeheartedly, until at some point down the line, this so called competition has destroyed town centres, and driven all the rest of the competition out of business, leaving huge monopolising retail behemoths to divide the market between them. That's what I have a problem with. I think all below cost sellign should be prohibited, not just that of alcohol.

There should always be free speech if they don't like it everyone has the right not to listen.

People don't, and shouldn't have the right, to spread deliberate lies about others. Neither do they, nor should they, have the right to cry fire in a crowded space. Speech is never truly free.

msg11

As someone said , this is just going to cause a massive reason for people to shop up North again.

Supermarkets use these 'loss promotions' too get people into there shop and buy other things. Or go up too see what deals they might have in the shop.

Putting down a Minimum price is just going to see a massive exit from the state into the North.

Cause guess what ? The supermarkets up there do ' loss promotions ' , so if you can save money on cheap beer up there and get the weekly shop done all in one. If this happens, there might even be something along the lines of a 'beer run' , which will see people just go up the North to buy beer, so that will totally **** up anything down here.

Pubs/Offo's , should drop there prices or make them in line with the supermarket promotions running at the time. So there is no difference in price, then if the person comes in, buys the 6 Tuborg @ €5 , and decides they want a bottle of Vodka and 2 Litres of coke, well there is some profit to be made on Vodka and Coke. Or run a promotion that's not in the supermarkets, competitions ; buy 6 cans of fosters and be entered into a draw to win 48 cans of fosters (one of the top of my head).

There is just no thinking from the publicans , they just moan . They adjusted the hours of the licensing laws to suit them and managed to piss everyone in Ireland off doing so. They should extent bar hours to 2am so last orders 1:30am all week, offo hours till midnight all week. Most supermarkets close before that or at 10pm, so that's a 2 more hours of trade over the supermarkets.

If people are drinking and decide they want more drink they can go the local publican offo to get some cans from him.

I'll give an example. I finished work at 10PM, last orders is at 11PM . I was thinking , I wouldn't pint a few pints. But, I said to myself there is no point in hell I am going around the pub for an hour. So I didn't drink. So there is a loss to the local pub right there.

On another note, if people choose to drink like an alcoholic , it's there problem. We are not in the stone age, we all know the effects of drinking, know that we should drink in moderation. Dicating to people when/where we should drink/get our drink has no stance from the government. We should be able to choose when and where we drink, who supply's it and what time I want to start at.

I just think this would be a very bad idea on so many levels, and mark my words. If this triggers shopping in the North again, there will be serious job loses, Offo's , Pubs and Supermarkets will be hit with job loses.

Lumen

Einhard wrote: »

I'm tipping the scales in everyone's favour. The problem with the market is that it's entirely myopic when it comes to defining success. Humans are too. So, incredibly cheap food and other commodities are jumped upon and welcomed wholeheartedly, until at some point down the line, this so called competition has destroyed town centres, and driven all the rest of the competition out of business, leaving huge monopolising retail behemoths to divide the market between them. That's what I have a problem with. I think all below cost sellign should be prohibited, not just that of alcohol.

If that's what you really want, why not just ban large supermarkets?

This regulation is impossible to enforce. What is cost? If I'm Tescos, I can just set up a subsidiary selling bundles of milk and beer, chocolate and vodka etc. How much does 5L of beer cost when it's bundled with 5L of milk?

Capt'n Midnight

Lumen wrote: »

If that's what you really want, why not just ban large supermarkets?

This regulation is impossible to enforce. What is cost? If I'm Tescos, I can just set up a subsidiary selling bundles of milk and beer, chocolate and vodka etc. How much does 5L of beer cost when it's bundled with 5L of milk?

If you were to mix the beer and milk you would get 10L of a horrible drink, but at an alcohol level of 2.5% the excise duty would be less than €2 on the whole lot.

sandmanporto

enda kenny is a tool. I wont say what i think his mam shud have done before he was born

Chaotic_Forces

Sorry for the bumping but I'm just not 100% sure on "below cost". I get it means if you buy something for 2 euro and sell it for less it's below cost.

But what about when the companies have things like "7 cans for the price of 6" or something? Is that below cost since it's clearly marked on the pack by the company and not the shop that's selling it?

vampire of kilmainham

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Not sure what the plans of the other parties are but Fine Gael are planning on banning the below cost selling of alcohol, this is yet another protectionist approach to the market that only ends up with the consumer being penalised.

Page 24 of this document "Extra VAT yield from banning below cost selling of alcohol"
http://www.finegael2011.com/pdf/LessWasteLowerTaxesStrongerGrowth.pdf

bet it will be still cheap in the dail bar where all the scum politicans gather and talk about us pesents as they look on us where they all sit an drink into the early hours and tell us to go home early a yea the same ol thing one law for the rich and another for us pesents hold on till i pour another whiskey an light a fag i bought some cheap off a dealer **** the politicans...:mad::mad::mad:

Capt'n Midnight

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Sorry for the bumping but I'm just not 100% sure on "below cost". I get it means if you buy something for 2 euro and sell it for less it's below cost.

It means not selling it for less that the distributor charges you for it.

Some of the cost is for marketing
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2010/0914/1224278817660.html

Last year, more than €68 million was spent on advertising both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks products using traditional advertising techniques. Diageo spent more than €18 million on advertising in 2009, while Heineken spent more than €11 million.

I'm assuming more would be spent too on non-traditional methods too

Korvanica

Just found out about this....

http://reginadoherty.blogspot.com/2011/01/ban-on-below-cost-selling-of-alcohol.html

^im surprised there arent more comments on the above article tbh..

**** Fine Gael...