Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

BillyBobBS

Rick Shaw wrote: »

Here's my suggestion, try and arrange a VFI members bar boycott at least one day each month, if not a whole weekend Fri-Mon morning.

People should instead either go without, or have good Friday style party's where the offies provide the booze.

Wouldn't take long before the lobbying the vintners demanded gets used against them and has the complete opposite affect.

A few weekends of their pocket being hit is all it would take to have the vintners back up in.arms again. The greedy hoors.

This is a great idea tbh.

Fr Tod Umptious

Mr. teddywinkles wrote: »

I'd say people who buy a few drinks at the weekend and such won't bother purchasing alcohol any more. And lot will be left on selves. Thick cnuts. They have deals on drinks due to excess stock in most cases. Proves only one thing. Consumption is down dramatically over the years.

But isn't that the idea from the (non vintner) supporters of this ?

The higher price means less consumption.

Still Ill

Surely any protest group needs a good acronym.. I propose 'Consumers Against Nanny State'!

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes I understand that, the poster to which I was replying was making the point about anti-competition ans I was using cigarettes, not based on pricing but based on the curb to adverts etc, as an example as to how governments can utilise 'public good' to get around this.

There is anti-competitive laws all over the place. You can't simply set up a bus company. You can't just set up an insurance company (well that was the idea!). There are plenty of industries where minimum standards must be met which make it difficult for new entrants to come into the market.

I made the (or a) point about anti-competition. Your cigarette analogy doesn't really work as the curb of adverts etc is a blanket curbing. In the case of MUP the government is restricting competition to pubs by increasing the prices in off licenses and supermarkets. They aren't restricting the pubs in the same manner, and therefore is arguably anti-competitive.

This isn't about making it more difficult for new entrants to the market, its about making things more difficult for Tesco and Aldi and Lidl et al. Companies that are already meeting all the standards and requirements set down.

Leroy42

I think my point was badly made and has been lost. Sticking an MUP on a product, does not, of itself, mean that it is anti-competitive. I don't disagree about the nature of what you are saying, all I am saying is that competition laws are very easy to get around especially if you can bring in the notion of public good.

Pubs are free to charge whatever they like, above a MUP, exactly the same with the Off-licence. There will still be a significant price difference, so they haven't wiped out the advantage.

They are restricting the pubs in the same manner. Pubs cannot sell below the MUP. The fact that people are prepared to pay way over that already is not the pubs problem. Currently pubs cannot run drinks specials, but off-licences can. Is that not anti-competitive?

weldoninhio

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think my point was badly made and has been lost. Sticking an MUP on a product, does not, of itself, mean that it is anti-competitive. I don't disagree about the nature of what you are saying, all I am saying is that competition laws are very easy to get around especially if you can bring in the notion of public good.

Pubs are free to charge whatever they like, above a MUP, exactly the same with the Off-licence. There will still be a significant price difference, so they haven't wiped out the advantage.

They are restricting the pubs in the same manner. Pubs cannot sell below the MUP. The fact that people are prepared to pay way over that already is not the pubs problem. Currently pubs cannot run drinks specials, but off-licences can. Is that not anti-competitive?

As far as I know, pubs can run drinks specials, i've been in pubs running them and they are constantly advertised. They aren't allowed have a happy hour.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Still Ill wrote: »

Surely any protest group needs a good acronym.. I propose 'Consumers Against Nanny State'!

Ah, but Nanny State implies that it's a health measure...

elperello

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

So if people stop drinking in protest it's a win win for the people who support MUP.

The new pricing has reduced consumption.

All these talk of protests etc, I wonder really how many are against this and how many really don't care.

I think a lot of the protesters would be in the demographic 18-35.

I'm 46 now, I could not give a hoot, but if I was 20 again, now that would be another story.

You have a point.

Targeted pub protests like the farmers supermarket swoops could be effective.
Like imagine 20 guys walk in and order 20 pints of guinness and just when they are put up say sorry we are out of here over MUP.

Hard however to see big street protests over the price of drink.

We don't know for sure but the poll above might be a pointer.

46 will you go away out of that 20 more years drinking at least for you young fellow:)

GhostyMcGhost

Still Ill wrote: »

Surely any protest group needs a good acronym.. I propose 'Consumers Against Nanny State'!

Be A Good Statesman: Oppose and Follow Consumers Against Nanny State

L1011

Leroy42 wrote: »

Currently pubs cannot run drinks specials, but off-licences can. Is that not anti-competitive?

The only restriction is on time limited / time expiring specials; although prices that go up throughout the day are allowed still so realistically there are ways around it.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

Are people really suggesting that they will give up a day every few weeks to drive to the north and back to buy enough drink to make it worth the hassle rather than simply head down to the local pub!

MUP will be nowhere near expensive enough to make pubs look like good value to people who drink at home.

GhostyMcGhost

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

MUP will be nowhere near expensive enough to make pubs look like good value to people who drink at home.

TBF nothing can make pubs look like good value anymore

€6+ a pint.... the damage is well and truly irreversible at this point

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think my point was badly made and has been lost. I don't disagree about the nature of what you are saying, all I am saying is that competition laws are very easy to get around especially if you can bring in the notion of public good.

"Sticking an MUP on a product, does not, of itself, mean that it is anti-competitive."
No of course not. The fact that you say that makes me think you don't understand the point I was making.

Currently pubs cannot run drinks specials, but off-licences can. Is that not anti-competitive?

Last night in Diceys all pints and bottles 2 euro. Pubs aren't allowed do happy hour or other time-based promotions, but they can and do promotions to bring the crowds in all the time.

But again, I think you misunderstood my point about competition.

cartel
kɑːˈtɛl/
noun
noun: cartel; plural noun: cartels

an association of manufacturers or suppliers with the purpose of maintaining prices at a high level and restricting competition.
"the Colombian drug cartels"
historical
a coalition or cooperative arrangement between political parties intended to promote a mutual interest.

elperello

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

MUP will be nowhere near expensive enough to make pubs look like good value to people who drink at home.

Interesting points.

Are you saying there is an acceptable level of MUP?
Once it's in do you think the neo-prohibitionists will go away? They will take strength from it and move on to their next campaign goal.

I for one don't want my pockets plundered by as much as 1 cent by this stupid proposal.

You could be right about the pubs. If drinkers have to spend more for their drinks at home they will have less to spend in the pubs.

Mr. teddywinkles

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But isn't that the idea from the (non vintner) supporters of this ?

The higher price means less consumption.

The question was weather retailers would support the bill. If the product isn't selling why stock it or stock as much. Increasing prices does not automatically mean more profit for retailers.
And the so called target consumer there trying to ween off excess consumption with this so called health bill isn't targeted at all. Just the occasional drinker which in turn hits retailers.

jbt123

Leroy42 wrote: »

NI will be bringing in MUP at the same time.
NI will be bringing in a hard border with possible border checks and personal limits for the movement of goods.

How much will you drink in two weeks that would necessitate the time of 1 day wasted and money involved (petrol, lunch, parking etc).

For such a plan to make sense then quite a large amount of drink would need to be involved and as such surely it proves that this measure will have an effect as many people will simply reduce consumption rather than go to such lengths.

Of course if you live near the border it makes more sense that if you live in Cork. But even from Dublin, it would be at least a half a day trip

No matter what MUP policy the North adopts it will still be cheaper than 'Rip-Off' Ireland down South. There will be no doubt about that.

We live about a 45 min drive from the North with a couple of us even working closer to the border, so no great amount of time wasted.

Don't need lunch... Hard border? Don't make me laugh. There's numerous border crossings on little by-roads that have been used in the 70s that will see an increase in traffic again should such a situation arise.

All in all, well worth it for a bunch of us numbering between 8-10 currently. I'd imagine a nice little loss for the exchequer here but sure Leo doesn't care anyway as long as the pubs are full of people paying through the nose in pubs that are generally bereft of any atmosphere whatsoever.

As I've said already, a complete and utter shambolic country. Sick of Fcukers under some false guise telling me how to lead my life.

elperello

jbt123 wrote: »

No matter what MUP policy the North adopts it will still be cheaper than 'Rip-Off' Ireland down South. There will be no doubt about that.

We live about a 45 min drive from the North with a couple of us even working closer to the border, so no great amount of time wasted.

Don't need lunch... Hard border? Don't make me laugh. There's numerous border crossings on little by-roads that have been used in the 70s that will see an increase in traffic again should such a situation arise.

All in all, well worth it for a bunch of us numbering between 8-10 currently. I'd imagine a nice little loss for the exchequer here but sure Leo doesn't care anyway as long as the pubs are full of people paying through the nose in pubs that are generally bereft of any atmosphere whatsoever.

As I've said already, a complete and utter shambolic country. Sick of Fcukers under some false guise telling me how to lead my life.

There is no doubt that for people in your situation a border run will be attractive and good luck to you.
However it's also fair to point out that the main population centres in the Republic, ie. Dublin,Cork,Galway and Limerick are out of easy reach. Also the further away people live from the border the less likely they will know about unapproved roads etc.
You can expect a few high profile seizures by Customs as well designed to put us back in our box.

Agree about the shambolic way public policy is used to disadvantage citizens.

hatrickpatrick

To be honest, if this does pass, I can see offies and supermarkets selling home brew kits en masse. They might even sell already-fermenting mixture which are as close as possible to being drinkable without formally counting as alcohol sales - there's a guy who goes around to the farmers' markets and sells his home brewed cider in jugs which require only a week or two of monitoring and breathing (loosening the cap a little each day) before they become fully fermented cloudy cider, I'd imagine you'll start to see mixes like this sold all over the place in offies and supermarkets. Beer kits are already a thing, it's just that not everyone has the equipment you need to actually brew beer - a mixture which has taken as much of this process and completed it behind the scenes, without going far enough to actually count as beer under the MUP definition, would be a great marketing gimmick I'd imagine.

Spanish Eyes

Boycott pubs. They wouldn't even give you a dish of peanuts the feckers.

I actually dislike pubs now as all I see are the same faces, staring glumly into their pint, or a shrieking load of hens or stags getting wasted. Loud music or greyhound racing on a loop on Sky sports. Jayzis they do that to make you drink more I'm convinced! This is kind of lighthearted but I have steel in my bones too whilst talking about it. How very dare they tell me what to do!

I enjoy going to the pub as part of a celebration or a one off night out. Much prefer a restaurant these days, getting older you see...

Anyway since the product I buy currently is premium priced it will not go up. Happy Days!

I don't think this will encourage anyone back to a pub who prefers a few drinks at home. AT ALL.

Think of the savings in taxis, buses and the chipper on the way home. And for those who still smoke, it's a godsend to be able to have a jar and a fag in your own home/flat. or on your balcony whatever. No one to tell you what to do.

There will be no more Dutch Gold or knockoffs of the Smirnoffs, Cider etc. They will be the same price as the premium brands if this comes in.

And the laugh of the century is that the Exchequer will get NOTHING from it really. All profits to the retailer/supplier. You couldn't make it up.

I think I need a drink now. Apologies for the extra long rant. But I needed it.

Zubeneschamali

elperello wrote: »

Are you saying there is an acceptable level of MUP?

No, I think MUP is unfair - hitting the poor to try and support the Vintners.

If the Govt want to simply jack up all excise on alcohol, I would personally pay more than MUP will cost me, but I would prefer that to MUP, and that would meet their new stated goal of driving down consumption for health reasons.

But it would hurt the Vintners, so it won't happen.

Dr Crayfish

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Boycott pubs. They wouldn't even give you a dish of peanuts the feckers.

No one is going to protest, or boycott anything, let's face it.

Spanish Eyes

jbt123 wrote: »

This all day long.


I think it's time for those in power to realise that the pub scene for a certain age group in this country is a thing of the past.

Agreed. But I do like going to the pub for a one off, usually great craic, but not on a regular basis anymore.

What did Vintners ever do to encourage their patrons? A few cocktail sausages and chips or a few hang sangers at the end of the night? A few peanuts, crisps, anything? NO.

The only place I ever saw this was in a pub in Cork. I was absolutely gobsmacked. Just checked and it was the Southern Star or so I am told. Great night.

elperello

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

No one is going to protest, or boycott anything, let's face it.

Sadly you are probably right.
That's not to say a bit of protest or boycott wouldn't help.
It works quite well if you are organised but in this case we are not.

Any more suggestions?

Spanish Eyes

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

No one is going to protest, or boycott anything, let's face it.

Yes I know, but it's good to have an oul rant just the same.:P

Some might do it though, although I doubt that the majority of people realise this initiative is totally for the Vintners. Nothing else.

Maybe the retailers of alcohol can fight back, but if they are going to increase their profits why would they.

It is just so unfair. But hey ho to those who got a fiver in the budget on the scratch. They'll be grand. I didn't.

ellejay

My own opinion is that it'll just increase the booze black market.

Dr Crayfish

If anyone has any experience creating social media campaigns I really think it could possibly be effective. Like boycott pub night or something in retaliation to this. I wouldn't know where to start really.

ellejay

There'll be plenty of loop holes.

Eg If a minimum sale price is implemented, what's to stop retailers GIVING the product away?
Eg Buy a bag of ice and you'll get a free bottle of booze.

elperello

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Agreed. But I do like going to the pub for a one off, usually great craic, but not on a regular basis anymore.

What did Vintners ever do to encourage their patrons? A few cocktail sausages and chips or a few hang sangers at the end of the night? A few peanuts, crisps, anything? NO.

The only place I ever saw this was in a pub in Cork. I was absolutely gobsmacked. Just checked and it was the Southern Star or so I am told. Great night.

It's more common than you might think.
I was in a pub in Knock one night a few years ago (don't ask why it's a long story!) and was practically force fed chips and sausages. It was in aid of a card game.
Anyhow my point is that I'd already eaten dinner and I had to nibble a bit to be polite.
I would actually avoid places who indulge in the practice of serving up greasy food late at night.

Dr Crayfish

ellejay wrote: »

There'll be plenty of loop holes.

Eg If a minimum sale price is implemented, what's to stop retailers GIVING the product away?
Eg Buy a bag of ice and you'll get a free bottle of booze.

They'll probably take these things into account in the proposed legislation

elperello

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

If anyone has any experience creating social media campaigns I really think it could possibly be effective. Like boycott pub night or something in retaliation to this. I wouldn't know where to start really.

I like your positive outlook, unfortunately I can't help you due to not having the skills needed. I would chip in a few quid if a crowd funding initiative is set up.

Anyone out there with Facebook of Twitter skills?