Revenues up 9% in New York Bars

Fox News | 3-29-04 | unknown

[at bay]

Fox news reported that bar revenues are up 9% over a year ago when the smoking ban went into effect. Apparently the "If I can't have my way I'll stay home" crowd of puffers were outnumbered by "Now that the air has cleared I think I'll stop in for a drink."

Since these numbers are supported by public tax revenue records, there's n o doubt all the "chimney chicken little/ sky is falling" scenarios proved to be just whiners blowing smoke.

[Gabz]

Then you are saying the ban had nothing to do with the loss of those customers.

I said no such thing........and you know it.

But I will clarify for others who may be unaware of your proclivity to twist the words of anyone who does not hold the same anti-smoker position you maintain.

The 15 people who stopped being customers of that establishment did so because of the hypocricy of the owner - who claimed in the paper his customers didn't come there to smoke, but refused to go non-smoking until the state made everyone else do the same.

[cinFLA]

but refused to go non-smoking until the state made everyone else do the same.

They deserted him BEFORE the ban because he refused to go non-smoking till he was forced to????

[Gabz]

And your point is...........what?

You live in Florida, different weather conditions from Delaware where I was less than 2 weeks ago.........45degrees and raining is not real conducive for going outdoors..........the bars were empty on St. Patrick's Day.........places I've been going to for 20 years.

If you plan to come anywhere on the DelMarVa penninsula anytime in the future, please let me know - I'll make sure to steer you to all the non-smoking places. Actually, I'd probably just tell you to keep right on driving north and go to Delaware - the good places I know in Virginia and Maryland would most likely offend your delicate senses.

[CurlyDave]

I can't believe anyone would actually make such a statement.

Since I have never actually looked for a non-smoking bar in Delaware, you may be right. OTOH the story was about New York, and I have looked there and in San Francisco area, before the smoking bans went into effect. No luck in either area, but I must admit I gave up after only visiting 5 or 6 bars in both cases.

From your experience in Delaware, what % were non-smoking and in what year? If 10% of the total were non-smoking I would be amazed. Remember 75% of the population is non-smoking, so I would expect 50-75% non-smoking establishments to be a reasonable number.

[Gabz]

I like your idea of a histogram chart.....can I FReepmail you about it tomorrow? I think I know a few bar owners who would be willing to utilize it.

[Gabz]

I personally wouldn't mind seeing complete bans in places paid for with government funds and all privately-owned businesses free to choose.

We are in agreement.

The article and the original post simply point out that the smoking ban isn't the end of the world overall. That is worth noticing, I think.

I think it is more important to look at where the numbers are coming from and how they are being determined.

The numbers for NYC are coming from the office of the person that pushed this ban as much as Bloominidiot did. And there is no differentiation between business types in this supposed increase because of the ban.

I'm sorry, I've got a problem with the numbers, and will remain sceptical of them until I see a specific breakdown betweeb bars, taverns, restaurants, and every other liquor license holder.........something that I have yet to see.

If the 9% increase, as meager as it is, can be proven to be ONLY in the bar/tavern industry I will be the first to say I am wrong.............but I don't think it will happen.

I witnessed this same type of number playing when the ban went into effect in Delaware, when it came to the racinos. The state admitted an 11-15% decline in revenue after the ban went into effect. They based this number upon the same months the previous year, but failed to include the nearly 30% increase in the ensuing months. The smoking ban in Delaware totally wiped out that increase and then some.....but they won't admit it.

[supercat]

From your experience in Delaware, what % were non-smoking and in what year? If 10% of the total were non-smoking I would be amazed. Remember 75% of the population is non-smoking, so I would expect 50-75% non-smoking establishments to be a reasonable number.

The portion of the overall population that smokes or does not has nothing to do with any reasonable expected ratio of smoking- to non-smoking bars. What really matters is the ratio of the following two quantities:

• The amount of revenue that is or would be generated by customers who will prefer any non-smoking business over any smoking one.
• The amount of revenue that is or would be generated by customers who will prefer any smoking business over any non-smoking one.

The fact of the matter is that there aren't a whole lot of non-smokers who would do much business in bars, whether or not the bars allowed smoking. There are a variety of reasons as to why that might be; one I would suggest is that smoking gives bar patrons something to 'do' during idle moments that they're not engaged in conversation or other activity, without being anti-social (someone smoking a cigarette can look around and solicit conversation much more readily than someone playing a video game, reading a book, etc.)

While I have no intention of starting smoking, I do believe that smokers have more fun in bars than non-smokers, and not just because they have a greater tolerance for the smoke that's generally found in bars. While smokers may sit at a bar for hours, conversing when interesting people show up and smoking when they don't, I wouldn't think non-smokers would be as prone to do so.

[Gabz]

The logical solution to anti-smokers' complaints would be for someone to publish a guide which lists non-smoking bars and restaurants

The antis already do that and in places where the antis haven't gotten their claws in, establishments advertise it.

[Teacher317]

So we should celebrate when we curtail someone's freedom at a profit?

[Gabz]

I realize the original article was about New York, but considering I haven't lived there in more than 20 years and did live in Delaware during the debate about the statewide smoking ban, I believed my comments upon it were appropriate.

I cannot comment on San Fransisco because the only time I have ever been there was after the ban. It's been nearly 6 years since I have been in New York and I was unable to smoke in any place I was in, except for one local tavern. Of course the New York snob visitors will claim my claim makes no difference because I was ONLY in Brooklyn.

I lived in Delaware from 1982 to 2003, so have many years experience in the state. Bars, I would say less than 1% were smoke-free, unless they were part of a restaurant. Prior to the smoking ban, at least 50% of the restaurants we frequented were smoke-free. And we had no problem with that - the proprietor had made the decision - not the government.

[Gabz]

Very interesting concept..........

(I've been know to sit at the corner of the bar buried in a book)

[supercat]

(I've been know to sit at the corner of the bar buried in a book)

I have too, on occasion, at a bar which served food. But generally I find being in bars rather boring unless they're doing karaoke, and sometimes even then. Smokers don't seem to have the boredom problem, though.

[Fledermaus]

More a result of the improving economy.

And it doesn't reflect the smokers just going outside to smoke. Which is the case since NY now wants to crack down on people standing outside of buildings smoking in public.

[NYCVirago]

You obviously don't know bartenders, barowners or wait staff on a personal enough basis where they would feel free to express their total disagreement with you.

I can't tell you how many times I pass by a bar or restaurant and see the staff outside smoking! And the alleged "point" to this law was to protect them from second-hand smoke. Ridiculous.

[qam1]

Since these numbers are supported by public tax revenue records

New York State and New York City have raised sales taxes (Which I am sure you were all for) so of course revenue is up.

[VermiciousKnid]

I heard the results of this poll today, wasn't this done by a group in favor of the ban.

No, the poll you're thinking of was the one that supposedly said that 80% of NYers think the ban is a good thing. It was conducted by one of those "Citizens for a Smoke-Free Something-Or-Other" groups. They used REGISTERED PARTICIPANTS for the poll.

This thing here is allegedly from the NYS revenue crowd. But as other posters have mentioned, they've cooked the books by comparing this year's revenues with 2002 numbers. On top of that, they are counting "revenue," which means they are counting the increased taxes as compared to 2002, as well.

They should get back to me when they decide to do a REAL survey...but they don't really have to, 'cause as a NYer myself, I can believe my own two eyes. The bars are being KILLED by this, and the ones who have lost the most business have decided to ignore the law altogether.

Regards,

[SheLion]

Yesterday, Fox News was advertising for Neil Cavuto's 4pm show how the smoking bans have business owners fuming, and the business owner's want the states to lighten up on these bans.  I taped the show.  Of all days for Neil to be off.......this was it.

I taped the show and will get the names of the three that were interviewed.  One was a sharp black woman who is a bartender in New York City.  The host ask her if her revenue was down.  She said her personal income is down 35% since the ban.  The host ask her if she wasn't happier though, going home at night and not smelling like smoke.  This sharp gal said right back at him "If I was worried about the smell, I wouldn't have taken a job in a bar!" 

 

The second guy was really good looking.  Dressed in a black suit, longer hair slicked back...........reminded me of the Mafia.  He supplies the bars in NYC with vending machines.........cigarettes, games, video's etc.  He, too said that his revenue has fallen 30% and if he could, he would have the smoking back today! As for this report recently put out by Mayor Blooming Idiot, he said that he doesn't know where the Mayor came up with these numbers, but they are now using these same numbers across the United States to force smoking bans down the throats of more business owners.  And he said those numbers are "bogus."

 

The third guy was in Texas.  He owns one restaurant and 11 bars, so I would say he is doing quite well for himself.  Well, seems the Mayor they HAD instigated the full no smoking ban.  Then came the election..........they ousted this Mayor, elected a new Mayor and now smoking sections are once again allowed.  He said he made his restaurant smoke free, but that was his choice.  His bars provide sections for both.......smokers AND non-smokers and he is once again doing quite well.

 

Thank God Fox didn't have on the likes of Glantz and Banshaf for a change! They had on REAL people who told the FACTS!

[SheLion]

More propoganda from the smoking nazis?

Without a doubt!

Those of us that know about Mayor Blooming Idiot do not like him and we do NOT trust him. He can twist the numbers all he likes, but the truth is in the pudding. The pudding was on Fox News yesterday. Three people who told it like it is about how the revenue has fallen off for them since the smoking ban was instigated.

[SheLion]

Fox news reported that bar revenues are up 9% over a year ago

No link for this report yet, but it was put forth by Mayor Blooming Idiot. So how can ANYONE believe HIS lies?

[SheLion]