The Facts About The Smoking Ban. If you're a business owner or not, this is a must read!

The Facts Online ^ | 11-01-03 | Dave Hitt

[jsbankston]

I live in Florida and have not patronized one restaurant since the ban went into effect on July 1,2003.

I am rather surprised that the State of Florida has a total smoking ban. How did such a bill bass in such a conservative state?

[cinFLA]

Coach House Restaurant, Wilmington Del

[hotshot]

Now that there is a minimum of second hand smoke that I am exposed to involuntarily, I won't have to pull around a bottle of oxygen with me like you will after 3 packs a day for 20-30 years. I lug around a NO2 bottle for my stang drop top, and that tires me out.

[Legerdemain]

If you think smoking is a Constitutional right, that is your first problem.

ok, I know this one does not back up his statements with fact, however I will bite....this is based on? Go ahead educate me as I am just a dumb constitutionalist.

[headsonpikes]

The percentage of the population in accord with the nanny-state authorities is immaterial.

There is comfort in numbers to sheep, I suppose.

[maryz]

A study of the aggregate meal tax receipts in Brookline, Massachusetts found that a smoke-freepolicy for all restaurants did not have a measurable immediate effect on the city’s total restaurantbusiness.

In MA, Brookline (along with parts of Cambridge)is the root and source of anti-smoking Nazi activity and has been for years. I would be surprised to hear that there actually were more than one or two smoking restaurants in Brookline prior to the ban, and those in the declasse section.

[CSM]

"Coach House Restaurant, Wilmington Del"

What number did you call? I just looked them up in Yahoo, Yellow Pages and found the following:

Coach House Restaurant
2605 Philadelphia Pike, Claymont, DE 19703
Phone: (302) 798-3050

It is within 5.2 miles of the search location. When I called the number above, I got the "this number has been disconnected" message from the phone company.

Let me know the number you called and I will give them a try.

What is the 2nd one you called? Your post stated you called two locations.

[cinFLA]

Smoke ban boost for restaurant business
Source: Adelaide (SA) Advertiser (au), 2002-08-11

Intro:
CONTROVERSIAL plans to ban smoking in pubs and clubs have received a boost from a study that shows a similar ban in restaurants actually boosted trade.

The landmark study, to be released tomorrow, investigated the effect of the 1999 smoke-free law on restaurant business in South Australia.

It found the ban reversed a downward trend in restaurant trade.

The average monthly turnover of the State's restaurants increased from $29,850,000 before the ban to $31,256,000 in the period after the law was introduced.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics data was in part produced by the Anti-Cancer Foundation of SA.

Before the introduction of the smoking ban the hospitality industry argued business would be lost because of a smokers' boycott.

However, Quit SA manager Andrew Ellerman said the ban had encouraged more non-smokers to dine out, resulting in the increase in restaurant turnover.

He said the big challenge was now for pubs, clubs and gaming venues to become smoke-free.

[Gabz]

sheesh.

Of course the pool of available customers decreased. Smokers stopped going out and many of their non-smoking friends did the same. It's amazing how many of my friends are still going to places in Maryland, nearly a year after the Delaware ban went into effect. The places with outdoor seating for dining and entertainment didn't fair as badly this spring and summer as those without, but because it was either unbearably hot or raining the better part of this summer, they did not do as well as even last summer.

A dear friend of mine bought a place about 3 years ago after 20 years of working in other places. She was doing a booming business with her lunch, happy hour and nighttime crowds. Within 6 months after the ban she scrapped her plans to open on Sunday. Lunch business is still booming - but for take-out not sit-down and eat in. She used to have 3 karaoke nights a week - that's down to twice a month. Those nights used to be so packed that she had more than one visit from the fire marshall.

Which brings up the ancilliary businesses being hurt by these bans. Bar and club bands and DJS are all hurting because a lot of the regular places they played can't afford to pay them, because they don't have the customers to justify the cost.

[CSM]

"The average monthly turnover of the State's restaurants increased from $29,850,000 before the ban to $31,256,000 in the period after the law was introduced."

What is the margin on the 2nd number compared to the margin on the first? We don't know. We will never know.

[Gabz]

Bravo!!!!!!!

[Gabz]

I don't know that they lied;

I personally was lied to by several of them, as were some owners of bars and restaurants that I know.

I think they just waaaaaay overestimated the number of people who stayed away from bars/restaurants because of the smoke.

I agree with you. and they totaly UNDERestimated the number of people who would stay away if the ban went into effect. nearly all of my non-smoking friends don't go out as often as they used to for reasons that I posted in another post - includingthe fact that most of their smoking friends are not going out as much and the local hotspots are no longer so hot.

[qam1]

Studies have shown that smoke-free policies implemented in other communities do not result in a lossof revenue for restaurants and bars. In many cases, such establishments experience increased salesfollowing a smoking ban.•

A study by Cornell University researchers found that a smoke-free policy attracted more businessand revenue to restaurants than it drove away. The study examined how New Yorkers’ dining habitsand spending patterns changed in the four months following New York City’s Smoke-Free Air Actimplementation. The results showed that non-smokers are eating out more, and are more thanmaking up for the lost revenues caused by smokers not eating out as frequently. (David Corsun et.al., “Should NYC’s Restaurateurs Lighten Up?” Cornel Hotel and Restaurant AdministrationQuarterly, April 1996.)•

Bogus, New York City didn't really have what you could consider a smoking ban at this time. Smoking was only banned in the dinning areas of restaurants that had more than 35 tables (which is a pretty good sized restaurant) and you could smoke at the bar or lounge.

A survey of Massachusetts adults, published in the American Journal of Public Health (Dec. 1997)found that an overwhelming 89% of respondents would go out to bars more often or the sameamount if all bars in the state were 100% smoke free.•

Bull, A push poll. 89% of the adult population doesn't go out to bars to begin with and won't no matter what the smoking policy is.

A study of the aggregate restaurant sales data from West Lake Hills, Texas (a suburb of Austin)found that the city’s smoke-free ordinance enacted in June 1993 did not decrease sales revenueamong restaurants. (“Assessment of the Impact of a 100% Smoke-Free Ordinance on RestaurantSales West Lake Hills, Texas,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Centers for Disease Controland Prevention, May 19, 1995.)•

Really than why are there no restaurants in Wake Hills Texas left?

A study of the economic impact of smoke-free bar ordinances on bar sales in seven Californiacommunities found no significant impact on business. Published in the American Journal of PublicHealth, the University of California study (Dr. Stanton Glantz and Lisa Smith) examined sales taxreceipts for five California cities and two counties that have laws requiring bars to be 100% smokefree. They found that none of these communities suffered any significant loss of business due to thesmoke-free bar ordinances. In fact, relative to total retail sales, bar sales actually increased in all butone of the communities.• A study of 15 communities in California and Colorado concluded that smoke-free ordinances donot hurt restaurant sales. (Stanton Glantz and Lisa Smith, “The Effect of Ordinances RequiringSmoke-Free Restaurants on Restaurant Sales,” American Journal of Public Health, July 1994.)• The publishers of Zagat Restaurant Guides found in their annual survey of more than 16,000 NewYork City restaurant patrons that eating out had increased in the six months since the city’s cleanindoor air law took effect. (Nov. 15, 1995, Press Release, 1996 Zagat NYC Restaurant Survey.)•

Stan the sham Glantz is not a doctor he's an electrician, He is lying. Nuff Said

A study of the aggregate meal tax receipts in Brookline, Massachusetts found that a smoke-freepolicy for all restaurants did not have a measurable immediate effect on the city’s total restaurantbusiness. (“Preliminary Analysis of the Economic Impact of Brookline’s Restaurant Smoking Ban,”Health Economics Research Inc., November 20, 1995.)•

Garbage again because they only measured "Meal Tax receipts"

Why didn't they measure the whole restaurant buisness? The obviously reason is the restaurants were hurt. A restaurant can lose a significant part of their profits and the Meal tax receipts won't necessary change. Plus that includes things like McDonalds.

A study of restaurant sales data in Flagstaff, Arizona, found that the city’s restaurant smoking bandid not adversely affect restaurant sales. (John Sciacca et. al., “Prohibiting Smoking in Restaurants:Effects on Restaurant Sales.”)

Just like NYC previously there is no real smoking ban in Flagstaff, The ban is only for the "Dining" areas of restaurants. So you can still smoke at the bar or lounge.

Now look at the current NY studies.

One in 10 jobs in the New York pub and bar sector have been lost since the city introduced its ban on smoking in the workplace in March.

http://www.thepublican.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=11342&d=32&h=24&f=23&dateformat=%o %B %Y

Cig Ban Leaves Lot Of 'Empties'

http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/75483.htm

Plus is Smoking is so unpopular than why are New Jersey Bars booming? If people were looking for smoke free places than New Jersey should be hurting because the non-smokers would be going to New York, but that isn't happening..

New York's smoking ban is a boon for out-of-state bars and restaurants

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/08/02/national0357EDT0441.DTL

Butts ban in city a boon in Jersey

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/88799p-80790c.html

[Mears]

Whiskey Point in Brookline probably had a few !!! LOL As far as everything else goes, Brookline has been an anomaly for years.

After all,it is the home of Mike Dukakis. Enough said.

[Eaker]

I am allergic to the smoke.

There is nothing in cigarette smoke to cause an increase in histamines, so you are not allergic to smoke.

I know you won't believe this because it doesn't suit you. People like you never let facts get in the way of whining.

[Liberal Classic]

Yes, but you were arguing from authority there. Just because a majority support public smoking bans, does not make them good policy.

You mean it is the nanny-state when 89% of the population and the Restaurant Association support a law?

[hotshot]

How much would you to wager and how would you like the bet held? Anyone who has asthma is allegic to smoke as its chemicals cause constriction of the airways. Second hand smoke causes asthma. And I do not have ashma but I am allergic(reactionary) to the smoke.

[cherinfl]

Did cinfl ever give you the name of the second restaurant!!

It amazes me how some people can be so ignorant!! At least us smokers are not afraid to give the facts, we don't wiggle around them or tell lies!!!

[Just another Joe]

Second hand smoke causes asthma.

Excuse me?
ETS does not CAUSE asthma. Period.
It may cause an asthmatic reaction but it does not cause asthma.

[Just another Joe]

He never gave the name of the second OR the phone number he used for the first.
CSM called the number for one of the restaurants the cinFLA supposedly called and got a number disconnected message.