Predictions for effects of the smoking ban

There are priorities and priorities. Earlier this year it was reported that

An indoor-smoking ban implemented in January 2007 in France cut hospital admissions for heart attacks by 15 percent during its first year in force, while Italian researchers found that a similar ban in Italy has reduced acute coronary events by 11.2 percent since January 2005, Science Daily reported Feb. 26.

Even if hospitality revenues drop 10%, I think most people would trade that for a 10% drop in heart attacks in the general population. However, I doubt the revenue drop is more than a temporary blip. Everywhere else it's been well demonstrated that the smoking ban has no adverse impact on revenues, no reason why Germany should be any different.

Except ireland and the UK of course where pubs are closing down left right and centre.

Incidently more detailed analysis came out in the SZ today.
Beer on-sales are slumping more heavily in the barelled rather than the bottled sector in Germany which to my mind indicates that it is local pubs rather than trendy "cafe-bars" which are suffering. As predicted.

The pubs in the UK are closing down because the government keeps whacking on more and more duty onto beer while the supermarkets keep subsidising it.

That is part of the reason STB for sure, but smoking bans are another reason as well.

SPIEGEL:

If bar owners would charge reasonable prices, people would most certainly frequent their bars/pubs more often. Last week, we paid 60 Euro for a truly wonderful meal, and afterwards 55 Euro for ice cubes diluted with alcohol. Pathetic.
San Francisco introduced the smoking ban approx. 13-14 years ago, no bar went out of business.
Italy did in 2005, the smokers just stand outside.
Why does arrogant Germany need exceptions?

You don't say what you paid 55 Euros for.
€55 though would get you five cocktails in Trader Vics in the Bayerische Hof that you would CERTAINLY feel the effects of.
Or ten cocktails at a local happy hour that would certainly have you rocking and reeling.

The wholesale price of beer for the pub trade, even not tied to a brewery, is higher than for the shops.
The shops don't have the same cost structure as the pubs and they can't run drink as a loss leader like stores can.


Why is Germany "arrogant" in being different?
Not that it is that much different of course: Smoking is allowed in Belgium in small pubs I hear from a friend, smoking is allowed in Sweden in separate rooms I hear from a friend. I'm not opposed to smoking bans as such, but I think there should be exceptions for separate smoking rooms and permission for small pubs to stay smoking.

Some of the fundamental differences are that smoking is already less socially acceptable in English speaking countries.
That preventitive health care is more widespread elsewhere.
That other countries don't have so much the noise issues.
That other countries maybe don't have so much a "street corner local" pub culture.

Tosh and fiddlesticks.

Mr. Janx Spirit, if you would ever explore life outside the Munich-UK line, you would see that you know absolutely nothing.
In that sense you are right, you are producing "Tosh and fiddlesticks".

I lived in San Francisco (not just for 3 months I might mention) and hated when we had to go out in NYC (this FYI stands for New York City) since they didn't have the smoking ban yet.
I'm at least 6-8 times a year in Italy (this is a country approx. 3-12 hours South of Munich by car, some of the more well-known cities are Rome, Milan, Venice). My Italian friends are smokers and leave me several times during the evenings to have a smoke.

Now take your Tosh and fiddlesticks and apply it to yourself.

Maybe you have been in Germany too long and the German arrogance has already gain control over you.

Leave off the racist bollocks won't you.

Ever thought that that Italy might have a more outdoor, venue hopping, more noise tolerant way of nightlife than Germany?

My piece of advice:

- don't go to NYC if you hate it (not even for 3 months)
- don't try to be witty if you ain't (witty - adjective (wittier, wittiest) - showing or characterized by quick and inventive verbal humour) kinda makes you look arrogant

- get yourself a map of Austria - will get you to Italy in less than 12h
- chill out, your coronary arteries will benifit of that more than any smoking ban

Monkstown I firmly believe that you do not have the authority to restrict my rights for free speech. Am I correct?

Furthermore I'm inclined to conclude you haven't been to the Dolomites (that's what parts of the Italian Alps are called) in the winter time.
Go spend some time in Cortina, Bormio, Kronplatz, Meran2000 at -10 degrees or colder.
All the smokers are standing outside, wrapped in warm clothes inhaling their cigarettes.

All this since 2005 !!!

Now it's your turn or Janx Spirit's turn.

Just a small advice: I constantly roam the globe, 67 countries and still counting. This year (meaning 2008) I have been already to 11 countries (could be even more), and 3 times to Italy.

I believe in free speach indeed.
That includes my right to pull people up for racist or xenophobic bollocks.

There was an interesting article in the SZ today.
Bit too self sure IMVHO that the attempts to get the bans turned over as unconstitutional will win but interesting nevertheless:

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/deutschland/artikel/284/179732/

------------------------------------------------

Ob man den staatlichen Gesundheitsschutz verfassungsrechtlich so weit treiben darf, den Menschen vor seiner Selbstgefährdung zu bewahren, ist aber verfassungsrechtlich zweifelhaft.
...
Wer wird durch ein Rauchverbot in Kleinkneipen geschützt? Die Nichtraucher jedenfalls nicht, die gehen eh nicht hinein. Vertrieben werden die Raucher, und den Wirten wird der Garaus gemacht. Das hat wenig mit Gesundheitsschutz zu tun, sondern mehr mit Intoleranz und Bevormundung. Davon aber ist im Grundgesetz nicht die Rede.

--------------------------------------------------

I'm amazed because I resented JanxSpirit BS comments, two people attacking me, one even with a learning and geography handicap (more later) but the liar liar pants on fire doesn't say a single word (JanxSpirit).

As to helterskelter I have the following advice for you:
1. Promise me you'll try to learn reading, at least my post. I stated 3-12 hours driving time to Italy.
2. You should buy the map first and then expand your travel horizon, which presumably reaches only as far as Südtirol. I referred to the country of Italy which, without using a ferry, extends down to Reggio Calabria, a mere 1600 km from Munich.

So please tell me now: Who is the geography fool in this round?

To recap. Predictions that I made for the smoking ban were:

*) It would result in a slump in trade for pubs.
*) Pubs would heavily use the smoking club loophole to continue to allow smoking.
*) The number of pubs using this loophole would be of a high percentage.
*) Thie issue of noise and street disturbance would become an issue in inner city areas that combine a high level of population density and pubs.
*) The council would not massively expand controls over pubs with smoking.
*) There would be no movement at state level before the elections this Autumn to tighten or weaken the law.

All come true.

Are you refering to the grubby watering holes near your gaff that you appear to be so fond of, or viable businesses in general ?

I like gruby watering holes yes.
But this also applies to some fairly high class venues cafe-bistro type places as well.

Report in the SZ last week said that nearly all of the venues in Augsburg's main party zone were smoking venues as well.

I've not yet had the pleasure of visiting 'Augsburg's main party zone' - whatever that might be ...

Do the toilets there smell particularly badly there or was it due to the stench of the customers this time?

From Wiki:

Zwischen Rathausplatz und Ulrichsplatz - stets im Blick eines der Augsburger Prachtbrunnen - haben sich zahlreiche Boutiquen, Restaurants, Kneipen, Bars und Diskotheken angesiedelt. Und obwohl ihr größter Teil heute etwas außerhalb der belebten Fußgängerzone liegt, hat sich die „Maxstraße“ dennoch ihre besondere Rolle im kulturellen Leben Augsburgs erhalten. Ob bei italienischen Spezialitäten im Damenhof der Fuggerhäuser oder an einem lauen Sommerabend in einem der unzähligen Straßencafés: die Maximilianstraße ist und bleibt das Eldorado der Genießer, Flaneure, Vergnügungssuchenden und Stadtliebhaber aus nah und fern.

Fact is, places are using the loophole of smoking clubs in Bavaria to stay smoking.

Pubs should renovate their toilets.
But as one of the publicans currently suing in Karlsruhe has said, he made investment and rennovations in his business but if the smoking ban stays as it is in B-W it will be wasted money as he will have to close. Right now, for smaller businesses there isn#t a huge ammount of perspective to make large capital investment.

As was of course, predicted.

Actually, I don't think that this is a fair representation of the situation (and should you be quoting huge chunks of Krout without placing in context for the wider readership?)

What to do?

Wiki you say?

I know, I'll go and log on and change it!

Do let us know when you have found a 'real' source

Hermann in legal dispute shocker

Now that doesn't happen very often round here does it?

Do report back and let us know if he was sucessful as opposed to just the usual tuetonic pissing games.

It's not a pissed off "Hermann" suing a neighbour becasue they mowed their lawn on a Sunday.

It's test case before the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe.
It will be a national news story when the result comes out.

Like its amazing how far you can go without good ground with legal insurance in Kroutland kind of news?

Just heard that the only pub in Gars am Inn (population 4000) is now a smoking club. Tough luck for all the non-smokers.

If you feel your constitutional rights have been infinged you can sue.
It's not a particuarly "krout" concept.

These publicans (it's a a test case organised by one of the liscense groups) are arguing that their rights to a level playing field, the right to carry out their trade and the right to self determination even if it is not healthy ("Recht au Rausch") are negated by smoking bans. I think it is too early to say, but they might well win.

Thanks for clearing that up. I didn't realise that the right to redress if your constitutional rights are infringed was more of a universal concept rather than a purely german one.

Although it appears now not to be an exclusively Krout concept, they do seem to embrace the concept with a lot of enthusiasm.


Thanks also for clarifying that your perceived accuracy of your predictions is based purely on heresay and gossip. The current title does ask you to stand up and be ridiculed. Thank you for playing.

If you look above, you will see my predictions have been proved right.

*) It would result in a slump in trade for pubs.
*) Pubs would heavily use the smoking club loophole to continue to allow smoking.
*) The number of pubs using this loophole would be of a high percentage.
*) Thie issue of noise and street disturbance would become an issue in inner city areas that combine a high level of population density and pubs.
*) The council would not massively expand controls over pubs with smoking.
*) There would be no movement at state level before the elections this Autumn to tighten or weaken the law.

You forgot the statement - 'pending supporting evidence'. Hope that helps

So two of your predictions were that a governmental body did nothing? How long did it take you to come up with these?

Edit: loving the idea of a load of 'Beamte' sleeping at their desks whilst they wait for their next 'long service' pay increase being used as argumental support. Comedy gold.

But they didn't do anything ... hence I must be right.

Ok MonksTown. That's exactly why I made this thread, so people couldn't pull that garbage. Your post claiming your success was longer than your actual 3 line prediction:

Besides the fact that it has a level of ambiguity that Nostradamus would admire, exactly what part of "the private club route will be frustrated" makes you read that you predicted:

I'll actually probably soon be posting a 6 month summary of hits/misses from this thread... something I've been meaning to get around to. Stay tuned!

I'd probably wouldn't use the term "frustrated" now as to the outcome of actions of pubs turning into smoking clubs.
They are more widespread now, 9 out of 10 venues or so round here.
Though becoming a smoking club brings problems with it, not least if you are after casual trade.

But generally, I think my predictions have come true.

You talking about your grubby local again?

No a range of bars int the area of Munich with the highest concentration of liscensed premises in Munich.

I don't JUST frequent skanky back street boozers full of dodgy geezers.

Well you've gone down in my estimations then

Although I still have a fond impression of you stomping about town in Deutsche Bahn uniform drag due to a misunderstanding over something Bell the Cat said.

Oh such a great idea! I love it!
Why dont they have it in Munich yet?

Monkstown your predictions: When did you make the stated predictions.
According to your post you said: To recap. Predictions that I made for the smoking ban were

In this thread I didn't find any?

If indeed bars might go out of business, my question is:
Wo did the natural rubber farmers sue, when synthetic rubber became availale? Tough luck.

There have been dozens if not hundreds of posts from me on the smoing ban, I'm not going to go and look for them.

Is the decline of small local pubs a price worth paying to have all venues non smoking?
If so, then fair enough, but it shouldn't be swept under the carpet. or hushed up that the law is effecting thos who DO want to smoke in pubs, quite possibly the majority of smlla pub patrons.

I predict, since my personal agenda does not include trawling such venues, that I will quite possibly be unmoved the plight of some small local pubs. Venues who feel that rather than being businesses they provide some sort of social service which should be given special protection from the laws of the land are of no concern to me.

If these establishments feel so strongly about there fate, I suggest that they do as everyone else does and go on strike. After all, most strikes here fly in the face of basic economics, so why should this sector act any differently.

Just want to point this out again...there are clubs/bars in the US that allow SMOKING.

So business evolution = legislation?

Bloody hope you aren't in either politics or business.

The legislation only reflects the evolution of social mores.

Smoking in someone's face is no longer any more socially acceptable than spitting on his shoe.

Hope you're not in any profession that requires logical analysis.

If that is your best take upon technology advance Vs social order then i would seriously examine your intellectual capabilities my friend.

or rhetorical prowess

See, if the evolution was complete, then there would be no need for a legislated ban, because bar owners would voluntarily institute a ban. Like any business owner, they merely do what will get them the most money. The fact that they so many are trying to circumvent the law shows where the demand currently lies.

If I owned a business, then even if spitting on people's shoes was legal in public places, I would probably still disallow it on my premises, as banning it would probably increase the number of customers I would have.

You don't seem to grasp the basic fact that bar owners would still have a choice as to allow smoking even if there was no legislation banning it. You're arguing like bar owners would be forced to allow smoking on their premises if it wasn't banned. That has never been the case.

Hope you're not in a profession that requires any sort of logical analysis either...

Sadly, society has to take responsibility for the pond life thou? Or the bleeding hearts get upset.

Don't be daft. All changes in social rules take time to filter down to the filthy hard core (filthy spitters in 1900; filthy smokers in 2000).

Wiping out spitting in public was never left to private persons to regulate, it was done through widespread public health ordinances, many of which are still in force.

The evolution of social attitudes on spitting in public is pretty complete now, and even if it wasn't in 1900, the rules against it were a good thing. Case closed.

Right - but if there were businesses where the owner allowed you could go and just spit on the floor on his private premises, then it would be allowed. If you, as a potential customer weren't happy with that policy, then you wouldn't go there, or enough people would stop going there to force the business owner to change his policies so he could make more money.

The reason that spitting on the floor isn't allowed in businesses is because it would reduce customers and income because most wouldn't like it. And that's why you can't spit on the floor of any business you visit - not because of any inherent legislation.

But, if a demand suddenly somehow developed for bars where you can spit, then it wouldn't take long before "spitting clubs" opened.

Nice try, but not even close...

Obviously a lot classier in Bayern than round our way. *hacks*

...And, I think that we're talking about banning smoking from bars, not public streets here. That's a completely different argument. We all have to walk down public streets, but we don't all have to frequent privately run businesses. I would be more in favour of banning smoking on streets than in bars. The council is responsible for the streets and if they were to implement a ban there, that would be up to them. Much like I think any ban in any premises should be decided by the owner or the tenant of that premises.

That applies to smoking as well as spitting...

Although I normally don't, I fancied a puff tonight so I bummed off a mate.
It was one of the VERY few non smoking bars in Munich 2 so we went outside.

Previously I would have put it out in an ashtray. but tonight I tossed the fag in the gutter.
Hardly the clean image Munich wants, oder?