Numbers don\’t lie

Mintel said that over six in ten adults over the age of 18 visit a pub regularly to drink. This is down from seven in ten people in 2007. The group found that more people visit pubs to eat than to drink. Three in ten people think it has been much more pleasant going to pubs since the smoking ban.

But people do.

If it is really more pleasant to go to a pub since the smoking ban then more people would be doing this more pleasant thing, no?

14 thoughts on “Numbers don\’t lie”

  1. Those 3 in 10 do find it more pleasant. They just go twice a year for a couple of beers now instead of once a year.

    Meanwhile, the people who used to go out and meet their friends every week (and kept pubs alive) now operate rotas where they drink at each others homes.

  2. “If it is really more pleasant to go to a pub since the smoking ban then more people would be doing this more pleasant thing, no?”

    Not if there are more smoking social drinkers than non-smoking social drinkers.

    The article doesn’t report how many said the experience has become less pleasant.(If that was even an option)

    There is no direct connection between the respondents who said they go to a pub regularly and the respondents who said the experience had improved.

  3. Since 7 out of 10 think it is less pleasant should,nt something be done about it while we still have some pubs left?

  4. 7 out 0f 10 say that pubs are less pleasant which is probably due to the fact that since the ban most pubs have got rid of their ventilation systems.

  5. Actually there’s no logical inconsistency. You can say that pubs have become more pleasant, yet still go less often. It could be because (a) you have less disposable income to spend there, or because (b) other leisure options have improved even more than pubs.
    Having said that I agree entirely with Tim Almond.

  6. Well, seven in ten don’t think it’s more pleasant.

    You need to read more carefully. The report says “three in ten people think it has been much more pleasant…”. Probably “slightly more pleasant” was another option.

  7. ‘Probably “slightly more pleasant” was another option’. Slightly more pleasant was probably NOT another opion.
    I just love that word ‘probably’. It is often used in scientific stuidies.

  8. Nothing like a scientific opinion study………….Thats all tobacco controls evidence consists of questionaire studies of opinions and biased to the hilt to boot!

    With junk science as a foundation for laws just how long can they stand!

  9. “. . .The group found that more people visit pubs to eat than to drink. . .”

    So, obviously, pubs are doubly bad since people drink too much *and* eat “junk” food – increasing both binge drinking and obesity.

  10. When the ban came in, the smokers withdrew altogether. And that broke up those fraternities of old stagers who used to hang out every night in the public or the snug, in a haze of pipe tobacco, chatting and playing dominoes. The non-smokers among those regulars drifted away too, once they realised that their pals weren’t coming back.
    They weren’t big spenders, but they were consistently reliably there. Enough to keep the pub ticking over. And the passing trade in the lounge bar provided a helpful bonus.
    When they started providing smoke-free lounges, most folk found that reasonable and sensible. Everyone was catered for, and we mostly like to live and let live. But the ban has been disastrous. In my small town, three grand old pubs have closed, and the remainder are all struggling. And it’s not surprising. Because what do they have left, as a unique selling point, now that the comrades have been banished?

  11. ‘Research by the company found that more than twice as many people find it more enjoyable drinking in a pub than drinking at home.’ I bet they do, don’t we all. But pubs are businesses that rely on lots of customers spending pots of money. Whilst their demise (a dozen pubs a week are closing) is partly down to changing social mores and economic constraint, for many people (much like public services), pubs have become a nice-to-have they’d rather not pay for.

  12. There are other factors. The smoking ban coincided with some other sorts of institutional bullying that make pubs less pleasant places to go and much more expensive to run, namely the effects of the new Licensing Act, which near killed live music in pubs, made getting a licence hugely more costly, made it easier to lose, and charged the newly empowered local authority licensing departments with suppressing drinking in accord with various moralitarian flaps, among other things “for the sake of the children”. ( I’m not joking: read Licensing Act 2003, s4 )

    Hence bouncers and neurotic ID checks everywhere, and monstrosities such as Clubscan and the Met’s Form 696 .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *