Why doesn't anyone else notice?

Post #163,059 by drewk 7/6/04 11:22:14 AM Reply	Why doesn't anyone else notice? I find it telling that attendance at bars goes up after smoking bans are passed. If this is in fact true, you don't need a ban. Simply point this fact out to bar owners and they'll go smoke-free voluntarily. === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #163,061 by ben_tilly 7/6/04 11:51:56 AM Reply	Because that doesn't work When one bar issues a smoke ban, all of the smokers go elsewhere and non-smokers don't show up because they don't realize that it is going to be smoke free. Besides if someone goes to bars to hang out with friends, the loss of the smokers is likely to make that person move. When all of the bars around go smoke free, smokers don't have elsewhere to go and non-smokers learn to expect no smoke. Smokers who went to bars before continue doing so. And non-smokers start showing up so attendance rises. This is one of those counter-intuitive social network effects where one member doing something gives the opposite effect from everyone doing that. Cheers, Ben To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act - [link\|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20\|Nebraska Supreme Court]
Post #163,079 by drewk 7/6/04 1:54:54 PM Reply	So who cares more? Besides if someone goes to bars to hang out with friends, the loss of the smokers is likely to make that person move. Why don't the smokers miss the company of their non-smoking friends? If non-smokers are more willing to go to smoking bars than smokers are to go to non-smoking bars, it sounds like people have already voted. Turn it around. What if everyplace was non-smoking and one bar started to allow it. Would smokers not go because their non-smoking friends wouldn't go? Who knows. And of course the whole "business goes up" argument assumes that better business is the only consideration. If I want to allow smoking in my home, I am (currently) free to allow that. If I own a bar I should have that same right. I should also have the right to not allow it. Personally I prefer no smoke But even Scott voted for smoke rather than give up a silly little game. === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #163,083 by deSitter 7/6/04 2:06:08 PM Reply	Re: So who cares more? The issue here is that, as with drunk driving and for the very same reason, the statistics are cooked and the real motive disguised behind flowery, touchy-feely, crotch-rot language. -drl
Post #163,147 by ben_tilly 7/6/04 6:55:30 PM Reply	Because a critical group is invisible People who would go to non-smoking bars but would not go to smoking ones. Given that bars are all smoking, they do not go to bars. Smokers who are part of the bar scene won't make friends of these people there because these people aren't there. Bartenders are unaware of these people since they aren't at the bar. They are an unknown audience that nobody knows how to estimate. However the increase in attendance after smoking bans are put in place suggests that this group of people should not be discounted. Cheers, Ben To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act - [link\|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20\|Nebraska Supreme Court]
Post #163,150 by a6l6e6x 7/6/04 7:24:16 PM Reply	Ah, that invisible opportunity cost. [link\|http://www.economist.com/research/Economics/alphabetic.cfm?LETTER=O&CFID=31583154&CFTOKEN=2c33db6-0733b200-1bf0-4951-aa0c-74633fc72a45#OPPORTUNITY%20COST\|Opportunity cost]. Alex "If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said." -- Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman
Post #163,156 by deSitter 7/6/04 8:24:31 PM Reply	Re: Because a critical group is invisible This isn't true - there are places that are known for having a "upscale" atmosphere and at these places you won't see excessive smoking - it being out of line with the narcissist ethos. You can smoke here but people do it outside or in the pool room or the like. -drl
Post #163,158 by admin 7/6/04 8:27:09 PM Reply	Really? Around here? Nope. All the bars smell like smoke pits. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #163,160 by deSitter 7/6/04 8:30:52 PM Reply	Re: Really? Like certain cigar bars in Clayton Missouri. -drl
Post #163,161 by admin 7/6/04 8:32:11 PM Reply	I don't live there. You're generalizing from specific instances. Without exception every bar I've been to has been a smoky mess. I'd go much more often if there weren't smoking in bars. And I tip well. ;-) Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #163,162 by deSitter 7/6/04 8:34:04 PM 7/6/04 8:34:28 PM Reply	Re: I don't live there. I was never outtipped by a Yankee :) -drl Edited by deSitter July 6, 2004, 08:34:28 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #163,170 by admin 7/6/04 9:09:37 PM Reply	High side of 20%... If they do a good job. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #163,172 by deSitter 7/6/04 9:12:05 PM Reply	$5 for two beers Sunday. -drl
Post #163,184 by jbrabeck 7/6/04 10:35:58 PM Reply	That won't buy one at ballgame.

Welcome to IWETHEY!