LCBO report to be released today...

[Jan Primus]

[quote="GregClow"]...

sources say the Liberals are reticent about any measures that could potentially make it easier for teenagers to get their hands on alcohol.


What a effen joke!

[PRMason]

One point that dosen't get made is about warehousing and distribution. Even if the LCBO closed all their stores in favour of private retail, I seriously doubt that they would give up the role of sole importer and distributor at wholesale. The private stores would have to buy their stock from the LCBO distribution warehouse much the same way as licensees do now. This way they could keep the most lucrative part of the business and sell off major real estate assets (stores). It would be a win-win for them.
Speaking as one who is outside the GTA, I don't know if the full privatisation of liquor stores would be beneficial. Sure, in Toronto there would be some premium spirit and wine stores and even a couple of premium beer stores. But outside of that area, I doubt if there will be enough demand for this type of establishment. My job as a niche market ,craft beer supplier would be made incredibly difficult. Instead of only dealing with greedy, unprincipled bar-owners, I would have to try to out-bribe MOLBATT for shelf space at each individual private store. For those of you not familiar with the cut-throat, ugly side of beer, I recommend you spend a month on the road trying to get and/or maintain accounts with the limited resources available to craft brewers. It is very scary and quite depressing.
For all its faults, the LCBO is a meritocracy. If you get listed and can convince the store manager that it will sell- BOOM its on the shelf. If it doesn't sell enough, its gone. Most LCBO stores are pretty indulgent, in my experience and allow the product to find its market. Again, I can only speak for myself here, I really don't know the shite Esprit and others go through on the import side.

[inertiaboy]

One point that dosen't get made is about warehousing and distribution. Even if the LCBO closed all their stores in favour of private retail, I seriously doubt that they would give up the role of sole importer and distributor at wholesale. The private stores would have to buy their stock from the LCBO distribution warehouse much the same way as licensees do now.

This is discussed in the report as well. The recommendation is to split the retail and wholesale operations and auction off licenses for both parts. Ensuring that everyone gets reasonable access to the wholesale network is another question.

[A]

Well, considering the report recommended auctioning a limited number of licences per area, which they even admit would be snapped up by Walmart, Loblaws, and large gas stations, who cares? Do you really think we would see more selection from this?

Except, that if it was possible to get beer at Loblaws and Walmart we would have something previously unavailable, and that is competition. And I can't think of any competition that doesn't lead to a better enviornment for consumers (be it price, selection or convenience).

Price? Cant beat the LCBO price, period.
Convenience? Arguably so, but I dont find the current system 'inconvenient'.

The only thing missing is selection. You arent going to get it by forcing companies to compete for extravantly-priced licences, which they will then be forced to cutback all but the most profitable selection in order to make enough money to make the whole effort worthwhile and profitable.

[borderline_alcoholic]

One point that dosen't get made is about warehousing and distribution. Even if the LCBO closed all their stores in favour of private retail, I seriously doubt that they would give up the role of sole importer and distributor at wholesale.

Except that the report also advocates auctioning off wholesale licenses to the highest bidders as well.

One of their aims seems to have been to remove the government role in taking any kind of risk of investment in alcohol products which may or may not sell and just allow them to make largely guaranteed income off of the sales of licenses and whatever they choose to charge for lab fees etc.

[A]

Except, that if it was possible to get beer at Loblaws and Walmart we would have something previously unavailable, and that is competition. And I can't think of any competition that doesn't lead to a better enviornment for consumers (be it price, selection or convenience).

What it would open up is the possibility that some of these stores will employ people who both know about good beer and will have some ability to stock it. It really only takes one or two of them to start to create that niche we are looking for. That would be a positive first step.

Walmart pays people $7/hour to stock shelves. You think they are going to hire a 'beer specialist'?

[A]

For all its faults, the LCBO is a meritocracy. If you get listed and can convince the store manager that it will sell- BOOM its on the shelf. If it doesn't sell enough, its gone. Most LCBO stores are pretty indulgent, in my experience and allow the product to find its market. Again, I can only speak for myself here, I really don't know the shite Esprit and others go through on the import side.

I would tend to agree. THe problem is that the LCBO is a large business with large overhead. So, they need large profits. The kind of stuff we would like to see up here wont bring in large profits, period.

What is needed is the ability for small stores with small overhead to be able to sell the kinds of beers we want. Any proposal that does not allow for this possibility is not interesting, IMO. I'd prefer the current system we have now.

[Cass]

The only thing missing is selection. You arent going to get it by forcing companies to compete for extravantly-priced licences, which they will then be forced to cutback all but the most profitable selection in order to make enough money to make the whole effort worthwhile and profitable.

Interesting...when I read this the first thing that popped into my mind was the cab license situation in Toronto. From what I understand it's awful for everyone except those who have the precious licenses.

[A]

The only thing missing is selection. You arent going to get it by forcing companies to compete for extravantly-priced licences, which they will then be forced to cutback all but the most profitable selection in order to make enough money to make the whole effort worthwhile and profitable.

Interesting...when I read this the first thing that popped into my mind was the cab license situation in Toronto. From what I understand it's awful for everyone except those who have the precious licenses.

We must be spending too much time together, that was *precisely* the same example that popped into my head.

[Belgian]

five guiding principles for the beverage alcohol system review:

* Safeguarding socially responsible consumption, storage, distribution and sale of beverage alcohol
* Convenience, variety and competitive prices for consumers
* Maximizing value to taxpayers
* Ensuring responsible reuse and recycling practices
* Promoting Ontario's products.

(Sounds to me like we'd benefit from a change.)

I think everyone should email Sorbara and their MPP about why they outright rejected this: finance.communications@fin.gov.on.ca.

"It is our very strong view (I LOVE THAT PART!!) that the public interest of Ontarians is best served by the continued public ownership of the LCBO," said Sorbara.

(Sounds to me like we're being told VERY STRONGLY that we benefit from zero change.)

So Cass, the 'reason why' is THEY HAVE A VERY STRONG VIEW. That's so profound and thoughtful an explanation. Doncha get it?

[Rob Creighton]

As usual and always; WE NEED THE OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER SOMETHING DIFFERENT!

Sorry for yelling. Would I travel to the only decent beer store in Cambridge/Kitchener/Guelph and consider it an improvement if I was treated well and found some interesting products at a 'fair'?!? price?. Yeah, sure.

Hell, I travel to breweries to buy beer now. Do I give a damn if Zehr's or Zellars offers a 60 pounder of Smirnoff for $5.00 off and a 24 of Labatt twisted sister ale at $24.00 +dep? I have a couple of favourite liquor stores but would gladly accept a private version and probably find the operators to be equally competent (or hopefully better) and I believe F&M Brewery would gain volume.

Are slotting fees inevitable? Only if the big three have the opportunity to say so. I find new pub owners every day who are willing to resist the big league kick-backs and take a chance on craft beers. Why would the retail environment be any different? I find craft stores in every state I travel to - are we saying we as Canadians aren't interested enough to develop a similar market?

Time to enter the 20th century guys - yeah that's right!

[Josh Oakes]

Fun topic.

Here's what we've got in BC...a public/private system that is the worst of both worlds. The government has retained distribution rights more or less. There are very few products available at the private shops that aren't available at the government ones. And they are all more expensive, because the private shops have to buy from the government. There's more to it but the only winners are the government that doles out and restricts supply of licenses, and the publicans - yes publicans - that get them. Ontario's principle #1, which I view as pathetic gerrymandering to MADD and the prohibitionists, would point towards Ontario doing much the same...only allowing existing sellers of alcohol to sell alcohol under a private retail system.

Here's the kicker - even though there are products you can get at in the private system - Belgian imports, US micros - you can't. Not one store sells them. The selection in the private stores is abysmal. Not because people don't drink microbrew. But because the big players in the booze business own all the shelf space. Especially since the government decided to tie private retail to pubs, giving extra leverage to big booze who can play tap handles and bar promotions off of shelf space.

The only thing our system gives us is access to brewpub growlers and bottles, but The Granite has proven that Ontario brewpubs can sort that one out, too, if they want.

Sadly, I haven't heard a word about LCBO privatization that involves anything other big players and big bucks. If there is no opportunity for mom & pop, Oakes & Radek, or whoever else to open a little beer shop, then privatization of the LCBO would be a disaster for both Ontario micros and Ontario beer lovers.

So the question, what would the LCBO be selling? The physical land has value, perhaps more if the purchaser isn't tied to a liquor retailing operation and can use the land as they see fit. But in many cases, the business is worth far more than the land. LCBO stores aren't all located in downtown Toronto.

The LCBO also has a liquor retailing business that only has value if the supply of retailers remains limited. Create the free-for-all we'd like to see and the LCBO may as well keep their existing business because nobody would pay much money just to watch their market share evaporate for the next decade. Not enough money to make the government look good at election time anyway.

The best option, as I see it, isn't even on the table. Because the table is being set by big business and neoprohibitionist interest groups, not the groups that make up the Bartowel community.

[Rob Creighton]

the table is being set by big business and neoprohibitionist interest groups, not the groups that make up the Bartowel community.

Yup, I agree without question, but; it sure is fun to point out what a bunch of weenies fence riding liberals are.

[Josh Oakes]

Reading the Globe it just gets even more genius. OK, I agree that the plan was never going to benefit any of my beer loving friends in Ontario anyway, but let's look at this stuff:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... /National/

1) $1.5 billion /year of revenue generated. I'm going to presume by "revenue" they mean "net income" because gross doesn't mean squat. Most of that is taxes! Not revenue by any accepted accounting standard. So the government, according to the report, is hooked on taxes. Splendid. How does that change under a new retail regime? Well, I think if anything it goes up since more convenient access might increase sales. But we can call this one a scratch.

2) Sorbara: "The suggestion that there is at least $200-million of revenue is at best speculative." NO SHIT. Any report discussing the future will tend be speculative, by definition. Any forward-looking statements in the LCBO annual report are equally speculative - and if it were a public company would contain a disclaimer stating as much - and this is being cited as a reason to reject the deal? Wow.

3) Mega cold water on the breakup of the distribution system. So you'd have a dozen different chassis but the same damn engine in each of them. See my rant above regarding BC.

4) "Mr. Lacey said the panel spent more than $500,000 on the review. The fact that its finding will essentially be shelved prompted howls of protect from opposition members that the government has wasted taxpayers' money."

So because they spent money on it they must follow the recommendations for fear of ridicule? Are you sure this is how government should make their decisions? Who is this Mr. Lacey and how fast can he be fired?

5) "For generations, alcohol control has been a core function of government," Mr. Lacey says. "It must and will remain so.""

I'm stupid. Remind me why this is. Better yet, remind me how someone with the two most idiotic quotes of the month managed to get a high-paying government consulting gig. I was wrong to think education was the answer, apparently.

This whole thing sounds more like an April Fool's joke with each article I read.

[inertiaboy]

inertiaboy wrote:

Except, that if it was possible to get beer at Loblaws and Walmart we would have something previously unavailable, and that is competition. And I can't think of any competition that doesn't lead to a better enviornment for consumers (be it price, selection or convenience).

What it would open up is the possibility that some of these stores will employ people who both know about good beer and will have some ability to stock it. It really only takes one or two of them to start to create that niche we are looking for. That would be a positive first step.

Walmart pays people $7/hour to stock shelves. You think they are going to hire a 'beer specialist'?

Agreed, Walmart would never hire a beer specialist. But I can see someone in a Loblaws somewhere running a good beer section and carrying a wider selection, kind of like what is happening in Metro Joanette in Montreal. This wouldn't be a conscious decision by the Loblaws, rather a combination of an employee who wants to support the industry and of a knowledgeable clientele. It might not happen often, but there is the chance it could happen once or twice.