The Bar Towel

SteelbackGuy wrote:
Well said Steve.

I've found that the bartowel, in general, has become a hub of complaints. Whiners gather in hordes to complain over and over about the same thing, most never happy no matter what chages may come about.

I guess some of these old dogs can't leaqrn new tricks.

Spoken like an employee of a state monopoly. If you don't love the LCBO you are a whiner. Thanks for your opinion.

Philip1 wrote:

SteelbackGuy wrote:
Well said Steve.

I've found that the bartowel, in general, has become a hub of complaints. Whiners gather in hordes to complain over and over about the same thing, most never happy no matter what chages may come about.

I guess some of these old dogs can't leaqrn new tricks.

Spoken like an employee of a state monopoly. If you don't love the LCBO you are a whiner. Thanks for your opinion.

You're welcome.
I'm no whiner. Just saying is all. These conversations saturate the bartowel each and every week, and it is beginning to get cumbersome and boring, and we seem to be moving away from being a group of people who love beer, and want to be discussing it, to a group of people who just constantly complain and moan. Thanks for your opinion. Thank you for saying thanks.

SteelbackGuy wrote:These conversations saturate the bartowel each and every week, and it is beginning to get cumbersome and boring, and we seem to be moving away from being a group of people who love beer, and want to be discussing it, to a group of people who just constantly complain and moan.

When threads are started that cover the "system" or its decisions and policies (like this one) generally the conversation turns to the way it does.

However, I see many, many threads across the board that focus on the new pubs, exciting events and great breweries we have here. I hope that continues.

The only guy on these boards that benefits from the existence of the LCBO calls legitimate complaints about the system "whining". Who'd a thunk it?

"most never happy no matter what changes may come about."

That's because the system is so far behind the times that the tiny, hollow changes they make do nothing to rectify the problems that exist.

DragonOfBlood wrote:The only guy on these boards that benefits from the existence of the LCBO calls legitimate complaints about the system "whining".

Uhm actually DOB the entire province benefits (after a fashion...) which is what Mr. Layton in the article was referencing and was alluded to by Mr. Beaumont in his post above. Whether or not you think that the cost to the consumer in the from of price, selection etc. is worth it is another question, and is not nearly as simple as people seem to think.

As for the opinion of ONE of the guys on the board who more directly benefits as an employee (and has been very open about that), I think SBG has made it pretty clear in other posts that his opinion would likely be the same regardless of where he worked. Just like all those folks who are blathering on about how the LCBO should be abolished, for ideological reasons regardless of where they work.

If you look at the comments on the article a good percentage of them are from Alberta and BC residents claiming that the private system is worse... The grass is always greener eh?

Careful Jer, Dragon is still a little on edge after MJ's passing...he's lashing out.

Good thread and article, whining or not.

JerCraigs wrote:As for the opinion of ONE of the guys on the board who more directly benefits as an employee (and has been very open about that), I think SBG has made it pretty clear in other posts that his opinion would likely be the same regardless of where he worked. Just like all those folks who are blathering on about how the LCBO should be abolished, for ideological reasons regardless of where they work.

If you look at the comments on the article a good percentage of them are from Alberta and BC residents claiming that the private system is worse... The grass is always greener eh?

That's right. I don't think the LCBO should necessarily be 'abolished', perhaps it could still exist as a controller of any new private store retail conducted in Ontario. The Bureau itself is not a chain of stores, it is a control body. Additional private stores could be licensed by the LCBO just as LLBO restaurants are now licensed, and the LC could still enforce an extremely high standard of 'social responsibility' to customers. All without the need to rely solely on provincial stores or rule product selection with an iron hand.

This means you could shop at a Loblaws beer section, and at the checkout the cashier would simply ID you if you appear to be under 40 years of age. Implement stiff legislation for licensees to do this - and use electronic ID confirmation (that technology is getting better., why not use it?)

Allowing the responsible retail of alcohol anywhere, just like cigarettes, would enable the Province to collect more diverse alcohol revenue with less overhead. And it would reduce travel, allowing consumers the option to drive their cars to fewer locations, thus reducing their personal carbon footprint. It's ecologically absurd many of us have to drive to three or more separate locations just for food, alcohol, and deposit returns. Enabling chain supermarkets to sell alcohol and (quite logically) handle return bottles would make a huge impact for many households...... Smaller specialty stores could be run just as accountably as the supermarket chain example, and could double as specialty food stores catering to the fine-food demographic, again reducing travel time, stress & auto pollution.

This doesn't seem whiny or pie-in-the-sky to me, it appears to be the best of what we've got and what we would like to have.

It's not like we have to reinvent the wheel. I'm just back from Vancouver and they've incorporated private stores pretty seamlessly. When I wanted barbeque beer I ran over to the BC Liquor store and grabbed some cheap(er) GI or whatever. When I wanted something more special I went to Brewery Creek and grabbed a box full of their offerings. Like Steve, I'm much less concerned about the price than the selection.

Belgian wrote:That's right. I don't think the LCBO should necessarily be 'abolished', perhaps it could still exist as a controller of any new private store retail conducted in Ontario. The Bureau itself is not a chain of stores, it is a control body. Additional private stores could be licensed by the LCBO just as LLBO restaurants are now licensed, and the LC could still enforce an extremely high standard of 'social responsibility' to customers. All without the need to rely solely on provincial stores or rule product selection with an iron hand.

This means you could shop at a Loblaws beer section, and at the checkout the cashier would simply ID you if you appear to be under 40 years of age. Implement stiff legislation for licensees to do this - and use electronic ID confirmation (that technology is getting better., why not use it?)

Allowing the responsible retail of alcohol anywhere, just like cigarettes, would enable the Province to collect more diverse alcohol revenue with less overhead. And it would reduce travel, allowing consumers the option to drive their cars to fewer locations, thus reducing their personal carbon footprint. It's ecologically absurd many of us have to drive to three or more separate locations just for food, alcohol, and deposit returns. Enabling chain supermarkets to sell alcohol and (quite logically) handle return bottles would make a huge impact for many households...... Smaller specialty stores could be run just as accountably as the supermarket chain example, and could double as specialty food stores catering to the fine-food demographic, again reducing travel time, stress & auto pollution.

This doesn't seem whiny or pie-in-the-sky to me, it appears to be the best of what we've got and what we would like to have.

I don't think anyone is going to want to handle bottle returns, and the beer store probably wouldn't want to handle returns from everyone else either.

I think they'd have to setup return depots, just as BC has done (they have deposits on non-alcohol drink containers as well). It's a serious PITA (compared to bi-weekly pickup, when they're not on strike), but it does make people recycle.

I'm really not keen on every grocery store, gas station & convenience store selling Coors Light, Bud, Canadian & Blue. I think that could actually hurt the local craft brewers.

It would be great if we had boutique stores... but even just allowing brewers to have additional outlets, or perhaps even OCB stores would be a step in the right direction.

If they really want to nurture the local brewers though, they can't constrain them to the LCBO distribution system. It's too costly.

Derek wrote:I don't think anyone is going to want to handle bottle returns, and the beer store probably wouldn't want to handle returns from everyone else either.

I think anything that eliminates individuals making extra trips is part of a good plan.

I would donate my bottles for bi-weekly home pickup to a bottle depot, if anybody with a truck wanted the cash income. 20 bucks deposit a year, 200 houses on my street alone... potentially 4 K a year the 25 trips.

Bytowner wrote:Like Steve, I'm much less concerned about the price than the selection.

Sure! And stores like Wegmans and Whole Foods in NY do have surprising selection. They are not providing Southern Tier Chocolat & Chouffe Houblon as a charity to beer geeks, they are competing for the business of people who want to buy premium products - be they ultra-premium beers or ultra-premium cheese. You can even skip Premier and have a very respectable haul from your grocery trip to Wegmans, keeping the first option in your back pocket.

Derek wrote: I don't think anyone is going to want to handle bottle returns, and the beer store probably wouldn't want to handle returns from everyone else either.

I think they'd have to setup return depots, just as BC has done (they have deposits on non-alcohol drink containers as well). It's a serious PITA (compared to bi-weekly pickup, when they're not on strike), but it
does make people recycle.

When I used live in BC I actually prefered the deposit system. I mean it promoted recycling way better than Blue Boxes do. Plus if recycling trucks don't have to pick up all that glass it has to save them on fuel costs which keeps taxes down. Plus picking up bottles and cans gives the homeless a source of income.

Derek wrote: I'm really not keen on every grocery store, gas station & convenience store selling Coors Light, Bud, Canadian & Blue. I think that could actually hurt the local craft brewers.

I live in Ottawa, and I was in Quebec last weekend and even the little small town grocery stores we stopped in had a pretty decent selection of Quebec Micros. Even when I drive down to Ogdenburg NY the grocery stores there usually have a pretty decent selection of various local stuff, so it is not like those products would disappear in that type of situation, they would just have more options. Like Belgian says if people want it they will stock it. Sure you won't find the giant stacks of any of these products like you will with Blue, but if there is a market for it people will fill it.

Comment from a reader:

Bob1249 wrote:Posted 2009/06/30at 8:24 AM ET
McGuinty himself paid $600,000 for a study on the feasibility of the LCBO that recommended getting rid of it. lower prices, better more responsive selection, more local wines sold, same taxes, lower cost distribution .....
need we say more??

Anything that frees up more money for social benefits like health care!

Steve Beaumont wrote: I personally have no problem paying a little more for beer and wine and spirits -- the subject that seems to be at the root of many of the comments made thus far -- because it helps our society as a whole.

I do mind paying higher prices. How about a high price store for you, and a lower one for me?
I also despise our taxes wasted on programs that do not help our society, but turn our people in government addicted drones. The way I spend (and save!) my money helps society more than any government program.

Belgian wrote: Anything that frees up more money for social benefits like health care!

Privatize health care then.

JerCraigs wrote:Just like all those folks who are blathering on about how the LCBO should be abolished, for ideological reasons regardless of where they work.

As though the LCBO isn't here for ideological reasons, and as though the LCBO works.

JerCraigs wrote:
Uhm actually DOB the entire province benefits (after a fashion...) which is what Mr. Layton in the article was referencing and was alluded to by Mr. Beaumont in his post above. Whether or not you think that the cost to the consumer in the from of price, selection etc. is worth it is another question, and is not nearly as simple as people seem to think.

Yes, the tax revenue is beneficial. However is the LCBO retail arm didn't exist it would dramatically increase the amount of profit garnered from the sale of alcohol, and it's not as though private retailers would be exempt from having their alcohol taxed, and then the sales taxed again as part of income taxes, etc. My problem isn't with the existence of the LCBO, it is with its retail arm only. The retail aspect of the LCBO is inefficient and reduces the overall amount of profit that could be fed into our social services

JerCraigs wrote:
If you look at the comments on the article a good percentage of them are from Alberta and BC residents claiming that the private system is worse... The grass is always greener eh?

The biggest problem with enabling private retail is the private retailer would still have to deal with the LCBO's distribution systems, which completely kills the incentive to have private retail. If the private retailer isn't free to negotiate his own contracts with brewers outside the system, then there is no point. As far as I know there are federal laws that exist that say even if a province has private retail, the provincial liquor boards must still act as the importer of product. This would obviously create a large number of poor retail environments, because stores would just be like the provincial stores but with less selection.

tupalev: For the record I own zero MJ albums, have none of his songs on my comp and am not a fan of his style of music, but hey, if that comment made you feel good inside congratulations. Cheers.