Forum Closed
The forum is now to new posts. All the historical content is still available to browse.
if you are looking for musicians to play with, please view the Bands Seeking Musicians list, or use the Musicians Directory
You can use our pages on social media to connect:
Minimum Drink Prices in Vic
| Message Board > General Chitchat > Minimum Drink Prices in Vic |
| Ian User Info... | Fucking lame: http://www.canada.com/victoria/story.html?id=40e5b7f1-85cb-47d8-9009-e1abbb638257 Granted there's not always many decent places in town to get a drink for less than 3 bucks but still, it's just another way the higher-ups in Victoria are trying to gear this city for the geriatric set. I've also heard they're trying to force the 99 cent pizza joints to close early. - Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:22pm | ||
| The One After Two User Info... |  Like you said ,not many bars in town serve a drink for less than $3 anyways. What pisses me off is that the bars are all for it. Strat was complaining how they are "forced" to have cheap drinks on Thursday or its a ghost town. WTF? its called compitition. Compete on price or service or go out of business...this isn't CUBA! Now if I truely believed this would create a safer downtown enviroment, transit service was increased and our life got better than I could get behind it, but the fact is... and Ian nailed it, Victoria wants a certain town and they will get it, and if the Strat is "forced" to take more of our money to do it.... good for them. It'll pass, Evolution will go under and I will drink in Esquimalt or Langford. I see BC is open for business, but sadly Victoria is not. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:42am | ||
| DOOMHAMMER User Info... | Need fucking cheap beer. I NEED IT fuck. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 1:19am | ||
| Nik Olaz User Info... | when i can get two beer for 8 bucks in all at a bar, i'd rather walk to the liquor store, buy me an old english 800, sit in my basement, drink it and listen to bolt thrower with some good friends. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 1:39am | ||
| Lucky Bar User Info... | I for one am for this proposed bylaw. Bars that have live music can not compete with clubs that have these super cheap drinks. All those bars can subsidize their drink prices through the cover charge. With Lucky, Logan's, and Steamers most of the cover goes to the bands. We can't offer those same prices unless we charged $10 to see a local band. There is a real misconception out there about the money that bars make. The overhead is huge if you want to put out a quality product. I appreciate that everyone wants to be able to drink affordably but trust me that at 4-5 dollars a beer you are not being gouged. Someone told me a joke once. "Do you know how to make a million dollars in the bar business?" "Start with two." Truer than you know. Ben. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 2:36am | ||
| Bobby User Info... | From what I hear and have experienced, Evo is one of the safer clubs in town...it also has very popular cheap drink nights...This looks like another way for the govt to legitimize squeezing a few extra dollars out of those who can least afford it. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:43am | ||
| Mi*coll* User Info... | Yeah- this is a big fucking surprise-- the Bar owners and managers support a minimum price-- an initiative that will boost their profit!!! BULLSHIT. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:59am | ||
| Død[]Sanger User Info... | Well the bar owners are all going to have a rude awakening when people come out to drink 1/8th as often as they used to as now getting the group togeather and drinking in a house will be the only option cashwise for alot of people who at present are massing at places like evo because at 1 - 2 bux a drink, they can barely scrape up enough dough for a buzz, change that to minimum of 3 bucks and what does the last 10.00 to their name buy them at the bar? 3 sleeves of the worst swill avalible??? This bylaw is a pile of shit, it's only use is to fuck the youngins yet again, and to drive the price of all drinks through the roof, because think about it, if a swill glass of some piss puke like AGD is going to run at 3 bucks, then what the fuck is a heiniken going to cost??? It worked for nanaimo because all they have there is piddly ass small bars fighting for a cheap piss crowd, take that here and I don't need to explain why it's going to lead to a protest. And above it all, minimum price law??? Isin't Canada a free country??? This is some yank-ass dubya style bullshit if ive ever seen it. PS.After this bylaw, for alot of people in the industry making minimum wage or close to it: "Tipping" really will be confused with a city in China... basically, bar owners get rich yet again, and the workers all get fucked along with the masses as well. What's next? A minimum of a one carton purchase on cigarettes? 20.00 minimum on drive through orders??? This is bullshit. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:45am | ||
| Metropol Steve User Info... | I agree with Ben. Minimum drink prices are a good idea. Q: How many of you out there are in decent local bands that are struggling because you can get people to come out to a three-band show for $5 cover? Wanna know where everybody is? A: They're at the bar that has the cheapest liquor possible (beacuse the $5 cover they charge pays for their $50 DJ and subsidizes their drink prices). What is the point of getting loaded for $10 at a bar and having nothing to look at but the wall? Wake up! The music community should be behind this. It will put all the bars on a level playing field. Then their level of success will actually depend on the quality of the entertainment they provide (for example, your band.) - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:17pm | ||
| Japanese Air Force User Info... | I wonder what this will do to affect the bands playing in said bars. If we've been playing for $5 per person covers and getting some of that as our take home pay, are the bars going to be lowering cover charges now and supplementing the band's lost income with bar sales? How does it work in Vancouver? I've played shows there where the cover is $10 or more and people are fine with paying that. Do they have regulated drink prices too? Or is it just that people in Vancouver don't mind paying to see good music instead of whining about a $6 cover? ~JAF - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:19pm | ||
| Død[]Sanger User Info... | Metropol steve: Like all the clubs even charge cover right off the bat, evo will stamp you before 10 and let you back in at 1 after drinking elsewhere, saying that everywhere that serves cheap drinks is using cover to subsidize that is not true man. Those who are broke beat cover, I assure you of that. Go to any club that opens before cover starts and watch how meny suddenly pour in to beat the cover clock. JAF - I think that in vancouver, the scene is disillusioned compared to victoria to put it simply... Those in Van realize their venues have to pay at least double the rent and fees compared to a vic bar, they also realize that bars taking the chance on that need to stay open to continue the shows, and of course the bands need a little as well.. $6 for a smalltown vic show - 9 bux for a van one, consider the extra 3 property tax IMO... - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:36pm | ||
| Lucky Bar User Info... | This message board is called LIVE Victoria, so I will assume that people here have some interest in live music in Victoria. Remember Harpos? Remember Soundgarden? Remember The Limit? Remember The Icehouse? Where are all these bars now? If clubs made mountains of money like you think, these places would still be here. People don't close profitable businesses. The fact is that bars are very expensive to operate. Live music is more expensive than dance clubs to operate. It is cheaper to drink now in Victoria than it was 10 years ago at most bars. Every other cost involved with operating a club has gone up. To put on a live production I have to charge a cover charge and a reasonable price for the drinks I serve. Last night there was $4 premium draft, $4.25 bottles of Canadian, $3.75 cocktail special and a $3.50 shot. This bylaw will simply set a standard for bars in this city to follow and hopefully encourage reasonable consumption and behaviour. Dods- If you think rent, licences, taxes, alcohol and staff are cheaper in Victoria than in Vancouver you are mistaken. You worked at Logan's. Ask them if they are getting rich bringing live shows to Victoria and then thank them for continuing to do it. Ben. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 1:22pm | ||
| I|I User Info... | Dod[]Sanger: *Isin't Canada a free country??? This is some yank-ass dubya style bullshit if ive ever seen it.* When something goes wrong, blame the yanks! Give me a fucking break! - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 2:19pm | ||
| Kickback User Info... | I'm all for giving this a try. Everytime we play Victoria we always meet 2 or 3 guys from nightclubs stamping hands and telling us about the super cheap drinks there (yes i admit it is good advertising), we also usually meet a person coming from these clubs that are over liqoured up and looking for an excuse to start shit. Granted this bylaw is going to suck for people reliant on the cheap drinks at nightclubs, but from my personal view it'll only benifit the watering holes that i go to and play at. You wont see me bitching when a few more people turn up to rock out. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 2:24pm | ||
| Haden User Info... | I wouldn't think there was enough of a cross over crowd that setting a minimum price would make a difference. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 4:16pm | ||
| Gman User Info... | If you want people to go to live music shows, act like live music is something exciting. In many, many places with live music, drinks are WAY more expensive than at other bars. This is taken for granted and is seen as a way to support local music and bars and promoters who support local music. (Well, and bands in general.) Lots of people still go to see shows. And, if your audience is only going to see you because of the cheap drinks, you're in big trouble. G - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 4:17pm | ||
| BBJones User Info... | Putting in a bylaw to remove a competitive advantage is bullshit. If they think having a minimum charge will prevent people from getting shitfaced and causing trouble they are sadly mistaken. Make the shitty clubs responsible for hearding up their drunken patrons on the street. And if you support the non-live clubs, then you have absolutely no say when live clubs have to shut down or turn to house music. And don't even try to whine when your band ends up having nowhere to play. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 4:38pm | ||
| Brandon User Info... | Does the bylaw say anything about the number of ounces in a drink? Evolution has $5 triples on sundays, that made me think of something. Deep has $0.75 gin on thursdays now thats cheap. So Deep instead of charging $0.75 could just make it $3 for a triple and beat the bylaw. Now granted i havent read the documentation on this issue, so I dont even know if thats a loop hole or not but it seems to me that clubs will make the price for doubles and triples just a hair over the $3 enforced charge. I like to go to these cheap clubs and get pissed before i go anywhere else, Then i can afford to have a few at $4-$5 somewhere else. I dont think the $3 charge is going to change the amount of pissed faced assholes because there'll be more and more people pre-bar drinking. It's those pre-bar drinking nights that always get me into trouble. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 4:49pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Ben is right; Victoria is probably the most expensive town in Canada in which to run a nightclub and it's even harder to entice bands to play here with the ferry trip and all. Yet the cover charges here are ludicrously low and yet people still whine about them. I just played in the hotbed of Fernie; we were the only band and played two sets. The cover was $15 and nobody uttered a peep, in fact they all wanted us back ASAP. Nowhere on our little tour was the cover less than $8 and most people thought it was cheap. As for the super cheap drink specials, well, ask any cop what they think of them. They routinely lead to over- pissed fuckwads causing endless trouble, so much so that cities all over Canada have outlawed drink specials and "happy hour" specials almost everywhere. People seem to feel the need to drink like Guatemalan cops whenever they run into a special and the result is almost always a hassle for the bars, the other patrons and the cops. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 5:14pm | ||
| Fred the Dragon User Info... | I believe that most major cities in Canada have some sort of minimum drink requirements (save the Maritimes... surprise). I might be wrong on that though. I think the most important thing to remember is that clubs that most of us frequent (ie the live music venues... Lucky, Steamers, Logan's) have never had the $.75 gin specials, so it's going to change essentially nothing for most people on this board. Go over to ravevictoria.com... I bet people there are freakin' out. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 6:10pm | ||
| The One After Two User Info... | Lucky Bar, I am sorry that life is so hard as a bar owner. At your club you don't have any or many drinks below $3 anyways. Well aside from the Nudi-Free Beer special...but that is special. I go to your bar for the live music. I would expect that you and the other progessive bars went to bat for us, the drinkers who support your bars. Life is hard for the corner store, does Walmart have to raise their price? Life is hard for the consumer. I would support bar liquor licences being raised and you guys can trickle that down however you like, but I bet that propsal would be less popular with the bar owners. Lucky Bar is my favorite in town and you guys don't compete with .75 cent Gin and bring great bands to town so I think I will come down for a pint :) ***As for Van, some of the cheapest bars in town to drink at are the live rockers. Cobalt began life with a $2 buck bottles, very rad. The Brickyard had/has $1.75 pints. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 9:15pm | ||
| Fred the Dragon User Info... | Oh fuck off man... you can't compare the Cobalt with Lucky Bar. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 9:58pm | ||
| sati User Info... | I'd just like to reiterate what Gman said.. if you want people to support live music, WE've got to start acting like its worth something. That means every musician and every real music fan needs to start treating it with more regard, showing everyone else that its NOT just casual entertainment or "only" a hobby. Stand up for yourselves! This is some pretty serious shit we've got going on, damnit! I think this is a big problem in Canada. People don't give culture (thats what it is!) more respect. Thats why we're losing funding etc. We let people look down on artists and treat us like irrelevant dirt. Don't let them con ya - we're a very essential part of society who deserve to be treated as such! Just my 2 cents.. anyways, I should check in here more often.. toodaloo.. - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:18pm | ||
| Mi*coll* User Info... | this debate actually reminds me a lot of the debate between the NHL owners and players. in both instances, the owners are screwed because of high levels of competition (too many bars or too many franchises). maybe the case is that the market on its own won't support this number? now, in both cases, they want regulations to "level the playing field". but that goes against all macro-economic theory! that being said- as a musician, i enjoy that there are clubs in town. perhaps, as the bar owners argue, we as musicians should get behind this. of course, those of us who are alcoholics shouldn't... - Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:07pm | ||
| Drunky McDrink User Info... | i don't think its gonna change much in terms of myself getting pissed when i go out(tho i guess i certainly can't speak for everyone)... so what if i have to actually finish off that 26 i bought to drink on before the bar and not have any left for later. I go to night clubs and live music bars on a regular basis(hugo's, steamers, lucky, logans, red jacket etc..)and pay regular prices for a good beer (ie 4$) so really if they start charging 3$ for a decent beer i won't be complaining. either way we will always find a way to get sloshed - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:02pm | ||
| Dr.DoomXXX User Info... | Lucky Bar, I have to say you're not making a shit load of sense. You say that you can't offer those same drink prices unless you charge $10, so go ahead snd do it then. I can't remember ever paying less than $7 cover to get into a show unless it some fernwoood all ager. Look at Logans, they had a show like a weak ago and as usual the cheapest drink available was $3.50 and a bunch of people got so drunk that they aparently went and fucked the place up damaging the bathroom doors. It's because prices like that force people into preliminarie drinking. No one wants to go to a bar, spend $20 and go home sober. One guy got so tanked he passed out on the table, 3 hours before the show even started I saw him and a bunch of other people who were there that night drinking old stock out side of my work. Trying to say that cheap beer is what put the Limit and Icehouse and Soundgarden out of buisiness is absurd, they all charged at LEAST $3 for their beer. Look at Namaste, the last thing they did before they went out of buisiness was raise their beer prices. It's natural selection and if a bar can't cope with the fact that no one wants to pay $4 for a fucking sleeve than they don't deserve to be in buisiness. FUCK 'EM! This all started when pigs started bitching about people being drunk after bar hours and now the government is trying to fuck over students and people who work fear minimum wage AND force single pizza slice places and the pita pit into early closing hours rather than stand up to police who don't feel like working for a living.It's so fucking typical for these shit eating politicians to scapegoat and fuck around with places that they have no interest in just to cator to brainless Idiots. people are getting sick of it and I wouldn't be suprised if people who are just turning 19 decide to take up drugs instead rather than try and acumulate $35 or $40 just to catch a decent buzz. Every time I walk through town there's always a junkie trying to sell me " Uptown........Downtown" just 'cause all all our cities efforts are diverted to atacking pot and alchohol ( AND BEER IS LEGAL FOR FUCKING SAKES!!!) ...........fuck it, maybe I should just move to Ireland or Scottland where the old folks like to drink to and don't pull such retarded non-canadian idiocy. - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 2:41pm | ||
| lonemonk User Info... | The idea of a .75 or $1.00 drink disgusts the shit out of me. You will always get exactly what you pay for, never more. For me, it isn't about the price of one drink or how drunk one can get for the least money, doesn't anyone *enjoy* drinking good booze these days? The price is fixed when the Fed. Government takes its cut, go blame them instead. - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 4:28pm | ||
| princess p User Info... | Three bucks is not to much to pay for a drink. Maybe this will mean less twinkies puking all over the bathrooms and cloging the toilets. Less retarded men fighting eachother for the chick with the least puke on her. Just as long as the price of good beer doesn't go up it dosen't bother me a bit ;) - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 5:59pm | ||
| The One After Two User Info... | its not about price. I would be ok paying tax, but not a forced price. It is wrong. - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 7:01pm | ||
| Lucky Bar User Info... | Mr.Doom- You have missed the point of what I was trying to say. These clubs that sell the cheap booze are making next to nothing off of it. At $1 a drink they are actually losing money. The only way they can do it is do subsidize it by having a cover charge at the door. Their entertainment costs are minimal(DJ). At a live venue most of the door money goes to the band, promoter or costs of putting the show on. Say I charged $10 for local bands on a weeknight and told the bands I was going to keep half of it. No one would come, the bands would be unhappy and I would be an asshole. It is not cheap drinks that helped to put those places out of business. It is having to compete with other places that sell cheap drinks that contributed to it. If you don't give a shit about live music in Victoria that shouldn't concern you. But if you do then please see that this bylaw will help. I would like people to decide where they will go out based on the quality of the product offered rather than the cheapest drink available. And so you know, on a $4 sleeve of decent draft, at least half of that money goes to taxes and product cost. Then there is rent, staff, licenses and all sorts of other bills to come out of the remaining money. Thats why the prices are where they are. No one is being greedy, they are trying to survive as a viable business. Ben. - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 7:47pm | ||
| jay brown User Info... | Minimum drink prices are one of the best things to happen to the clubs in this city in a long time, and I'll tell you why. From a promoter or a bands point of view, I cannot count how many times there has been crappy turn outs at shows because some shitty fucking bar down the street has had dollar drinks on and of course everyone goes where the cheapest booze is no matter how much the bar sucks ass. Some bars will not do dollar drinks for the simple reason that you do not make any money charging a dollar a drink so you might as well not sell it in the first place. Those are usually the live music venues, or the venues that bring in good quality d.j.s because most of the bottom feeders that do dollar drinks will not bother paying a band or a d.j.to be there cause they already have a guaranteed crowd. Now if everyone has a minimum drink price of three bucks what will be the incentive to go down the block to the crappy bar if you can stay in the good bar and watch some good bands or just listen to some good music in a cool enviroment for exactly the same price. The only thing minimum pricing will do is put the lame bars out of business, because nobody will bother going if they cant get drunk for twenty bucks.the good bars will get more business, the people that bitch about not getting drinks for a buck will stay home and then we wont have to deal with them and everyone will be happy. All minimum pricing does is create a level playing field, then people get to choose where to go based solely on which room has better things going on and not which room has drinks or the cheapest. - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 7:58pm | ||
| Lucky Bar User Info... | While we are talking about cheap drinks I would like to invite everyone downto a new night we are doing at Lucky Bar on Thursdays called Hang the DJ. Music from The Smiths and David Bowie to Queens of the Stone Age and Interpol played by you guessed it, a DJ. It is pretty cool and the drinks are(for Lucky) pretty cheap. Rainier $3 sleeves and $9 Jugs. Premium draft $3.75 sleeves and $12 jugs. Hi-balls $3. Tell the doorman that you were invited on Live Victoria and we will waive the $5 cover. Please don't get me wrong here. I love my job and I love putting on shows in this city. I just want to make sure that I can do so for a long time. Thank you for your support. Ben. - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 8:15pm | ||
| Lucky Bar User Info... | (This is from Liam, the other Lucky guy.) Waitaminnit... nobody actually said that cheap drink prices put The Limit, Icehouse, etc out of business, just that the fact that most of the live venues in town have gone out of business or changed formats can be attributed partially to the simple truth that they are less profitable. And we really didn't mean to come off as giving you a sob story. Yes it is true that running a venue is hard work. Yes it's much much harder and less profitable to run a Live venue. No we are not sobbing. Why not? Because it's fucking worth it. It's worth it to bring good music to people, to offer a stage to local and international bands, and to give people something they can't get at cookie-cutter nightclubs. As for natural selection, think about what is being said here... regardless of your political views on government or police control of beer prices, the practical result of the natural selection scenario as described is the demise of venues that try to offer something more than an appeal to the lowest common denominator - IE: you will be left with your choice of Top 40 dance bars with cheap (crap) drinks, and hopefully you can dowload some footage of cool live shows from the internet... since they won't be happening anywhere around here. Luckily, that scenario is unrealistic because there are usually enough people who chose quality venues and higher caliber entertainment over the cheapest way to get a buzz. And yes, maybe people will drink more at home if they have no cheap-ass bar to go to, but at least they'll come down to see some good shows once their buzz is on, rather than rot to Britney and Usher. The one thing that nobody has brought up in this debate is why the club owners are not fighting the bylaw. Is it because they will make more money? Maybe, but with all the math in the earlier posts it's easy to see that the difference is not that significant. (Plus, the bylaw comes hand-in-hand with a major tax hike for bars.) There is a simpler reason: nobody (well, almost nobody) in town actually WANTS to charge pocket change for a drink. Price wars are a vicious trap that once started, you (as a venue) cannot get out of. You HAVE to keep your prices at a minimum just to stay in the loop. Once you start, you can't stop without kissing your clientele goodbye. And that destroys your motivation to try to produce a better product for people. If nobody seems to care about anything but your drink prices, it's hard to really care about what you are offering them in terms of product ($.75 drinks kinda taste like, well, $.75 drinks), service, atmosphere, and entertainment. Most bar owners would rather compete through providing something better for their clientele. Really. And just so you know, this initiative was not started by City Hall. This is the fourth city I have lived and worked in that has introduced this sort of bylaw. In every case, it was in reaction to an agreement between the majority of the bars and the police who all believed that retarded prices for drinks leads to nothing more than further retardation. And in the end this really is a practical matter. Dirt-cheap drinks lead to problems for the venues, for the public, for the community, and for the police (who, regardless of your view of them, do take care of some shit for you from time to time). If we can rectify those problems through a bylaw that most involved are OK with, then why not? It's a bit absurd to say or think that a congenial agreement to standardize minimum drink prices will lead to an Orwellian society. OK. That's done. I am going to hit some 75 cent bars while I still can. -Liam. - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 8:34pm | ||
| Dr.DoomXXX User Info... | Rather than have this decision made for the city (or province ) it should be put to vote. (Not to mention the retardation of having all the liquor stores have to close at 11. We're not all 90 years old for fucks sake!) - Wed, 24 Nov 2004 9:03pm | ||
| Livevic Scott User Info... | It is put to a vote, all the people that you voted on in the last election (National, provincial or local) will vote on the issue. Its done that way so we don't spend every cent of every tax doller holding full public referendums on any little issue that comes up and can spend that money on (what few) social programs and public goods need and use. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:55am | ||
| The One After Two User Info... | This is frustrating. Not everyone in Victoria understands the briliance of Interpol or the power of (insert local band here). Top 40 Bars are popular b/c... they are top 40 bars, that appeal to 19 years old girls. 19 Year old girls appeal to men and thus full bar. Lucky, you could have $1 drinks and still have a slow night if the band isn't worth seeing. Now Vancouver is a different place, but there, the bars have $10 cover, lines down the street, then they nail you with a $2 for coat check and then run anywhere from $5 for a pint. these places are packed! So what if Deep has .75 shots. So what is Evolution has $1.50 pints (which I believe is the reason you guys want it raised). Its a different customer. If Deep people started drinking at Lucky, I would stop. Minimum drink prices imposed by the city so you don't have to compete is wrong. Should there be just one brand of beer? Maybe Walmart should be forced to raise their prices? Local retailers can't compete and there parking lots are packed with people who just want the lowest price. This isn't about supporting live music or not, it is about choice. And this city is forcing the choice on us. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:40pm | ||
| DOOMHAMMER User Info... | The only people that would be happy with this are the fuckers who sell shit like 'rainer' so they can get 3 bucks a sleeve out of it. I would rather drink fucking old school shitty ivanhoe beer for 1.50 each than the pale ales and dark beers and shit. Regardless, this just means drink more before going to the bar. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 2:01pm | ||
| Dane User Info... | I don't really care all that much how much drinks are at various bars unless the price is really breaking the wallet. Usually $3 - $4.50 is okay. I like the music; the atmosphere of a place first and the people that will be there first and foremost which is what attracts me to come to a bar in the first place. I'm not one for going to the bar just for the sake of it. There are a lot of people that come to the bar for these reasons so this ruling won't really mean much to them. Other people that go to cheap drink nights are those just looking for a night to get pissed and be around others (check out people etc.). I would imagine only some of these people will come to other bars they usually wouldn't go to otherwise as a result of the proposed level playing field for the price of drinks. I would imagine bars that have to adhere to minimum price for drinks will come up with some other method to undercut other bars with cover charge or they'll give some sort of giveaway or whatever else they can do to keep people coming. They will do this because they are catering to those that don't come to the bar necessarily for the sake of listening to live music or speciality DJs. Even if the drinks are the same price everywhere the cover charge is what people looking to get wasted will zero-in on. I think cover charge for concerts is the biggest challenge bars that host live music have to face with the public because it is the cover charge that deters people who don't value live music from coming just as much as the fact drinks are not dirt cheap. For example a lot of people won't make the connection that they can see quality entertainment on many given nights for $10 and then pay $4.50 for drinks. In many cases they'll only think about the fact the cover charge is $10 when they could pay $5.00 somewhere else. But then they overlook the fact they'll probably get nailed with a mandatory coat check (sometimes $2 per item) and drinks that are just as expensive if not more. In many cases they'll pay in the neighbourhood of $6 - $7 for drinks if they don't have to pay an initial cover charge. So in the end I think setting a minimum price across the board for drinks may marginally increase attendance at live venues but will cause other bars to come up with more creative ways of keeping their clietele that come to their bars to mingle, get pissed and be seen. The main challenge live venues face is promoting the value of paying much needed cover charges to support those in the community that work to bring them good music and other arts. The minimum drink price issue is significant to a degree but is definetely only part of the issue. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 2:21pm | ||
| Livevic Scott User Info... | One After Two raises a quality point that anytime there is government intervention in economic policy there will be inefficiences and i'm usually against the government meddling with any of that. If the goal of the city is to ease the problems ont the police force they should put more funding into the force and charge the offending factor a tax to cover the difference (which is what it sounds like they're doing with the $8 per seat increase in taxes on bars) however raising the minimum charge will only result in a loss of consumer welfare. As for live venues benifiting from the chnage.. Its also a valid point that people who just wanna get pissed will do it wherever they get the best deal because they don't care about the product being offered they just want the highest alcohol content at the lowest price bar none. The only extra money the live music bars might see is from people who leave the live bar after paying the cover (or buying ticket) to drink at the cheaper bar down the street, and come back hammered to watch the band they wanna see spending nothing at the bar thats supporting their entertainment, which if I were a live venue I would be fucking pissed about (as not only would I have no money but i'd have to deal with some drunk asshole) Maybe to solve the problem without a minimum price the city would pass a law saying that all bars have a "no in and out" policy and have a fine for everytime there is an incident outside their club as it would be obvious it was their over serving that caused it.... (although there are many holes in that idea too) I'm just saying that they have found there to be a problem with the current system and they are going to change something. With all that said in the long run I don't really give a shit since I only really ever goto live clubs or pubs anyway and I can't really remember the last time I payed less then 3 bux for a drink. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 3:08pm | ||
| Dr.DoomXXX User Info... | I noticed on the cover of the Times Colonist today that B.C. was the leading province in drug use. Could this be because out of every where in the whole country it's B.C. that has by far the worst liquor laws and prices? the stupid liquor control is telling us that if we're not in a bar that we can't buy booze after 11. What the hell is wrong with them? A lot of people work very stressful jobs ( like 7-11's and subways) and I find that most of them want to unwind a little after dealing with the temper tantrems that inevidably take place on a daily basis. A lot of them don't get off work until 11 or later. I've seen people buying some really bad shit late at night and if the liquor laws weren't so shitty mabe they woudnn't - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 3:40pm | ||
| Gman User Info... | Hey Dr Doom, I think they meant *prescription* drug use. Scott, Canada (and all countries) do a lot of economic intervention. The Bank of Canada sets the leading interest rates, for example, which *heavily* influences how and where money is spent. A truly 'free' market is an ideal which in my opinion would be catastrophic were it put into practice. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 4:09pm | ||
| Dane User Info... | No ins and outs would definetely not be the way to go. It happens from time to time when a bar is at its capacity but people just have to wait in line to get back in again. There would be a ton of people that would protest that for sure. I would also heavily be against that too. Fines for those bars that have stuff happen outside their establishments also wouldn't accomplish anything either. People consume liquor and drugs all over the place so it's not necessarily the bar's fault because someone gets into a fight infront of their establishment. A lot of people walk by bars looking to cause trouble and they could have been drinking at a number of places and at home before they started the fight. People are always looking to place blame on other people. People have to take responsibility for their own actions. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 4:27pm | ||
| Livevic Scott User Info... | Gman - I'm very well aware of your point, I just didn't really wanna make that post an longer with anymore econ drivel, I think One After was saying that for maximum economic efficiency they should up the taxes for the bars which would cover the cost of the extra police inforcement and then let the market work itself out, which would 'in theory' work out to the clubs having to raise their prices to meet the difference. However Maximum economic efficiency does not always lead to maximum social welfare... which I think we would all agree with. Dane - I know people would bitch hardcore, thats why I put "although there are many holes in that idea too" HELL I don't even think its a good idea ...however I was just pointing out that it has been recongnized that there is a problem with over consumption and there are more then one ways to fix their proposed problem most of which would probably be worse then the one which they are actually atempting. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 4:44pm | ||
| Lucky Bar User Info... | Hey... (Liam again... the guy at Lucky who is not Ben.) I thought I would get away with one post about this but there is still an element that is missing from this discussion, and that is: the bylaw is not really being FORCED on the venues by anybody. The bars in Vic welcome the change (for reasons spelled out earlier). So to use one of the earlier anologies... this isn't like the government working against free economic systems and fair price-based competition. It's more along the lines (imagine this for a second) of stores like Wal-Mart, Home Depot and Chapters WILLINGLY seeking outside price control as a way to level the playing field so they don't HAVE to survive by undercutting. One of the side effects would be that smaller more independent stores would have a far better chance at survival. Competition would be based on quality of product and service along with the reputation of the company, not discounts. Bargains would still exist, but they would be reasonable, rather than ridiculous. If that happened, would we be debating economic / social / political theory? This has ahappened in other cities, and it has worked. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:20pm | ||
| The One After Two User Info... | Guys I support your bar, I just don't support this issue. I am looking forward to the Battle of The Bands Finale next week ;-) - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:49pm | ||
| ya mon User Info... | Perzonally I don't give a ratz azz. I'd rather smoke up and then go zee zome bandz. - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:40pm | ||
| Grain fed User Info... | I've been behind the bar on the stage and in front of the bar alot too. I personally see this as a good thing. If you're bitching about drink prices at Evo this is "LIVE"victoria.com and from recollection I only remember Dizzy playing there once so maybe those people that waste their money on piss poor draft might come out and see a show a little more often. If you really just want to get wasted for cheap then you should just buy a couple OE's or an eight pack or whatever and sit in your basement crankin tunes with your buds. And if you can't plan your night far enough in advance to make it to the liquor store before 11 you should probably lay off the bong a bit cause most of those clerks want to get off work and see the show! - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:01am | ||
| Livevic Scott User Info... | Awwww but Unky Liam argueing about semantics is the best (only?) part of web boards. Its also a good way to build site traffic...Not that we have any sort of adjenda or anything =) *Demon laughter* - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:52am | ||
| Lucky Bar User Info... |  I am not trying in any way to stop the debate at all... just adding my 10 cents (2's just not enough) to the spew. I guess I meant to say that nobody would be arguing about that particular scenario... since we would all see the benefits. And just so's everyone knows, one of the big clubs upped the ante this month by dropping cover altogether. That means that they are not making the door revenue needed to sustain cheap drink nights, but are charging nothing for booze anyway. And that's fighting dirty. It means they are no longer trying to win by competing... they are trying to push the price war so far that it will drive some of their competition out of business altogether. Meanies. -Liam. - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 2:07am | ||
| Livevic Scott User Info... | Did you know that in 1970-71 there was a drug company (Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.) which provided brand name valium to hospitals, and then when a generic brand came into the market and started charging lower rates then them they competed for a while by cutting prices and eventually lost it and just gave away Valium free for a year. The eventually they lost an anti trust law suit because the theory is you can only keep lowering prices as your costs keep coming down (for one reason or another). So the only way they could have given it away legaly is if their costs were zero, which can't happen so they got this huge ass fine (actually it was only 50g's) There wasn't really much point to that story but I got a kick out of it. Maybe you could launch a law suit under the competitions act, or start selling Valium on the side. =) - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 2:22am | ||
| Troutbreath User Info... | Not that I want to start a whole new discussion but......you cheap drink weenies should remember to tip the waitperson. It's a way to show you have some class even as you puke up on their hard earned footware. - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 9:24am | ||
| Brand X Media User Info... |  | ||
| Masturbating The War God User Info... | That guy is there every monday. - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 6:52pm | ||
| User User Info... | Like sinning is not expensive enough already...It's cheaper to smoke weed than cigarettes. This is nothing but a money grab. It will do nothing to keep people from getting drunk and belligerant. Just like $8 for a pack of smokes won't make somebody stop smoking, it just means less money to feed and clothe their children, and just like communist liquor stores don't cut down on alchoholism and underage consumption, they just make it inconvienient for those of us that drink beer after 6pm. - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 6:56pm | ||
| Don Cherry User Info... | If this does happen I'd like to see a guarantee for the bands and more of the cover charge going to venue, the bar, to cover costs. This would let the bars advertise and get more people out to see the show. Also it would enable the bars to pay for more bands to play more often, and allow the local musicians to make a living off playing music. Conversely people at the bar wouldn't be able to drink as much so they might not come out to the shows. I really enjoy playing in town, LUCKY BAR, {thanks for having us on saturday} STEAMERS, LOGANS, DIEGOS and so forth, but the cost of playing seems to be more than the bands are getting paid, so as a musician I can see a, be it selfish, reason for the change. I for one am all for the bylaw if the bands playing are seeing a cut of the new cash flow, based off of lucky bars post first post, but if this does turn out to be a cash grab it would kill the music scene because no one would go to bar gigs, because of expensive drinks and covers, so no one would hire bands. - Sun, 28 Nov 2004 5:46pm | ||
| The One After Two User Info... | sorry Don, you won't be seeing any of that money. Lucky will not be affected as they don't charge a nickel for a beer. Dance clubs will, and those people won't be flooding into your show. ...but maybe you could mix the two??? Have a band, some dance music, a band then close out with some dance music??? Used to be a popular way to do it at the SFU pub. Good crowd, exposure for the bands hmmmmm? Someone said earlier that maybe there will be no limit on the size of a "pint." I wonder if we'll see the three-buck litre beer? Yum-yum If you are for or against, there will be a public meeting on the issue, Tuesday at 1:30PM (I think, maybe 2PM ) at City Hall. - Sun, 28 Nov 2004 7:10pm | ||
| Don Cherry User Info... | I think more people would show up for gigs if they weren't first going to the cheap drink clubs getting pissed then going to the next club and trying to cough up another five or ten bucks just to get in. I'm with the bars on this one in thinking the three dollar min. would eliminate that. The only reason I could see people paying ten bucks to go see some no name dude/ette standing behind a desk playing records, when they could go see some real live no name musicians, would be that the drinks are dirt cheap. - Sun, 28 Nov 2004 8:42pm | ||
| DOOMHAMMER User Info... | Think of it. Whats going to happen is you're going to have a minimum of 3 dollars per beer. That means the shitty bars like evolution will have three dollar beers, and the over charging venues like sugar (that already charge 5 dollars a beer) will charge 6 - 6.50. Right now these venues charge 3.50-4 a beer anyways for the most part, they're just going to raise thier prices accordingly, if its already a dollar more than the cheap bars, its just going to be a dollar more than the 3 dollars with the mindset 'Hey, its still only a dollar' Some bars are going to get some more business, but the industry as a whole will probably lose more money than make, and I think most people care about themselves than the whole. - Sun, 28 Nov 2004 9:57pm | ||
|
|||
Not logged in
Log In / Register (optional)
