List of all posts by user:

Just a suggestion to the MA, why dont you get one of your representatives to contact the Department of health for clarification of this possible doorway ban and ask directly if this will affect beer gardens, find it hard to believe it will as this would go far beyond the so called 'enterance' and is no health hazard. A BIG Welcome back to Bob.

This just in from Bob Feal-Martinez, 'the BII really are playing a dangerous game, they are losing ground on the training front to CPL, they are losing individual members. At a grass roots level members are to say the least perplexed by the contradictory messages from the Executive and the apparent reluctance to criticise the Pubco's. Whatever I am told that is going on in the background, if not reflected in a public stance it is worthless. As for the BII not having a view on the tie, I seem to recall them saying that it's removal wasn't a viable option. I think Neil Robertson may genuinely believe he is not sitting on the fence, but you cannot possibly agree to two opposing view points and not be, hiding behind the 'tire' excuse we are the Industries 'professional body' simply doesn't cut it anymore. The whole process of mediation was a non starter from day 1 as most 'sane' licensees realised. When there are two opposing forces with two totally different agendas agreement is impossible. The BII should start to remove certain Pubco's from their list of accredited operators and remove their corporate membership, only then will the BII start to recover it's credibility, and the Pubco's realise they no longer have an influencial ally. To do this the BII need to appoint a different board of assessors. Those currently there have too many vested and conflicting interests.'

Ewan, with respect could you explain why my post was withdrawn. Was I wrong in pointing out that the L&G Model, was to get others to buy freeholds and then lease them back over a 35 year lease period, with a sitting tenant paying L&G. Who then paid the freeholder.

So it seems that an entire article spread world wide was based on the results of research that hasn't even been undertaken yet. How much more corrupt can you get, sow the seeds Correction: Heart attacks plummet after smoking ban, ASH Daily News 14th September 2009 We have heard that the figures reported in the Sunday Times yesterday (and now circulating elsewhere) are not based on any research conducted to date. The impact of the smokefree legislation on heart attacks is being analysed by Anna Gilmore and team at Bath but they have no final results yet. Their findings will be available next year in time for the three year review of the legislation.

Once again some interesting in fighting. I do not think your Industry quite understands how foolish you make yourselves look to customers like me. What this article clearly shows if at least one of you could see it is that the free trade is exploiting the tied trade. The free trade price may well be similar to the tied trade. But what is clear is that the free trade could sell their beer 30p/pint cheaper and still make more profit because of buying it substantially cheaper. So may I make a simple suggestion, instead of attacking each other you actually put the 'little grey cells' into action, and state it as it is, rather than try and be all intellectual. A simple statement like the Free Trade buys it cheaper so should sell it cheaper, who is ripping who off. Just the thoughts on a customer.