Where does eveyone stand on smoking bans?

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

Bob Dole still thinks there is a grant opportunity in this whole thing. Big Tobacco ought to be willing to fund a study of 2 identical restaurant/bars on either side of a common parking lot, with rotating staff, where one business is smoke-free and the other has a smoking section. Compare apples to apples and see what kind of results come out of it.

I'd really like to see some solid numbers on the fiscal effects of these bans. I have no idea where to even start looking for information that isn't coming from one side or the other.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

I'd really like to see some solid numbers on the fiscal effects of these bans. I have no idea where to even start looking for information that isn't coming from one side or the other.

Bob Dole is completely serious. If you could set up multiple situations geographically where there were otherwise equivalent choices, with the only difference being that one was completely smoke-free and the other had a smoking section, it could provide some interesting data.

You'd have to have one parking lot with a central entrance, identical decor and layout, rotate all the staff, etc... But you could track all sorts of data comparing the business of the two and come close to "settling" all this bullshit for good with actual numbers instead of opinion and anecdotal evidence.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

Bob Dole is completely serious. If you could set up multiple situations geographically where there were otherwise equivalent choices, with the only difference being that one was completely smoke-free and the other had a smoking section, it could provide some interesting data.

You'd have to have one parking lot with a central entrance, identical decor and layout, rotate all the staff, etc... But you could track all sorts of data comparing the business of the two and come close to "settling" all this bullshit for good with actual numbers instead of opinion and anecdotal evidence.

I just found a study that says that in 2003 18% of the US population over 15 years old smoked daily. I think the smoking place would take a beating.

Also, that doesn't account for the fact that when not given a completely non-smoking choice people would still eat out. I know I ate at restaurants that had smoking sections. I hated it, but I did it.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/58/41/35625042.pdf

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

I just found a study that says that in 2003 18% of the US population over 15 years old smoked daily. I think the smoking place would take a beating.

Also, that doesn't account for the fact that when not given a completely non-smoking choice people would still eat out. I know I ate at restaurants that had smoking sections. I hated it, but I did it.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/58/41/35625042.pdf

Maybe Bob Dole isn't communicating what he's suggesting clearly.

You'd have the choice of identical restaurant/bars, where one is smoke-free and the other has a smoking section.

And while you and many others would obviously choose the smoke-free alternative, there are a lot of other people beyond the 18% that would choose to hang out with the smokers, even if they didn't smoke. We're the fun ones, after all...

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

I'd really like to see some solid numbers on the fiscal effects of these bans. I have no idea where to even start looking for information that isn't coming from one side or the other.

FWIW, a buddy of mine owns a sports bar in a town here that imposed a smoking ban 1/1/2007.

I was there Tuesday for lunch and he told me his revenue increased by over 60% and is rising since the ban took effect. Seems the smokers stayed loyal, and dealt with the ban, while a new client base emerged from people that refused to go there before because the smoke was so bad.

Considering that only 21% of Americans smoke, I'm not sure why owners are complaining. There are 4 times as many non-smokers that could refuse to visit an establishment based on smoking being allowed, versus that small 1 in 5 they MIGHT lose when a ban takes effect.

[ChiefaRoo]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

FWIW, a buddy of mine owns a sports bar in a town here that imposed a smoking ban 1/1/2007.

I was there Tuesday for lunch and he told me his revenue increased by over 60% and is rising since the ban took effect. Seems the smokers stayed loyal, and dealt with the ban, while a new client base emerged from people that refused to go there before because the smoke was so bad.

Considering that only 21% of Americans smoke, I'm not sure why owners are complaining. There are 4 times as many non-smokers that could refuse to visit an establishment based on smoking being allowed, versus that small 1 in 5 they MIGHT lose when a ban takes effect.

Interesting.

[Hydrae]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

FWIW, a buddy of mine owns a sports bar in a town here that imposed a smoking ban 1/1/2007.

I was there Tuesday for lunch and he told me his revenue increased by over 60% and is rising since the ban took effect. Seems the smokers stayed loyal, and dealt with the ban, while a new client base emerged from people that refused to go there before because the smoke was so bad.

Considering that only 21% of Americans smoke, I'm not sure why owners are complaining. There are 4 times as many non-smokers that could refuse to visit an establishment based on smoking being allowed, versus that small 1 in 5 they MIGHT lose when a ban takes effect.

This is the part that I don't understand. If there is a demand for non-smoking establishments (it seems there is such a demand) and all of these places are making better money since being forced to go non-smoking, are all of the business owners in this country idiots? From this kind of evidence it would seem that they all missed a golden opportunity to go non-smoking and increase their revenue. It took the government banning smoking to help their bottom line. Go figure.

This is why I think this whole argument is silly. It absolutely should be up to each business owner and the customers are then allowed to vote with their pocketbooks. From the way it sounds, if we got rid of the bans a lot of places would stay non-smoking, it is better for their bottom line.

This is certainly a freedom of choice thing. Not for the smoker vs non-smoker, it should be about the freedom of the owner to cater to the customer base they want to attract.