Tuesday, 18 November 2008

Lovely cuddly-wuddly pubcos in whose safe hands we trust our pubs.

News story here.

As if life isn't tough enough already for the people whose humble livelihoods are the hands-on running of pubs - Enterprise is to "get tough" on tie breakers.

"Buying out of the tie is nothing more than stealing", says Enterprise boss. If that's the case then the exorbitant prices for stock relative to the open market they charge are what - extortion, demanding money with menaces, fraud?

Remember folks, the tie system is illegal under the Treaty of Rome as anti-competitive - a clause for which Britain stupidly has an exemption.

The Fair Pint Campaign is doing stirling work opposing the biggest difficulty faced by the pub trade; but where's CAMRA when their alleged campaigning power is needed? Oh yes, I remember: they support the tie system and in doing so implicitly support the crippling dominance of Enterprise and its chums. Crackers. Bloody crackers.

Background stories:


The Woolpack Inn said...


Your poll on Enterprise Inns is flawed. The two options are not mutually exclusive.

Jeff Pickthall said...

Damn, I've inadvertently given away my non-unbiasedness.

The Woolpack Inn said...

No, no, what I mean is that there is no "both" option......

Tandleman said...

I like the fair pint campaign recognising as it does the need for the tie for those tied to brewers who own up to 500 pubs, (To do otherwise would mean we would lose all our Family Brewers.

The tie was originally a good thing in that it allowed brewers to develop and have an outlet for what they made. It was never designed for giant and avaricious PubCos. It is their monopoly we must challenge.

You are mostly right in what you say, but your anti CAMRA swipe is just your prejudice showing. CAMRA has campaigned against the big Pub Companies and indeed, if I remember correctly, spoke against them in the last round of government enquiries.

CAMRA, as far as I know, supports the tie in broadly the same way as the Fair Pint Campaign which you rightly praise.

The Woolpack Inn said...

Now then, I do hope that this isn't going to turn into a spat again.

I don't think Jeff is alone in his thoughts. Indeed I would fervently defend them if it were not for the fact that I value local CAMRAs support for my pub. Plus I've joined CAMRA and know that the membership is well meaning.

I think Jeff’s swipe at CAMRA is more than JUST prejudice - it is a perspective that needs to be aired.

I get as many discerning ale drinkers in my pub who think CAMRA has "lost the plot" as I get staunch CAMRA members.

For me the beer tie is a bigger influence on beer than short pint measures, but it SEEMS that the tie is only a minor issue to CAMRA.

I think 500 pubs is still too big for a pub estate.

But, but, it’s all too complicated as I try and explain in my blog.

Tandleman said...

Not meaning to, but the tie and CAMRA is a hard one and gratuitous and inaccurate swipes don't illuminate.

Mind you, it's Jeff's blog, so fair enough in that respect, but you must expect comeback on it!

By the way the Full Pint Campaign IS outmoded. At our last Greater Manchester Branches meeting, we told the NE member present that in no uncertain terms. It is policy though and can only be changed at the AGM,though its prominence is quite another thing.