Pondering the Pub Thing Again

You know I love pubs. You don't? Look, I even owned one for a while, that's how much I love them. Owning a pub, it turns out, isn't always quite as much of a love thing as just going to one on a Saturday night, getting a bit tipsy and making slightly knob-head innuendo flirty jokes at the nice lady bar staff. Which is fun, until you get home, sleep it off, and get next day it gets pointed out by your partner, who of course was there too, that actually, you really are a knob-head. You remember through the haze of the hangover that actually, yes, you realise now, and for a few hours vow to never drink again. Or at least not quite so much. At least until next week at any rate.

The problem is, when you own a pub, and that drunken knob-head is in fact making irritating flirty jokey innuendo at your partner, you realise that actually drunk people, when you are not drunk, are very much not funny at all. But still, they are part of the territory, and you have to remain calm, as a person of responsibility, when you are the pub owner, and the person who might have to be up in the docks should anything turn nasty. Trying to square some of these circles was the reason I started writing this blog in the first place. Ultimately the stresses made us decide to leave the pub, before it got the better of us, although arguably, it already had.

I'm really going quite far off the track with this opening, but it is relevant background I think. And just to point out, we are just over a year into having our own licence on-trade outlet again¹, on Millom Station. You might have heard of it, it's called Hardknott OnTrack. We like it. We'd like it to be busier, and open more often, but it serves it's main purpose, which is to ensure there is somewhere in my town we can get Hardknott Beer served the way I want it. Due to the way I have it staffed, I'm normally only found in there sober when it's closed, generally fixing something. Any other time I'm found in there I'm a drunken dick-head. The arrangement seems to work OK, most of the time.

I possibly didn't need to give you that "I think I know what I'm talking about" preamble to introduce the main theme of this post, but I think the wrapping around the subject helps to make more of what would otherwise be just a favour for someone.

Earlier in the week Frances Brace, a British Guild of Beer Writers member forwarded me some information about a pub in her village that was potentially never going to open again. Asking if I could raise awareness as the village is trying to raise enough money to buy the pub and run it as a collective. The pub is call The Duke of Marlborough in Somersham I'm only too pleased to try and help, although I'm not sure what mentioning it on my blog will do, but happy to do so.

It got me thinking, as oft times I do; If no one want's to buy and run this pub, then perhaps this is just a lost cause? Putting all your money into a pub, or even finding a bank that will help out, can be a bit daunting. Haven't you heard? Pubs are struggling, so why would anyone in their right mind want to fund such a daft idea. If you think I'm working against Frances' request, bear with me.

The trouble with owner-run pubs is that often you become too close, too passionate, too caring. Very often everything you've ever owned has been ploughed into the pub and it is the licensee's whole life, and complete existence. Couple that with long days, a need to unwind, and a pint or two at the end of the day and you can end up with an incendiary situation when dealing with the thing day-in, day-out.

Could pubs run by the community be the very thing? I used to think not. How on earth can a pub be run by committee? That's just daft.

But it does seem to be working. In Cumbria there is the Hesket Newmarket pub The Old Crown. This is reputed to be the country's very first community owned pub. Why does the model seem to work? Why should a pub that doesn't seem to thrive under private ownership seem to do OK when run under the guidance of a gathering of pub enthusiasts?

I feel I do understand a little. For a start, a pub has a large user base. People who own the pub, in a collective, are likely to want to use their asset. They are also providing a feed-back into the pool of ideas, but generally off-line, rather than as a drunken knob-head saying "''eresh mate, what syou wants to do ish..."

I've had some great ideas when I've been drunk. I've also had some really lousy ones. The trouble is, when you've had a long day, and trying to unwind, the last thing you want is some drunk trying to tell you how to run your business. Rather than being receptive to new ideas, the scenario tends to make me more determined to ignore them all, even the ones I shouldn't.

A committee of genuinely caring people, who love the pub, and can discuss collectively the ideas, hopefully whilst not too drunk, may generate a truly inspirational environment. In any case, so long as they keep the job ticking over, and the books balanced, whatever they do, they'll be maintaining the pub the way they want it to be.

Most importantly, if the pub is in the hands of the community, perhaps it is more loved. Despite the fact that most licensees work very long hours for precious little reward, very often annoyance is directed at the licensee for "ripping off" the beer drinker. At least in the case of a pub run by the villagers, and other interested parties, the price of the pint is at least going back into the village asset with full transparency of the economics involved. The pub goer is empowered and given a little bit of control, and everyone is happy.

-----------------

¹It is now over 5 years since we sold our first pub. It is interesting that many people are unaware that we are no longer there. Indeed, we recently decided to stop supplying that pub with any beer at all, hence no mention of the pub's name in this text.

Café or Pub?

There was talk the other night in the pub about onomatopoeiae. Strictly, of course, such a thing is one or more words that imitate or suggest the source of the sound they are describing. Now a pub isn't a sound, well they can be quite noisy, but it's a building. Think about it though, if you had never heard of a pub the sound makes you think of some smelly, damp, squelchy thing you'd avoid if you found one by the side of the road. Of course, unfortunately, sometimes this is actually the case when it comes to pubs.

Now there are plenty of bloggers out there telling us how bad pubs are. It's no wonder nobody goes in them, they should just jolly well tidy themselves up, oh and also at the same time provide cheap booze and nosh into the bargain. I run a pub and therefore I understand all too well how difficult it is for a publican to balance price against customer expectation of quality. The problem is where exactly to pitch their product; at the cost conscious customer or the quality conscious customer?

One of the things that the publican can do very little about is the building. OK, a lick of paint here and a few nice comfortable chairs there, a big plasma screen telly, if that's what will work and maybe, if he's flush with cash, knock a wall down between two rooms to make a nice open plan type of affair. But, bottom line, he's stuck with the bricks and mortar he has. For many pubs that is not a problem, once the inside is good and there is a customer base that grows things can be great.

One busy week last summer, on our day off, we managed to get to a town late afternoon. It's nice when we are out to get some food made by somebody else. We spend all our time trying to make other people happy we might as well enjoy some TLC ourselves. Because I like pubs and beer and like to help to support our industry we search out pubs to eat in. However, because we always seem to get away late, due to this supplier needing to be phoned for an urgent delivery, or some other administrative humdrum necessity, we quite often get to town after lunch is finished. The rural pubs that we do enjoy visiting for lunch would already have stopped serving and so we decided to explore a town that is well known for good food.

On this occasion it was approaching 4pm. We walked past several new build café type places, which I thought looked nice, but decided on a traditional pub. This particular town is a little unfamiliar to us so pot luck was required. We chose a nice traditional Victorian facade pub, it was difficult to see inside but I'm normally happy to take pot luck.

Once inside a pub I feel uncomfortable turning around and walking out just because the pub turns out not to have the facilities I like - it seems a little rude. On this occasion I should have realised as soon as I saw the very obvious and slightly overbearing plasma screen TVs showing dart games. However, I do know that every pub has to play to its clientele so we stayed and ordered a pint of the one hand-pulled beer. Sadly, it would seem, that was off and the suggestion by the landlady was that the cask had failed to sell quickly enough. I found this interesting as the pub clearly was not a quiet one.  The fall back position of nitro-keg Guinness, which I have not had to suffer for some time, was accepted with reluctance.

After all we were only looking for lunch. A quick look at the lunch menu confirmed the usual suspects of Cumberland Sausage, Cottage Pie, ubiquitous curry and other similar traditional rubbish. No doubt the darts fans would be right at home with this along with their pint of bland mass produced lager or nitro-keg John Smiths. One thing was for sure the prices were extremely reasonable and three lunches plus three drinks came to less than £20.

Conversely, I could have chosen one of the nice cafés with their big windows letting in bags of natural light giving an airy and less stuffy environment altogether. The lack of distracting and frankly offensive in-your-face sports channel and an increasing number of interesting bottled beer selections make my recent eating experiences in licenced cafés much more pleasurable than the traditional town centre pub. Indeed, it is my experience that pubs generally don't do wonderful food, its beer soaking stodge prepared to a budget. Equally, the buildings of traditional pubs can often be constraining and creating a situation where the style organically drifts towards my onomatopoetic description I began with, as much due to the desires of the regular drinkers as to anything else.

Regular followers of my views will rightly wonder why I write this negative view of pubs. I regularly get upset at writers who simply state that pubs, generally, need to try harder. My point here is that the general view of the pub is that it has to provide a traditional environment that fits the desires of the established customer base. New build cafés and modern refurbished bars often provide a better, more modern style but then get accused of being overpriced and snobby.

I'd finally like the reader to consider the constraints the building that is the pub puts on the operator. Many traditional pubs which "should try harder" have an uphill struggle against such things as accessibility, food hygiene, fire safety and other reasonable legislated conditions of operation. Many pub operators are doing a great deal of work just to keep up with these and are having a hard time competing with more modern new builds and refurbishments.

Equally, it can be difficult for a pub to portray the style to the passer-by. Many traditional pubs are in Victorian buildings which might well portray a romantic notion but high window ledges and narrow windows can make it difficult for the passer by to get any sort of glimpse into the interior. This is a problem that concerns me about my own place, short of propping our door open, which makes the bar cold, we find it difficult to portray an open "feel" from the outside. We've tried placing an A-board by the road, several times, but the number we have lost due to them being blown over or run over is depressing.

If a pub is delivering a service that is satisfactory for the bulk of its customer base then where is the problem? Despite the example pub above not being to my taste it is an operating pub that provided a service that was popular with some. Further more, it goes to make me wonder whether we would in fact be better off ceasing to worry about the pubs that close, perhaps some buildings are better off being put to alternative uses.

What value the pub?

We know that pubs are having a hard time. The market is shrinking and the more I think about it the more I wonder if there is anything that can be done to help. Additionally, there are big pubs springing up taking a share of that shrinking market. I'm sorry to mention them again, but The Wetherspoons model is extremely successful and obviously what the vast majority of the pub customers want. If we can get to the point of accepting this then it raises some interesting issues.

Today I have read some detail in a report that has been issued by the commercial estate agents Fleurets. It doesn't really make very good reading unless you are looking to buy or lease a pub. If you own a pub and are hoping the value of your pub has gone up in the last 4-6 years then think again, it probably hasn't by very much. Mind you, not many investments have done particularly well in that time. Of course in business you can expect to potentially lose if you invest in something. That's the risk of doing business.

Please allow me to digress for a short while. If I had bought a shop I could probably sell pretty much what I wanted from that shop. There might be some limitations but basically if it is legal to sell it then I could. If I set up as a butcher, only to find that the bottom fell out of the meat market due to competition from supermarkets or because everybody went vegetarian then I could change to being a baker or candlestick maker or even, should I choose, a newsagents or clothes shop. If things got really tough then turning the property into a house would also be an option. This happens a lot with shops and nobody blinks an eyelid, generally.

A couple of years ago I got into a discussion with somebody regarding this very issue. I was concerned about how this individual was actively standing in the way of a failed pub gaining planning permission for a change of use into a private dwelling. My argument is that if a pub cannot make an honest living for the landlord then it should be sold. The reply was that there were too many people making money by deliberately running pubs down so they could make a killing out of a change of use. This was only made possible by the over inflated domestic property market, or so it was claimed.

Now that we have seen a massive downturn in the economy, one that is argued to be the worst since the Second World War it is alleged, the domestic property market has collapsed. Contrary to the assertion that the differential between the price of a house and the price of a freehold on a pub was distorted, the values of pubs have possibly fallen faster and further than house prices.

What I find even more interesting is that the larger pubs seem to be more desirable and therefore not dropping in value as much. This reflects the fact that there is a minimum trading which makes a pub viable. Below this there are very real disadvantages of the lack of economies of scale. It is sad, but the community pub that is seen as in need of protecting is going to get harder and harder to keep alive due to economic factors.

It might be sad that the last pub in that village of 100 houses is closing, but I wonder if we are fighting an inevitability by trying to prevent a change of use.

A changing market

The recent news report highlights just how much the pub industry is changing. The point of the piece is not to detail that the industry is changing but to lament the rapid closures of pubs. But can we really do anything about this? I'd argue that the answer is "NO". OK, some would say that restricting the tie system in some way might help. Some would say that overturning the smoking ban would help. Personally, I think that it's inevitability. I know this goes against some things I've written in the past, but perhaps I can change my mind.

Our socialising culture is changing. It's been changing for years. Pubs that hang on to the spit and sawdust, old fashioned model of a pub are finding that it no longer works. Depending on volume sales of ubiquitous brands, except where there is a volume market to be had by default, will almost certainly result in poor trading.

We wonder why so many pubs are turning their style over to restaurant format, or apparently becoming "Gastro pubs", perhaps we miss the point that this is where the money is, and it's been going that way for some time. The bistro, trendy, modern bar that serves a combination of progressive cask ales and more individual continental beers are becoming all the more successful. This might well be at the distress of some traditionalists, but this is the way it goes.

Additionally to this, although the consumption of alcohol might be reducing, and more over might be reducing more in "community pubs" this does not account for the apparent overall reduction in pubs. What I believe is having a greater effect is the move to larger, more efficient pubs, the likes of Wetherspoons, that can clearly manage to achieve economies of scale that smaller community pubs cannot. One large Wetherspoons for instance, will probably manage to turnover the same money as up to 10 ordinary, small, community pubs put together. If Wetherspoons is the thing that people want, perhaps this is what we should accept.

The remainder of the market is going to be the more trendy, restaurant style pub or the specialist beer bar. The style of business where spends per head can be maximised. The remote, small rural pubs are going to find it more and more difficult to survive and the industry would, in my view, would be better off accepting this.

There are a couple of good posts that look directly at the BBPA assertion that 52 pubs per week are closing. One on Jeffo's blog and one on Southport Drinkers blog. The comment threads are worth looking at.

Update: As I was writing this it seems a post from Tandleman and a post from Curmudgeon have also been written at a similar time. Just for completeness, and to prove I do take notice.

30% of pubs need to close

I've talked before about the inevitability of pubs closing. The beer market is shrinking and it is becoming more and more difficult to make money out of pubs.

The other night I had a quantity surveyor in for a drink. Nice chap. He apparently specialises in valuing pubs based on their fair maintainable trade. He recons that around one third of pubs do well as a result of the owners working hard. Another third do OK because the owners work hard and around a third are not viable even though the owners work really hard.

He does admit that an OK pub can be turned around with really good management and maximise potential, although it can easily drop back again with average people.

The most striking comment to me was the fact that there are simply too many pubs and a third are no longer going to achieve the fair maintainable trade that would be sufficient to make the pub viable. It is unfortunate and really a result of changing attitudes of the general public to the pub trade.

Closed pubs

I've noticed recently a couple of pubs that have closed.

The Golden Fleece at Calder Bridge has never raised much above the radar for me. While it was still open it advertised free WiFi, cheap food and all sorts of deals. It has never concentrated on quality and never done real ale very well. Now it's closed. Calderbridge has one other pub which, when run well, as it is now, beats this one hands down. The Golden Fleece would be better left shut and changed into something else.

The Globe at Gosforth used to be a good pub for older teenagers. I'm guessing they all do drugs now. It's also never been very significant at the real ale job. Recently they advertised two course meals at ridiculously low prices. They took all the handpulls out and went all trendy wine bar, chrome font and sweaty condensation kind of rubbish. There are several good pubs in Gosforth, this one isn't needed.

Doing deals that costs more than revenue is going to result in failure. Ignoring handpulled ale in a rural location will result in the same; I said so every time I drove past these pubs during the last couple of years.

So pubs, leave the aiming at the lowest common denominator to Wetherspoons. They are good at it and fill a gap in the market very well. Raise your game, get the quality right and charge an appropriate price for it.

The King Canute effect

Canute the Great, also known as Cnut, or Knut is of course famous for the legendary story about him trying to hold back the tide, and failing. The act was of course to demonstrate to his subjects just how powerless he was to stop some inevitable forces.

We all know that pubs are closing and this is of course a terrible problem we are facing. It does distress me though that What’s Brewing, and many other CAMRA publications are banging out mantras like “Stop 1 in 8 pubs closing”. How do they intend to do this? They intend to do this by metaphorically lying down in front of the demolition bulldozer.

The reason 1 in 8 pubs are going to close is that they need to. The industry is not viable as it stands. There is over capacity and under demand. Please CAMRA let the poor ones close and you’ll end up with a better industry.

I want CAMRA to succeed in achieving something. It would be better if the organisation worked with the industry for once. We’re all in this together and it’s tough, resisting a change that is inevitable will only alienate the industry that you want to thrive.

There might be things we can do to help but I do not believe the current CAMRA approach is one of them.

Diversification

We've all heard about the drop in beer sales and the even bigger drop of beer sales in on-licence premises. I include here the latest chart made using data from the BBPA site. If I've done everything right you should be able to click on the image to get a full sized view of the chart.

Let me know if it didn't work.

Really, this is old news. The red line, showing sales in pubs and other places licensed to sell beer for consumption on the premises is getting close to the green line which is off licence sales. The total amount, the blue line, is falling more slowly.

The UK has a population of 58 million. We drink between us about 30 million barrels of beer a year. That's just a tad less than 1/2 a barrel a year each. or 144 pints a year or less than 3 pints each a week. I'm more than doing my share then. The average person consumes not much more than a pint of beer in a pub a week.

What of course is alarming is that the drop of beer sales for pubs is around 1/3. This represents a drop of revenue, for which there is little I suspect we can do. The most common recommended course of action for the licensee is to look into diversification. This does have certain merits for some establishments.

What I really want to explore though, is the misguided concept that it's as simple as that. Diversification also represents increased complexity. Simple and complex are diametrically opposing concepts.

We have a diversified business. We have accommodation, we do food, we brew beer and we sell maps and books. This level of diversification results in a complexity of business that is difficult to sustain. I think I shall just bullet point the main problems with this.

• A business that is operational 7am - 1am, with potential problems 24 hours per day.
• Residents check in at the times the bar and kitchen are busy.
• Bookings enquiries for rooms normally occur in the evening, when we are busy with customers.
• The kitchen is in use all day, making maintenance difficult.
• The number of products we buy make the accounts tiresome for the turnover value.
• I have to do my beer duty, which is normally late, and I don't get around to invoicing for CAMRA festivals.
• I have to beat off beer label collectors with a big stick.
• A small pub is a very tying business for the owners. A more diverse one is even harder to leave in the hands of staff.

Diversification is not a simple as it seems.

There are other things I end up doing as a result of our brewing diversification. Showing people the brewery and talking about how it is made, for example. The fact of the matter is I enjoy this aspect, so I shan't complain.

A shrinking market

I have previously talked at great length about the many problems facing pubs and why they might be closing. But despite daily global bad news, we seem to be achieving some success in our own establishment, which I am very pleased about. Recent posts by Tandleman and Pub Curmudgeon strengthen my belief that we are approaching our own problems in the right way. Indeed, it is a shame that Tandleman thought I had fallen out with him, when in fact many of his suggestions for a good pub can be given a tick here. We don't get it right all the time, but we tend to know when we've failed and correct accordingly.

Curmudgeon focused a thought that I perhaps had not realised before. It is the fact that we really don't worry here about the price of drinks in the supermarket. This is because we provide a service that greatly exceeds supermarket service. A warm and comfortable place with a friendly welcome. Here is the proof, if any proof were needed. Equally, I should stop worrying about the alarming trend for economy drinking that is gaining ground in town centres as this is also far removed from the market we are aiming at.

So why do I complain so much? Well two reasons. One because we're not out of the woods yet. We still need to do more to make our pub sustainable. More importantly, I am keen to use my experiences to do what I can to communicate about common problems from within the industry. There are many experts out there telling it the way they see it. CAMRA, of course, who have a perspective from a section of customers, the breweries and pub companies, who are really only interested in financial performance, and then there is the industry press, who frankly I think tend to be slightly biased towards their big advertisers perspective. Apart from Jeff, I don't think there are many licensees who write about their experiences on a regular basis. That, really, is why I write this blog.

If we look at the wider pub industry, and this is something I think about a lot, there are many problems, as we know. The volume of beer sold generally is falling and the volume sold in pubs is falling faster. Wetherspoons has captured a grand market share, and good luck to them. Many other pubs have grown in size by adding conservatories, dining rooms, function suites and the like. But still the revenue into the industry is falling. Improving the financial turnover of one pub will reduce the market share somewhere else. 

I understand that there are about 700 Wetherspoons pubs. Many of these are actually new creations and much bigger than the average pub. Again, taking market share from an ever shrinking market. Clearly Wetherspoons provides a product that people want. That is why they grow, no other reason. If that is the style of pub that people want to patronise, then so be it.

From Wetherspoons financial report they take around £900m a year. That's over £1.2m per pub. Although I have no hard facts, I think that many marginal pubs struggle to get a tenth of that. So it could be argued that Wetherspoons have gained market share equivalent to 70,000 marginal pubs. I think, that as a result of Wetherspoons, many pubs have to close.

The industry response to Wetherspoons is generally price competition. This is causing, in my view, a drop in standards. In my experience, the UK is cheap for drinks in pubs. I have had holidays in France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium and Switzerland. The quality of service is generally better and the prices are higher for drinks than the UK. I think we should leave Wetherspoons to their market and every other pub should look at providing something better.

I think we are in a trap if we think that we can stop pubs closing. We cannot stop outlets from eventual failure if they are not viable and trying to do so is folly. I believe that resisting the change is damaging the industry. We cannot magic revenue out of thin air, if the total value of pub trade is dropping, then it's dropping. Not only that, if we permit some pubs to close the remainder will strengthen and become better pubs. Maybe we will get more pubs who tick the boxes in Tandlemans bullet list.

Open sometimes or never?

My pub is closed at the moment. We're doing stuff to it, we've had a holiday and it's always too quiet to be worth opening this time of year. We are, after all, a tourist pub in the middle of nowhere, a very beautiful nowhere, but it's remote non the less.

Stonch also had a close down period over the Christmas break. I'm guessing most of his trade is from city workers who disappear during holiday time. He was closed for 11 days. 11 days holiday? I bet that's the most he's had away from the pub since he started earlier in the year.

When I was staying with Ted he closed for Christmas eve and Christmas day. Ted could have opened for Christmas eve and quite probably would have done alright out of it. I feel guilty that I did mock slightly. But Ted was adamant that on this occasion his wife and girls came first. He was at least going to do at Christmas what they have always done.

My friends at The Prince of Wales close every week Monday, Tuesday and part of Wednesday, except for bank holidays. They always have done, it's what they advertise and the majority of their customer base are very happy with the arrangement.

The first year we closed for part of the winter was the first year things started to improve for us here. We saved money on power and staff costs. Costs we could never recoup from the tiny revenue at this time of year, yes, even including Christmas and New Year. We started to get a breather, and get some important work done on the property.

The situation is explained here and also here on The Woolpack Inn blog. Notice the second anonymous comment. To me it says "how dare you have a life, how dare you have a Christmas of your own".

It seems to me that many pubs stay open at times when it is not financially viable because if they don't the publican comes in for grief. For us, closing for part of the winter is probably saving us from ruin, both financially and psychologically. We still continue to get criticised for this even though it is now the third year we have closed for most of the winter.

So would you rather your local, if it had to, closed part time, or closed altogether?

State side style

There seems to be a problem understanding how to make a lively pub scene. I am aware that as a licensee I have a biased viewpoint that can dilute the authority of my opinions. Having just been to Brussels and now being in Oregon I feel that we, in the UK are missing something very important, but I just can't put my finger on it.

Could it be the tied system? No you cry, that's not it.

Too much emphasis on cask ale and price of a pint? No, not that either, comes the chorus.

Anti-smoking, gastro, neo-prohibitionist, family friendly, consumer protection, public safety...........

I don't know, but something is different.

Our great pub culture is different to anywhere else. Perhaps this difference is the problem. But we don't want to loose it, quite rightly.

I feel we skirt around the issues rather than looking at it head on, and honestly. So come on, lets get the discussion going properly, and lets think outside the box rather than saying, "It's OK the way it is"

I'm here in snowy Oregon, in a nice little "Anglo-American Brew Pub" that apparently was inspired by the British Pub culture. Ted needs some more custom right now.

I need some writers inspiration. This trip is supposed to inspire me into working out what we could learn in the UK. I'm struggling to make sense of it so if the readers have suggestions than let's hear them.

To Bar or not to Bar?

What makes a good pub? What is the difference between a food pub and a restaurant? Can an establishment major in food and still call itself a pub? Why does the café bar culture not work in the UK?

That last question might seem like a tangential issue. I believe not, the key word of course is culture. We have a pub culture in our great land. For centuries we have congregated in the public house for social reasons. Until very recently we did not, on the whole, eat out as a nation. Conversely on mainland Europe, there is a long tradition of socialising that entails a mixture of food and drink, sometimes formal dining and sometimes snacking. The Brits used to just go out for a pint, perhaps a packet of crisps, or if you where really posh had scampi fries.

The above constitutes sweeping generalisation. This is no better than saying all lager drinkers are numpties or all UKIP MEPs are nutters. Cultures change over time. Whilst in Brussels recently we went into several very pub like places; Delirium Café and Mort Subite being examples. Food here was very simple, consisting for example of Croque Monsieur or Croque Madame, which are toasted cheese and ham sandwiches, the madame variation including an egg....indeed in Delirium the food appeared to be completely packet snack foods and ordering from the bar was compulsory. There is a sign outside declaring that in fact the place is a pub. There is evidence that the Belgians respect our pub culture and in some cases are embracing it as their culture changes.

Our culture is also changing. In the good old bad old days pubs tended to be male dominated boozers. Drinking, smoking and being bawdy was the order of the day. I have myself enjoyed many an enjoyable evening in this environment engaging heavily in all three activities. This is indeed a grand part of our culture and never may it die out. It is fact thought that this style of pub is becoming less popular. The more diverse, mixed culture we now enjoy, a unisex attitude where comfortable surroundings, a larger choice of products and a more refined style are in increasing demand. This refined style also justifies a higher price.

The pubs where drinking takes centre stage are important. But the male dominated, spit and sawdust pub of the past, where gents toilet is a shed in the back yard, and the women stayed at home to do the ironing are fast failing. Most would agree this is a good thing. Pubs need to become something else to survive. I have a strong conviction that the "anti-gastro" brigade is actually inhibiting the progression of pubs. Why are pubs changing to something more like restaurants? It's because it works for them. We can't just keep pubs as they used to be as some sort of museum piece, they are businesses that must move with the times.

In a recent post on Jeff Bells Blog questions are asked about the issue of "gastro pubs". There appeared to be general condemnation of the pub that majors in food. I resisted in jumping in to comment for a while. I'm glad I did resist because in the end it would seem we all agree. Comparing the British restaurant pub to the bars on the continent reveals a very stark contrast. Jeff and his commenters points out very well that when you enter a pub and it is set out with cutlery on every table you have to ask "can I just have a drink?" Our Continental beer cousins have their bar tables left clear so that you can just have a drink, the Maître d' just politely asks if you are having food, without pressure.

Perhaps though we are too sensitive, after all the government wanted to encourage a "cafe culture" for our pubs, and is that such a bad thing? Perhaps implementation in this country of the continental style bar has been less than ideally executed, but we can't just keep damning every attempt by pubs to move the offering away from the traditional.

Conversely, because there is a shift in culture, many more couples go out for a meal rather than just a drink. Restaurants are becoming popular these days and pubs run the risk of loosing out. Changing demographics and the long term increase in spending power results in less people going to pubs. Perhaps some pubs have to behave more like restaurants to be able to attract customers and compete in a different market rather than the indifferent trade of the old fashioned pub.

Perhaps we need to embrace diversity in our pub industry rather than complaining about pubs that are trying to be innovative. Perhaps a changing culture upsets some, but that is progress and that progress is ultimately for the better. Perhaps we need to blur the divide between the pub and the restaurant. Yes many pubs that major in food also need to learn how to accommodate casual trade. But we also need to remember that diversity will result in some pubs not being able to satisfy everybody. Perhaps if we can learn to do it like the Continentals it will be part of the answer to the problem of closing pubs.

The astute Brussels visitor would know that the two bars mentioned in the text are not shown on the pictures. The first picture is the outside of a brew pub called Les Brasseurs the second is inside a rather nice cafe bar that I forget the name of.  I have in front of me a "Palette Dégustation 5 bières". I had also ordered a light snack.

I believe they care

So what did we go to Brussels for again? We went to take Cumbrian cask conditioned ale to some MEPs and show just what is special about the British pub. Maybe I just wanted to prove I could take cask ale all that way, rack and tap it and be able to serve it at the right temperature. Paul Nunny of Cask Marque checked the beer. 11.8 centigrade I believe was the temperature. More importantly Mike Benner, chief exec of CAMRA (right) said "You've set a new standard for cask ale in Brussels". Wow, can't get better than that eh? If they had looked very closely they might have seen some beer was just not quite as bright as I'd like. It had travelled 550 miles by road and a cross channel boat ride to get there. I'm guessing it was a little shook up.

Many MEPs appreciated that effort. Godfrey Bloom (UKIP) has to be the best. We only took 2 pint glasses. Godfrey, bless him, snatched one and held onto it all night. "Can't drink out of them 1/4 litre things, people will think I'm a Lib Dem or something." mmmm...

Irrespective of party, the assembled MEPs seemed genuinely concerned about our pub and brewing industry. If only I could remember who they all were.

Anyway, Mike made a great speech which then got backed up and gaps filled in by, oh, now I forget, was it the SIBA guy or the BBPA fella? Well, a great amateur journalist I am. Tosh, whoever it was, good points were well made.
On the Saturday before we sailed I sent out a press release about our endeavour. Well you didn't think I was going to go to all that trouble and not raise at least a little bit of publicity did you?

Within an hour I had the local BBC on the telephone. Radio Cumbria I believed. They wanted an interview for the news bulletins and I agreed they could telephone me before I crossed the channel the following morning. I told them we were crossing around lunchtime. Wrong!

Finally I got the call as we were waiting to board the ferry at about 10am. Just as we were reaching the end of the interview the queue started to move. Starting the engine cuts out the bluetooth hands free - the interviewer said, once I picked up the phone, that he had everything he needed. I still get that feeling something was left unsaid....

Most of the setting up was done on Sunday afternoon. On Monday morning we returned to finish a few tasks and then off around Brussels for some sightseeing. No sooner had we found the Christmas market than the mobile rang. It was ITV wanting to film our bar, today in fact, soon. Not only that they wanted to film somebody drinking the beer.

OK, rush back across town to the hotel and get changed into something respectable. Back to the Brewers of Europe. Damn, the lines haven't been cleaned yet! Will the beer be clear? A quick, but significantly insufficient line cleaning procedure was undertaken. My beer was like pea soup still, Keswick's was not quite there. David from CLA cheats and uses conditioning tanks, a fair bet. Yup, his Wicked Jimmy was ready to roll.

Over the course of 4 days I think we did 6 media interviews. Our main theme of course was the number of pubs closing. 36 a week. 1 in 8 before 2012. What can the MEPs in Brussels do? Not much in reality except perhaps loosen the EU rules on VAT and duty so that draft beers can have a favourable rate over packaged drinks. But still, I met some interesting people and my pub got mentioned on local radio and TV.

The next morning we had to get back to the venue early to pack up. InBev had an event there that evening. I had got there early enough to park right outside the door. The InBev event organiser then complained because his lorry had nowhere to park. So I had to park across the road because their many people could not possibly carry everything that few extra yards, sorry, meters. Great I thought. Massive global brewer muscles tiny micro out of the way.

But before we left we saw a couple of interesting things. First the dispense technique for Stella Artoir. In the picture the text reads

"The Removal

Your bartender then closes the tap...........and moves the glass away from the font to prevent any drops from falling into the glass. These drops come into contact with the air, and oxidise, making them unworthy of your glass of Stella Artois."

Now firstly, any oxidisation will add flavour to the beverage, which in this case can be no bad thing. Secondly, do we really think that any Stella Artois drinker is going to give a hoot about oxidisation, or know it if it hit him in the face?

Still, it's nice to know that beer production is such an ancient art form. We also found in the same building a stone tablet depicting Egyptian beer making.

The best bit about the trip was the return cargo of beer. I'm currently drinking Bush Amber 12%, before that I had an Orval 6.2%

Tomorrow I think I'll post about Belgian bars, beer and food and smoking.

8/10 for CAMRA

Mike Benner, the chief executive of CAMRA has written to the Chancellor asking him to consider some important points. There is a press realise on the CAMRA site. This is also reported by The Morning Advertiser.

This clearly comes in the wake of the excellent Community Pub Inquiry report. Although this report is grand it will not work to simply give politicians recommendations. They will only act if they think it improves their vote. So we need to show the government that we care about the findings. We need to gain the support of the popular opinion.

CAMRA is doing the right thing in starting to publicise the issues contained within the report. My only complaint is that it's not enough yet and it's happening too slowly. However, it's the right move.

Looking at the responses to the Morning Advertiser article is interesting though. The ferocity of the attacks on CAMRA and the tied system are alarming. From the CAMRA perspective I rather think that this is a little like a pupil who has done his best piece of work to date, only to be told off by teacher for a few spelling mistakes.

It does also show just how hated the tied system is, mainly by licensees, but still, CAMRA perhaps does need to think about this.

The Wetherspoons love affair

I have long worried about the effect Wetherspoons has on the small, local, independent, community pub. I worry that Wetherspoons is to the small pub as Tesco's is to the corner shop.

I've just called in this afternoon to The Prince of Wales, a pub that should make the owners money, but doesn't because they think they have to compete with Tim Martin's prices. I don't think they have to as their beer is great.

I was going to write some more about this pub owing to it being one of the pubs I love best, but then I saw a piece on Wetherspoons and their relationship with CAMRA, it got me thinking a few things.

Initially I thought that I agreed with many of it's points. I certainly question Wetherspoons friendship with CAMRA. It is certain that many pubs just cannot compete with Wetherspoons prices. There is a finite beer market out there and Tim Martin's empire has very successfully captured a proportion of that at the expense of other pubs. This is a truth that will cause some pubs to close.

I found myself at odds with the piece when it started to question what it calls "petty rules". I am a big fan of licensees being permitted, in fact being encouraged, to define their style of business. A dress code for instance is a sure way of defining the ambiance in a subtle way. Although banning tracksuit bottoms might eliminate some desirable customers, if a premises makes the link between a certain style of dress and a certain style of behaviour then it is a useful way of defining the customer base.

Tim Martin gained points with me by his rules on children. Family orientated pubs are fine. Some pubs though do not need to be so accommodating to families, indeed I believe we still need some child free zones if we are to avoid posh restaurants taking over from the pub. I was so pleased when he made his rules about children not staying in the pub under certain situations. I believe if the pub industry is to regain some credibility in the responsibility stakes then we all need a little of this.

Criticisms of CCTV and the EU are also things that question the author's understanding. CCTV can be a realistic necessity to ensure compliance with licensing conditions suggested by local authorities, especially where cut price alcohol is involved. The EU is no friend of small business be assured of that, and the small pubs that Wetherpoons threaten are all small businesses.

At my local CAMRA branch meeting there were mixed thoughts about Wetherspoons. Spurning free handouts of discount vouchers conflicted with the fact that the branch passed an important membership milestone as a direct result of Wetherspoons involvement in recruitment.

I have met Mike Benner, the chief executive of CAMRA. There could be a suspicion that he is getting too cosy with Tim Martin. It is very difficult not to think that CAMRA and Mike are being bought out by Wetherspoons. But Mike does not strike me as that type of guy. He believes in CAMRA, he is trying to make it work, he convinces me that the Campaign is more important than just numbers, be it people or pounds sterling.

It is not unusual in history for there to be an unpleasant, but necessary alliance between the friend and foe to fight an even bigger foe. I find myself questioning my whole hatred of Wetherspoons. I doubt I will ever like the concept, but might learn to live with it as perhaps it is a necessary evil.

Perhaps Wetherspoons, CAMRA, Mike Benner and Tim Martin, the closing pub that is not viable and the opening of disused bus depots as pubs are all part of a moving vibrant industry that brings us Real Ale.

Government - "Not in the business of keeping pubs open"

In the Community Pub Inquiry the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) are reported to have stated that they are not in the business of keeping pubs open. It is my view that government regulation and legislation is a major contributor to the failure of the pub as a small business.

DCMS are responsible for government policy on tourism and leisure including licensing laws. They are the main department that could do something to prevent the demise of the small pub.

We should remember that every small business that needs to employ a few people or has public areas are all having similar problems. The small corner shop, the little greengrocer or butcher are also burdened. There may be some advantages of the legislation that has been brought in. It is much harder now for rogue traders to do a bodge job on your electrics or your gas central heating. Perhaps this is good. Perhaps the small independent pub is just one type of small rogue trader that needs crushing.

The difference between the corner shop and a pub is complexity of the business, and if you are a small shop owner please don't be under the illusion I think you have an easy job. A pub has nearly every aspect of legislation to deal with. Health and safety at work, food safety, public safety, alcohol licencing, public disorder, employment rights, building regulations, fire safety, public entertainment, performing rights licence, etc. On top of this, because of the vast range of products that the pub goer expects to have available, has very complex accounts. A pub is possibly the most complex type of small business there is to run.

The problem is, for the small pub, the regulations are completely pointless. Take for instance the fire regulations. Last year their was a fire at a hotel in Newquay where 3 people were killed. That was tragic. The interesting thing is that the event made a major news story as would any hotel fire that killed people. The fact is that this incident, though very tragic, is extremely rare and despite continual increases in legislation there is little if any reduction in fatalities in the small community pub. The current situation is that the fire safety inspection is now the responsibility of the pub owner - the fire service is now just an enforcement rather than inspecting authority. This is a measure brought in to save costs for the government but puts these costs disproportionately onto the pub.

A similar situation arises with food safety. The new HACCAP regulations are designed to reduce the incidence of food poisoning by less than 20%. If you knew the complexities of HACCAP then you would understand that for a small business this far exceeds the laws of diminishing returns. In fact I imagine this sort of regulation simply distracts the licensee from actually running a safe kitchen as he or she is often the one in the kitchen telling the staff to keep the raw chicken away from the lettuce. If the licensee is too busy filling in paperwork then this is time away from safety supervision. HACCAP should not be required where the business owner acts as a daily on the job supervisor.

I am no fan of the Pubco. I am unlikely to ever be one unless I end up owning a chain of pubs myself. I am sure that they have a commercial advantage by having the resources to tackle the swaths of regulation that exists. The sole freehold trader does not have the advantage of this support. It is with some surprise then that several Pubco's have contributed evidence to the inquiry and they all seem to be supporting the idea that regulation has gone far too far.

So consider these things next time you are canvased by a Parliamentary Candidate. Ask them what they are going to do about regulation that has gone far beyond the point of sensible diminishing returns. Specifically ask them if they are going to simplify legislation that affects the pub industry. Ask them if the Government would like to make it their business to keep pubs open or if they think the small pub is a rogue trader that needs to be eliminated.

Pub operating costs soar

I posted yesterday about the All Party Parliamentary Beer Group report on the Community Pub Inquiry.

I've finished reading it and I think the most striking thing about the findings is just how complicated the whole issue of pub viability is. It is just not appropriate to simplify the issues in the way many do. I do believe that it is the best, almost unbiased report I have seen for some time into the overall pub industry and it's problems.

I hope over a series of pieces to try and distill the findings for the reader. But as I say, the overall issues are complex and I would urge anybody who is intent on complaining about beer being too expensive or this or that pub closing should first very carefully read the report.

Today I'm going to simply quote some costs at you. Costs that have escalated over the last 10 years or so.

The operating costs of the average pub are now around 45% of turnover - they used to be more like 32%

Of the operating costs 17% was wages in 1997 - it is now around 50%. This shows that minimum wage, leave entitlement, statutory sick pay and working time directive have had a significant effect as well as a whole raft of other employment laws.

Beer duty has gone up by 27%, whereas duty on wine has only gone up 16% and duty on spirits and ready to drink (RTD) spirit based drinks have only gone up by 3%. To me RTDs are a main catalyst of the increase of alcohol related social problems.

It used to cost a single £12 fee and an instant decision by the Licensing Justices to have a simple change to a licence, called a licence variation. For instance to open up or brick up a door. Now it probably costs £1000 and months of work. This is not helpful when pubs need to adapt to survive. Pubs have not got the resources or time to do this. For a small change the cost of legislation far outstrips the cost of the practical work.

The cost of legislation on pubs is astronomical and moreover the type of legislation is not appropriate. Take HACCAP for instance. This requires a member of the team to document trivia for the environmental (mental) health officer to look at and give the pub Brownie points. This distracts the sole trader from the kitchen where he is often the one ensuring the food is safe. A classic example of paperwork detracting from safety and at the same time making the small business almost impossible to run. It is though, not one single piece of legislation, but the whole raft that is put onto the industry in a one size fits all policy making system.

One recommendation is for the duty on draft beer to be reduced. Alternatively for the VAT on draft products to be decreased. Unfortunately the E.U. prevents that. At least that's what the economic Secretary to the Treasury claims.

It is striking that the report finds that the average profit for the licensee is only half of what he pays to the treasury in VAT and beer duty. This is before he pays his employees' NI and income tax.

I say it again - reader, yes you!! don't let the government ignore this very important piece of work done by the APPBG.

COMMUNITY PUB INQUIRY

I am halfway through reading the report on the Community Pub produced as a result of the All Party Parliamentary Beer Group Inquiry. It makes interesting, if difficult reading.

It can be found here. I think it is excellent and should help the industry - but don't let the government ignore it. It's been published for a couple of weeks and despite having talked to somebody who is very closely involved and reading the trade press as much as time allows, it only came to my attention today. (Probably partly my fault - but I still should have seen it in the trade press or on a blog or something - wake up guys!!)

It discusses the many and varied problems facing the smaller pub business. It includes of course the two major ones often cited:

1. Smoking Ban
2. Cheap supermarket drink

It also lists a whole range of other factors including:

1. Cheap, high quality home entertainment (reading blogs for example!)
2. Rafts and rafts of legislation (boy do I know it)
3. Beer duty increase(27%) is greater than spirits(3%) and wine(16%) (spirits surely are more of an alcohol problem)
4. Overzealous legislation enforcers - the council normally
5. Unfair rating system
6. Rising labour costs (minimum wage and employment rights effects)

And many more.

There will be more on this here - but if you think cheap supermarket booze and the smoking ban are the main issues, read the report and think again.

I believe if the consumer focuses only on the two big issues, because they are the ones that the consumer cares about, pubs will still close at an alarming rate because we miss the point.

Energy for beer cooling.

I thought that the general pub goer might be interested in knowing how much it costs to keep the beer at the correct temperature.

These figures represent the profit from the first 10 pints of beer sold per day.

The bar staff represent 60 pints per day minimum on a 12 hour opening schedule. General heating and lighting at least another 20 pints per day, insurance at least 10 pints per day. It is estimated that legislation could now be costing the typical pub outlet £30,000 per year. That's 80 pints per day.

Many small community pubs just can't get to these volumes, no where near in fact.

These figures are not all based on precise scientific methods, but the ball park is not far away - the point is many customers just don't think about the costs that the pub has to cover for the environment that is provided.

Pubs are closing, are we really that surprised?

I have always been bothered by the continual issue of pubs closing. For me this is a multifaceted problem. Clearly it is a sad day when any pub ends up closing, for whatever reason. Before we became owners of our own beverage dispensing retail outlet we lived in a small village where the small local was under threat. It closed when the brewery sold it into the free trade while the new owners refurbished. It was closed for so long we wondered if it would ever reopen. We had to walk over a mile to the next nearest place. Now we have got our own pub, we worry about making it viable and bringing in enough money to pay the overheads and maintain the building to the standards required by customers, health and safety, environmental health, the fire service etc. We do wonder if the effort required in making it viable is ever going to bring rewards and the worry can be enormous.

I also worry about the impact that the resistance to change of usage is having in a more subtle way. Although it is completely understandable that there is resistance to a pub being turned into some other use, it may just be causing unnecessary damage to the pub industry and more importantly the people who have decided to make it their livelihood. CAMRA's well meaning attempts to keep pubs open may be doing no more than prolonging the agony of an eventuality.

It is true that there are some success stories. CAMRA have helped to jolly along communities into supporting a dying pub and eventually finding a licensee who can turn around the fortunes of an establishment, but this is probably not the norm. It is more often than not the case that the resistance simply puts great stress on a pub owner and the surrounding community with the eventual result that the owner looses a significant part of the investment put in and looses faith in pubs as a way of earning a living. The industry looses any skills that the disillusioned had.

It is true that if there was no check on the closure of pubs then there is likely to be wholesale closures that would be significantly damaging, so I'm not suggesting that a fight is never appropriate. We do need to look at the overall effect of fighting lost causes.

A major argument for keeping a particular pub open is that all it needs is "the right management team". The thing is it takes an incredible type of person to run a pub well. It takes an even more incredible type of person, probably with an incredible partner, has a good financial collateral and lots and lots of energy to be able to turn a failing pub in to a fantastic pub. There simply are not the number of people in this country who have all these qualities to run all the faltering pubs that are out there.

It is often said that if a community pub closes it rips the heart out of the community. I think community pubs closing is a symptom of the heart having already gone from the community. In a previous post I mention about the lack of respect for pubs. This is often even more so in smaller communities. Often the community is so insular that it would not matter how much the average landlord tries he will never do enough. The beer will always be too expensive, the food will not be as good as the the food the landlord that was there two before him did, they will always remember the time that they were permitted to stay until 3am, throw up on the carpet, fight, shout and swear and every previous landlord just laughed at it all! Like hell!!

In my experience, even if we say it's OK to behave like this in a pub, many pubs are scaring away decent folk because of unacceptable behaviour of the "regulars". In many small communities an "incomer" will have a very tough job changing the ethos of a pub to one that will work. All pubs, community pubs and town pubs alike need to progress. In small insular communities this is extremely hard to achieve. For a community pub to work the community has to work in a positive way with the licensee and respect the tough job he has.

A common criticism leveled at the failing pub is that it is not open at the times that the customers would like it to be open. "How do they expect to make money if they are always closed!" is the cry. But very often the perception of the customer is biased towards their own needs rather than the viability of the pub. If the general community really thinks that most rural pubs will take enough money to justify being open on a wet Tuesday afternoon then they are mistaken. Besides, is a licensee not permitted to have a life outside the pub?

A common "answer" to the problem of keeping a pub viable is to try and diversify. Become a post office, shop, library etc. Well these ideas might work in some situations and great if they do. The problem with diversification is that it also results in complication for the operator. Put in simple terms: if you went to bed every night after 1am do you think you could get up and be cheerful to open the shop a 9am - I know I couldn't.

A further problem most publicans have is that of staffing. There simply are not enough quality people out there in the local rural community who are prepared to work the unsocial hours required. There might be people, but frankly, some that will do the work cannot be trusted to be behind a bar.

There is a rather sceptical view out there, that I believe is over hyped: it states that many of the pubs that are closing are being deliberately run down to ensure there is proof that they are not viable. The owner is doing this to make a major profit from the change of use. I believe in the vast majority of cases this is not true. Put simply, if a building is worth more as a house than it is as a pub then the pub is a very long way off being viable. Most pubs, in my view, should be worth significantly more than the base value of the building as a dwelling. Pubs often have significant investment in cellar equipment, kitchen equipment, specialist fixtures, fittings and furniture and there should be, from a business point of view some value in "good will".

It remains a fact that many pubs are worth a lot less than the building would be were it to be sold as a dwelling. This is not just an anomaly of the property market, it is a problem with the amount customers are prepared to pay for beer. The value of pubs in rural locations, has, for a number of years, been significantly less than dwellings.

The reason is simple, in economic terms most pubs in the rural locations, most "community pubs", cannot pay their way in a commercial sense. We are, I believe in the pub trade, going through the same pain that the coal miners went through in the late 70's and early 80's as they were forced into realising the situation that their industry, as it stood, was not viable.

We can fight it if we like, but rural pubs, where the population surround them is small, will fail. Trying to stop it will just put people through misery.

That does not equate, though, to the end of the pub. Not providing we are prepared to redefine the pub. If we accept that pubs might have to do something different. If we accept that the quality food destination pub (rather than gastro) is part of the the answer. If we accept that some pubs might do better without a pool table or juke box or swearing obnoxious locals, then we have a chance.

We have to accept, more than anything, that a local pub, serving a local community and visitors alike, might have more problems making it pay. Weatherspoons prices can only be charged in Weatherspoons, and so your community pubs need to charge more. Your village store charges more because it's right where you want it and you save on your petrol. We have not yet made that link.

Many people come into the trade using all their life's worth. Putting everything they own and more into the venture. Buying property should always, in the long term have a reasonable degree of security. This is rapidly turning out to not be the case with investments in pubs. The pub market is changing, preventing decent people from getting back what they have invested is going to make the pub industry even less attractive to ordinary people investing in it.

But more than anything, respect your pub and respect your licensee, he/she may not be the best but they might just be the best you are ever going to get.