Login Register
 °

THE BIG DEBATE: Is the pub trade being ruined by big companies?

By Lincolnshire Echo  |  Posted: February 23, 2013

Pub trade
Comments (17)

With Lincoln city centre often being criticised for its number of chain pubs and a lack of independent bars, the Echo is asking the public if they think that the pub trade is being ruined by big companies. Here, two experts present either side of the argument...


YES

Steve Renshaw, secretary of the Lincoln branch of CAMRA

Related content

Pubs in Lincoln are expensive and don’t support local microbreweries. These are common observations by visitors to the city. Clearly, they are generalisations and there are notable exceptions. But, based on my travels, I find it difficult to disagree. The reasons are complicated, but one of the major factors is the ownership of our pubs.

In the good old days, most pubs belonged to the local breweries. They were tied houses – they only sold their brewery’s beer. Independent pubs became known as free houses, and could buy their beer from any brewer.

Things changed after the Second World War, when brewery mergers began. By the 1980s, the “Big Six” brewers owned more than half of the country’s pubs and produced 75 per cent of its beer. Mrs Thatcher’s Government was concerned about the lack of competition and, in 1989, issued the Beer Orders. Brewers were not allowed to own more than 2,000 pubs, and had to give landlords the option of selling at least one guest beer produced by a rival.

Because the big brewers weren’t prepared to open up their pubs to other brewers’ beers, they came up with something new – pub companies – to which they sold all their pubs. As these “pubcos” didn’t brew beer themselves, they were exempt from the legislation.

So, today, we have a situation where around half of pubs in the UK are owned by pubcos. These pubs have to buy their beer only from the pubco, at a price up to 50 per cent more than a free-of-tie publican pays.

Alongside this, pubco licensees often find themselves paying rents that are above the market rate. Around Lincoln, we have very few free houses, so there isn’t the same level of competition as in many other towns. Hence the higher prices in our pubs. And, as the pubcos broker deals with the bigger brewers, microbreweries have found it difficult to get beer into their pubs.

For some years, CAMRA has campaigned against the unfair practices of pubcos. This came to fruition last month, when the Government announced a new, statutory code to ensure fair practices for a number of issues, including rents and the prices publicans pay for beer. It will enshrine the fundamental principle that “a tied licensee should be no worse off than a free-of-tie licensee”.

The code is expected to apply to all companies owning more than 500 tied leases.

Regional family brewers, such as Batemans, who have used the beer tie for more than a century to guarantee a market for their beer, will be exempt.

One development that has benefited microbreweries is the Society of Independent Brewers’ direct delivery scheme. A number of pubcos, including big boys Punch Taverns and Enterprise Inns, allow some of their licensees to source beer brewed within 30 miles of the pub, via the scheme.

I visited The Strugglers Inn, a Punch pub on Westgate, to find out what can be achieved within the constraints of a pubco lease. Apart from snacks, there is no food on offer, so the pub stands or falls on the quality and diversity of its beers.

There are eight handpumps on the bar. By using Punch’s core and guest beer lists and direct delivery to the best advantage, landlady, Anna, managed to serve 386 different real ales during 2012. And the quality has been recognised with the award of CAMRA’s Lincolnshire Pub of the Year in 2010 and 2012.

And what about the beer? 8 Sail Brewery’s Victorian Porter (5% ABV) is produced in the shadow of Heckington’s famous windmill. It’s a full-bodied, beer dominated by dark malt flavours, but with hints of berry fruits and some bitterness at the end. Perfect after a winter’s walk.

Find out more about CAMRA’s campaigns at www.camra.org.uk/campaigns


NO

Dave Pawson, Punch Taverns’ central operations manager

In March 1987, when I was 13, we packed up our sold house and moved to a “new town” called Redditch in the West Midlands, leaving Lincoln, our home city.

We left behind our family and friends because my father had retrained as a prison officer having been made redundant from one of Lincoln’s largest employers, Clayton Dewandre, where he had worked for 25 years, following the closure of the factory.

I tell this story to illustrate a point about how the communities we know can change significantly.

When Claytons (hopefully some of you will remember it, maybe even worked there) closed, a section of society who lived, worked and socialised together, shared the same tastes and views, were dispersed. What effect did this have on the community pubs?

When I was asked to write this piece I asked my dad to tell me his stories about his favourite pubs in Lincoln when he was a young man.

I’ll list some of them for you: The Lincoln Imp on the Ermine, The Roaring Meg on Nettleham road, The Turks Head on Newport; The Brickmakers Arms, Stamp End; The Ripon Arms on Portland St; the Roebuck and the Queens Head on the High St. Great pubs from a great time. These were the glory days of the community pub and the community.

So what has changed? It’s not about ownership of pub buildings. People have changed. Their tastes, what they want, what they can access and when they can get it.

In the glory days of the pub there were three channels on the TV and you only went to a gym if you were at school or in prison. The pub was more or less the only leisure activity for a working class male between the ages of 18 and 65.

It’s a simplistic and flawed argument to suggest that pub companies and the beer tie are to blame for the demise of the industry.

It refuses to acknowledge that society has changed so significantly. Leisure is now a hugely competitive market with gyms, multiplex cinemas, coffee shops, huge indoor shopping centres, online gaming, nine hundred TV channels etc. Pubs no longer have the monopoly they once enjoyed.

What is the future of the pub, and especially the community pub, in the face of such competition? I think it’s a bright one, so long as we look forward to what the future can hold and acknowledge what the consumer wants rather than looking backwards and apportioning blame.

The pub is a retail business. I know it means much more emotionally and so it should, but at its heart it provides products that customers purchase and then consume on the premises.

If the pub is a retail business it must operate on retail principles. It’s about service, standards, comfort and quality of product. This is just a given to the general public today.

Cost is an issue, no doubt. Since 2004 beer duty rates have increased by 42 per cent. In 2008 the Labour Government imposed the “Beer Duty Escalator” which committed to an “inflation plus 2 per cent” rise in beer duty up until 2014/15. The coalition Government continues with that policy.

The average price of a pint is now £3.10 and a third of that goes to the Government. When it comes to the price of beer, I know where I’m looking.

Punch Taverns has a vested interest in the success of our pubs. Our tenants buy their beer from us and, yes, it is more expensive than a “free of tie” publican, but we balance that out by charging a lower sustainable fixed rent for the business.

The more successful the pub is, the more beer they will buy. Why would we set a rent for a pub that is unsustainable? It’s self-defeating.

You price a pub out of business, you lose your income. Our success is interdependent and that’s why we are investing heavily in our estate.

Nationwide, over this year we will spend £45 million on pub refurbishments. In the last two years we have spent a quarter of million pounds in Lincolnshire investing in our pubs with a further half a million earmarked for the next year.

We are building popular pubs (with a fantastic range of real ale) run by successful tenants. When we have that, we all win.

Read more from Lincolnshire Echo

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters

17 comments

  • Pete67  |  February 26 2013, 6:29PM

    eatmygoal - Tuesday, February 26 2013, 11:15PM - - - Don't know why your getting reds you put some good point in there. Obviously we've always (well before I was born in the forties), Gyms and Cinemas, but from the ones I remember from my younger days the new ones are totally different. Hence people are likely to try them.

  • eatmygoal  |  February 26 2013, 4:17PM

    Between suggestions that I post crude pictures and name calling I am sure you are making some good points. Well done you.

  • Cloth_Ears  |  February 26 2013, 3:35PM

    "The gym et al are not new things but have never been more popular" It must be the et al part of your statement that are actually proving to be more popular, as we are currently in the middle of an obeseity epidemic. Then again on my visits to the gym it is mainly full of rotund punters stuffing "power bars" down their throats whilst getting their moneys worth out of the jacuzzi. I do agree that the "local boozers" that cater for the "lone wolf" with yellow stained fingers who are happy to spend the night propping up the bar in silence puffing away on a fag are doomed to close. Im not sure i would offer you outside for a large slice of shoe pie in the car park for our differing opinions, but i would certainly consider it for your excellent portrail of a pompous wazzock...

    |   1
  • eatmygoal  |  February 26 2013, 2:13PM

    It has been a gradual decline and with the increasing use of other things so the use of pubs has declined. The gym et al are not new things but have never been more popular. Considering the fact the smoking ban covers eateries, there are a staggering number of new ones opening on the Brayford. Perhaps people who smoke only avoid not smoking in pubs and are happy to not smoke in other places? The young crowd even manage not to smoke in one of the two new night clubs to have opened since the smoking ban. There is not gospel, just my view, perhaps in years gone by instead of making crass remarks you would offer me outside to the pub car park for taking a differing view point to you?

  • Cloth_Ears  |  February 26 2013, 11:50AM

    "More than that, there are now more leisure options available. Gym, multi screen cinemas, restaurants etc" Oh yes i remember only 10 years ago we used to gather around the 6" screen at my neighbours watching the talkies..... Are you really suggesting that Gyms, cinemas and restaurants are a new thing???? Prehaps once the novelty wears off the pubs will be bustling again. Not to mention the fact that now, according to the gospel handed down by "eatmygoal", nobody meets in public places any more and match.com is now the norm. Some (possibly your goodself Mr. Goal) spend evening glued to the computer screen firing out images of their genitals to whomever requests them, but surely i can't be the only one who still prefers to spend my evenings conversing face to face with people or is this a skill that is no longer possessed by your generation??

    |   3
  • eatmygoal  |  February 26 2013, 11:15AM

    I think the best reason given for the pubs closing is as described by the Dave Pawson, and also by the point about encouraging less drinking. Our culture has shifted in a number of ways. Firstly there is more importance placed on the family and taking the family out as a whole. This means that the trip to the pub is less often. More than that, there are now more leisure options available. Gym, multi screen cinemas, restaurants etc. The reverse is true of lack of money, there is more disposable income now and more choices on what to spend it. Pubs are more expensive than before and no longer the default cheap option for a good night out (Orange Wednesday anyone?). Secondly there has been an increase in binge drinking. The younger generation who would have been going into pubs to replace deceased regulars now prefer to "pre load", get drunk at home on cheap drink from supermarkets. The onus now is very much on getting completely wrecked the more irresponsible you are and less memory you have the more of a legend you are. I know, I have tried and failed on many occasions to become that legend. Thirdly, allied to that is the fact that communities have changed. People tend not to know their neighbours anymore, they tend not to socialise as much with those close by because through better transport and communication you can meet up with friends around the country and globe. There was a time when you would find your wife in the village, probably in the pub or dance at the local village hall. Now you go on Match.com, or chat to them in another city. Basically the world is changing and the pub is no longer the focal point of it, it is one of a number of things. There will always be pubs, or more likely bars, as people enjoy an evening out at them. But people are not going to go to them every day, or even every week as there are other things to do. It is very easy to throw your hands up and say it is the smoking ban. It nicely encapsulates the whole problem and conveniently places the blame on the government and on legislation and gives the false hope that if only the decision was reversed 10 pubs a week would open in the UK. The ban has no doubt had a contributing effect, but only as part of a great number of other factors. I have always been a drinker and smoking around me has never really stopped me. It is nice these days to not have to shower the minute I get home to stop my pillow smelling of smoke in the morning and put my clothes in the hall to air them, not to mention the enhanced risk of cancer through no fault of my own. But I drink less now in pubs because I play football in the week, go to the cinema and comedy gigs and at the weekends visit friends which normally ends in staying in their place drinking wine or beer from the off liscence.

    |   -2
  • Vexxed  |  February 26 2013, 9:49AM

    The stupidly high tax on alcohol plus the smoking ban has ruined the pub trade. When they brought in the smoking ban, the pubs just emptied straight away. Now with the higher taxes, it's just not worth it any more. What they should have done, is create no smoking areas in the bars, lower taxes on the alcohol instead of being greedy and everything would have been fine.

    |   3
  • InsideStory  |  February 24 2013, 3:17PM

    The funny thing now is adverts on television trying to put people off drinking too so what the no smoking ban as done to the decline of the pub trade the Government are trying to make worse but hey more tax on beverages cant be any worse than taxing the smoker.We are all in this together. You cant discriminate against one with out the other . Have fun being controlled by the tax system in the country.

    |   7
  • Dailyman  |  February 23 2013, 3:21PM

    I think you'll find the cost of the drinks is ruining the pub trade, not the smoking ban

    |   -21
  • Pete67  |  February 23 2013, 2:49PM

    hykehamfan 'So enough with putting types of people into little categories, its pathetic' - - - If your read carefully you'll see I put 'The trouble is I think the non-smokers who didn't go before are also Teetotal'. Note the 'who didn't go before', so I assume you are one of the ones non-smokers did as opposed to the non-smokers who didn't.

    |   2

      YOUR COMMENTS AWAITING MODERATION

       
       
       

      MORE NEWS HEADLINES

       
       

      Poll