The Londoner & The Office

[DavidS]

Business at The Londoner and The Office on Sukhumvit 33 has been down recently. I do not know whether this is an unrelated trend or because of the new smoking laws.

Some people seem to think that it is because the playing field is not level – there are still bars that permit smoking inside. This apparently has a spillover effect, because it is not just the smokers who move there, their non-smoking friends follow.

If this is the case then I think it is a heavy price for these establishments to pay for trying to do the right thing.

This is not about whether smoking is good or bad, neither is it about whether the laws are good or bad. There are entrenched opinions on these issues and re-hashing them is not going to change anything.

It is about doing the right thing and suffering for it. It is about the staff at these establishments paying a particularly heavy price. Tips are obviously down, and I'm sure everyone has noticed the way the cost of living has been increasing sharply the last 3 months.

I have no financial connection with these 2 establishments, but I would ask that if you support the idea of these establishments doing the right thing, then please consider giving them some patronage as a sign of support.

By the same token, if your local is in a similar situation, post it and I will make the effort to pop over and show some support.

[MSingh]

Nice food in the Office & the Hammers have never lost when i watch them in there so that's sad to hear..

[kyb789]

Wednesday's still seem to be a big party at Londoner's. The bar allows smoking and drinking out on the patio. The smoking patrons took the party outside when I was there. I personally stopped going to those bars for one reason....price. Tourists can pay western prices for food and drink, but locals take their money elsewhere. The price increases in tourist areas have gotten ridiculous.

[howtoescape]

Wednesday's still seem to be a big party at Londoner's. The bar allows smoking and drinking out on the patio. The smoking patrons took the party outside when I was there. I personally stopped going to those bars for one reason....price. Tourists can pay western prices for food and drink, but locals take their money elsewhere. The price increases in tourist areas have gotten ridiculous.

I went into the Londoner for something to eat in January looked at the prices on the boards and walked straight back out again, the prices were more expensive then many pubs in England, i also hear that the foods as bad as British pub grub.

[misterman21]

Business at The Londoner and The Office on Sukhumvit 33 has been down recently. I do not know whether this is an unrelated trend or because of the new smoking laws.

If this is the case then I think it is a heavy price for these establishments to pay for trying to do the right thing.

.

Depends on what you call doing the right thing. Conforming to oppresive laws, with facism writen all over them, is obviously not the wright thing to those who value their freedom of choice.

Thats the trouble with democracy: the will of the few is impossed upon the many.

Signed: A non smoker - sitting in a smokey atmospheric bar with my mates

[clausewitz]

Wednesday's still seem to be a big party at Londoner's. The bar allows smoking and drinking out on the patio. The smoking patrons took the party outside when I was there. I personally stopped going to those bars for one reason....price. Tourists can pay western prices for food and drink, but locals take their money elsewhere. The price increases in tourist areas have gotten ridiculous.

Thanks for the warning. I was thinking of moving to the Londoner from the Dubliner - where I have my Sunday brekki sometimes. 380 baht they charge (without a drink). Sounds like the Londoner would be just as bad.

[PhilHarries]

It is unfortunate for the owners of the establishments but despite their vociferous protestations that banning smoking will result in an upswing in trade from non-smokers this just is not happening. It was the same in Ireland and now in the UK that after a brief upward blip pub attendance has declined drastically and the rate of pub closures has reached epidemic proportions. Smokers tend to be more egrarious, outgoing and social people and non-smokers follow them for the atmosphere (pun intended). So places that "do the right (?) thing" are penalised, in the UK ending up closed and in Thailand losing out to the places that are more, shall we say, flexible.

btw I am a lifelong non-smoker and if anyone wants the source for the pub closures thing I can get it but might take a little time (I lost the source for the Ireland stats).

[bartender100]

One pub closing every 6 hours in the UK, mixture of reasons

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/39611/...g-time-for-pubs

[TokyoT]

I personally stopped going to those bars for one reason....price. Tourists can pay western prices for food and drink, but locals take their money elsewhere. The price increases in tourist areas have gotten ridiculous.

BINGO

[Digitalbanana]

Price is my reason for passing the Londoner also. Better value elsewhere...

[Naam]

Depends on what you call doing the right thing. Conforming to oppresive laws, with facism writen all over them, is obviously not the wright thing to those who value their freedom of choice.

Thats the trouble with democracy: the will of the few is impossed upon the many.

Signed: A non smoker - sitting in a smokey atmospheric bar with my mates

better look out for Clayton Seymour

[DavidS]

The trouble with the surveys or stats is for every one that says something, another contradicts it.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080329/thl-...rk-0b0437e.html

I guess the most accurate description is "mixture of reasons" above. There are smokers and non-smokers patronising the 2 establishments I mentioned. And a number of people have posted that they do not go to these places because of price.

Perhaps its too early to draw any conclusions, but posts so far point to the main factor really being value for money? If the place gives its customers what they perceive to be great value for money, not just price but atmosphere and overall experience, people will keep going. And if not, they don't.

[burman]

Wednesday's still seem to be a big party at Londoner's. The bar allows smoking and drinking out on the patio. The smoking patrons took the party outside when I was there. I personally stopped going to those bars for one reason....price.

Yes Wednesday is busy because it's half price on drinks night. I popped in there once on a Friday about 8-9 O'Clock, it was completely dead.

Have to admit though, smoking outside is one of the reasons too.

[misterman21]

Beer and fags go together like - well beer and fags! Ask any smoker how they feel about having to stand outside a pub - 10 metres away from any officious prick with a badge (in the UK) - to smoke a cigarette!

If your in a nightclub then it can often be against the club rules to leave or a right palaver to leave and re enter. The local government in Sheffield are even regulating to ban smoking outside public places!!

A lot of people in the UK have now started to drink at home - wine consumption has gone in to orbit. England is becoming a nation of wine-os!

*fags is common in english for cigarettes ( for information of speakers of english as second language and americans - still learning english)

[DavidS]

*fags is common in english for cigarettes ( for information of speakers of english as second language and americans - still learning english)

Good thing you clarified this. Heaven forbid that anyone took the other meaning. The Politically Correct Police would have been on your case.

[DavidS]

Yes Wednesday is busy because it's half price on drinks night. I popped in there once on a Friday about 8-9 O'Clock, it was completely dead.

Have to admit though, smoking outside is one of the reasons too.

That says a bit. If the perceived value for money is there, smokers will go to the place and step out / party outside if they have to. And if they do not see the value for money, they up sticks and move.

The only thing I find sad is the playing field does not appear to be level. Businesses should compete on a level playing field, it is better for the consumer and in a first-world law enforcement situation, they would.

[mrtoad]

I'm not sure if the Londoner has really lost many customers, as it is a pub that is often empty.

Wednesday nights have always been busy, and as long as they do the one for one it wont change. Certain sporting events, and the pub is packed also, but other than Friday and Saturday nights, the place can be pretty empty, and with it no atmosphere.

The Office is an interesting one, as it seemed to have become quieter proir to the ban, and appears to be continuing in that trend from the OP's post.

I have found my regular bar now which at present allows smoking, serves decent priced food and has a good atmosphere.

[sgunn65]

I have just returned from the UK where I went to the closing night of my old local. The landlord told me that the last few months had killed the trade and that 2 of the oldest pubs in Twickenham were also closing down (one has been there since the early 1700's).

In Bkk I usually ask if I can smoke inside. If the answer is no I will move on, if the answer is yes I tend to stay for the evening. As far as I am concerned level playing fields are fine but customer choice is also fine. I am exercising my customer rights until such times as all the bars change. However if customer power means that all bars go back to smoking then so be it.

I am one of those strange breeds. I tend to smoke for 6 months then stop for 6 months and have done so for years but always find smokers to be the gregarious ones. I have met the best people outside smoking at conferences and the same often happens in pubs. That is not to say that this is the rule as all my English friends bar one are non smokers.

[OxfordWill]

and that bar is....

[onnut]

Molly Malones allows smoking upstairs, dont know how long for though. upstairs now has a good atmosphere and downstairs you cannot smell any smoking going on. food is cheap and good portions, not bad tasting either. so that is my bar of choice for now.

[mrtoad]

and that bar is....

I use Soi 8 as it is a decent bar which allows freedom of choice. Molly Malones is another that has shown some common sense of offering something to it's smoking customers. Good on both of them.

[JimmyCA]

Depends on what you call doing the right thing. Conforming to oppresive laws, with facism writen all over them, is obviously not the wright thing to those who value their freedom of choice.

Thats the trouble with democracy: the will of the few is impossed upon the many.

Signed: A non smoker - sitting in a smokey atmospheric bar with my mates

I think it is well known by anyone with even half a brain that the smokers have been imposing on non-smokers rights all along. I agree it is sad a law is needed to deal with the rudeness of a smoker's dirty habit.

[twschw]

The insults have begun. DavidS I commend you on your civility twords smokers. I know you don't care for smoking but at least you are not insulting.

[burman]

Well at least you've been benefiting from all our tax money.

As far as the smoking/bars debate goes, I think freedom of choice is the answer. If a bar wants to be non smoking it can, and if it wants to be smoking that should be fine also. There's plenty enough of bars to go around to support both groups.

[mrtoad]

Well at least you've been benefiting from all our tax money.

As far as the smoking/bars debate goes, I think freedom of choice is the answer. If a bar wants to be non smoking it can, and if it wants to be smoking that should be fine also. There's plenty enough of bars to go around to support both groups.

Agree with that 100%.

[howtoescape]

Well at least you've been benefiting from all our tax money.

As far as the smoking/bars debate goes, I think freedom of choice is the answer. If a bar wants to be non smoking it can, and if it wants to be smoking that should be fine also. There's plenty enough of bars to go around to support both groups.

Agree with that 100%.

Also agree and im someone that hates cigarettes with a passion, id sooner they stopped people being blind drunk in bars, ive never had any fear of someone who smoked too many tabs.

http://www.thelondonpaper.com/cs/Satellite...ticleController

Edited April 3, 2008 by howtoescape

[ClaytonSeymour]

Business at The Londoner and The Office on Sukhumvit 33 has been down recently. I do not know whether this is an unrelated trend or because of the new smoking laws.

Some people seem to think that it is because the playing field is not level – there are still bars that permit smoking inside. This apparently has a spillover effect, because it is not just the smokers who move there, their non-smoking friends follow.

If this is the case then I think it is a heavy price for these establishments to pay for trying to do the right thing.

This is not about whether smoking is good or bad, neither is it about whether the laws are good or bad. There are entrenched opinions on these issues and re-hashing them is not going to change anything.

It is about doing the right thing and suffering for it. It is about the staff at these establishments paying a particularly heavy price. Tips are obviously down, and I'm sure everyone has noticed the way the cost of living has been increasing sharply the last 3 months.

I have no financial connection with these 2 establishments, but I would ask that if you support the idea of these establishments doing the right thing, then please consider giving them some patronage as a sign of support.

By the same token, if your local is in a similar situation, post it and I will make the effort to pop over and show some support.

It's up to the authorities to enforce the law and ensure that it is a level playing field. Let's wait until June when the law will supposedly be enforced.

Hopefully we'll see a few of the disobeying bar owners in the same position as these guys - the sooner Mr Howitt is bankrupt the better.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7324402.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/7315046.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/herefor...rcs/7284337.stm

Whilst the smoking ban may be having some impact, prices in bars such as the Londoner are probably more off putting for some - especially with the current global economy fears.

Similarly, going back to the UK, it's hardly surprising that smaller pubs are struggling, the big chain pubs rule the roost now, go in any Wetherspoons pub & you'll see they're full, whilst the pub down the road is empty - pricewise, the local boozer simply can't compete. Let's not forget the ridiculously cheap supermarkets too.

Edited April 3, 2008 by ClaytonSeymour

[polecat]

Depends on what you call doing the right thing. Conforming to oppresive laws, with facism writen all over them, is obviously not the wright thing to those who value their freedom of choice.

Thats the trouble with democracy: the will of the few is impossed upon the many.

Signed: A non smoker - sitting in a smokey atmospheric bar with my mates

I think it is well known by anyone with even half a brain that the smokers have been imposing on non-smokers rights all along. I agree it is sad a law is needed to deal with the rudeness of a smoker's dirty habit.

What rights are we talking about here? Is it something in a constitution? In your home country? Here? Where? I've never heard of 'right to smoke' or a 'right not to be subjected to smoke'? Freedom of choice is a two way street, and far from being a 'right' it's a privilege.

Anyway,the top and bottom of the matter is that if smoking in bars keeps non-smoking, phone-on-belt wearing, Apple Mac-using, latte-drinking, velcro sandal-wearing, Phil Collins-listening types at home ... It's got to be a good thing, hasn't it?

[DavidS]

The problem with the freedom of choice debate is that the law as written does not permit that. I agree it would be an elegant solution, New York allows bars to purchase a tobacco licence and declare themselves smoking bars. But this is not the case here.

What you have is bars breaking the law on smoking. At 20,000 baht a time, that is 600,000 baht in potential fines in 30 days. Obviously they are not paying 600,000 baht in fines, are they?

I don't know about you, but I do wonder.

Which brings me back to my point, a level playing field is better for the consumer.

[ClaytonSeymour]

Yet again we see the pro smoking lobby going on about freedom of choice blah, blah. I'm sorry, but stop being selfish and face the facts; you are stuck in nicotines grasp and slowly poisoning yourself. Just because you are too weak, or unwilling to deal with your addiction, why should you have the right to poison others too? Should I have the right to poison the local water supply? If you want to slowly kill yourselves fine, do it in private & not in front of your children.

Count yourselves lucky that governments haven't banned smoking entirely, but that's only down to one thing - the huge amount of taxes it raises for the treasury coffers.