CAMRA to talk to OFT about beer tie

14 April, 2009

By James Wilmore

This marks a SIGNIFICANT shift on the part of BBPA and CAMRA and should be widely welcomed because, clearly, the wool is falling away from their eyes and the lies they have been fed by the pubcos are finally being recognised for what they are. There is a danger that if CAMRA do apply their extraordinary status as a super complainant to bringing OFT's own myopic view of things back to the structure of the pubco model that it does not in itself divert from the real issues of closed competition issues, market manipulation, effective monopolisation and endemic price fixing which need to be seriously investigated, addressed and legislated against.

The sages who rail against the surrent state of play. In turn:

Sylvia: 'common sense and the law'. ?. Your own statement is contradictory. No one is forgetting who OWNS tied pubs. The fact is tied pub owners have abused their power so much they and seamlessly NOT done what they say they do that they should have their 'rights' as owners, as you put it, summarily withdrawn. The ownership and management of tied pubs should be vested in the hands of people responsible enough to carry that mantle of responsibility. The current 'owners' (many of them only 'manage' these estates anyway) do not deserve the benefits that come with ownership. The reason there's only one case of a downward rent review (remember Enterprise and Punch particularly stated at BESC they have 'not enforced upward rent reviews sinece 1996') is because the whole industry has been fitted up to the extent that ONLY a RICS member with a personal, direct financial interest in a tied pub could even HOPE to get a downward review because they understand the opaque nonsense that has been built up around rent reviews that is designed purely and squarely to totally rip off licensees. That side of the inequity in the system is being dealt with properly elsewhere than on this forum.

Steve W: This is ENTIRELY of interest to CAMRA. The product lists of (some) of the pubcos MAy be broad but the price lists keep real ale purchases streamlined strictly to the pubcos' agenda unless individual licensees committed to providing a wide range continuously are prepared to wear a non commercial hit in their GPs.

As a free of tie licensee you're talking what seems like sense but you simply are misinformed about tied costs. The tie is a pernicious burden which comes with NON of the contervailing benefits which lessees pay handsomely for. If tied lessees were in any other retail environment they'd be taking their goods back for complete and immediate reimbursement and taking their custom elsewhere.

mary: YOU have it in a nutshell.

Chris Roberts: Oh dear oh dear oh dear. More tripe from the anti ant tie lobby - the vociferous 'lobby for no particular cause other than to have our own tortuously oblique and impenetrable agenda aired in public' campaign. You ever wonder why you were banned from another public forum so you had to set up your own yukky YUKU world with Sylvia? Do you even know how old Steve Corbett is? What on earth is your agenda?