exactly. And bars and restaurants are different cases; bars probably do
have a higher percentage of smoker patrons.

Seems to me that Montgomery County MD was non-smoking ten years ago and it
certainly has a healthy population of restaurants. I will grant that the
overall affluent demographic there may be a factor in this but demographics
in general play into this a lot. Smoking it less common among the educated,
I seem to remember reading; assuming that is true a blue-collar bar
conceivably could lose business if all its mechanic/tow truck driver
customers decide to get a six pack and hang out at each other's houses
instead of going out.... I know that's a stereotype but I am just giving an
example.

Dana

Ian Skinner writes:

> The other way that "up too" could be misleading is of only one establishment
> lost that much business for this or any other fact, they are then held up as
> both the example and the reason you can say up too... even if all the other
> places are not suffering like this.....
> 
> --------------
> Ian Skinner
> Web Programmer
> BloodSource
> Sacramento, CA
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 8:51 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
> 
> 
> I question whethet this is in fact the case. Somebody somewhere has
> probably studied it but I don't have any statistics to hand. Still, that
> link wasnproof of anything either.
> 
> Dana
> 
> Matthew Small writes:
> 
> > Actually, I don't ever think there was a message that non-smokers did not
> > frequent bars & restaurants because of smoking.  the ban was to
> non-smokers
> > that work in those places, and to protect non-smoking customers from being
> > exposed to smoker's air.
> > 
> > That being said, and the fact that I have fully supported the smoking ban
> in
> > a restaurant, if the facts are true that banning smoking is causing
> > restaurants to lose that much (30% - 50%) of their business, then I
> support
> > repealing the ban in favor of very stringent rules for separating the
> > smoking section from a non-smoking section - e.g. completely enclosed
> > smoking areas, different ventilation systems, etc.  Of course, that does
> not
> > protect the non-smoking workers. I don't know what to do about them.
> > 
> > - Matt Small
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Angel Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 10:54 AM
> > Subject: RE: Where are the non-smokers?
> > 
> > 
> > > Well...
> > >
> > > It does say something about Non Smokers.
> > >
> > > If you ban smoking...and you lose 20% to 50% of your sales...
> > >
> > > Then that means you have lost smoking customers.
> > >
> > > It also means that those smoking customers whom you have lost, have
> > > *not* been replaced with non-smoking customers.
> > >
> > > Part of the reasoning for the ban was that there were thousands of
> > > non-smokers that do not frequent bars and restaurants because of the
> > > smoke,ergo if there was no smoking these people would patronise these
> > > institutions.
> > >
> > > -Gel
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > That doesn't say anything about non smokers it simply says the smokers
> > > are going where they can still pollute the air thats all.
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5

Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
                                

Reply via email to