News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.1K     5 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 853     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.7K     0 

LCBO / The Beer Store

Should the LCBO be deregulated?


  • Total voters
    169
  • Poll closed .
*shrug* I don't mind condescending on an issue like this.

Wow. Just, wow.

At any rate,I'll leave it with the summary that the LCBO is doing a inadequate job at providing a service which it now actively markets rather than tries to control, which was its original function. I would prefer liquor to be more accessible (because I'm a terrible person, really. Please, help save me from myself oh wise provincial government!) and I don't see that happening in any meaningful way with the current system.
There are certainly many places (actually, pretty much everywhere in the western world except here) that have private liquor sales, and doubt that many are saying "wow, look what they have in Ontario, we should implement that!", however, there are a good number here saying the opposite. I have never had a visitor seem envious when I've explained to them why we have to walk for 20 minutes to get a bottle of wine.
 
Last edited:
TK -so I have this straight, you think that the majority of people need to be barred from purchasing liquor anywhere other than the LCBO?

I don't think people should be able to purchase hard liquor from just any store, no. Beer, yes. Hard liquor, no.
 
Wow. Just, wow.

Why is that wow? People here condescend on all sorts of stupid things like Glass colours - why be surprised about something that has an actual effect on society?

At any rate,I'll leave it with the summary that the LCBO is doing a inadequate job at providing a service which it now actively markets rather than tries to control, which was its original function. I would prefer liquor to be more accessible (because I'm a terrible person, really. Please, help save me from myself oh wise provincial government!) and I don't see that happening in any meaningful way with the current system. There are certainly many places (actually, pretty much everywhere in the western world except here) that have private liquor sales, and doubt that many are saying "wow, look what they have in Ontario, we should implement that!", however, there are a good number here saying the opposite. I have never had a visitor seem envious when I've explained to them why we have to walk for 20 minutes to get a bottle of wine.

I dunno. I think Canada is a pretty special place. Maybe we are who are are because of the subtle effect policies like these have had. Who knows.

You don't have to walk 20 minutes to get wine. You can take all sorts of different transit types there :) But really...why SHOULD we have such easy access to alcohol? What benefit is there? Easier drunk-ing? Wow, the benefits will probably be innumerable.
 
Last edited:
But really...why SHOULD we have such easy access to alcohol? What benefit is there? Easier drunk-ing? Wow, the benefits will probably be innumerable.

Comforting to know there are still a few old-fashioned bossy boots out there, protecting us from ourselves.

At this late date, it's hard to see how allowing beer and wine -- even the dreaded Thunderbird -- at corner stores will hurt anybody.
 
If the logic works for alcohol then why not for cigarettes? Given our taxpayer funded health care system it makes just as much sense for the government to 'regulate' smoking. And the dangers of our youth taking up smoking are just as important. So why not?

I am normally not a Mike Harris type who supports privatizing everything but I have a distinct ethical problem with a government body that is suppose to discourage the consumption of an item yet sells it in well done up stores. If you argue that the LCBO provides decent customer service, then I will argue that it has surely strayed from its core mission of discouraging alcohol consumption. It's like Health Canada setting up nice tobacconist outlets to err 'regulate' smoking. Would we tolerate that? An even more clear cut example is the effect of the new mega casinos which have increased gambling addictions. Instead of discouraging destructive behaviour it's now fashionable for governments to monopolize the activity and collect revenue from it under the guise of 'regulating' it. It may make money but is it really ethical for governments to be in these domains? I say no.

Governments should not be in the business of catering to our vices. End of story.
 
In terms of alcohol sales reform in Ontario, I'd start by directing by ire toward the Beer Store (Brewers Retail): a private monopoly on beer sales mostly owned by three companies all of which are now under foreign control.

There was recently a province-wide petition on it sent to the McGuinty government that was dismissed with a response in the lines of "The Beer Store is a great system – there is no need to change it - and no need for further discussion."
 
LCBO's mission statement, from (lcbo.com):

The LCBO’s mission statement is: We are a socially responsible, performance-driven, innovative and profitable retailer, engaging our customers in a discovery of the world of beverage alcohol. The LCBO’s brand vision is Discover the World – to take customers on a journey of learning and discovery, demystifying the products we sell so that informed choices can be made more easily.

That said, I do think that alcohol and tobacco are different. Alcohol is safe in moderate quantities, while I don't think that has been demonstrated for tobacco. It is also not addictive to a much larger portion of the population in the way nicotine is.
 
LCBO's mission statement, from (lcbo.com):



That said, I do think that alcohol and tobacco are different. Alcohol is safe in moderate quantities, while I don't think that has been demonstrated for tobacco. It is also not addictive to a much larger portion of the population in the way nicotine is.

If that's the case, then using the philosophy underpinning the LCBO, the imperative for tobacco to be sold by a government run retailer is all the higher. After all, if tobacco is more dangerous should it not be better 'regulated'.

Converesely, if alcohol is not as dangerous as tobacco, then should it not be less regulated and be more easily available at the corner store? Surely it should be as easily available as cigarettes?

This is exactly why the LCBO's raison d'etre is bunk. As a society, surely we have evolved to the point where we don't need the government to regulate our alcohol purchasing. After all, we have gotten over the age when drinking and driving was acceptable. And these days we license marijuana to cancer patients. Surely, we are well enough along to be able to responsibly buy wine and beer at the corner or grocery store.

It's also interesting to note that the LCBO does not really regulate anything. You can walk in and buy as much as you want, even if you wish to drink it right outside the store or on the drive back home. The offences that arise from misuse of alcohol are dealt with through laws which have no relation to the LCBO. When my family lived in Dubai, alcohol sales were regulated by the government liquor outlet. One had to have liquor permit (which required a decent income to attain) with only so much alcohol allowed to be purchased per month. That's regulation. The LCBO does not work that way. So what is it's function?

The LCBO does not regulate consumption or sale of alcohol. All it regulates is the number of retailers....and it limits the competition to zero.
 
Fair enough, it's your opinion. But what difference does the owner of the store make?

It isn't store owner, it's ubiquity.

There are corner stores on, appropriately enough, nearly every corner. I don't believe we should have hard liquor for sale on nearly every corner. To rope cigarettes into the picture - I'm not sure I support cigarettes on every corner either.

I'm not calling for prohibition, but certainly suggesting that we should make certain vices less convenient.
 
Now the whole story

There are some great and interesting points of all sorts being made here and because I am employed in this business I will now give the truth.


1. LCBO is a monopoly dealing mostly with monopolies Molson, Labatt’s, Diageo, Corby’s. Why? because it is easier for a Government employee to deal with a few big companies than lots of little ones. They also have greater control over their business because they only have to tell a few of their monopoly friends what to do with pricing and marketing as apposed to having to tell many small ones, because some of them might also not agree with their ideas.

2. All liquor boards in Canada except Alberta have minimum pricing of beers, spirits and wines. What does this mean? That a manufacturer who wants to give the consumers of a particular market a lower price, the boards will not allow them to. This means all consumers are paying an inflated price.

3. Why would the boards want consumers to pay more? In every Province (again except Alberta) liquor is taxed as a percentage on cost. The higher the price the board is charged the more taxes the board receives. In Alberta they work on a “flat tax†so every bottle sold is taxed say $13.00 and a supplier can charge a penny with the retail being $13.01 or a $100.00 and the retail then $113.00. In all other markets they want the suppliers to charge an artificial high amount so they can get more taxes from their 170% tax mark up.

4. When the boards want more taxes for the Province, the answer is easy. We get a phone call (they rarely put it in writing for obvious reasons) and say everybody is raising their price $3.00 per case. The they get more taxes and when we tax payers complain the Government simply states “it was not us, but the suppliers increased the prices.â€

5. The best analogy I can use for this is a supplier if I walk into my meeting with LCBO and say I have the exact same product that you sell but mine is $2.00 a bottle cheaper they would throw you out, as it would reduce their revenues. If you walked in and said I have the exact same product but is $2.00 more a bottle, they take you out for lunch! Imagine that conversation at WalMart? I can tell you the best retailer in the world’s response would be exactly opposite… but then again they do not own a monopoly.

6. Some people mentioned advertising. Obviously, it is stupid for a monopoly to advertise! Don’t worry their monopoly supplier friends happily pay for all that and as someone noted it is a profit center. If their supplier friends are finding it costs too much to advertise the boards say “then you all have to raise your prices†Ya more tax revenue.

7. I can guarantee you prices are cheaper in Alberta by huge amounts with an open system. Over Christmas Smirnoff was advertised everywhere for $18.95 and there were Irish Creams advertised for $12.99, and you can buy about 10 different brands of beer for a buck a beer!

8. Selection? Are you kidding me? With most board monopolies there are 1400 lisings while in Alberta there are over 14,000, enough said.
9. Now if you want to get into the cost of buildings, staffing, pensions, unions, and benefits that is a whole other topic but I can guarantee you there is not one liquor employee in Alberta getting near half and likely more like 25% of what a shelf stocker in any Government store makes.

10. There are other things people here mentioned about service, locations, hours etc and use your common sense and guess who has more convenient places to buy liquor, more locations, more competitive pricing, more selection, longer hours, more staff able to assist you… a private enterprise trying to compete with the guy across the street or a monopoly??

11. Lastly I will say of what I know about Alberta it has been privatized for about 18 years and the Province has not turned into a bunch a drunks wondering the streets aimlessly or under age drinkers or anything like that! In fact last time I checked Alberta was doing quite nice with their economy compared to the Communist union run monopoly jurisdictions.

12. I am sure there will be people on this forum that would ague with some of these statements but that is because they are likely employed in one of these fat cat living off the public coffers jobs.

13. So let’s all drink to the continuing price fixing, limited selection where the suppliers & government benefits the most while the boards make record profits and sustain these high paid jobs and we will continue to be a have not Province but we have Alberta to send us transfer payments!!!

14. In the gasoline business consumers ask the Federal Governments to look into price fixing and collusion when in the same governments that is what they do every day in their normal course of business. It is so hypocritical! And don’t think any time soon they will (as they never have) charge any gasoline company with this offense as it is what they do daily in the liquor business.
 
Last edited:
2. All liquor boards in Canada except Alberta have minimum pricing of beers, spirits and wines. What does this mean? That a manufacturer who wants to give the consumers of a particular market a lower price, the boards will not allow them to. This means all consumers are paying an inflated price.

The price fixing is actually the 'social responsibility' part of the LCBO's mandate being expressed. The wisdom is that extremely inexpensive alcohol (like buck-a-beer) encourages alcohol consumption.

7. I can guarantee you prices are cheaper in Alberta by huge amounts with an open system. Over Christmas Smirnoff was advertised everywhere for $18.95 and there were Irish Creams advertised for $12.99, and you can buy about 10 different brands of beer for a buck a beer!

Any time I've been in Alberta I've paid more for the same products.

11. Lastly I will say of what I know about Alberta it has been privatized for about 18 years and the Province has not turned into a bunch a drunks wondering the streets aimlessly or under age drinkers or anything like that!

Their Premier was a notorious drunk. Skunk-drunk homeless people has been an ongoing issue in Edmonton and Calgary.

In fact last time I checked Alberta was doing quite nice with their economy compared to the Communist union run monopoly jurisdictions.

They have oil to thank for that, certainly not competent (see above) leadership. Ontario's recent hard-ships have nothing to do with the LCBO (which add to our province's coffers not drain them)


It should also be pointed out that Alberta has only privatized the retail sale of liquor, the wholesaling (including purchasing the liquor to distribute to private retail stores) is still done by the AGLC. The only difference between the two systems, really, is who owns the stores and who pockets the profits.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top