LCBO for sale says Liberals.

[Oleg Bach]

Yes, yes yes: the LCBO and the beer store are monopolies. Are they government-run monopolies ? One is, and the other one is not.

I would bet that the hard liquor industry is a monopoly that is private...but I do believe that these booze peddlers tossed the government a bone buy letting them control the beer trade. Beer store is government and LCBO is the same old Mafia guys...how close am on on that one Mike?

[Oleg Bach]

A monopoly means no choice and no competition. It doesn't really matter who is running it.

It's not about who is running it but about who is controlling it - middle management is of little consequence on this issue. Monopoly means a licence to do something and only one licence is available.

[Guest TrueMetis]

A monopoly means no choice and no competition. It doesn't really matter who is running it.

Is the Molsons you buy at store A really different than the stuff at store B? What are they not offering aside from micro-brews?

Edited January 5, 2010 by TrueMetis

[Michael Hardner]

A monopoly means no choice and no competition. It doesn't really matter who is running it.

See the posts above.

[Michael Hardner]

I would bet that the hard liquor industry is a monopoly that is private...but I do believe that these booze peddlers tossed the government a bone buy letting them control the beer trade. Beer store is government and LCBO is the same old Mafia guys...how close am on on that one Mike?

You're 180 degrees wrong: In Ontario, beer is run by (I think) a Belgian company partnered with an American one, and liquor by the Province.

[msdogfood]

Well now we've been down this road before haven't we. The Tories were unable to sell it back in the 90's so I don't know if the Liberals will have some better luck. I hope so. Finally the provincial Liberals are beginning to see the light and want to sell things off and make government smaller and to do what? That's right save money.

I don't see it as a problem. Someone buys the LCBO, lays off all the unionized workers and restructures. Hiring people to work for it at $14/hr + benefits to start instead of $30. Owner has doubled his profits and people still have an income they can live off of.

I wonder if we're going to hear the socialists attacking the Ontario Liberals for their own massive debt. They blasted Harpers Tories over the debt that all parties agreed to spend. So now it's very funny how quiet they are when the Ontario Liberals have a massive debt of their own.

Not good!!

[Oleg Bach]

You're 180 degrees wrong: In Ontario, beer is run by (I think) a Belgian company partnered with an American one, and liquor by the Province.

SO foreign powers control Canadian beer? Shocking! You mention that the liquor industry is controled on the provincal level..does the provice distil and package this product? Do they pay for the marketing campaigns? NOT...so putting the frontal technicallity aside..who ever makes booze and who ever has managed to gain a licence to sell it controls it...the gov is just a front as far as I am concerned...Why would what was once tough crimminal types give up their rights in full to some bureacrats as far as their very lucrative enterprize..that is a monopoly because it is addictive.???

[Michael Hardner]

SO foreign powers control Canadian beer? Shocking!

Kind of surprising when it's a monopoly, though.

You mention that the liquor industry is controled on the provincal level..does the provice distil and package this product?

No.

Do they pay for the marketing campaigns?

No.

NOT...so putting the frontal technicallity aside..who ever makes booze and who ever has managed to gain a licence to sell it controls it...

No. The manufacturer produces their product. The retailer controls the sale.

the gov is just a front as far as I am concerned...Why would what was once tough crimminal types give up their rights in full to some bureacrats as far as their very lucrative enterprize..that is a monopoly because it is addictive.???

Your question is loaded. Are you ?

I'm thinking that you're just being silly here by asking why the distillers would sell to the province, which isn't being considered by a long shot.

[Oleg Bach]

Kind of surprising when it's a monopoly, though.

No.

No.

No. The manufacturer produces their product. The retailer controls the sale.

Your question is loaded. Are you ?

I'm thinking that you're just being silly here by asking why the distillers would sell to the province, which isn't being considered by a long shot.

Finally you make funny. Getting to almost like you. No I am not loaded. Just a strong believer in the idea that private people have a tremedous amount of control over governments. To the point of those operating within the private sphere being a type of government..so they would be selling to themselves if you know what I mean? Canadian big buisness is so successful as we saw with out banking institutions that wheathered the storm - because they are extremely private - occultish and hidden to a degree. Americans as I mentioned to BC are full of bravado and love to brag and show off..our guys for instance the appoint judges and have those judges...project the personal political and socio-economic agenda on to society at large. I just believe that's how our system really works..The nation is like a private estate - kind of like a feudal mafia enterprise with very very nice people running it....you notice how careful I am not to offend.

[Michael Hardner]

Finally you make funny. Getting to almost like you. No I am not loaded. Just a strong believer in the idea that private people have a tremedous amount of control over governments. To the point of those operating within the private sphere being a type of government..so they would be selling to themselves if you know what I mean? Canadian big buisness is so successful as we saw with out banking institutions that wheathered the storm - because they are extremely private - occultish and hidden to a degree. Americans as I mentioned to BC are full of bravado and love to brag and show off..our guys for instance the appoint judges and have those judges...project the personal political and socio-economic agenda on to society at large. I just believe that's how our system really works..The nation is like a private estate - kind of like a feudal mafia enterprise with very very nice people running it....you notice how careful I am not to offend.

If you want funny, I can be a regular Groucho. I'm not sure why this matter of Government-controlled monopoly versus monopoly raised such a dust-up, though. Maybe I come across as one of those temperance ladies from the 1920s who look like Zeppo in a feathered hat.

[Oleg Bach]

What are you doing Mike? Your not worried about not making the kids college fund are you? I could be wrong about what I have seen but I doubt it. Welcome to the real world. You may as well except the fact that this is the way it has always been for at least a few thousand years. Big money is always made though human addictions..be it shelter - drugs - booze - food - sex - and now AIR....it is very addicting..and there is big bucks in Co2...Remember as Leo Divinci said - powerful men spend invisable coins....It all about belief - believe that you are rich and you are..problem is that the rich have so many people believing they are poor that it is an over whelming environment...Your own mother or wife will turn on you when it comes to sticking up for the rich status quo that really has no money or real power...and once support structures fail - the human ones though betrayal - the super dogs win.

[Michael Hardner]

What are you doing Mike? ... Big money is always made though human addictions..be it shelter - drugs - booze - food - sex - and now AIR....it is very addicting..and there is big bucks in Co2...

I'm not arguing that.

[blueblood]

Kind of surprising when it's a monopoly, though.

No.

No.

No. The manufacturer produces their product. The retailer controls the sale.

Your question is loaded. Are you ?

I'm thinking that you're just being silly here by asking why the distillers would sell to the province, which isn't being considered by a long shot.

So you guys in Ontario don't get offsale at the bar???

If that's not the case, that's yet another sales spot for beer and beer based beverages.

Edited January 8, 2010 by blueblood

[Michael Hardner]

So you guys in Ontario don't get offsale at the bar???

If that's not the case, that's yet another sales spot for beer and beer based beverages.

No, we don't. That would be handy though.

[GrizzlyBear]

Currently, there is no free market in the sale of alcoholic beverages in this province, thus I would be all for the McGuinty government selling the LCBO to a private company...and while they're at it they should get their paws off the Beer Store as well.

The Beer Store, contrary to what I've read in this thread, is not owned by a Belgian or American company...and yes, the government does have a hand in its operations. The Beer Store is a consortium run by Molson, Labatt, and Sleeman...is legislated by the Liquor Control Act, and can only sell products already approved for sale at the LCBO. Therefore, the Beer Store is not a completely private-run company free of government strings. One need only visit the Beer Store's website to verify this info.

It is high time the Ontario government got with the program and recognized the money that could be saved by selling to the private sector, off-loading fiscal responsibilities to municipalities, and greatly shrank the size and scope of government.

[Smallc]

How come conservatives think that sticking a few cliches together is the same thing as coming up with a good idea?

[nicky10013]

Currently, there is no free market in the sale of alcoholic beverages in this province, thus I would be all for the McGuinty government selling the LCBO to a private company...and while they're at it they should get their paws off the Beer Store as well.

The Beer Store, contrary to what I've read in this thread, is not owned by a Belgian or American company...and yes, the government does have a hand in its operations. The Beer Store is a consortium run by Molson, Labatt, and Sleeman...is legislated by the Liquor Control Act, and can only sell products already approved for sale at the LCBO. Therefore, the Beer Store is not a completely private-run company free of government strings. One need only visit the Beer Store's website to verify this info.

It is high time the Ontario government got with the program and recognized the money that could be saved by selling to the private sector, off-loading fiscal responsibilities to municipalities, and greatly shrank the size and scope of government. People aren't going to be so liberated by the decision to privatize that they go out and spend twice on alcohol what they do now. The extra 9 bucks on a bottle of Johnnie Walker Gold, or the extra couple dollars on a bottle of Johnnie Walker Red simply isn't a deterrent for that many people to just spurn the purchase of alcohol altogether.

I agree, SmallC.

I also don't get where people can argue that Ontario selling the LCBO would save money. The LCBO brings in 2 billion dollars worth of revenue to the province each year.

So please, other than the grunting of "government bad, private good." What is the argument for privitization? I fail to see how a local grocery store could bring in the same type of choice as the LCBO has and I fail to see how 2 billion in tax revenue could be brought in from the tax on liquor sales from privatized stores.

Edited January 13, 2010 by nicky10013

[Michael Hardner]

Hey there Grizzly,

Currently, there is no free market in the sale of alcoholic beverages in this province, thus I would be all for the McGuinty government selling the LCBO to a private company...and while they're at it they should get their paws off the Beer Store as well.

The Beer Store, contrary to what I've read in this thread, is not owned by a Belgian or American company...and yes, the government does have a hand in its operations. The Beer Store is a consortium run by Molson, Labatt, and Sleeman...is legislated by the Liquor Control Act, and can only sell products already approved for sale at the LCBO. Therefore, the Beer Store is not a completely private-run company free of government strings. One need only visit the Beer Store's website to verify this info.

Ok, part wrong part right here. But you have helped clarify.

The Beer Store is run by Molson (Molson-Coors, which I would call American as it's mostly owned by Americans and incorporated in the US) Labatt (Owned by A Beligian Company) and Sleeman (owned by a Japanese company).

You're right that it's privately owned and run, but it's owned by at best a minority of Canadian interest. I didn't know Sleeman was involved.

It is high time the Ontario government got with the program and recognized the money that could be saved by selling to the private sector, off-loading fiscal responsibilities to municipalities, and greatly shrank the size and scope of government.

The offloading thing was discovered, and done from 1995 onwards by the Harris government. The LCBO makes money, and doesn't cost money.

[fellowtraveller]

You guys are all stuck in some sort of brainfuzz where the only option is to sell the entire LCBO to a single entity, which means you somehow want to exchange one monopoly for another.

Why not just sell off the retail operations while keeping the wholesale part?

That is what Alberta did, and they have offloaded a big liability, greatly expanded consumer choice by the private sector creation of many more outlets and choices, and reduced risk and liability for taxpayers. And... they still make a pile of money for the Treasury via wholesale operations and taxes.

No more cashiers and stockboys making $23 hour for unskilled work, plus benefits. Unless of course, a liquor store owner chooses to pay that much. There are many. many more liquor and wine shops in Alberta now than there used to be.

[Michael Hardner]

No more cashiers and stockboys making $23 hour for unskilled work, plus benefits. Unless of course, a liquor store owner chooses to pay that much. There are many. many more liquor and wine shops in Alberta now than there used to be.

Ok, so that money goes instead to the corporate owner, who sends the money to its corporate office in... who knows where. The $23 per hour finds its way back into the economy at least.

I don't see that costs are going to go down much for the consumer, and the retail profits are no longer going to go into the province's coffers but elsewhere. Doesn't sound like much of a win to me for a one-time payoff. Furthermore, I doubt the province's ability to negotiate a good deal for this.

[fellowtraveller]

Ok, so that money goes instead to the corporate owner, who sends the money to its corporate office in... who knows where. The $23 per hour finds its way back into the economy at least.

I don't see that costs are going to go down much for the consumer, and the retail profits are no longer going to go into the province's coffers but elsewhere. Doesn't sound like much of a win to me for a one-time payoff. Furthermore, I doubt the province's ability to negotiate a good deal for this.

1. There are very few corpoarte owners of the stores, many are owned by former LCB employees. Their corporate office is often in the basement of their house.

2. Why would you want to have much cheaper retail costs for alcohol, do you want an alcoloism problem like Russia? The retail profits go into the hands of small business owners, a group you likely fear and loath. But how do you think that the privatization has helped conmsumers? Two ways: many more liquor stores everywhere, but especialy in small communities that had no service before, you had to drive to the booze store in a bigger town before. Second is the wide diversification of speciality stores, lots of things like wine stores, Scotch stores, places with 300 kinds of beer- the private ownership has filled many niches.

Now stop to consider how do these small business owners manage to do this, still making a profit, and still pay a stiff price for their qwholesale grog, all abought from the govt wholesale operation? Because they are more efficient at it than any govt could be, that is how. The rertail operations of the govt were easily the least profitable part of the business.

3 It is not anything at all like a 'one time payoff'. The sale of the stores had the following benefits: lots of cash from sale of real estate holdings, dumping all the fat wages, benefits and long term pension obliagtions of a group of staff that quite frankly added no value to the process of getting a commodity to market. and of course no need to invest further in an aging infrastructure of non performing liquor stores.

The big money is in wholesaling: limted capital investment: still all there

Taxes: oh yes, still there

Taxcpayers: more net revenue with no risk and more stores with more products.

See, like that.

[Michael Hardner]

1. There are very few corpoarte owners of the stores, many are owned by former LCB employees. Their corporate office is often in the basement of their house.

Why is that ? Is that achieved through policy ? I understood that the entire retail chain is to be sold...

2. Why would you want to have much cheaper retail costs for alcohol, do you want an alcoloism problem like Russia?

Ok, well if that's how you feel we can reduce the prices and increase taxes for rehabilitation.

The retail profits go into the hands of small business owners, a group you likely fear and loath. But how do you think that the privatization has helped conmsumers? Two ways: many more liquor stores everywhere, but especialy in small communities that had no service before, you had to drive to the booze store in a bigger town before. Second is the wide diversification of speciality stores, lots of things like wine stores, Scotch stores, places with 300 kinds of beer- the private ownership has filled many niches.

1. Don't put words in my mouth. It sets your argument on the wrong tack. I don't fear and loath small business.

2. Better choice and more access are advantages, but I don't think that's why the Liberals are thinking about selling it, nor (in my opinion) what Ontarians would want to get out of it.

Now stop to consider how do these small business owners manage to do this, still making a profit, and still pay a stiff price for their qwholesale grog, all abought from the govt wholesale operation? Because they are more efficient at it than any govt could be, that is how. The rertail operations of the govt were easily the least profitable part of the business.

I'd be more in favour of selling the LCBO if the stores ended up being locally owned and operated, but I haven't heard anything like that.

3 It is not anything at all like a 'one time payoff'. The sale of the stores had the following benefits: lots of cash from sale of real estate holdings, dumping all the fat wages, benefits and long term pension obliagtions of a group of staff that quite frankly added no value to the process of getting a commodity to market. and of course no need to invest further in an aging infrastructure of non performing liquor stores.

There's no guarantee that the wages and benefits would go away. Just because an enterprise is sold, it doesn't mean that union agreements end. In fact, there are laws that say just the opposite.

The big money is in wholesaling: limted capital investment: still all there

Taxes: oh yes, still there

Taxcpayers: more net revenue with no risk and more stores with more products.

See, like that.

You've made some good points, but the advantages seem to be mainly to provide more choice of products, more stores, and to pay workers less, but small business owners would make the difference.

[Oleg Bach]

To bad we could not jump back in time and gets some advice from some experts on the LCBO sales. Talk to Jesus Christ a consumer of product and Al Capone the distributor of product...what would Al do?

[fellowtraveller]

Why is that ? Is that achieved through policy ? I understood that the entire retail chain is to be sold...

Ok, well if that's how you feel we can reduce the prices and increase taxes for rehabilitation.

You do not jae to sell all the buildings to a single entity, you'd almost certainly get more by selling them within their communities. The entire chain does not have much in the way of assets, the main one is the monolpoly ofg the retail end, which will be removed and greatly disperesed, whioch can readily be handled through licensing. the remaining assets of the retail store chain are the buildings and land. The alcohol belongs to the wholesaler, also the LCBO. The employees are not an asset, they are a liability. Eventually, every building is also a liability as it ages and needs replacement and major capital investment

1. Don't put words in my mouth. It sets your argument on the wrong tack. I don't fear and loath small business.

2. Better choice and more access are advantages, but I don't think that's why the Liberals are thinking about selling it, nor (in my opinion) what Ontarians would want to get out of it.

Ontarians are not stupid, why wouldn't they wish to retain the profiatbility of the LCBO while eliminating all that risk and liabil;ity associated with retail?

I'd be more in favour of selling the LCBO if the stores ended up being locally owned and operated, but I haven't heard anything like that.

It ius utterly astounding that nobody has examined the option that Alberta took. I very much doubt that many if any Albertans would choose to revert to the old system, and I know the govt has no reason, revenue or otherwise, to even consider it

There's no guarantee that the wages and benefits would go away. Just because an enterprise is sold, it doesn't mean that union agreements end. In fact, there are laws that say just the opposite.

When the jobs end, the wages end. i agree that certain benefits continue and there are pension issues. Those are also compelling reasons for govt and txpayers to get out of the retail business as soon as possible. Risk, Liability. There is absolutely no reason at all for govt to be involved in retailing booze, it is a holdover from another day, a time when the Church railed against sinners. Why doesn't the govt have an exclusive stranglehold on the sale of bread, or tires, or candy, or gasoline. What is it about the sale of booze that makes it safe only for civil servants to handle? Time to move on and let the interests of taxcpayers prevail, just this once

You've made some good points, but the advantages seem to be mainly to provide more choice of products, more stores, and to pay workers less, but small business owners would make the difference.

those aren't the main reasons at all, they are side benefits. Reduction of risk, reduction of cost, return on investment..... like that. Workers only get paid less if the marketplace deems that their services are worth less. What does a cashier or shelf stocker make at Safeway in Ontario? That is the comparator, because that is the level of skill involved.

Edited January 14, 2010 by fellowtraveller

[Michael Hardner]

There's no guarantee that the wages and benefits would go away. Just because an enterprise is sold, it doesn't mean that union agreements end. In fact, there are laws that say just the opposite.

When the jobs end, the wages end. i agree that certain benefits continue and there are pension issues.

That's not how it works. The union is there, so the union will continue.

Those are also compelling reasons for govt and txpayers to get out of the retail business as soon as possible. Risk, Liability.

What risk ? You mentioned that once below - please elaborate. This is currently net positive year in, year out. I don't see any risk there - it's a license to print money.

There is absolutely no reason at all for govt to be involved in retailing booze, it is a holdover from another day, a time when the Church railed against sinners. Why doesn't the govt have an exclusive stranglehold on the sale of bread, or tires, or candy, or gasoline. What is it about the sale of booze that makes it safe only for civil servants to handle? Time to move on and let the interests of taxcpayers prevail, just this once.

those aren't the main reasons at all, they are side benefits. Reduction of risk, reduction of cost, return on investment..... like that. Workers only get paid less if the marketplace deems that their services are worth less. What does a cashier or shelf stocker make at Safeway in Ontario? That is the comparator, because that is the level of skill involved.

As I pointed out before, the union doesn't go away.