Comment by morleytj
8 months ago
A similar situation in the US can be seen in Boston. Historically terrible nightlife and for easily explained reasons. Liquor licenses are distributed by the state at a capped amount that can potentially be increased each year, meaning the majority of new businesses wanting to have alcohol sales will need to purchase an existing liquor license from another business, often at an exorbitant price (over 500k USD on average I believe)
This makes it extremely difficult for any new businesses to start, and massively advantages large chain businesses that have the ability to make the initial investment in securing a license, versus small or quirky businesses which just have no chance getting started.
This makes so much sense to me. I've always thought Boston's nightlife was terrible when compared to places in Texas. You go to Austin and there are the most random bars, clubs, and restaurants. Most have their own quirks and personality, making it so no one place is exactly like the other.
Unfortunately most people don't seem to understand that over regulation can end up benefitting bigger more established businesses, simply because it raises the barrier to entry.
If this is one of those sought-after business zones in a rich area, there are only X slots to fill, and somehow it's decided who gets them. Take away liquor licenses, and the barrier will be rent instead. If you want lower barriers, there simply has to be more real estate available in that one area.
It's usually like this in other cities, the rich areas have high-investment establishments that play it safe. Maybe that's ok if you want something mainstream and/or high-end.
There are some pretty awesome small, unique bars in Boston, but there could be so, so many more if the liquor license laws and rent prices were more reasonable, though.
Why do you need a liquor license for nightlife. There is more to life than just drinking alcohol.
"Night life" tends to refer to bars and clubs, and regardless of your personal stance on drinking the majority of people going to bars and clubs expect to be able to drink alcohol.
Because the economics of it are such that there's where you get your money. How much cover charge are you willing to pay to go out to a club playing local talent on a random weeknight? A cover charge that would actually cover costs at a venue with no bar would be exorbitantly expensive. This is why many places with cheap cover have a drink minimum.
Yeah, this is actually a problem for venues now that younger generations drink less alcohol.
People will drink a beer every set in a show, but they’re less likely to do that with coffee, soda, THC drink, or any other beverage except water, which most bar venues offer for free.
You can sell other drinks, food, entertainment, services, games, etc. Alcohol isn't the only thing people are able to do at night. There are plenty of activities that are possible.
3 replies →
Businesses that sell alcohol make a lot of money, businesses that don't tend to go out of business.
Wish it weren't so (I don't drink alcohol, personally), but that's the economics of it.
Sure, and offering gambling is another good way to make a lot of money. Yet, we don't see every business offer gambling to its patrons.
2 replies →
Plenty of restaurants don't have alcohol. Night clubs are a different story.
Because you can't drink caffeine at night and we don't have any competing depressants.
You certainly can drink caffeine at night. But maybe that's just a sign I am too habituated to caffeine, because I can drink it and have no ill effects on my sleep schedule.