Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: First Saskatchewan theatre to sell alcohol at movies

This is topic First Saskatchewan theatre to sell alcohol at movies in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006942

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-15-2014, 10:57 AM:

Broadway Theatre first in Sask. to sell alcohol at movies

quote:
It may now be easier to talk your spouse into seeing an indie film.

The Broadway Theatre is taking full advantage of the changes to the liquor rules by Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming last year. The theatre will be opening their bar during screenings.
Broadway Theatre

The Broadway Theatre will begin bar service at late movies starting this Friday.

"Before, liquor and film could not mix." said Kirby Wirchenko, executive director for the Broadway Theatre.

As of Friday, late night shows will offer gin and vodka, as well as wine and beer.

The Broadway Theatre is the first movie theatre in the province to expand it's beverage offerings.

Wirchenko said the theatre is doing this to keep up with the times, not make money.

"If you buy a five dollar Pepsi from me, I make better money than I do on a $6 beer," he said. "However, if as a customer, you really want that to be a part of your night, I don't want to stop you."

Can't say I'm too impressed -- there's an exactly zero chance that I'll ever sell liquor in my theatre here. If I wanted to run a bar I'd be running a bar.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 01-15-2014, 11:07 AM:

You do realize that theaters that there are plenty of theaters that already do well serving alcohol, right?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-15-2014, 11:34 AM:

We put a concession stand into our balcony about 20 years ago. The idea was to ease crowding in the main lobby, but it was a flop, because people were just so used to getting their stuff at the main stand, so it became more trouble than it was worth.

We haven't used it since, but I always thought if things got dire enough and we needed a hook to "bring back" the adults, we could always go for a beer/wine license and offer that perk in the balcony. Of course that would come with its own set of problems but there's a sizable crowd that would love it.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-15-2014, 01:30 PM:

Perhaps one of the keys in preventing over-indulgence of alcohol (and associated drunk behavior) is pricing the drinks accordingly.

I can have mixed drinks or beer at the Warren Theater in Moore, OK (in the two adults-only Grand Auditorium premium priced balconies or the two adults-only Director's Suite luxury screening rooms). The catch is the drinks aren't cheap at all. Someone will blow a lot of money trying to catch a good buzz there.

Restaurants don't typically charge a great deal more than bars for their mixed drinks and beers. However, the difference is noticeable enough. I think that cuts down on some of the binge drinking. Those who want to do that will always have the thought in their head they could get hammered elsewhere for less money.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-15-2014, 02:44 PM:

I always figured, if we DID go that route, that we would have like a 2 beer limit and we'd close the concession after the show starts. Most people could make 2 beers last for 2 hours. If they can't do that, they probably aren't going to movies much anyway.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 01-15-2014, 02:44 PM:

Over here, many theaters, including chains, have been selling beer in bottles or cans for as long as I remember and selling it in closed cans and bottles doesn't require any kind of license, just some basic procedures to make sure you only sell it to people above legal drinking age.

There is no age segregation in the auditorium and for now, nobody came up with any laws preventing this. It will not be really socially acceptable to start drinking during a matinee or morning presentation of some kiddie movie, but nobody will actually prevent you from being socially inept.

But, I've never really experienced any problems with this, if there are problems with drunks those people were usually already drunk before arriving at the theater in the first place. Also, I don't think that the average theater is the "ideal" place to get drunk anyway.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-15-2014, 05:30 PM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
Over here, many theaters, including chains, have been selling beer in bottles or cans for as long as I remember and selling it in closed cans and bottles doesn't require any kind of license, just some basic procedures to make sure you only sell it to people above legal drinking age.

Interesting: in the UK, the distinction is between whether it is sold for consumption on or off the premises, not whether it is sold in open or sealed containers. Therefore, an establishment that in my new home would be called a liquor store (i.e. a retail outlet that exists solely or mainly to sell booze) is known as an "off licence" (or colloquially, an "offie") in Britain. The term means that it is somewhere that is licensed only to sell alcohol to be consumed off the premises, as distinct from a pub or bar, which is licensed to sell booze that can be consumed on its premises. This seems to me to make sense, because a large number of people congregated in one place and drinking represents a potential public order problem, but somewhere that sells booze to 100 different people who then disperse to 100 different places to drink it does not.

However, an "on license", so to speak, isn't a carte blanche to do what you like. Local councils can and do attach specific conditions to the licences of specific establishments, usually beacuse of local residents nearby (e.g. no drinking in a pub's back yard after 8pm to keep the noise down - that sort of thing). The last theatre I worked full time at had a licence that allowd it to serve booze in the bar within the theatre building, but not to allow customers to take it into the auditoria. This struck me as a reasonable compromise, personally: it allowed people to socialise with a drink or two before or after the movie, but reduced the chances of sloshed 'n stupid behaviour during the film itself.

I don't think I've ever been to a cinema outside the US that allowed drinks to be consumed in the actual auditorium; and come to that, only one in the US (it was a single screen independent in Anchorage, but I can't remember the name).

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 01-15-2014, 06:57 PM:

Bear Tooth Theatre Pub, formerly the Denali Theatre.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 01-16-2014, 03:03 AM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
Interesting: in the UK, the distinction is between whether it is sold for consumption on or off the premises, not whether it is sold in open or sealed containers. Therefore, an establishment that in my new home would be called a liquor store (i.e. a retail outlet that exists solely or mainly to sell booze) is known as an "off licence" (or colloquially, an "offie") in Britain.

When it comes to alcohol, you get into all kinds of weird, inconsistent regulations, that not only vary between countries, but even states/provinces, counties, etc.

In the Netherlands for example, historically, the license to sell alcoholic beverages was mostly coupled to hygienic aspects, that's probably why there is still no special license for selling alcoholic beverage with low ABV in "closed containers". The laws have been changing although, especially to include all kinds of enforcements. The legal (public) drinking age of alcoholic beverages of < 15% ABV has been 16 years for as long as I remember, but that has been raised to 18 years starting the first of January 2014. But selling anything above 15% ABV still requires a special licenses, even if it is in a store and in "closed containers". In general, those extra rules don't lead to anything but some stupid situations: Some supermarkets now event don't sell alcohol to you, if you're accompanied by a minor (supposedly to limit the possibility of the adult buying it for the minor, which is of course hogwash), but that same supermarket often also has a self-checkout, where you pay your scanned products at a terminal, nobody is verifying your age there...

The UK is also quite special, because it actually forbids minors drinking alcoholic beverages at home, whereas most countries only limit the sale to minors/people below drinking age and drinking in public spaces, although some US states also seem to limit this. And then there are those Arabic countries that have their own weird interpretations of when and where it is legal to drink alcohol...

In the US, there also seems to be a great deal of inconsistency regarding age segregation. Some states don't allow people below legal drinking age to be present on premises where alcohol is being consumed, often resulting in rather hilarious situations, where one below drinking age can't be in the bar area of a certain establishment, but where it's no problem to sit at a table in the restaurant area few feet away.

quote: Leo Enticknap
I don't think I've ever been to a cinema outside the US that allowed drinks to be consumed in the actual auditorium; and come to that, only one in the US (it was a single screen independent in Anchorage, but I can't remember the name).

Many, if not most cinemas in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany serve alcohol that can be consumed in the auditorium. Many of them also have some kind of cafe/bar and need proper licensing for that anyway, if you go for this license, you will surely want to include your auditoria, even if you might yet decide against serving alcohol there.

So called "service cinemas", where food and drinks are delivered at your seat are still a niche market around here, so getting drunk at a theater would, in most cases, involve getting up several times during the movie to go for a "refill". That alone would not be socially acceptable. Also, selling alcoholic beverages to obviously alcoholic-impaired people, which is usually even legally prohibited, would be utterly stupid anyways.

Besides all the confusing laws and regulations, the most prominent thing here is just common sense. As I stated before, the only problem I've had with drunk people and cinemas were those that arrived there in an already intoxicated state, which can largely be avoided by not letting them in in the first place. For someone with an "out-of-control drinking habit", a cinema auditorium is not really the most ideal place to get drunk.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-16-2014, 11:12 AM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
The laws have been changing although, especially to include all kinds of enforcements. The legal (public) drinking age of alcoholic beverages of < 15% ABV has been 16 years for as long as I remember, but that has been raised to 18 years starting the first of January 2014. But selling anything above 15% ABV still requires a special licenses, even if it is in a store and in "closed containers".

A system whereby the legal age for drinking beer is lower than that for wines and spirits strikes me as sensible, too (though in this case, the cutoff seems to be wines, as almost all are below 15% apart from sherry and port). Your average 16 year-old is not going to come to any harm from a beer or two in a properly supervised environment, but I wouldn't want them knocking back vodka.

quote: Marcel Birgelen
The UK is also quite special, because it actually forbids minors drinking alcoholic beverages at home...

Not according to this page - and what prompted me to look it up was the memory of growing up in Britain, where it was perfectly normal for parents to give their kids a glass of wine with a meal every now and again (e.g. on special occasions), starting from the low teenage years. So if it ever was illegal for a minor to drink at home, that law was about as widely respected and enforced as the motorway speed limit (i.e. not at all). Assuming that the parents are able to act responsibly (which admittedly nowadays is a big assumption), that strikes me as a good way of doing things, rather than having booze off limits until an arbitrary cutoff date and then risking people go crazy immediately after it.

quote: Marcel Birgelen
In the US, there also seems to be a great deal of inconsistency regarding age segregation. Some states don't allow people below legal drinking age to be present on premises where alcohol is being consumed, often resulting in rather hilarious situations, where one below drinking age can't be in the bar area of a certain establishment, but where it's no problem to sit at a table in the restaurant area few feet away.

ID-ing policies vary, too. I was once in the bar of a hotel at a conference talking to someone who was in his 70s and, not meaning to sound unkind, quite clearly looked it. When I tried to buy him a drink, the waitress asked for ID from both of us! I was 28 (i.e. only seven years older than the minimum age, and so it was just possible that she thought I could have been below it) at the time and therefore thought she was just asking for ID from me. But she then explained, apologetically, that due to anti-discrimination laws in that state (Minnesota), they either had to ID everyone or no-one. And so, in order to avoid falling foul of alcohol age laws as well, they ID-ed everyone. My colleague noted that this was the first time in at least 40 years that he'd had to show his driving licence in a bar.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 01-16-2014, 04:22 PM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
Not according to this page - and what prompted me to look it up was the memory of growing up in Britain, where it was perfectly normal for parents to give their kids a glass of wine with a meal every now and again (e.g. on special occasions), starting from the low teenage years. So if it ever was illegal for a minor to drink at home, that law was about as widely respected and enforced as the motorway speed limit (i.e. not at all). Assuming that the parents are able to act responsibly (which admittedly nowadays is a big assumption), that strikes me as a good way of doing things, rather than having booze off limits until an arbitrary cutoff date and then risking people go crazy immediately after it.

It's Wikipedia and I didn't check the references, so let's take it with a grain of salt, but that page almost begins with: The United Kingdom is the only country that has a minimum legal age for drinking alcohol in a home. In many cases, people even don't know better. If I would ask a random person around here what the minimum drinking age at home is, most would probably come up with 16 or 18 years.

But there are also many things that aren't perfectly legal, but just tolerated. For example: Many people think that it's legal to buy and use limited amounts of canabis in the Netherlands, but it's not, it's just being tolerated to some extent and that "policy of tolerance" has never been under such a pressure as in the last few years. In some places in the U.S. it's now actually more legal than in the Netherlands.

quote: Leo Enticknap
But she then explained, apologetically, that due to anti-discrimination laws in that state (Minnesota), they either had to ID everyone or no-one. And so, in order to avoid falling foul of alcohol age laws as well, they ID-ed everyone.

Up until about 5 days ago, I've never been asked for an ID when buying a beer, wine or other alcoholic beverage in my whole life anywhere in Europe. In the U.S., that's another story... Many of those ID laws have been around here too, but nobody really cared about it, since there was no real hard enforcement and it was always a hard case to prove (the general consensus was, somebody needs to show his/her ID when he/she looks 25 or younger). But since they drove up both penalties and are actually enforcing it now, everybody went nuts.

I could go on for a while, but the discussion would become a very political one. Let's keep it this way: Trying to solve social problems with more laws is usually doing just the oposite...

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-16-2014, 04:27 PM:

They have (or at least had) this same policy at Saskatchewan Roughrider football games. When they first started selling beer at the games a few years ago I remember reading that everyone who wanted to buy a beer needed to present id. I'm pretty sure they had a photo of a little old lady showing her ID at the beer stand along with the article.

It does make a certain amount of sense. At exactly what point do you not ask someone for ID? There are a couple of kids that come to the show here who look like they're about ten years old but are really 19, and there are a few who look like they're twenty and are really 12. If you nab everybody, then no-one can say, "But you didn't ask that guy over there."

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 01-16-2014, 04:40 PM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
I don't think I've ever been to a cinema outside the US that allowed drinks to be consumed in the actual auditorium

Most of the Edinburgh cinemas allow customers to take alcoholic drinks into the screens. Depending on the site the drinks can be bought from the cinemas cafe/bar (in a plastic glass) and/or from the snack counter.

I am not completely sure how the licensing works but I think routine auditorium checks are required as part of the conditions. Late shows (finishing after the bar close/drinking up time) may be problematic, but still seem to allow customers to take in drinks.

The prices tend to be high, especially in the multiplexes which are not running a bar for non-cinema customers.

Posted by Allan Young (Member # 6332) on 01-17-2014, 08:35 AM:

The BFI Southbank in London has the rather wonderful policy of allowing alcohol to be taken into the auditoria but disallowing food of any kind. Gin and tonic good, popcorn bad.

Posted by Steve Matz (Member # 1890) on 01-17-2014, 10:51 PM:

If they sold alcohol in any of the theaters here you would see our City Cops scouring the Parking Lots hoping to write someone up for a DUI.Thats what this police force lives for because of the amount of the fines they rake in. Call a cop because your house got broken into. "Sorry it will be about 45 minutes we are Doing Movie Theater Patrol"... [puke]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-02-2014, 12:33 PM:

quote: Steve Matz
If they sold alcohol in any of the theaters here you would see our City Cops scouring the Parking Lots hoping to write someone up for a DUI.

If the theater is one that is not easy to get to on foot or by public transportation (which in the US means most of them), that would create a risk.

Every now and again someone tries to open a pub or bar at a "motorway services" (a dedicated food/drink/bathroom/gas stop facility on a British freeway with its own entrance and exit - unlike in America, you often don't find a little strip mall with these things at most normal exits), the people wanting to do it make the point that passengers in cars and buses aren't driving and therefore why should they be denied a beer or two? And in response, the road safety lobby predicts that if you did put a pub in a service station, the law of averages dictates that there would be some drivers who'd be unable to control themselves.

I'm guessing that the licensing authorities in the US cities which do allow booze to be served in theatres have decided that the risk of drink-driving problems isn't big enough to justify denying the licenses. And theatres are by no means the only places that serve booze and that you can only really get to by private car - most restaurants around here fall into that category, for one thing.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-02-2014, 02:57 PM:

Honestly, I didn't bother responding to the "they'd surround the theater hoping to catch someone" because it's simply ridiculous. People serve booze at almost every major restaurant and there aren't cops just circling around all of them all the time. Why? Because the cops, believe it or not, are not stupid enough to waste their time doing such a thing. They wait around bars because people go to those to get drunk. People having a beer at a theater are not a priority of theirs because they know that people don't primarily go to a movie theater, whether it serves alcohol or not, to primarily get drunk.

Posted by Allan Young (Member # 6332) on 02-03-2014, 09:34 AM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
Every now and again someone tries to open a pub or bar at a "motorway services"

The first one opened a couple of weeks ago.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 02-03-2014, 12:21 PM:

I land with those who don't see the controversy here.

When I bought my drive-in, our $5 carload screens were a complete zoo. It frequently took 3 hours to pick up the trash... mainly beer cans & outside food containers. My restrooms were frequently vandalized. Patrons were rude and confrontational.

The root of the problem was that all anyone need to get in was a 5 dollar bill. People were blowing the rest on beer before coming out. They had no investment in their evening here, so no reason to respect the place, and no real consequences if they got kicked out.

I completely turned the problem around by eliminating the "free ride" and going per-cap admit. Almost immediately, the problem patrons found somewhere else to go.

Nobody is going to spend $10 or so to spend 2 hours in your theatre, just to get smashed on white zin and be an ass.

We frequently patronize an area theatre, which has a VIP, 21+ auditorium. We'll have a couple of drinks through the movie. I've never seen a hint of a problem from anyone.

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-03-2014, 05:25 PM:

The first year that my theatre was open, I did what is now my usual free Christmas show with Santa Claus. I thought it would be nice to give away free popcorn in addition to the free admission.

NEVER AGAIN. After the show I had to use a grain shovel to clean up the popcorn off of the floor. I can't remember how many garbage bags full of popcorn I threw out that day, but it was more than a few.

Since then admission to the Christmas show is free, but you have to pay for your popcorn. It's still nutty, but there's far less waste and I'm a lot happier.

Posted by Steve Matz (Member # 1890) on 02-03-2014, 07:18 PM:

[quote]Honestly, I didn't bother responding to the "they'd surround the theater hoping to catch someone" because it's simply ridiculous. People serve booze at almost every major restaurant and there aren't cops just circling around all of them all the time. Why? Because the cops, believe it or not, are not stupid enough to waste their time doing such a thing. They wait around bars because people go to those to get drunk. People having a beer at a theater are not a priority of theirs because they know that people don't primarily go to a movie theater, whether it serves alcohol or not, to primarily get drunk.[quote]

Well I can tell you never lived where I do or your a cop yourself. This City writes more DUI's Than probably any small city in a 5 state area. Why, because even a 1st time DUI ends up costing the person close to $1500.00. They don't care whether your at a Eating establishment or where ever. This is a Business for them not worrying about Safety concerns.

People sneak in Booze all the time to indoor Multi-plexs and if the City allowed Alcohol in theaters our Cops would be there. Trust me I lived here over 55 years I know the routine.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-04-2014, 12:36 AM:

quote: Steve Matz
This City writes more DUI's Than probably any small city in a 5 state area. Why, because even a 1st time DUI ends up costing the person close to $1500.00. They don't care whether your at a Eating establishment or where ever. This is a Business for them not worrying about Safety concerns.

We can go one better. Until about a year ago, the biggest intersection in the middle of town had automatic cameras that flashed you if you went through a red light - even if you did so only a split second after it turned, and in some cases even if you were turning right and the intersection was clear. However, once a critical mass of locals had received love letters from the city (or more accurately, the business to which the city had subcontracted the "safety camera" racket) demanding $400, certain local politicans who were behind the cameras going up in the first place found themselves out of office at the following election, and the cameras were removed.

I would say that champagne bottles were popped when the cameras came down, but because Loma Linda is pretty much run by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Martinelli's grape juice bottles is probably nearer the mark! My theory is that because Loma Linda offers about the worst prospects for catching drunk drivers outside Saudi Arabia (I would guess that about three quarters of the city's population are teetotal), local law enforcement had to look for other ways to make money. That one sure backfired, though.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 02-04-2014, 07:29 AM:

1 drink during a two hour flick is not going to get you wasted...yet alone drunk. I'd much rather sip a pint then suck back a massive sugar loaded pop.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 02-04-2014, 08:29 AM:

quote: Frank Cox
If I wanted to run a bar I'd be running a bar.

...and if you wanted to sell popcorn and soda and junk food, you'd be running a candy store, right? [Wink]

How far behind can it be before they start selling weed as well? Although I think the consequences of selling weed would be less of a potential problem than selling alcohol, other than getting super melloed-out patrons to get out of their seats once the show is over. Then on the other hand, whatever the downside, it would all be compensated for by the skyrocketing per cap sales of muchies at concessions!

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-04-2014, 12:47 PM:

Alternatively you could sell your patrons some even harder stuff, and then they'd be out before the show is over!

"It's not the drugs, it's Stanley, guys!"

Posted by Dave Bird (Member # 490) on 02-04-2014, 02:02 PM:

Haha Frank! Reminds me I chased a bunch of pot-heads out of the drive-in last summer at intermission after a kids movie. Mom and Dad in their 60's and 40-something shirtless son (who looked just like Spaulding and Lacey's dealer in "Caddyshack"). Had a few people complain so I went to talk to them. They denied it of course, so I gave them the option of moving (their VW MICROBUS) to the downwind side of the lot and told them I'd be reporting their licence number to the police. They tried to get mad at me, but were too mellow, and I reminded them I live in BC most of the year, I know what I'm smelling. They were gone shortly thereafter.