GMB calls for £12k cut in wholesale prices

Ken, I think it was reported in the Beano last week but doubtless our Comrade can confirm it if someone reads it to him. Smithers, "Pub Revolution brought about this change, we won't be going away." sounds a little strange particularly given your use of the word "WE" and the lambasting you took from the REAL GMB people on here. Anyway, keep polishing that rubber toy Kalashnikov, it obviously makes you feel that you're part of something even though you're not. Wolfie Smith was more convincing.

Smithers it just seems rather strange that all this"progress" and pressure put on and changes won from the Pubcos only seems to be known about by your good self.

No one else has reported these "successes" which, I for one would have thought would have been shouted from the rooftops and reported in press releases to the trade papers if for nothing else but to increase recruitment for GMB

But wait, ... deafening silence and not one article anywhere in any of the press(trade and local).

Does that not seem strange to you because it certainly does to me.
Ken Nason

So once these strikes actually happen can we then move on from the subject? It would be nice to discuss other issues within the trade without being labelled a pro-pubco person. We've waited patiently for these strikes, so stop talking and lets see some action!
Then we'll KNOW what'll happen, instead of speculating!

These are simple facts ken, the problem with people who are not in this trade and who spend all day critiscing progress, is that you fail to see how quickly things are changeing, what was true 6 months ago is different to what is happening now, as i have said before, things are changing for the better, if you cannot keep up, then it simply shows how out of touch you are with the speed of current internet communications. undoubtably we have put huge pressure on the pubcons and they have changed their practices slightly, not enough in my view, but its still progress. Pub Revolution brought about this change, we won't be going away.

More and more licensees are joining the GMB. Obviously there are many licensees who agree with what the GMB is suggesting. I think that the licensees have had enough of their pubcos treatment, and feel that something must be done no matter how drastic. Some feel they have nothing to lose, as they will not be able to afford to run their pubs for much longer without the tie going.

Smithers seems to be either somewhat confused or is making serious U turns. He started his pub revolution tirade on line by saying that tenants will take part becasue they have nothing to lose now he states "as for not haveing anything to lose, that is not true". Then he has lways said that direct action via a strike would happen and that tenants were legally protected from breaking their contracts, now he says that"this revolution is going to be a "Slow-Burner" there are certain problems i believe, particularly in the qestion of legality of the strikes"

A u turn or enlightenment by those on here who have been saying that since Smithers first posted?
Ken Nason

Surely Colin / chris, your buddies at the supermarkets would let you fly-pitch outside their front doors, as you spend so much time defending them, maybe right next to the recycling bins? failing this, contact your other buddies; "giles and Teddy Turpin" surely, they would Waive all the usual charges and let you lease part of their carpark free of charge and free of tie!

Che, thanks for the offer but as the mobile bar is freehold I'll just do what I like. Smithers, the beauty of the idea is that if I choose to park right outside your pub there's naff all you can do about it. Good eh? just as well you're so pro 'free market' and 'competition' isn't it?

Chris/Colin, i don't let any freeloading fly pitchers in my carparks, in your case, not within 300 miles.

Colin/Chris whoever you are you can come and park your mobile bar in my car park if you like but the rent is 3 times more than you would normally pay,i want to see your insurance and public liability certificates,You can only sell beer/bottles/wine and sprits what i sell to you and there is no negotiation in the price or the rent.Oh and im going to monitor what you sell just incase you dont sell anything that your not allowed to and if there is any indication of this im going to impose fines on you.Oh i know the equipment cant tell the difference between water/line cleaner or beer but thats just a technicality. I will sell you my products at 40% more than you can buy them wholesale and i also want you to pay for POS that we are given free so you can advertise and market said products.I will want too see your accounts and all your stocktaking records.I will also expect you to repair the carpark should it be in a bad state of repair.The opportunity is fantastic and as long as you get your margains right you can make a decent living the only thing i require off you is a 3 month rent deposit up front! Let me know and i will the contract written up.Che

Good points HL, perhaps this revolution is going to be a "Slow-Burner" there are certain problems i believe, particularly in the qestion of legality of the strikes, but one thing i believe is for sure, Pub revolution may be the newest players in this saga, but we are hear to stay and membership will continue to grow. hopefully the existance of us will put pressure on things and bring about much needed change?

Smithers? "it is anti-competitive and has no place in modern Europe"? Good grief man, you wouldn't even allow me to park my mobile bar in your car park so don't talk to me about 'anti competitive'. :(

Smithers, the ONLY way to fight is in the Courts. Anything else is a waste of time and energy, not to mention misleading the gullible into false hope. Personally I think a class action should have been brought long ago, that's what people expected and paid for.

Smithers, given the MASSIVE attendance of the GMB roadshows which constitute 0.14% of the licensee membership of that organisations, it' safe to say that this is just another damp squib. Having said that, anyone considering joining who read your ranting and raving would have immediately reconsidered. Well done Comrade, excellent work for the pubcos.

PSalvadori.

I could not agree more about this, it is a very personal decision, which could have a major effect on an individuals business. If you read my post to smithers, you will see that all I personally do, and actively, though sometimes I will admit possibly to vocally do, is to encourage others to research the facts for themselves!

People must be one hundred per cent informed and convinced before making such a decision; for them not to be is after all, is only going to end up in a situation where they believe things where; shall we say, mis-sold to them!

Smithers.
I said I believe it to be foolhardy, as I would surmise others do. I have a tendency not to do anything without hours of personal research; I will not take the word of anyone as gospel. It is essentially that the phrase We Believes appears to frequently in the statement by the GMB to convince me that they are 100 per cent convinced; there are no guarantees, whilst nothing can be fully assured, their vagueness in a great many issues make me ponder.
You must admit, that you too have been guilty of ranting, which at times has led to you reiterating these unconfirmed We Believe, doubtless when frustrated by some and wound up to the maximum, but sadly, you have still done this. It is this which has led to many of our personal Bun Fights, sadly, you allowed others to wind you up even more and you got less focused on the issues!
It is these things that I worry about when the vulnerable and desperate are involved. I have no problem whatsoever with you stating facts on issues that you have personally researched and without doubt believe in. I will go so far as to say, that Inez in only two emails, has brought me around to believing the problem is more widespread than I think, than all your posts over the past weeks! Perhaps, dealing with things more calmly and taking time to formulate a decent straight answer, and ignoring those who you believe to be having a go for the hell of it, would be far better than your past knee jerk reactions.
Whilst I am still uncertain, due to both business and personal reasons; I am considering actually attending one of the GMB meetings, I do not need help myself, but I have no problems appreciating that others may benefit from my support! For the good of the trade as a whole, and providing that I am convinced, I will support those who are suffering

HL, you may beleive it is fool hardy, it takes guts to take this action, there is a big difference between determinned to bring about change and being fool hardy, as for not haveing anything to lose, that is not true, many of us have put our necks on the line along with our livelihoods and homes. we have been let down by our business partners and are not going without a fight. if people want to join with us, then that is up to them, if they are easily put of by the scaremongering on these colomns, then they probably were never going to carry out the strike action anyway. people have a choice, scareing them into pubcon inflicted bankruptcy,, as 2 people regularly attempt to do on this forum, is makeing them give up without a fight. The bottom line is that this beer tie would never be tolerated in any other country in the world, it is anti-competitive and has no place in modern Europe,i have no doubt that it will soon be gone, probably not soon enough.

HL, a diligent assessment that took time and offers good advice. It will be up to the individual to consider his options, such as remain to him.

Smithers.
Because we believe it is foolhardy perhaps? Plus as I said to PSalvadori, people are putting the faith and all they own on rumour and gossip. This has always been my problem with your rants! Have you actually personally researched the thing yourself, there is plenty of information, freely made available by numerous Government Agencies and NGOs for that matter. I take the view, it is my life, and I will do my own research rather than hope someone, who has nothing personally to lose, told me the right thing!

Smithers, is there anything in my post that was not 100% true and factual?
Statement of fact Smithers no trashing
Ken Nason

I wonder what drives people on here to repeatedly trash everything that Pub Revolution and GMB are doing in an attempt to stop even more pub closures ?

I see the roadshows of the GMB have been a resounding success with the best to date hosting a whopping 52 and Guilford roadshow managing 8.
Hardly a massive turnout from a membership of 3500 to give a concensus for "strike action"
Wonder what's next?
Ken Nason

Ken, the really REALLY important question was: do you get out to a pub much?

Just as long as you've convinced yourself Ken. That's all that really matters.

Psalvadori.
It appears there are those who are dim out there or are they just desperate enough to see light where there is none?
The Pub Rev website states legal immunity; now either the person who wrote that phrase has not got a clue and just got it wrong, or is misleading people. There can be no immunity, that is a fact; GMD have not actually said immunity, they have carefully or perhaps unconsciously allowed others to make this promise on their behalf.
They know the risks? If a contract is broken, that matter can be settled in Court by the aggrieved party and nothing can stop that, with the exception of a handful of people in this Country, and I doubt HM The Queen is going to be involved. The GMB have said; they believe that this can be termed an industrial dispute, but have never guaranteed it! The GMB can provide you legal representation, but that is the limit of their scope. Let us say, everything goes your way; who and what can stop Ted or Giles, individuals to Court, when they please later? Nothing and nobody is the answer, but those grasping at straws seem to believe it cannot happen, unless the laws in this Country are changed before any action, they may find out the hard way that they made a mistake!
You, as I recall, termed this a war; if it is, it is a legal one, and sadly the law is on the side of the PubCos. Whether or not they concede to any demand made by a union on the tie or anything else, the fact remains, those who took part broke a contract and are open to action being taken against them, whenever and however the aggrieved party decides.
I have said before, as has the other man who too is accused of being in favour of the tie. I am not a supporter of the tie; I actually don’t care either way. If the PubCos fall, I already have an agreement with the Head lease holder to occupy my Pub, a Premises Licence Application on my desk and enough money to lose accept the loss of my deposit and still trade, I have agreed FoT prices for my current FoT and any future place already. How many people relying on the GMB have? Have you? You hope that any appointed Receiver will sell it to you cheap, but what if someone walks in with a better offer, that you cannot match, he is obliged to sell to them. And those issues are just for starters!
I understand the anger of some. I do not believe that everyone who is suffering is doing so because of the hand of a PubCo. Nor do I believe the grass will be greener for them. It is the many who do not have a plan that I worry about!

Paul, it can hardly be THAT confidential if Ted Tuppen only needs to spend 11 quid to get it.

HL, fair comment. Cannot but agree with you. Can only say that the vulnerable you refer to are financially vulnerable but not dim. They know the risks, its all about options.

Psalvadori.
Oh I know I do. I puit a great deal of planning in to achieve it! I also know how rare they are, I cannot find another, even FoT that will match my needs and wants at the right price currently.
I have no hostility towards any group, if the tie goes, I'll make even more! However, the spouting of unsubstantiated and blatant porkies, annoys me a great deal, and I just want the truth about things. Vulnerable people blindly following promises of a better life, must actually know what they are getting themselves into. There is a great deal of half truths floating around, many people are making promises they cannot or have no intentions of keeping. That is dangerous to many.
I also do not see that the tie is the biggest danger to the industry as a whole, so get slightly peeved when any post turns into a tie debate, and the essence of it is lost. There is a lot more to fear out there than Ted and Giles, but it seems only JFL are really concerned about it. There is little point in winning a battle on the tie, only to lose the overall war on the trade.

Sorry Colin, confidential, for bona fide GMB PRM members only.

Paul, maybe that should read; "Rare as a happy leaseholder" as they certainly are thin on the ground on here, I have only counted one so far.

Mr Salvadori, and what prey might that 'protection' from the GMB actually be?

HL, you have a cracking lease. You should treasure it. You are looking for others so you know they are now as rare as rocking horse s**t. I understand your hostility to GMB PRM now, you have a lot to lose. But you shouldnt lose, incumbent tenants are being protected. You may have to join the GMB to get this protection.........

Roger, I have no intention of explaining myself three times on this matter. Sorry if your interpretation of what I said doesn't match what I actually said but as they say that's your problem my boy not mine.
Ken Nason

I'm sure you're not too dim to understand the point Ken. Just rather devious in trying to pretend you don't understand it. You were wistfully telling us that in pre-decimal currency days pub customers were rather resilient to beer price rises - and arguing that it will remain so. So the price differential between pubs and supermarkets is not causing an exodus from pubs then? Do you go to pubs much, Ken?

Robin, it sounds like Kens explanation was designed purely for you.

Victim,
In a nutshell; 530K of which 26 per cent is mine.

'Pubco Victim', if you are housed , clothed and fed in the depths of a recession you can consider that relatively successful in comparison to those that are not. There are a few million people who would more than happily change places with you.

Roger why do you have this seemingly uncontrollable desire to drag any posting to your viewpoint?
My postings on price were in reaction to the barrier perception of a pint moving over a 3 pound a pint hurdle and customer reaction to that perception.
NOTHING to do with supermarkets or time machines or your obsession of discounting anything historical and not of today.
Ken Nason

Ken's wisdom "Again I will explain for the feeble minded. It is to illustrate that customer perception of price is the same now as it has always been". Were there supermarkets selling booze below cost in the pre-decimal currency days then Ken? By my calendar it is 2010 Ken, can you put your time-travel machine on charge?

HL, you say that you are successful? What is your definition of successful when talking pubco pubs? Could you give me a rough turnover and what it means to you in the form of drawings/salary so that we can get a benchmark for success please. Just from your tied pub i'm talking and not any other business ventures you may have. Many thanks Pubco Victim

Che. Maybe I am missing something here?!
Whilst 12K will, I will freely admit, stop someone starving to death; it will hardly turn their business around if things are that bad. This is where it all goes wrong for me, if people are struggling and suffering as much as many would have me believe, 12K is an insult to them.
As for any thought about putting me out of business, I am tied, so I will get it too?! Stop being silly and please explain this stance of 12k saving the world.

Tilly, for once we are in agreement re ", you do not run a pub, so your advice means nothing.". Inez Ward and Steve Corbett are in the same boat so that's settled then, glad that we agree. For the record, I retired rather than failed so just maybe my advice is worth just that little bit more than those you so revere.

Colin Matlock/Chris Roberts, you do not run a pub, so your advice means nothing.

Roger, another cretinous post from you to your usual standard.
Again I will explain for the feeble minded. It is to illustrate that customer perception of price is the same now as it has always been.
What's a car Roger?
Ken Nason

That 12k will go towards assisting tenants who are not able to compete in a free market to er.........compete in a free market! Then hopefully they will be able to put smug people like you out of business. Make the playing field level and you will see what 12k will do.

Real. Give it a rest. I am successful; therefore do not exist! And you expect reasonably minded people to take what you write seriously? No 2 Pubs are the same, nor actually businessmen, this is doubtless why, as I have said the only failures around me are FoT, though I did spot another one over the weekend, sadly for your inane arguments, that was a Managed house.
Back to the subject in hand. What exactly, if achieved, is 12K going to do for these suffering lease holders?

I don't believe it! Now Ken has taken us back to the pre-decimal currency era to make a point. How was the pub industry before the motor car was invented Ken?

Mary apologies for missing replying to you in order but Roger surfaced again with his usual helpful comments.Whilst the vast majority of pubs are finding it tough(along with many other businesses) at the moment ( I think the pc term is challenging) it is wrong to state that it is purely the tie as the main factor. Most of the pubs are not tied therefore they do not have that added overhead to contend with. I remember when I first started behind the bar mild ale was 1/8d (around 7p) a pint and with the proposed increases in the pipeline it was going up to 1/10d (81/2p). All the mild drikers swore that they would give up when it passed the 2/-d (10p) threshold. Many years later those same drinkers were still in the same bar complaining that they would give up when it passed the £1 a pint mark. I'm quite sure the ones that are still alive will give up when it passes £3 a pint.Balancing the books of a business isn't just about concentrating on one overhead or price its about controlling the interaction between the forces that act on the business. As you wisely identify there is a point at which ALL businesses become unviable and identifying this point when it approaches is as important as pricing your products. Sometimes it is outside influences that cause this sometimes it is the tenant themselves and sometimes it is a combination of many forces actin upon the business. Ken NAson

Roger is it not about time that you contributed to the topic rather than giving into your uncontrolable desire to attack my posts? Now there's a novel suggestion. Ken Nason

Shamus, in a recession it's not about making money but about surviving until business returns. A better measure would be the number of pubs still trading and viable. Ken NAson

Tenant fred, with due respect I would ask if you have not taken a wage for two years A) how do you eat and pay your bills? and B) do you not think that in two years it would have struck you that the pub was not viable and that perhaps an exit strategy neded to be looked at? Nothing facicious just a curiosity as this is a story that is repeated regularily on these pages. by tenants complaing about their lot Ken Nason

Shamus if Happy Leaseholder was actually a real licensee, he would know what he is saying is a load of tosh, I have a freehold as well as a tied Leese, my freehold is not doing as well as last year, and my tied Leese is on its last legs. The freehold I buy my beer at reasonable prices, the tied beer price is killing the tied pub. Please, people who do not run pubs, stop telling us who do what is happening, as we are the ones who really know what the trade is like.

Hats off to Ken Nason. He's cracked it with one blinding flash of brilliance only he could conjure up. The answer to why many publicans are in debt is that their pubs are non-viable! Careful analysis of this amazing discovery suggests that overheads (including rent) consume all the gross profit leaving no net profit! You don't say Sherlock!!

No problem at all Ken. Just that you have completely changed your stance. As ever you rely on the fact that your 180 degree U turns become lost with the ageing of your previous posts on the subject.

Ken thank you for accepting that there were members of the IPC willing to discuss the tie whilst the BBPA were not. On another point raised some publicans have remained busy yet are not making a living due to the tie as it stands now. There will always be a limit to the ceiling of any given business as trade is finite and not infinate. People are price conscious and paying £4 a pint is just not acceptable to most customers. If you took a straw poll of tied publicans five years ago you would find that most were still making 50% gp on beer. These same publicans have increased prices to try and combat the rises by the pubcos yet see 40% as roughly the gp now as every business reaches a tipping point where customers will vote with their feet. The rise in tied prices is far greater than in the real world and this directly impacts on closures.

Fred and Shamus. As I said, I only know one, who admits he got it all wrong! I am in the trade, so I am well aware of what is happening. But one must wonder why many are not. Nobody seems to want to believe it is themselves who are ultimately responsible for their businessses and it is only them who can improve it.

Shamus, tennant fred and desperate tennant, thank you for your support, I am sorry to hear how bad things are, obviously, I must admit, I have been sickened by a couple of the Presumtuos and self-righteous people on these forums, this week, so please feel free to email me through the facebook site if you need any help, or, alternatively, you can roll over, well and truley, CHURNED, as ken suggested. Smithers

Happy Leaseholder - It is very few and far between licensees who are making money. Yes, I am a tied licensee and I am not making money, and I know I am not the only one as I know many other licensees.

Happy Leaseholder you show that you know nothing of what is happening in the pub trade, there are so many suffering, there are so many not making a penny profit.

Smithers you are so right, I have not been able to take a wage in over two years now, I am struggling from week to week to pay the bills, it really is as desperate as you say, I wish that people on this forum would believe this.

Smithers. Each and every Publican I have met is making cash, bar one, who holds his hands up as a failure through his own inability. Stop these sweeping statements, they really do weaken your point! As I have said on other threads, the only 2 closures in my area have been FoT. Given my central London location, FoT places are rather rare, but nobody wants to touch them because they are situated badly. Why do you even slant the good that PubCos are doing by giving concessions? They are trying to help, probably very late in the day, but nobody can go around throwing charity in all directions, there is a bottom to every pot!

Smithers, no one doubts that there are publicans who are in debt, the question is why are they in debt other than the big bad Pubcos takes all their money. Could it be that the pub has become not viable due to not enough customers coming through the door thereby throwing the overheads out of kilter? These tenants who have not made a wage(even though self employed people don't have a wage) for 18 months and have been working for nothing is all very emotive but, when analysed the simple question arrises, how do they manage without food for 18 months? As to the OFT hanging their heads in shame? It was not their job to slve the trades problems merely investigate the allegations made by CAMRA. This they did and are revisiting their decision to avoid appeal proceedings costing them and CAMRA mega money. With or without action those tenants you spoke of have already lost their investments some 18 months ago Smithers. Ken Nason

All of the publicans I have dealt with very recently, have not made a wage for the last 18 months or more, this means that a lot of people have been working for nothing, indeed in most cases the publicans have got into terrible trouble with debts, the pubcons are giving rent concessions, but this is in order to keep them from haveing even more empty pubs. The reason GMB are involved in this, is because all other trade bodies have so far failed to force this issue. The OFT really should hang their heads in shame, they have effectively avoided dealing with this until way past crisis point. It would appear that without direct action, taken now, many publicans will stand to lose their investments.

Roger you really do try the patience of a saint. No Roger I don't now say...... I have always said it is just your twisted agenda bending interpretation that changes. If you recall I asked you how a prospective tenant could possibly produce his business plan WITHOUT having a price list from a Pubco, but of course you never answered that one. It is impossible to have a price list, which is subject to constant revision, included in a lease document. If a Pubco does not produce one at the time of initial discussions it is common sense that the prospective tenant should ask for one. What is your problem or big deal over that? Ken Nason

Media girl it is quite simple to have a constructive debate or discuss a topic in an adult fashion as long as the idiots keep out of it with their usual infantile personal attacks and insults and agenda driven obsessions. Oops spoke too soon and along came Roger.........................Ken Nason

Mary. the two organisations you quote were both of the stance that they would only accept nothing less than removal of the tie and that nothing less is acceptable. GMB have declared open industrial action to achieve this end and fair pint, evn now being a member of the IPC has not changed it's basic stance of achieving total removal of the tie despite I am sure working on other aspects of trade concernes as part of IPC. So basic foundations for a constructive "mediation were not there and both sides it seems were equally intransigent in achieving common ground. Ken Nason

Ken i can only reiterate that Fair Pint were only one of the members at the table and it would appear that others were quite clearly willing to discuss the matters you have raised but it was a closed shop. Maybe this was the reason the GMB pulled out as they were there to discuss the tie and fairer deals by all accounts. I was not there and the whole farce of a mediation was wrapped on confidentiality but even i recall the the fact that the tie was not up for discussion did not come to light until after the mediation collapsed. I think to try and lay this at the door of fair pint is unwarrented if the BBPA said that they would advocate the tied tenant being no worse off than free of tie the tied prices would have had to have been reduced and talks could have come to a compromise potentially but as we all know this is not on the pubcos list of things to do.

The GMB's involvement is absolutely wonderful, it will give us licensees the publicity we so need. This publicity will reach many, the shareholders, the bondholders, the board members, the government and the courts. Thank you GMB.

Ken. You are quite incredible. So you are now saying that it is crucial for the lessee to have the Pub Cos current price list. That is totally different to what you said earlier, and is of course precisely what I have been arguing for. However, you seem to want the lessee to be forced to have to ask for it rather than it being volunteered with the lease document. How strange!

Mary no actually I don't is unbelievable. Put yourself in their position of coming to a meeting with people who have only ever publicly called for nothing less than the complete removal of the tie (fair pint). That leaves no room for negotiation so the prudent thing to do in business is not to even start discussions as there is no compromise on the other sides position. Now we can only assume what the position might have been if the stance taken by those people had been we would like to look into how the tie could be reviewed and updated to the advantage of both tenant and landlord. Ken Nason

It is nice to read both Mary and Ken's comments, as they both are behaving like adults. Also it makes sensible interesting reading.

Ken, been reading your and Mary's correspondence on this thread, most refreshing after the bun fights that I will try to avoid in future. The problem for lessees is a history of complete intransigence by the pubcos, and recent price rises could be seen as inflammatory. We see no sign of their attitude changing, they treat inquiries with similar indifference. It seems all that is left is direct action. And as this is likely to be painful some think it best to fight the tie at the same time. The GMB Pub Revolution Newsletter clearly states its aim : "to secure negotiation with pubcos to achieve very substantial cuts in wholesale prices and a resolution to a wide range of grievances experienced by the tied tenants at the hands of the pubcos middle managers and their agents like Brulines." Removal of the tie is not in their agenda. Their concern is that the OFT concluded tenants were being overcharged to the degree members were unable to make a wage and losing their homes. The desire to break the tie comes from individuals who fear a return to overcharging after at best gaining a small or temporary concession, and from a belief that a straightforward rent gives landlords the ability to invest in their pub and its offering, funded by their fairer reward for extra sales thus generated.

Ken as far as I jave read there were other parties wanting to discuss the tie who may have thoughts echoing your own yet it wasn't even up for debate, which seems unbelievable don't you think? This has no doubt helped GMB membership and talk of action as the publicans know that the pub companies will not address the issues that need to be addressed. If nothing else the publicans know they are not alone in their experiences rather than believing the company line spun by the bdms.

Mary unfortunately it isn't about awareness as the two sides in this matter are fully aware of the situation. What you are talking about is an awareness in the media, not the trade. As far as I can see no organisation has sat down with either of the main pubcos and thrashed out the problems. As I said not one organisation has gone to the companies involved and said 'look we have a problem here perceived or real and here is our proposal to sort it out what do you think and can we work together to find common ground to ensure everyone's future'. What has happened is a posturing of remove the tie or else. (as per the GMB stance) Your quoted reference to the refusal of BBPA(under instruction from their members) to not discuss the tie could be undrstood under this pre-decided stance which had been publicly advertised. If perhaps the attitude had been let's talk about acceptable revisions to the tie rather than removal or nothing the desire to talk may have been there. Ken Nason

Mary. Why do tenants have to unite? The judiciary is available to every citizen in this Country. If an individual feels aggrieved, whether it by in business or not, they can go to Court about it. It seems to me that Unionization is people clutching at straws and attempting to gang-up on PubCos.

I again acheived a reasonable discount from a beer supplier today, if i buy 20 x 11 gallon(every week) kegs of a low end beer, i can have them at 40 pounds each, for 6 months, this is the beauty of free enterprise as opposed to "tied" extortion.

Thanks ken, I think your last post hit the nail on the head and nicely lends itself to the thread. If publicans are not unified they will be trampled on. Whatever anyones view on the GMB may be or the legality of their actions it cannot be denied that they are uniting publicans to stand together which can't be a bad thing. Whether you think everyone is being led like lemmings or you think they may have a legal route it is all raising awareness of the issues.

Mary the whole basis for disagreement and confusion is in trying to interpret things which are neither defined or actually part of the contract. This is why it is important for things such as codes of practice to be included as integral to and enforcable within the terms of teh lease. The reason for the reluctance of pubcos to enter into discussions on thes epoints is purely because it ties them down and does not allow them to insert their definition on matters of contention. Tenants reluctance to challenge the Pubcos on matters such as beer minitoring equipment has in fact allowed then to write the rulebook for matters not directly coverd by the lease. The use of subjective terms such as fair etc will always lead to disagreements. As to dry rent, as I have said before it doesn't exist. As to differentials between tied and untied supply prices they have always existed since brewers had tied tenancies. The more tenants allow pubcos to get away with the more they will attempt to take a bit like the government and the smoking ban. Ken Nason

Ken thank you for your comprehensive reply. I presume the 10% above wholesale pricelist would be counterbalanced by a lower dry rent or what is it for? I think it is possible to change the way things happen currently and I fully agree that the pubcos have effectively made their own comparables without being challenged. What I would ask is that given the fact that we have highlighted potential ways forward based on what should be happening what is your view on tied tenants paying up to twice the real world wholesale price currently whilst their rents are in line with a free of tie set up? Is this not wrong? Should it not be challenged? Many who signed leases did so on the basis of fair and equitable partnerships(clearly laid out in codes of practice). You may say that codes of practice are not legally binding and maybe just a layout of best practice however others strongly believe that these codes and partners statements were integral to the lease signing process and are intrinsically linked. One thing is for sure and that is that the current way that leases are treated is not in line with the spirit of the agreement and need to change as highlighted in TISC2004 and BEC2009. The 12k raised by the GMB is the tip of the iceberg. What happens next, who knows, but it won't be pretty either way. This however should not be a reason for not seeking change if one side has unjustly enriched themselves at the expense of the other contrary to the agreement they signed.

Ms Clancy, thank you for clarifying that Pub Revolution members have been joining the GMB since the end of 2009, and THEY have had more value from the GMB than their contributions to date. I apologise for questioning the truthfulness of your comments. I still find them disingenuous and disparaging, but I am getting used to it here. The GMB like the rest of us have bills to pay, and we are happy with their value. 3 pubco pints a month, I can live with that.

Salvadori. I’d read that post again! The GMB have always had members, your brethren account for very few! Like I said, any chance of a fact or 2 from smithers and yourself?

Strange how a certain poster is hanging on my every post nowadays, so much so, that he actually has to "Pre-empt" my comments, over to you ken / colin

Smithers many have said the same and many more eloquently and knowledgeable than your good self. We awaiting the great crash. Reasons for your prediction Smithers? Of course not I keep forgetting you don't lower yourself to explain anything do you? Ken Nason

Roger, sorry I didn't realise that there was a limit on the length of one's post but of course explaining something fully does take rather more than just posting insults for the sake of ones own hang ups. Anyway back to your post. So the clause in the lease which specifies that supplies will be at the current list price is too difficult to understand for your incumbent licensee. It is also outside their scope of intelligence to ask for a price list, schedule of discounts from that list ans then telephone several wholesalers to ask them for prices, then sit down with a calculator and work out the difference and also be able to from the same pubco price list work out their required gp to enable them to start producing their business plan. Seems qute simple to me and not outside the scope of someone anticipating a career in th etrade. Perhaps your experience of what abilities are required to run a pub is different from me Ken Nason

Mr Salvadori, It is you who should do a little research. GMB have been pontificating on these issues and claiming to represent 3,500 licensees since at least April of last year and you only have to look on their website to see that. The fact that Pub Revolution only joined with them late last year is somewhat tangental. You are just the latest fly caught on their web! They have in fact been taking subs from licensees for a long time predating that.

Mary, the only basis for calculations of rent etc is as set out in the contract which refers to market value (based on a FMT basis). Unfortunately market value is assessed based on comparative rents elsewhere in the sector (as with housing). Effectively over the last decade the Pubcos have effectively produced these comparatives themselves in artificially raising the average rents in their sectors. People like the RICS have had no option when assessing rental value by using these comparatives which surprise surprise is produced by the Pubcos decade of actions. Now the tenant’s involvement in the production of these rent levels is that they did not to the best of their abilities fight their corner in the raising of rents over this period for several reasons. Some because they did not have the correct negotiating skills, were ok so decided to accept the rent being proposed or did not keep sufficiently good records to prove their case against increases. Whatever the reason they must accept their part in where they are now. As to brewers list price I am referring to the supply price to wholesalers which would be quite easy for them to be have to release as an industry standard without influence by any large organization. Having this as a set standard would help their profitability as well. All that then needs is for the contract to state that the tenant pays say 10% over this price. What the Pubcos negotiate as a discount for guaranteed barrelage is down to them but the tenant will have a fixed % above market supply price which will relate to free of tie whilst still being tied to their landlord allowing the landlord to benefit from the tie. I think you would be hard pressed to find anywhere it says that you were entering into an equal partnership of any kind. A mathematical equation based on relevant factors would be quite easy to produce and applied pub by pub. Square footage, type of pub, car park size, maintenance standard, facilities etc. so that when any of the parts of the formula change i.e. due to a refurbishment, then automatic recalculation takes place, both ways. This would do away with rent reviews as an annual reassessment would be all that was required. I would leave it up to the mathematicians to work out the interactions between factors but it should be quite possible. As to sitting at the table yes there has been some but not one of the groups has yet produced an overall plan for solving the trade’s problems just small aspects of it and all based on the tied model alone. In the words of the dreaded Blair we need a road map. Ken Nason

"Looney leaseholder" / steve, whatever way you look at it, the beer tie and the Pubco CHURNING / PYRAMID SALES scam is in it's last throws now, why don't you go and take up a more lucrative form of propaganda ?

HL, thank you for confirming my last post regarding the untruthfulness of a poster. And great to see you praise the work of Fair Pint, about time.

Smithers. Propaganda?! Is there any chance, even just the slightest, that you would agree to understand what you are writing? Please do look up the words before typing them.

Salvadori. Are you taking lessons from smithers? It seems you are blind to facts too, and also have a passion for claiming the work of others. Fair Pint and the FSB started down the Euro road in the middle of last year, they and the GMB finally sat down with the DGC I believe in September. Given that your little bunch did not get into swing until October……..care to explain? You really should understand or research things before leaping in or accusing Ms Clancy of deception.

It will be interesting when the pubcons are forced to give this money back to the leaseholders.

Same old tripe from Mr Nason in his 'War & Peace' epic. Anything and everything except a tied lease agreement which tells the prospective lessee the price he will have to pay for his beer. After all we wouldn't want him to be able to compare that with freetrade discounted prices and know the real cost of the wet rent now would we Ken? Change the record for heaven's sake!

Ms Clancy, your first post was inaccurate enough, your latest untruthful. Do be careful to check your facts. As a member of GMB PRM I know when PRM and GMB PRM were formed. You clearly havent a clue. What is your agenda?

Ken, i understand where you are coming from and you point on the methodology not being in the contract is very valid.It is however inferred that there is a correct way of assessing the rent as clearly laid out in pubco submissions during the TISC2004. The only real change is the acceleration of the wholesale price list prices vs the free of tie world. Recent rulings have however pointed to the fact the RICS guidance is valid when properly interpreted. You may say i am playing the pubco game by trying to change terms but i assure you that i am not. I was offering you a possible way of determining what the free of tie price is at a given point in time. The contract does not define how the rent is set and this does need addressing, which has been done so in part by my previous point. With regards to brewers list prices + 5% i don’t know where you are going with this. Do you mean the prices paid in the real world of the wholesale pricelists produced for the pubcos? How would this be any different to the situation we have now if the Brewers/suppliers have been more than happy to draft an artificially high price list for tied tenants to pay? I think my previous idea works better but then i would. The contracts also say that all payments are rent, which includes insurance and beer tie yet the tied beer profit is kept out of the equation as explained in an earlier post. This is not the belief that people had when they signed in good faith on the dotted line. There are many arguments of bad faith and unfair contracts which deserve to be challenged. Why should one party get anyone to sign under the false pretences of an equal partnership and potentially knowingly operate their model in a way that ultimately leads to the failure of the publican? When you talk of mathematical equations for rent setting this is of course complete sense yet only a week ago Enterprise claimed that their is no set formula, which i know not to be the case. There is a formula if they get the rent they want and then the formula is no longer valid when changed. I don’t agree that Fair Pint have not achieved anything in three years as they have highlighted the issues and continue to do so. I think your question of them coming to the table to discuss the issues is a little strange given that they went to mediation where the BBPA refused to even discuss the tie. Some may say that Fair Pint have been more than up to the challenge of sitting at the table and have addressed the many issues with the RICS who are now having to take appropriate action. I don’t mean they are rewriting the rules but that they have noticed how the rules can be manipulated to meet the ends of the dominant party, in this case the pubcos. There is always a way forward and not taking just because of property company debt is not constructive for anyone. I am not suggesting this is your view but merely offering my own.

Colin Matlock I note you state that you have are a shareholder in ETI, interesting that, was it not ETI who did a deal to shut you up some time agao. Did they trrow in some shares as well as the cash?

Diane the GMB actually have been quite busy. They have helped an awful lot of tied tenants.

Diane, who do you work for, incidently ?

Diane, please stick to the facts, the GMB have not been involved until recently, it is yours and colin/hl's propaganda that is muddying the waters. incidently, it is the best £11 per month any of the hundreds of tied leaseholders i speak to have spent. we have already trashed the screwlines data.

Mr Salvadori, What utter twaddle. GMB were claiming to represent 3,500 licensees as far back as April last year!! Clearly those members pre date that. So they've been sitting on a tidy bundle of cash and doing diddly squat except raise their own profile in order to rake in even more money since then!

Colin. Doubtless the lunatic will rant on and do more damage to any cause decent people have.

Mary, I always reply to intelligent questions and debate where required. Firstly lets get the contract question out of the way. I know many think that I state this as some sort of stick to hit a naughty boy with but unfortunately it is a fact of life for a tenant (Tied and FOT). Most of the complaints and arguments lead inevitably back to this fact that most tenants find unpalatable and want to forget. My point in the post was not you signed, if you read it but if your statement was true then you would not have a contract.You all signed a contract which is legally binding willingly and with full knowledge of the requirements of that contract, that is not in dispute.You are in your post doing what the Pubcos do and that is to change the methods of assessment to suit your own outlook. This is where it all falls down in that both of the biggest areas of contention and tension between landlord and tenant are the rent and the supply prices, neither of which are defined in the contract, mentioned but not defined. This is then compounded by third party assessment of those guides. I have long advocated that both should be defined in the ontract, the rent as a mathematical calculation referring to the pub concerned with all of the variables of that pub as part of the formula so when one thing changes the rent changes but everyone knows exactly what those changes are. Secondly supply price should be an agreed % over brewery supply price to accommodate the tie and the Pubco negotiates their discount off brewery price for themselves. So they get brewery discount and a % from the tenants sales.Again everyone knows where they stand exactly. Brewery goes up £5 keg then tenant goes up £5+%. Unfortunately this will mean revisiting the contracts but hey no one says it will be easy.We need a cmplete overhaul of the system at the same time as allowing the landlords to receive returns for their investment. How much progress has actually been made by shouting the odds of remove the tie over the last three years? None. Tenants are still overcharged and rents are still high in many cases. Some tenant are doing ok in the recession others are going to the wall. We need to get round thre table and work out a solution. I said to fair pint a long time ago that they must produce a viable plan for the future rather than just demanding the removal of the tie. Ken Nason

Kevin, I've never taken you to be a fool or anything close to it. Just as well that Smithers has been exposed for the plonker that he is, saves us all a lot of time.

Ms Clancy, maths defective or being deceptive? GMB started taking subscriptions in December 2009, so your figure is some 5 times overstated.. Prior to receiving their first insfalment they invested a minimum six figure sum in research and advice to and Europe wide lobbying for the pub revolution movement. They have provided free counsel to various lessees in court proceedings already, plus instant telephone access to legal advice for members with problems since day one. They will do well to break even on their investment by 2011. There is so much disinformation and odious post on these forums by people who should know better, and I have to ask you, what is your agenda? For me, best £11 a month I have ever spent.

Ken thanks for the reply. The comparisons could be obtained by being allowed to contact breweries and wholesalers to get current pricing . Not too difficult to do really but as you know breweries will currently not give out prices or enter into negotiations if you are not free of tie. I am a little dissapointed that you have reverted back to your you signed the lease line as the debate was getting interesting. You are vorrect that the pubcosake tied tenants gp suffer to balance the rent but this should not be how the calculation on rent is arrived at. The pubcos should enter an agreed realistic free of tie price based on research within their calculations and then offer a tied rent which is realitic and sustainable tracking the free of tie prices annually. This way the pubcos still make additional profit due to buying power but the publicans have sustainable rents and beer prices. Unfortunately this is not what has happened and the tie has been abused beyond all recognition as you are aware.

Ken thanks for the reply. The comparisons could be obtained by being allowed to contact breweries and wholesalers to get current pricing . Not too difficult to do really but as you know breweries will currently not give out prices or enter into negotiations if you are not free of tie. I am a little dissapointed that you have reverted back to your you signed the lease line as the debate was getting interesting. You are vorrect that the pubcosake tied tenants gp suffer to balance the rent but this should not be how the calculation on rent is arrived at. The pubcos should enter an agreed realistic free of tie price based on research within their calculations and then offer a tied rent which is realitic and sustainable tracking the free of tie prices annually. This way the pubcos still make additional profit due to buying power but the publicans have sustainable rents and beer prices. Unfortunately this is not what has happened and the tie has been abused beyond all recognition as you are aware.

Kevin, I think you may see exactly what I have achieved in the fullness of time. I have sparked debate, that is what i do. your friend "wolfy" was a lazy work dodger, i see no similarlity.

CHURNING ken, that is what you are defending, The whole pubcon scam is finally out in the open, you can waffle on here all you want, everyday, you won't stop the tie being shown for the scandelous rip-off that it really is. It's just a shame you don't have any consideration for those people who have lost houses, homes and money over this "Pyramid Sales Churning Technique"

Comrade Smihers days of voicing the opinions of the GMB Pub Revolution may soon be over. Last night in another place Paul Salvadori opined that I was a fool for taking any notice of him. I fear he may not be carrying the flag on the day of the glorious revolution. Life immitating art, Wolfie Smith never made it either.

Mary, I know exactly where it came from and can assure you I am up to date. I left it blank to see whether anyone else did. The point being that the OFT findings were rubbished by all in the tied sector and defined as dishonest through to fraudulent by some. But surprise surprise one of the figures produced during that investigation is now jumped upon and cherry picked to demand a reduction in what exactly? As to the FMT calculations this has been gone over before. A lower gp calculation gives a smaller profit from which a lower rent is the outcome. The problem with the counterbalancing lower than free rent comparison is, as I have asked all of those who chant the "no worse off" mantra is, where do you obtain your comparisons from. My feelings are that tenants in the past have not put as much effort into rent negotiation that they should have done and as a result they suffer inflated rents now. So what exactly are they after, a return of all of the differentials between free of tie and tied prices charged since the start of the contracts? In that case why do you have a contract willingly entered into.Ken Nason

Regarding the 12k i believe this to be the minimum that tied pubs are being ripped off, afterall it only equates to £230 a week so if you are buying 2 x 22's of lager a week you are paying over £230 more than the average wholesalers (who i'm assuming make a profit and aren't in it for the love of it like we are) I spend between £2000-£2500 on draught products per week, i could get the same stock from my local wholesalers or even Bookers for half the price so i estimate i'm being overcharged by over £50,000 per year. If you'd like the proof then i can make it a "Fact" for those who only deal in "Facts" If you like to search for the facts yourself you could knock up an imaginary weekly order and get some price comparisons from various sources and then compare with the latest pubco price list which has just seen an 11 of Carling go up to over £135 (£65 @ Bookers atm) But if Colin, HL and Ken tell me i'm wrong then i'll have to accept it and just carry on down the road of pubco assisted business suicide until i'm broke and my family are homeless because i signed the lease so therefore deserve to be ruined.

So using Smithers satement of GMB union fees of £11 per month and GMB's claim to represent 3,500 publicans, that means GMB have £462,000 of licensees money sitting in their bank account. And what have they done with it? From what I can see is all they've done is a bit of rabble rousing about having a ballot (which they've been saying they're going to do for about a year!!), failed to organise one and are now sitting on nearly half a million quid! Nice work.

HL, now that we have had a definitive response from GMB Pub revolution on the 'Colin' thread we should be able to expect Comrade Smithers to be no more. A victory for common sense over lunacy.

Reading an article in The Other Place, it would appear that the GMB National Secretary believes that he has 3500 members, I cant believe even a union fat-cat can misplace 4.5K members! smithers, care to explain or are you going to take your normal stance when posed a reasonable question and do a bunk?

Freetrade, help is at hand. You will see someone on here persistently posting that he only pays £20 a keg for beer. I suggest that you make contact without delay. See you in Cuba in the summer. Oh by the way HL, Cuba is actually the cheapest Caribbean destination these days. I've been there four times over the years just because I love the place. I recommend Trinidad and St Lucia too.

Freeholder John, no-one is against the tied tenants at all per se. However, I cannot speak for anyone else but the rank dishonesty of the 'end the tie' campaigns stick in my craw. It is quite clear that nobody has the intention of passing any part of a future windfall onto the consumer as is evidenced by nobody prepared to guarantee a reduction in prices. The dishonesty is that without the tie 'everyone will benefit' and that is so much BS. I don't have a problem with anyone making a living but hypocritical profiteering at the expense of the consumer is quite intolerable. Over a year ago a certain group were distributing posters stating that beer would be �1 a pint cheaper without the tie but when asked to confirm that as fact, oddly enough they went very quiet and on that subject,remain so. All in all they are quite simply trying to garner public support based on a blatant lie and that they are failing to do so is quite justified.

Freeholder John. I am a tied tenant! I find I have enough cash, many of my friends do, and just to take a less than random example, a member of Fair Pint holidays in Cuba, nothing against that, but it proves we are not all broke. This is not tied tenant bashing, this is a search for the truth, sadly, the GMB and/or smithers are telling porkies and may well lead people to self destruction. I think that is a pretty serious issue.

Just for the record im a fot operator and times are still tough, my private landlord always wants as much rent as possible and the beer suppliers are always pushing up thier prices! there is not much competition in the market due to the recession, carlsberg uk have even stopped handing out glass wear and beermats. the wholesalers cant reduce prices. so what are the gmb going to do for me?? why dont they fight for less red tape, regulation and a drop in beer duty as this would benefit tied, freetrade, managed and brewers! imagine the weight of wetherspoons and mitchel and butlers battling the government rather than jus a feww hundred tied tennants.

Ken the 12k figure was in the OFT report as i am sure you will know being up to date on such matters. I agree that this 12k is very low with the difference being more like double. Ken as you advise on such matters you will know that the pubcos enter their tied prices in their fmt calculation at the expense of leasee GP. They use this as a basis for their rent model so that the tied beer profit does not get split, if you enter free of tie prices in the same model you will see that the difference is in excess of 20k even if you took into count a rise in rent due to the divisable split of profits. This model however is based on flawed fmt rental valuations with costs added in around 30% whereas operators will know that the truer figure is around 45%. It really is not that difficult to work out and the RICS are on to it.

Come on guys, give the tied tenant a break, they have to make a living, they work long hours, for what, daily stress and pressure because there is no money to pay bills, etc., I think those of us who are lucky enough not to be a tied tenant should stop knocking them and either back them up or back off.

Smithers, as a shareholder with quite a sizeable wedge in ETI I can categorically state that I'm not worried one little bit. You on the other hand must be a tad miffed that to date, you haven't been right about one single thing. Try scrounging the money to buy a lottery lucky dip, you stand much more chance of getting it right for once.

Steve W, good point regarding Comrade Smithers. To help him out the duty would be around £29.00 for an 11 of bitter. Surely all the GMB has to do is ask him where he gets his supplies from and they would vastly exceed their target of £12k. Come on comrade care to share with your brothers?

I am so glad that we have a smithers on our side and not a colin. the colins on this website dont have a clue how hard it is to survive in the pub industry in this day and age.

Personally I welcome the involvement of GMB in the licensed trade and they do have a valid place in representing those people employed within it. Barstaff are paid a pittance for what at times can be dangerous work and oddly enough with all of the 'no fair guv' blurb we hear from the anti tie brigade, not once have I read anyone posting that they will pay their staff more appropriately if ( a big IF ) the tie were ever to go So, who's going to be the first to (a) GUARANTEE a reduction in price at the pump and (b) GUARANTEE to give their staff a justified pay rise? Rachael/Inez. PLEASE keep up to speed, I am recently retired now but certainly have many more years in the trade under my belt than those whom you revere so much.

Rachel. The hint is in the name Petal, I have a lease with Punch and therefore an interest. What planet did you breeze in from?

So Smithers still no indications as to when I have called anyone left wing loonies and yobbos? As per usual all rubbish posted with no evidence to back it up. Funny how you feel you can make statements about others without facts but anyone uttering anything regarding yourself is complained about as trashing or hounding your good self. Evidential that you work on a completely different set of values from everyone else. Ken Nason

smithers. Does nobody connected to you tell the truth? They said 12K, it is even on their wedsite. So, who is telling porkies again, or are you all at it?

The figure of 12k is quite a conservative one, I beleive this could be more than double 12k in most pubs. The stealth rent that is known as the beer tie is finished, worrying times for shareholders!

Can someone explain to me how the OFT investigation during the CAMRA affair was rubbished by every tied tenant on here but now their so called knights in shining armour have suddenly taken up the cause using this figure of 12k which was provided by who? Ken Nason

Colin Matlock , sweetheart, why do you want the tied tenant not to survive?

Smithers - 3 direct questions: (1) What is the duty on an 11 gallon keg of average strength? (2) is the answer to question 1 below what you're claiming to be paying? (3) Are you a liar or a thief?

Tilly - if you're that interested, a look at the timings of my postings will show that I tend to post in short, sharp bursts as & when I can; it may just look like I spend a lot of time on here. But surely it's the very fact that my pub IS ran well that I CAN afford time to pursue other trade-related interests, such as this forum? It helps to give some wider perspectives when it's all too easy to get 'trapped' between our own four walls. Regarding the GMB, I'm not hard on them simply for being a union, or trying to 'help'; I'm hard on them because I don't believe they have a place in an industry populated by self-employed people? I'm hard on them because I think their action will do more harm than good to licensees who are already struggling? I'm hard on them because they tend to attract people like Smithers, who are "all campaign and no brain"!

Happy Leaseholder/Colin Matlock as you are not involved in this trade, why are you so intersted in trying to stop the tied tenant from making a living.

"a load of lunatics and left wing yobbo's" ?? Perish the thought.

Interesting move from the GMB and one that I hope will put further pressure on the outdated and failed structure of the sector. Looking at the CV for the new minister of pubs it seems that Mr Healey has good connections with the TUC and presumably will be ready to listen to his union colleagues.

Smithers. Well come on, explain how this 12K is going to stop all these leaseholders from sticking their heads in their ovens?

Smithers putting aside that nothing I posted has confirmed any point you have made other than you have totally ignored what I posted re the GMB. I have misled no one (as per your last assertion to this point) and I would be grateful for you to point out where I have called anyone left wing lunatics or left wing yobbos(your words not mine old son). Of course you never will. I thought you had stopped recruiting for GMB? (another lie I see). Why in heavens name do you feel I should be doing anything to save British Pubs? Ken Nason

Thank you Ken, that's exactly my point, you have been misleading people into thinking we are a load of lunatics and left wing yobbo's, when in reality we are people who are fed up with the massive gravy train of freeloaders that have been taking money out of our pubs for decades, GMB membership is only 11 quid per month and so far they have defended us and highlighted what has really been going on in this trade, what have you been doing to Save British Pubs ?

tilly. Perhaps SteveW is being so hard on the GMB because he feels they are leading people up the garden path and their supporters tell far to many lies!

12000 quid on a 300 barrel pub is 40 quid per BB. If it takes a Union to negotiate that on behlaf of tenants, they really do not deserve to be in business! But hey, they will then drop their prices by 80p per pint, so they will not be in business for long!

Smithers unfortunately as the GMB nor their greatest advocate on here will supply anyone with any details of these "massive amounts of hard works carried out" despite many genuine requests, how can anyone judge for what they are to be congratulated? Ken Nason

Steve W why so hard on the GMB?

SteveW, this is not any of your concern, if you are truly happy with your deal you don't have anything to worry about. The GMB meetings are the only way forward now, as everything else has repeatedly failed tied leaseholders. Its just a shame that a certain few people on here cannot congratulate Pub Revolution and GMB for the massive amounts of hard work we have all put into developing a better bread of tied pubs for the future.

Steve W, you must be very quite in your pub, as you seem to be on here 24/7.

Let's just see how many 'thousands' turn up at these events shall we...

I urge all GMB members to go along to the nearest meeting to you. The pubcos must be made to change, and the GMB may be a driving force behind change.

I will be at the Guilford one, we must highlight the immoral tied pubco model any way we can.