A Christmas Gift for the PLCB

I don't often do things for free, and I don't do much at all to help the PLCB. But in the spirit of Christmas, here is my gift to them. I'm giving it to them early, so maybe they can get a head start on using it. I'm not optimistic about that, but you never know.

One shining example of beneficial government regulation is the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture registration for all baked goods (widely defined as any food that has been cooked in any way). They are good and sensible health regulations for those foods. That is why you see "Reg. Penna. Dept. Agr." on so many products. If you sell it in Pennsylvania, it must comply with the rules we have here.

HARK!  I bring you higher variable prices!

If the PLCB is going to pick our pockets with "variable pricing," they could try to make it up by applying the same kind of forward thinking the Department of Agriculture did in 1933 to protect the citizens. How about if the PLCB required labeling for the amount of added sugar in wine and liquor? There are some wines that have the same amount of sugar per serving as Mountain Dew (Barefoot Moscato is one), and of course the flavored whiskeys and rums almost all have large amounts of sugar.

By requiring sugar content labeling, the PLCB could finally help improve, in some small but significant way, the health of the citizens. It's not completely new, either: both the LCBO (the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, the largest purchaser of wine and spirits in the world), and the Quebec SAQ (their liquor board) require the sugar content be made available on their websites already, so every major vintner, along with thousands of smaller ones have the information ready to go.

The PLCB could and should go further by mandating sugar content be listed on the label. Like anything governmental, it doesn't have to be immediate, say one year to get the sugar content info on the website, and then four years before it HAS to be listed on the label.

So if the PLCB really wants to be a world-class leader, wants to benefit the citizens, wants to help combat poor health, and wants to do something for the first time in 83 years that actually is helpful to their owners (that's us!), they should jump on this bandwagon wholeheartedly. I know it will be a hard pill to swallow, taking an idea from me, but guys: you can always claim it was "under consideration" for the past few years. I won't tell.

"PLCB Modernization" means "PLCB higher prices"

Another installment in our ongoing series of revelations about why "modernization" is a scam.

We always hear about how the "PLCB Modernization" plans will make so much more for the state! But what they won't tell you is that they all work by taking more money out of your pocket. Here is one of sneaky little things they want to do that will cost you more. You don't see much about this item, as the PLCB has buried it pretty well. Well-hidden or not, it is one of their many ideas that will cost you, the consumer.
 

Because it's the PLCB way!

In the liquor industry there are specials that are offered called SPAs  or Special Purchase Allowances. By current law these SPAs have to be passed on to the consumer (that's you!), which is why you see  those sale tags on the shelves. The PLCB isn't making any less, as none of that reduction comes out of their pocket; they are just passing on the SPA.

However, the PLCB doesn't want to do that anymore. In sworn testimony, the PLCB said "With flexible pricing, the Board would be in a position to retain, and ultimately remit to the Commonwealth, some of the savings afforded by the Board's suppliers" In plain English? 'We aren't satisfied with making the exact same amount on sale items, we want to make more and have the citizens save less.' (I did a post last year about "flexible or variable pricing" if you want to review that.) In a worst case scenario, which is without a doubt what the PLCB will do, they could get an SBA, adjust the pricing upward and pocket 80-90% of the savings that were supposed to be yours.

Now, in the free market, a store will leverage those SPAs by not only using the reduction in their cost but by also cutting their margin to lower the price even further in order to attract customers away from other businesses. That is why sale prices elsewhere are more of a bargain than the sale prices in PA. The PLCB doesn't want to do that, though, because they need more money to cover their ever-expanding operating costs.

In 82 years, we have never seen anything done to change the liquor code to save you money. Benefiting the consumer is not what the Almighty Liquor Code is for, after all, unless it's about free drinks while playing slots. They have no problem with that.

It is time to END IT, not mend it. Get the state out of the alcohol business and into regulation where it belongs.






For parts 1-4 of this series see :
Part I,
Part II
Part III
Part IV