Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Let's Kill Another Privatization Myth III

Another favorite clerk message is that privatization would kill off the local or craft brewery, winery, or distillery. Not a lot of data out there on this point since the craft movement really didn't exist 25 years ago when Iowa privatized or 20 years ago when Alberta privatized, but there is one current example: Washington State.

How did the craft movement do in Washington from before privatization to after privatization?

In FY 2011, before privatization there were:
  • 739 Winery licenses
  • 151 Brewery licenses
  • 35 Craft Distillery licenses

In FY 2013, the first year after privatization:
  • Winery licenses increased 7.4% to 794
  • Brewery licenses increased 47% to 223
  • Craft Distillery licenses increased a whopping 83% in just two years to 64.
  • While not producers, but indicative of the increased selection available to Washingtonians, the Importers and Distributors licenses increased an incredible 129%.

While it may be true that some in-state sales declined (hard to say since all the data isn't available), that doesn't seem to have stopped the craft movement. One thing you can say about the free market is that people don't start businesses to lose money; they aren't the PLCB, after all, with millions to waste on signs and kiosks and things. If they're starting businesses, they're pretty sure they can sell product.


Anonymous said...

Tick, tock, tick, tock. Another month down and no bill to privatize or even partial privatization. One has to start to wonder if the GOP Senators want Corbett out of office because all they have provided him is a deficit, huge cuts to education, and gas tax hikes. Well at least things are looking up for you. I don't believe partial privatization (wine only) would have met your goal of getting rid of the State Stores. So, on the bright side for you, you have a long, long time to blog about getting rid of them.

sam k said...

Don't forget increased funding for more prisons! Thanks Tom, you da man!

Albert Brooks said...

Well John, it is you after all, we have been waiting 40 years and each time get a little closer. The end is inevitable it is just a matter of when. You only have to lose once but then you know that.

As long as you and Fearless Leader keep saying things you can't prove and given the normal incompetence and ineptness of the PLCB I'll have plenty to write about.

Geno Washington said...

Would the movement for privatization have been in existence in 1950? I wonder because it was around that time that supermarkets came into being as we know them today, and shopping centers as we know them came to fruition around the same time.

Lew Bryson said...

Not privatization, as far as I can tell, but grocery stores have been trying to break up the beer oligopoly since the 1930s. I had that from people at the Pennsylvania Food Merchants Association; they told me that was the main reason their group was founded.

Anonymous said...

It's not me wit the tick tocks Albert. I usually don't have time to waste reading this, but have been informed by folks that think its funny that you have this delusion that every contrary comment comes from me. To those people; Some of you can't be looking at this as often as you claim. This thing only gets an average of 14 hits per day. Which is why I say ignore the blog. John Rz

Lew Bryson said...

It's about as funny as the people who think every anti-PLCB comment on the newspaper sites must be Albert.
As for the blog, we get a lot more than 14 hits per day, but I've always said that it's more about who's reading it than how many. It's still reaching its intended audience. Which is not union members, BTW.

Anonymous said...

I should have said people visiting the blog. Some may check back multiple times. Damn, I just did. When I got tired of hearing about comments I made on a blog I hadn't even seen I sent this link out with a "why bother message". I swear last night it said the average daily visitors was 14, so it seems you've been downgraded. So Lew, which of the 134 are the "who" that are so important? JRz

Lew Bryson said...

I shouldn't be surprised that you're using an inaccurate source. My Google and StatCounter numbers are different, and since they're internal, undoubtedly more accurate. But if you want to know more...sorry, not telling. Why should I? Ignore the blog, John. It's not important.