Monday, September 8, 2014

The more things change, the more things PLCB

Moving at the speed of the PLCB

Eleven years ago (August 2003) the Chairman said that "Supermarket owners are clamoring to put state-owned liquor stores within their walls" Back then the PLCB wanted 2-3,000 sqft for their "store in a store" Now the latest version of "modernization" is down to 400sqft -  or under 2 aisles worth which is less than the store would offer if the system were privatized.
The store in a store concept had been around for over 20 years even by 2003 so how much clamoring has happened?  Of the over 5,000 grocery stores in the state, only 15 have a state store in them about the same number that had the failed wine kiosks. I think ignoring might be the correct word not clamoring.

He also said that state stores should be open until 11 which is something the PLCB can do without any legislative approval. So far it hasn't happened but hey, it has only been 11 years and we are talking about the PLCB - you know those same people who say they are consumer driven.  Maybe they meant driven to New Jersey or Delaware to get real service and selection since he knows "...the state store system has made it inconvenient to buy spirits."

Just a blast from the past that shows how well "modernization" has been going.


Anonymous said...

The last modernization bill moving in the Senate had grocery stores selling wine, that would be bought wholesale through the PLCB. It was shot down by Sen. Eichelberger and others that are tied to the convieinence store industry because gas stations were not included. I think you are talking about a House bill that has not even gotten out of committee. Why, I do not know. Bored or something?

Albert Brooks said...

I'm posting about the last proposal endorsed By President for Life DADA Young as part of a modernization plan. Just another example of how out of touch the clerks and the union are with what the people really want. Why you don't know that I can't say. Must not be keeping up I guess.

Anonymous said...

If Mr. Young endorsed the Senate bill would it have any chance to pass the House? Amateur bloggers are easily confused, wouldn't you say? Wow! Talk about not keeping up. Seems you're a couple lps back!

Albert Brooks said...

There is no chance of anything that Wendell endorses passing so the point is moot.

No confusion at all on my part. You and he are both against moving into the modern free market that doesn't treat customers like children. You may be confused thinking that people want to keep the current system. I think that is called brain washing.

Anonymous said...

If the point is moot, why then the post? I'll ask again. Bored or what?

Lew Bryson said...

"Why the post," seriously? Because it reminds people what an empty sham 'modernization' is. What the PLCB and UFCW seem to mean when they say 'modernization' is 'come on, give me one more chance, I can change, and we'll be good.' Lies, shellac, and window dressing. Blow it up! Put a nonpartisan team together - retail, public health, local government, AND consumer - citizens, for a change - and let THEM come up with a plan instead of the Legislature, which seems incapable of ignoring special interests for the greater good.

Albert Brooks said...

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Just a reminder of how out of touch the PLCB and the union are...... See you couldn't remember that and I had to repeat it.