http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink ... g-mad.html

The Telegraph plays this like we might be getting Australian schooners instead of pints but really that's just a load of old column filling. The real story starts when you get to about the 4th paragraph.

So how do we feel about losing the 'pint'

David Willetts claims "consumers and businesses want more choice." I have to say, having been in many pubs and having had many pints I can't ever remember feeling that I wished the pub could sell me the same product in a different sized glass. As for businesses wishing for an alternative to the 'pint' or 'half-pint' - I simply can't see it? Which landlord is it who would like to change all his beer glasses, dishwashers, shelf-space, prices and order tablets for no benefit what so ever?

The story points out that the pint has been a legal measurement of beer for 313 years to date. You might argue that the law is old so needs updating... but I would have to ask why?

_________________
Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do.
"Emmett is able to write fairly well, he clearly isn't unintelligent overall" - Quote MALCO - Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:57 pm

It's simply an opportunity for the larger chains to introduce a 'confusopoly' whereby it becomes impossible to make like-for-like comparison on price or value for money. I can pretty much guarantee that this is the result of lobbying in that direction.

Naturally the DM will have barked at the whistle, and want to take us back to a gentler time before Tony McZanuBliar and the EU-PC-Nonsense Commission Quango forced the pint upon us in the 1700's.

_________________
Soppy anti-British, pro-crime, anti-education, pro-immigration, anti-family nonentity

I agree with regards large chains. They wouldn't object. They will all change together at the agreed date. At the same time another swathe of private landlords will bail-out rather than try to keep up with the corporates.

_________________
Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do.
"Emmett is able to write fairly well, he clearly isn't unintelligent overall" - Quote MALCO - Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:57 pm

Yeah, I want more 'choice'. I'm so sick of ordering pints.

Obviously I want to support this noble move to give us consumers more choice where absolutely nobody wants any more choice at all.

_________________
http://redsparrows.tumblr.com

I think having smaller wine glasses makes good sense.

_________________
Where there is great doubt, there will be great awakening; small doubt, small awakening, no doubt, no awakening.

There's already a small/large distinction in them too, ain't there?

_________________
http://redsparrows.tumblr.com

I predict whether it comes in or not, people really won't give a toss. People who go to pubs like beer, not measurements (well, most people anyway). As long as said beer is still available, there will be the odd grumbler moaning about how they wish we could go back to flaggons, but that's probably about it.

Besides, a pint is inappropriate for many types of beer and always has been. That's why at any decent beer festival you can buy thirds and halves anyway and various-sized glasses to match (something only touched on and buried well down the Telegraph article). I'd much rather have a smaller, suitable measure of a strong porter or continental lager than have to have a pint because it's a pint or nothing. And getting less beer but only paying slightly less for it? That, I would suggest. is the pub's issue and not an inherent problem with having different measurements.

I really can't see the issue. It's not like anyone has ever gone round demanding all mugs are the same size so we can get a regulation half-pint of tea, is it? And also, there is the elephant in the room that *nowhere* in the article does it suggest the pint would be withdrawn anyway. Seems to be an article portraying one thing that might not happen anyway (and almost certainly not in the sense the article implies) as another, deliberately to get some people wound up.

Edit: also, while I think of it:

Beer glass change: been in a pub recently? Most now sell you beer in branded glasses and a huge array of shapes and sizes. The days of the standard dimpled jug or straight glass are long gone already.
Dishwashers: these accommodate various sizes of glass already. As these other sizes are likely to be smaller, this clearly won't be a problem.
Shelf space: Unless these new glasses are going to be like massive saucers and incredibly wide, how would this be an issue? They are likely to be shorter than already existing glasses.
Prices etc: beer changes price anyway. Quite regularly. A landlord would just set a price and then people can decide to pay or not (and that would probably be as tough as adding a new inventory item to the program that runs the tills, or writing something on a blackboard if the pub is a bit more old school).

You're right, it's a cultural issue rather than a technical one. But it would be just as easy to say why not close all pubs completely. People could still buy alcohol if they wanted to, they would consume it in their own home and if they wanted to have friends round then they could invite them. See, no problem.

_________________
Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do.
"Emmett is able to write fairly well, he clearly isn't unintelligent overall" - Quote MALCO - Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:57 pm

At the risk of sounding like Peter Hitchens, you can put your finger on letting supermarkets sell cheap/undercut booze as a moment this country spiralled further down the pan. It's possible to contend that there's a direct link beween the demise of the public house and a decline in moral standards.

_________________
Mailwatch. Love us or leave us.
http://www.coalitionofresistance.org.uk/

It would also be just as easy to say all pubs should be painted blue with lemon yellow ceilings. And just as relevant.

I go to pubs for the atmosphere and to meet friends and have a drink in a pleasant environment. I imagine that's what most people go for. Unless you go to pubs with the primary aim of consuming a very specific set amount of liquid that can only be reached by drinking a multiple of one pint, and the mere existence of alternatives is enough to throw you off your arithmetic and make your consumption of your fixed amount impossible, the additional availability of different measures will make precisely no difference to your enjoyment of your visit.

And just as an aside, the "punter's won't be able to work out prices" stuff is a red herring too. All beer is not the same price anyway, and likewise the exact same beer is differently priced in different pubs, often in different pubs within spitting distance of each other. Unless the landlord of a pub selling schooners insists on hiding his glasses behind a screen so no-one can see how big they are, that payment transactions must occur silently and be made one person at a time with no discussion of the fee levied, and that drinkers must consume them silently in individual booths, I suspect people will be able to make the same judgment calls about whether the amount of beer is worth the price asked or not as they would do now when e.g. buying a pint of Guinness in a London pub for over £4 or going for a local beer at £2.80 instead.

You're right, that does make you sound like a crazy.....

Could be some truth in it espically if you take the idea that it is someone else judging how much you've had instead of yourself and if your in a club and you've directly come from home you only have to act slightly so sober and you can get in and drink for 4 or 5 hours none stop.

But anyhow going back to the story as someone mentioned they sell them in different size glasses anyhow.

That's the point isn't it. You can already buy 'a unit' which happens to be called a 'pint' which is about 550ml or half of that quantity known as a 1/2 pint. Just seems a bit stupedio to even investigate or consider the idea of changing it.

By comparison however...

There are many arguments for not changing it.

Aside from the technical aspect and all the adjustments which will have to be made to accommodate different measures there is also the cultural aspect.

'Fancy 550ml after work' does not have quite the same appeal as 'fancy a pint'

Of course, going misty eyed and lusting after tradition isn't popular in this forum so I won't elaborate on that last point. Take it or leave it.

_________________
Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do.
"Emmett is able to write fairly well, he clearly isn't unintelligent overall" - Quote MALCO - Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:57 pm

Besides, the amount of actual liquid you get in your glass tends to vary somewhat depending on the type of drink. The head on a Guinness usually takes up a good deal more space then that on a lager

I do think Red Arrow has a point. Pubs are a more controlled environment for drinking, if someone has clearly had to much they can be kicked out and there are less underage drinkers.

Cheap booze is a real problem in UK and northern Europe.

_________________
'Because we've reached the limits of what rectal probing can teach us'

Now we are getting technical!

I drink the head on the Guinness though. All 'counts' as far as I'm concerned.

Don't think it matters. The drinks won't change so not really about that. More to do with the amount of space inside the contain you use to serve the drink in.

_________________
Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do.
"Emmett is able to write fairly well, he clearly isn't unintelligent overall" - Quote MALCO - Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:57 pm