Skip

It's all the same...
March 13, 2014 9:19 AM   Subscribe

A sports arena in Boise is being sued after it was revealed that their $4 "Regular" beer and $7 "Large" beer were the same size, though different shapes. Two fans produced a Youtube that proved it and it went viral.
posted by Chocolate Pickle (86 comments total) 7 users marked this as a favorite

 
I guess people have not gone through as many Piaget stages of development as they used to go through!

But that is like buying tea -- large, medium, small -- all use the same amount of tea (1 bag) and you get charged more for the bigger size, even though it's just water...
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 9:23 AM on March 13 [14 favorites]


The video.
posted by Mike Mongo at 9:24 AM on March 13 [2 favorites]


Accurate volume perception is notoriously difficult, but you have to admire the nerve of scamming a stadium worth of drunk sports fans in such a blatant manner.
posted by Dr Dracator at 9:24 AM on March 13 [15 favorites]


Especially hockey fans!
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 9:25 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


To be scrupulously accurate, it looks like the large holds maybe half-an-ounce to an ounce more liquid than the regular.

But yeah, I feel like I've noticed similar tactics at other sports arenas. I never thought to actually test it out.
posted by muddgirl at 9:32 AM on March 13 [6 favorites]


woulda gotten away with it too if it wasn't for those meddling vids!
posted by Think_Long at 9:33 AM on March 13 [39 favorites]


But that is like buying tea -- large, medium, small -- all use the same amount of tea (1 bag) and you get charged more for the bigger size, even though it's just water...

My understanding is that most of the cost is in the cup, rather than the tea bag.
posted by hoyland at 9:34 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


But ... they're not "the same" size. It's shamefully close for a $3 upcharge, and the "large" beer costs more per ounce either way, but there's a huge difference in headspace (3oz, at least). That large cup isn't even close to "arena full." When have you ever gotten a beer at a sporting event that wasn't threatening to spill? They're just about always full to the brim.

People are being ripped off, but the beers aren't "the same size."
posted by uncleozzy at 9:36 AM on March 13 [7 favorites]


This also happened a couple years ago at the Seattle Seahawks stadium.
posted by Harpocrates at 9:37 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


hoyland: "My understanding is that most of the cost is in the cup, rather than the tea bag."

Paper drink cups? My boss is charged $0.05/cup regardless of size. Still a ripoff.
posted by jgaiser at 9:38 AM on March 13 [2 favorites]


They are charging more for the placebo effect. What's wrong with that?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 9:42 AM on March 13 [2 favorites]


They are charging more for the placebo effect.

Maybe they could just pretend to charge more.
posted by burnmp3s at 9:44 AM on March 13 [38 favorites]


See, this is where the Germanic love of order is a solution. Because by law, all cups for serving beer in Germany and Austria have calibrated lines drawn on them. 0,5L, a simple line, no ambiguity. They're serious about the line too, it's used for all sold drinks. I have some souvenir coffee cups from New Year's in Vienna with the little calibrated line drawn inside for serving glühwein.

Measurement can go too far though. In New Zealand a standard drink is 30ml of 80 proof liquor. Yes, a whisky is one exact fluid ounce barely coating an ice cube. And they have machines to measure it precisely. I'm sure it's good for my health but it makes for a sad fucking drink and there's no room for a sympathetic bartender to be generous.
posted by Nelson at 9:45 AM on March 13 [23 favorites]


Airports, sports arenas, everywhere competition is artificially removed, capitalism stops working and companies start milking customers for all they are worth. Same thing with the cable TV/Internet monopolies in the US.
posted by Triplanetary at 9:45 AM on March 13 [13 favorites]




but there's a huge difference in headspace (3oz, at least)

No way is that a 3oz difference. I wish they had measured it, though.
posted by muddgirl at 9:48 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


Meh, if you didn't want to get ripped off you wouldn't be buying beer in a stadium.

Frog, meet scorpion.
posted by Kadin2048 at 9:49 AM on March 13 [3 favorites]


People are notoriously terrible at estimating volume and measurements, and this is all part of a time-honored tradition of bilking folks who just want to drink their damn beer in peace. Cf. the classic circumference-too-hard pub trick.
posted by phunniemee at 9:49 AM on March 13 [4 favorites]


No way is that a 3oz difference

That was my initial instinct, but if you figure the cup is about 4-1/2 inches across at the top, and there's between a third and half an inch of headspace, it's about 3oz, unless I've done the math completely wrong.
posted by uncleozzy at 9:52 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


I all for anything that keep Hockey fans sober less drunk.
posted by Confess, Fletch at 9:53 AM on March 13


The UK also has legal obligations concerning the size of beer and various other weights and measures. Its a criminal offence to serve less than the legally mandated standard.
posted by biffa at 9:53 AM on March 13


I know from personal experience that a squat plastic cup doesn't look like it holds nearly as much as a glass pint glass, despite both being 16 oz.
posted by smackfu at 9:54 AM on March 13


The prices do actually follow a somewhat linear progression on a per oz basis from stadium to stadium. It looks like New Orleans and Miami give the best value here.

If you can afford the ticket prices - cheapest for last year was Cleveland at $109 and most expensive was Chicago at $446 - you can probably afford an overpriced beer.

The best seat is where you live in front of the TV. Cheap beer, no bathroom lines, food cooked the way you want and easy replay. And no drive home.
posted by vapidave at 9:57 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


The UK also has legal obligations concerning the size of beer and various other weights and measures. Its a criminal offence to serve less than the legally mandated standard.

They actually typically serve more than the glass can hold and hardcore pubsters will even ask them to top it up after the head settles.
posted by srboisvert at 9:57 AM on March 13


I read a comment on this somewhere else that was cursing at them for pointing this out. Now all that's going to happen is the small is going to cost the same but lose 4oz or whatever. In the end the customer loses, less beer, same price. At least under the old system those who knew could take advantage, now everyone loses.
posted by Carillon at 9:57 AM on March 13 [2 favorites]


No way is that a 3oz difference

If people super care about this, I have the exact same plastic cups at home and can measure for you tonight if someone reminds me.
posted by phunniemee at 9:58 AM on March 13 [10 favorites]


Yes please!
posted by Carillon at 9:58 AM on March 13


http://www.thebeergauge.com/
posted by srboisvert at 9:59 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


The operators claim the cups are 20 and 16oz which should be both easy to verify and a bulletproof defense of the the class action case. No where is a claim made that the large is cheaper per ounce.
posted by Mitheral at 10:01 AM on March 13 [3 favorites]


That large beer had headspace, too, though maybe not as much.
posted by MrMoonPie at 10:02 AM on March 13


I unfortunately must have reached the point where I've learned to meekly accept consumer abuse in the form of price gouging as a matter of course at sporting events, because my first thought after watching the video was, "$7 for a beer at an arena? That seems like a pretty good deal compared to what I'm used to paying at the events I attend regularly (mostly baseball games)."
posted by The Gooch at 10:02 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


The beer gauge, aka "how to get punched in the nose by a bartender".
posted by Nelson at 10:02 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


De l'audace, encore de l'audace, et toujours de l'audace.
posted by ob1quixote at 10:04 AM on March 13


The large cups (the ones I have at home) are technically 20 ounces but I believe hold 21 when completely full. (They hold exactly the same amount as my 21 ounce "large working glasses" I have.) The small cups appear to be a clear version of the ubiquitous 16 ounce solo cup.
posted by phunniemee at 10:05 AM on March 13 [4 favorites]


Yeah, $4 for a 16 oz beer at a sporting event seems crazy cheap to me. Boise!
posted by smackfu at 10:06 AM on March 13 [3 favorites]




This reminds me of another alcohol related volumetric perception deception, that I've read about but can't find a link for right now.

It was about a type of shot glass being used by unscrupulous bars and night clubs. The glass was wide and aggressively tapered, so that it held half of it's volume in the top 2 millimeters, making a half filled shot seem like only a slight underpour. A customer could order two almost-filled shots and then pour one onto the other without spilling.
posted by ceribus peribus at 10:10 AM on March 13


The UK also has legal obligations concerning the size of beer and various other weights and measures.

Indeed it does. When I was working as a barman I was told that the amount of head on the beer was similarly regulated - you couldn't have more than 5% of the drink being froth. Our general rule was that if the head was more than a thumbnail in depth, we had to let it settle and then top it up. (That's quite apart from the fact that oh-so-hilarious customers would probably ask you for a Flake if you served them more head than that anyway.)
posted by ZsigE at 10:12 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


The operators claim the cups are 20 and 16oz which should be both easy to verify and a bulletproof defense of the the class action case.

Man, I should not trust my eyes. It likely is a 4 oz difference. Volumes are tough.

No where is a claim made that the large is cheaper per ounce.

The ounces aren't listed on the menu board, though (are they listed somewhere else?). If it listed $7 for a 20 oz beer and $4 for a 16 oz beer, that would be a different matter - it would be the customer's "fault" for not doing the math and paying nearly twice as much for 4 extra ounces.
posted by muddgirl at 10:17 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


Maybe the beers are worth 7, but people ordering the smaller size are getting a deal! They're saving 3 bucks, a gift! The other price is what they all should be charged.

And mark my words, the poster of the video has now KILLED $4 beer. They'll all be $7 now.
posted by cccorlew at 10:18 AM on March 13 [2 favorites]


Technically, it's not beer, it'll be Bud.
posted by arcticseal at 10:20 AM on March 13 [4 favorites]


Wasn't this debunked as the taller ($7) cup was the wrong cup given to the customer? As I understood this, there were three cup sizes for the vendor to use: short, small volume domestic, $4; tall, small volume imported, $7, tall, bigger volume domestic $7. And the vendor just grabbed the wrong tall cup.
posted by Old'n'Busted at 10:22 AM on March 13 [2 favorites]


And mark my words, the poster of the video has now KILLED $4 beer. They'll all be $7 now.

$10, they have to make up for the cost of defending the class-action suit.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:23 AM on March 13


I remember going to Mets games in the 60s (long before the World Series season) and marveling at how a vendor could pour 2-3 cups from one can of Rheingold. As far as I can tell, beer pouring scams are part of a Great American Tradition.
posted by tommasz at 10:26 AM on March 13


This also happens with soup at restaurants. Often, the less expensive cup (which tends to be deep) and the bowl (which tends to be wide) seems to hold the same amount. (Last noticed at California Pizza Kitchen.)
posted by ShooBoo at 10:31 AM on March 13


Is this where I mention that I just learned you can fit 4 beers in a regulation frisbee?
posted by Night_owl at 10:33 AM on March 13 [5 favorites]


i read the same as Old'n'Busted in a reddit thread - that what you're seeing is the difference between domestic and import cups.
posted by nadawi at 10:34 AM on March 13


You know, they're doing a similar thing at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia. They've kept essentially the same core players since their World Series appearances, and yet last year they finished 16 games below .500. ????
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 10:41 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


The UK also has legal obligations concerning the size of beer and various other weights and measures. Its a criminal offence to serve less than the legally mandated standard.

Throughout the EU, I'm pretty sure. I'm kind of amazed that the US doesn't.

For those not familiar, glasses have to be either one of the standardised sizes -- e.g. 1 pint, 1/2 pint, 1/3 pint, etc -- or have a clearly visible and labelled line indicating one of the standard fill volumes. Whether it's by law or common practice I'm not sure, but drinks with a head can be slightly underfilled (~95% liquid) provided that the barkeep honour the customer's request for a reasonable top-up. Using the larger glasses with a fill line is obviously the best way around this, but then bar staff have to get into arguments with customers who ignore the fill line and want their glass filled to the brim. A standard measure of spirits is 25ml. Wine by the glass is 125ml or 250ml.

Short-selling is watched out for by Trading Standards, who also, I'm told, use dip-stick tests to check whether certain brand-name drinks really are what they're advertised to be. Tests are infrequent for any given pub (trading standards has never been over-staffed, and the Tories' "war on red tape" primarily manifests as gouging customer protection services like trading standards, leaving them struggling to keep abreast of food and product safety issues, never mind short selling), but in principle the consequences range from steep fines to suspension or loss of license.
posted by metaBugs at 10:41 AM on March 13


A couple of years ago the Boston red Sox were lagging and they wanted to apologise to the fans by offering a $4.00 beer (regular beers range from $7.00 to 9.00). Now in the past it was always a 16 oz. beer. The $4.00 beer was 12 oz, and only available at two stands in Fenway. If I do my maths: 12/4=3. 16/7=2.25. Thanks for nothing, well actually thanks for less.
posted by Gungho at 10:49 AM on March 13


I'm kind of amazed that the US doesn't.

Congress likely lacks the authority to pass such a law. It would have to come from the states, meaning it would be very difficult to establish a national standard. Even today, weights and measures are regulated by the states. See those little seals on gas pumps? County officials.
posted by valkyryn at 10:52 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


Measurement can go too far though. In New Zealand a standard drink is 30ml of 80 proof liquor. Yes, a whisky is one exact fluid ounce barely coating an ice cube. And they have machines to measure it precisely. I'm sure it's good for my health but it makes for a sad fucking drink and there's no room for a sympathetic bartender to be generous.

Ask for a double. It's a nice thought but if the bartender has been slipping you 1.5x and you have 3 standard drinks instead of 2 in the system it's going to be a night in the lockup when you blow over .05.
posted by Talez at 10:53 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


When I lived in a hotel while working in The District, I spent most nights eating and having a drink or two in the hotel bar. One night I had occasion to to have a drink there with a Brit acquaintance. He ordered a beer and when it was delivered asked the bartender, "Do you think there's room for a shot in there?"

"Yeah," says the barman.

"Think there's room for two?"

"Maybe," he replies, less sure.

"Then how 'bout you fill that up with fuckin' beer, Mate?"

I lived there for several more months. The bartender never let me live it down.
posted by ob1quixote at 11:01 AM on March 13 [36 favorites]


Throughout the EU, I'm pretty sure. I'm kind of amazed that the US doesn't.

What's the history of that? Was it common for unscrupulous barkeeps to underpour? The US perspective is generally "well, not going there again" if you get short-poured.
posted by smackfu at 11:05 AM on March 13


I'd imagine it's so that people can accurately keep track of how much alcohol they've consumed.

Mixed drinks in the US tend to be *WAY* stronger than their equivalents in the EU. Every shot is individually metered and accounted for.

The American culture of tipping and buyback is also pretty entrenched, so I doubt that you'd be able to allow or require bars to actually account for the drinks that they serve without facing serious opposition.

On the other hand, US beer pours do seem to end up being short quite frequently (not to mention that US pints are also considerably smaller than British pints, and also a bit smaller than the 500mL glasses used in the EU)
posted by schmod at 11:19 AM on March 13


Was it common for unscrupulous barkeeps to underpour?

There's a type of traditional publican in the UK who, much like park-keepers in The Beano, is basically at war with all his customers, all the time.

Beer is so ridiculously expensive in London pubs (5.40 GBP a pint in my local) that it is a serious business to lose even 3-4 percent of a pint.
posted by colie at 11:19 AM on March 13


Short-selling is watched out for by Trading Standards, who also, I'm told, use dip-stick tests to check whether certain brand-name drinks really are what they're advertised to be.

Interesting. How does one test for this? Certainly you can measure for an estimate of alcohol content with a proof/tralle hydrometer to see if whiskey is watered down, but how can you test for bottom shelf in a top shelf bottle? As I tend to have my preferred dose out of a beer bottle that is generally opened in front of me, this doesn't apply, but I'm always interested in how to test the untestable (cf. Thomas Jefferson's wine).
posted by 1f2frfbf at 11:19 AM on March 13


I've never really thought about it before, but it's certainly not something specific to alcohol. A surprising range of things can only be sold in standard measures: it's not a coincidence, for example, that jars of jam, marmalade and honey in the UK are all filled to the same weight. (I can't find a link to back that up, it's from a conversation with a trading standards officer I know. AFAIK, the idea is to make comparison of products easier for customers, and to prevent exactly the kind of thing that the stadium in the link was (allegedly) up to.

Wikipedia has a list of historic weights and measures acts in the UK stretching back to the Witenagemot in the 10th century.

The trading standards website has a brief but interesting history of laws and enforcement, including:
FOOD AND DRINK

Apart from the systems of weights and measures the area of trading standards work with the longest history of regulation has been the composition and sale of food and drink.

The Assize of Bread and Ale of 1266 regulated the weight of the Farthing Loaf, and the quantity of a Penny of Ale according to the price of the ingredients. Bakers or Brewers who gave short measure could be fined, put in the pillory or flogged.

Over the following centuries, further legislation was enacted covering the selling of a wide variety of foodstuffs such as wine, cheese, fish, salt and tea. These acts covered the quantities products were to be sold in, and the measures to be used. Further acts covered the checking of equipment and weights used in trade transactions.

Legislation was also passed to ensure the quality of foodstuffs and outlaw adulteration. Unscrupulous producers and traders would add sawdust to bread dough, grease to coffee and even sulphuric acid to vinegar. Where adulteration resulted in widespread serious illness or even death the tradesmen could be executed.

By the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, mill owners were complaining their workers were performing badly due to the poor quality, adulterated food. This again led to legislation being passed throughout the 19th and 20th Centuries.

Today the quality, weight and description of foodstuffs are covered by a wide range of laws. Trading Standards Officers inspect factories and retail outlets to ensure standards are maintained.
posted by metaBugs at 11:23 AM on March 13


The US perspective is generally "well, not going there again" if you get short-poured.

Works pretty well if you notice you're getting a short glass.
posted by Dr Dracator at 11:24 AM on March 13


Throughout the EU, I'm pretty sure. I'm kind of amazed that the US doesn't.

In my state, which is generally recognized as one of the leaders of modern beer culture, we had a proposed regulation that simply said "You get to put up a cool sticker on your wall if you pour real 16oz pints".
It was entirely voluntary, and had no penalties for not doing it.

It was killed by the restaurant/beverage lobby.
posted by madajb at 11:24 AM on March 13 [4 favorites]


A couple of years ago the Boston red Sox were lagging and they wanted to apologise to the fans by offering a $4.00 beer (regular beers range from $7.00 to 9.00). Now in the past it was always a 16 oz. beer. The $4.00 beer was 12 oz, and only available at two stands in Fenway. If I do my maths: 12/4=3. 16/7=2.25. Thanks for nothing, well actually thanks for less.

Nope. The $4 beer was ~33c an oz, and the $7 beer was ~44c an oz.
posted by gaspode at 11:25 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


Interesting. How does one test for this?
I understood from the conversation that it was a test for a chemical marker added to the drink specifically to aid identification -- because they're interested in whether it's the brand that's being claimed, as much as they are in the alcohol content -- but honestly I don't know.
posted by metaBugs at 11:25 AM on March 13


Nope. The $4 beer was ~33c an oz, and the $7 beer was ~44c an oz.


Yeah, 12/4=3. 16/7=2.25 is giving you 3 ounces per dollar for the $4 beer vs 2.25 ounces per dollar for the $7 beer.
posted by xorry at 11:38 AM on March 13


User srboivert has a very important link up there that you may have overlooked: http://www.thebeergauge.com/

The shape of a beer glass is very deceptive, and most people would be stunned to realize how much of their beer is in the very top, an amount easy to keep back by underpouring. An inch of head space can amount to a 25% shortage.
posted by Fnarf at 11:38 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


Certainly you can measure for an estimate of alcohol content with a proof/tralle hydrometer to see if whiskey is watered down, but how can you test for bottom shelf in a top shelf bottle?

I know that in Texas, bartenders are required to destroy the tax stamp on a bottle of liquor as soon as they empty it. It doesn't prevent refilling but makes it a bit harder.
posted by smackfu at 11:49 AM on March 13 [1 favorite]


You know, drinking iced tea is never this much of a headache.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:53 AM on March 13


You know, drinking iced tea is never this much of a headache.

Probably about 90% of the reason I'm so good at liquid volume measurements is because I drink a fuckton of milk (generally down about 3 pints during a meal, sometimes more) and am super lazy, so want to minimize the number of trips I make between my couch and the fridge. (Larger cups, tall pours, maxing out the space to the brim, etc.)
posted by phunniemee at 11:59 AM on March 13


Anybody who's paying $7 for 20 oz of beer instead of $8 for 2 16 oz beers is an idiot anyway.
posted by brand-gnu at 12:11 PM on March 13 [3 favorites]


It might also be said that it's not quite as fun though either Zarquon, though of course YMMV.
posted by Carillon at 12:38 PM on March 13


> Meh, if you didn't want to get ripped off you wouldn't be buying beer in a stadium.

Airplane bottles to the rescue!
posted by scose at 12:39 PM on March 13


Airplane bottles to the rescue!

... or this.
posted by uncleozzy at 12:40 PM on March 13


I've long thought those calibrated lines marked on glassware were called Plimsoll lines, but apparently that's really the name for the waterline markings on the hulls of ships. This misunderstanding says nothing about my level of thirst, I'm sure.
posted by exogenous at 12:40 PM on March 13


If you can afford the ticket prices - cheapest for last year was Cleveland at $109 and most expensive was Chicago at $446 - you can probably afford an overpriced beer.
posted by vapidave at 11:57 AM on March 13


That list is for average ticket prices. Prices vary wildly depending on where you're sitting. Weirdly, this list omits the Nashville Predators (or I'm just not seeing them) - where tickets start at $35 (or $15 if you're a college student and wait for a "college night"). (Actually, tickets start at "I know a guy who can get me free tickets" if we're really being accurate.)

Your point stands, I think, but the cost of food and drink can be a substantial portion of the expense if you can only afford the cheap seats.
posted by joannemerriam at 12:49 PM on March 13


> Weirdly, this list omits the Nashville Predators (or I'm just not seeing them)

The list covers only NFL teams.
posted by savetheclocktower at 12:53 PM on March 13


If you can afford the ticket prices - cheapest for last year was Cleveland at $109 and most expensive was Chicago at $446 - you can probably afford an overpriced beer.

You realize this was at a minor league hockey game that's two tiers below the NHL, right? The ticket could easily have cost less than the beer.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:53 PM on March 13


Okay less is exaggerating, but they don't sell tickets over $50, from what I can tell.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:55 PM on March 13


The list covers only NFL teams.
posted by savetheclocktower at 2:53 PM on March 13


Thought it said NHL. My bad.
posted by joannemerriam at 1:02 PM on March 13


I guess one "good" thing about Utah's asinine liquor laws are that all liquor pours are standardized. No matter where you buy liquor, it's 1.5oz in your drink. Makes it easy to tell what places rip you off since there's no deviation in the amount of kick your drink has. Every restaurant is required to have the magnetic locking measured pours, even if they're poured behind a Zion Curtain. Draft beers are a little looser, but the 3.2% limit renders most drafts as pointless cups of carbs. I try to stick to the high alcohol craft beers in bottles.
posted by msbutah at 1:06 PM on March 13


Weight each cup, then fill it with water to the brim (meniscus even with the rim of the cup?) and weight it again. That will give you the capacity in mL of each cup.

29.6 mL = 1 fluid ounce.

It should be fairly easy to establish what the actual capacity of each cup is.
posted by etherist at 1:45 PM on March 13


colie: "Beer is so ridiculously expensive in London pubs (5.40 GBP a pint in my local) that it is a serious business to lose even 3-4 percent of a pint."

This is one reason I like living in a country where beer is not expensive and the serving sizes are generally small (20 cl). I don't think anyone here has ever complained about a beer not being topped up all the way to the tippy spill-out-all-over-your-hands top. You just buy another one.
posted by chavenet at 3:08 PM on March 13


Fun fact: The Seattle Seahawks' stadium that was doing this a few years ago was CenturyLink Field. The Boise arena doing this is CenturyLink Arena.
posted by Hatashran at 3:34 PM on March 13 [1 favorite]


£5.40? Really? I lived about 100' from the City for a while, and spent most days just off the Strand, and I still don't recall ever wanting to pay that much. What were you drinking?

That is a lot, but remember that in some cities like Vancouver you'd be paying CDN $8 for 16oz, and be expected to tip another $1 on top.
posted by maledictory at 4:01 PM on March 13


I have the exact same plastic cups at home

You guys, I suck. I am out of those cups I said I have. I thought for sure I still had a sleeve. This is bad for two reasons: 1) I am not able to perform our little experiment and 2) now I'm going to have to do dishes so I can drink while eating dinner.
posted by phunniemee at 4:19 PM on March 13 [2 favorites]


I was sitting in Table Rock listening to people grousing. They're pissed. CLA better be having a couple $3 beer nights this summer, or they're going to lose a lot of customers.
posted by BlueHorse at 6:59 PM on March 13


£5.40? Really? I lived about 100' from the City for a while, and spent most days just off the Strand, and I still don't recall ever wanting to pay that much. What were you drinking?

I'd agree that this is on the pricey side, even for London, unless you're drinking something a bit special or are in a club or something where they tend to massively mark up the drinks.

Somewhere around £3.80 (about $6.30) is what I'd argue is probably the price of an average beer (i.e. a common lager like Kronenbourg or Heineken or a common ale like London Pride or Doombar) in an average London pub at the moment. Less if you're prepared to drink in somewhere like Weatherspoons or get lucky and end up in a pub that does discounted ales.

That's not to say it's cheap - but closer to parity with similar sized places in the US (such as New York) than most people think. Especially once you take into account the fact that in those places you generally tip a dollar (which in London you don't) and that the whole "fourth drink is free" thing seemed to be falling out of favour, at least last time I was over there anyway.

Outside of London, of course, it's a different world. London Pride sells for £2.80 ($4.65) in the pub my aunt owns just outside the M25 up in Stevenage.
posted by garius at 2:21 AM on March 14


It's 4/12 vs 7/16.
posted by skammer at 6:18 PM on March 14


« Older found mike   |   From working in an industry... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post