TOPIC:

"noby":3dkpemo7 wrote: I'm not sure how much is for TV, and not-withstanding they really believe in what they're doing, but they do come across as pompous and arrogant at times.
I really don't like what they've done with the pub, and it seems the locals agree, and are staying away. As one guy put it, they said they wanted a pub that serves food, but they ended up with a restaurant that serves beer. They have priced the locals out of it, some preferring to travel to the next village for their pint, and it could be a long winter when the novelty wears off.[/quote:3dkpemo7]

I think they did misjudge the redecoration of the boozer. It might have been suited to the centre of a big town; the last thing you need in a rural setting is the locals abandoning your pub in droves. Probably would've cost them a lot less for a less radical upgrade too. That said, I do think that a modest price increase could be justified considering the pub had been completely refurbished. The "if they don't want to pay it, then they can piss off" attitude was grating though.

Also, I noticed that one of the beers on the beer list was selling for about £7, I wouldn't pay that much for a beer unless it came with a free lap-dance, preferably from the leggy but incomprehensible nordie from Girls Aloud. (Actually any of them would be fine, but you get the jist.)

Its would appear they miss judged the local consumers and put something in that would be more suite to central London

I'm not sure jumping from £2.10 to £2.70 can be considered modest in the context of a village with a population of 500.(I'm not sure of the going rate for a pint in England (I'll be finding out next week though) but that seems excessive for rural England) Whatever about charging £14 - £19 for a main course, you need the locals to keep supping your beers to survive.
Like you said though, whatever your opinion on their business plan their attitude stinks.

They also had a visit from the Cask Marque people, and only passed on three of their five ales, so didn't get the award. I know, as they said, it gives them something to work on, but their own two casks seemed to come out the worst.
One beer was 9deg and another was 19deg(!)(11-13deg was the allowable range).

"noby":1mmadlsf wrote: I'm not sure jumping from £2.10 to £2.70 can be considered modest in the context of a village with a population of 500.[/quote:1mmadlsf]

We actually agree on that one, the price increase was far from modest imo. The locals seemed to think so too and voted with their feet.

"noby":1mmadlsf wrote: They also had a visit from the Cask Marque people, and only passed on three of their five ales, so didn't get the award. I know, as they said, it gives them something to work on, but their own two casks seemed to come out the worst.
One beer was 9deg and another was 19deg(!)(11-13deg was the allowable range).[/quote:1mmadlsf]

That was badly judged too. I wouldn't have the inspector in unless I was reasonably confident of getting the award. They seemed to do it with a hope-for-the-best attitude.

"Poc":cqe1o3fg wrote:
We actually agree on that one[/quote:cqe1o3fg]

So we do. I misread it first time round.


A for the cask marque, with that fluctuation in temperatures it seems they, or their cellarman, don't even have the basics down yet, and like you say it was far too early to get the inspector in.
It was probably all her fault anyway, and she doesn't know what she's doing etc. etc.

Self belief and resistance to criticism is crucial to make a success of a venture like this. You will get a hundred reasons to give up and only a couple to continue. I admire that aspect of their attitude but they do take it a bit far and come across as arseholes at times - maybe they are trying to live up to the blokey image.

I very much doubt if they would have got their distribution deal with Tesco without playing on their celebrity profile(s) and they are honest enough to admit that. It was interesting to note that one supermarket (Sainsburys?) did a blind tasting. I wouldn't have thought they would be bothered.