The Wolf With the Red Roses wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:50:27 -0400, Charles
> wrote something wonderfully witty:
>
>>In article
>>, Kurt
>>Ullman wrote:
>>
>>> How long ago, though? With the advent of (profitable) non-smoking
>>> hotel chains, it might be time to take another look.
>>
>>Times change and smoking bans are now spreading not only to hotel
>>chains but also to internationally.
>>
>But it isn't a Smoking Ban, it is a Marketing strategy. If it doesn't
>work out in the long run & improve the bottom line, it won't be
>continued. As quickly as they went non-smoking, they can switch back.
Depends on who you are talking about. If there are smoking
regulations in a jurisdiction, then the business may not have the
option to switch back. Not cruise ships, but land based businesses.
It sounds like it is so much trouble to smoke now that it would hardly
be a pleasure.
I am mildly allergic to smoke, but I have a friend who goes into shock
if he is exposed to smoke. Originally, the school had an enclosed
faculty lounge area where faculty could smoke (now that's been done
away with because of smoking regulations). My friend couldn't walk
through the room next to the smoking room without having an asthma
attack and he couldn't go to most restaurants and many businesses
before there were regulations against smoking in effect.
I am violently allergic to mold, and I have to wear a respirator where
it is present, so perhaps folks who are allergic to smoke could get
respirators to wear so that they could go to the lounges or casino or
wherever smoking is allowed. (That's a joke - respirators are too
uncomfortable to wear for that to be feasible)
|