Source du sexe. The usual doorman says smoking is banned om May 31st.
I liked to go there put 10 or 20 into the poker machine and smoke a stick.
I liked to go there put 10 or 20 into the poker machine and smoke a stick.
Any Predictions For Strip Clubs After Smoking Ban?
- Thread starter ExoticSpirit
- Start date
I'd love to quit smoking but as you mention in one of your quotes...
It's interesting that the gov't has programs to get people off hard drugs but nothing to help smokers. If they were truly serious about gettiing people to quit smoking maybe they should invest some of the cigarette taxes we've paid over the years into research to find a way to help smokers quit. They should also offer paid programs to help smokers quit. But no, instead they have created a cottage industry of companies with their various solutions such as different types of gum or patches which in general do not work very well. It's easy for non-smokers to just say "well why don't you quit" but it's not that easy.
Now this morning I hear that they may pass legislation to fine smokers up to $1000 for throwing cigarette butts on the ground. I guess they are looking for a way to replace the lost revenue from those who do manage to quit.
No help for us, just attack attack attack.
It's interesting that the gov't has programs to get people off hard drugs but nothing to help smokers. If they were truly serious about gettiing people to quit smoking maybe they should invest some of the cigarette taxes we've paid over the years into research to find a way to help smokers quit. They should also offer paid programs to help smokers quit. But no, instead they have created a cottage industry of companies with their various solutions such as different types of gum or patches which in general do not work very well. It's easy for non-smokers to just say "well why don't you quit" but it's not that easy.
Now this morning I hear that they may pass legislation to fine smokers up to $1000 for throwing cigarette butts on the ground. I guess they are looking for a way to replace the lost revenue from those who do manage to quit.
No help for us, just attack attack attack.
Would the gums or patches help?
I'm not a smoker so I wouldn't have first hand experience on what it's like trying to quit. But since it's a nicotine habit here, wouldn't the gums and patches help?
As for business, I doubt that in the long run the strip clubs will lose out. Maybe in the short term just as a knee jerk reaction to the ban but I would think that in time, smokers will miss the girls and return to the clubs. I would think that Ottawa and Toronto clubs are doing okay these days.
I'm not a smoker so I wouldn't have first hand experience on what it's like trying to quit. But since it's a nicotine habit here, wouldn't the gums and patches help?
As for business, I doubt that in the long run the strip clubs will lose out. Maybe in the short term just as a knee jerk reaction to the ban but I would think that in time, smokers will miss the girls and return to the clubs. I would think that Ottawa and Toronto clubs are doing okay these days.
The nicotine addiction is only part of it. To successfully quit smoking you have to change your behavior and avoid the situations where you usually smoke. Like when you're out with friends having a few beer and enjoying the naked ladies. Besides, staying out of the clubs saves me more money than quitting smoking would. With a bit of luck I'll quit doing both.
Well said Techman, I smoke and I'm tired of those cry baby non-smokers - Hey you wanted a non-smoking environment go sit inside and enjoy it! Leave the outdoor tables for the smokers.
The club/bar industry happens to be how I make a living and most of us in the industry are not happy, my bartenders and waitresses are among the most upset. Smokers tend to drink more and stay longer (I have no scientific study to back this up, it's just the way it is).
What we have noticed in other cities that have the non-smoking ban is that while the # of people going to clubs did not dramtically decrease, the amount of time that they stayed did. A lot of people (smokers mostly the afterwork crowd) would come in and after 1 or 2 drinks would go out for a smoke and well they didn't come back in, in the pre-ban days these people would have stayed for 4-5 drinks.
Funny story: Last weekend I'm leaving a restaurant around 1:00 AM and I standing there having a smoke (outside) while waiting for the valet to bring my car, when these 2 couples come out of the restaurant DRUNK and proceed to stand beside and "fake cough" like my smoke is bothering them. Well now I'm ready to loose it so I turn to them and say "It's a big street move the fuck down 5 feet or take a losange for that fucking cough". The 4 of them move away and proceed to get in their car and drive!!!! Drunk!!!
Imagine the nerve
- God forbid you should smell my smoke, but go ahead destroy your liver then hop in behind the wheel and play Russian Roulette with the lives of everyone else.
Last edited:
You'll see a regular steam of smokers stepping out to the curb for a smoke... Bars here in Boston are the same way... Ones that have outside patio sections let smokers smoke there. The rest usually have a revolving group of smokers right outside the door all night.ExoticSpirit said:
Non-smokers will be much happier due to the fact that the clubs will be, obviously, cleaner and breathable...
Smokers... Get a warm coat for the winter.
Smokers are an unexplanable, incomprehensible bunch of peoples. NOt their fault, it's the cigarette!
Both my parents died of smoking-related illness. That stopped my brother from smoking cold turkey but it still took the death of the second one.
My sister is still a big smoker and just can't stop. Why? She have no clue! She's a nurse and see peoples dying of lung cancer, heart attack, strokes and all every day but still, she can't stop!
Myself, I remember the days as a kid around Christmas, when we were visiting one ou our old uncle. 10-15 adult, 8-10 kids, all packed in a 2 bedroom appartment, with all adult smoking one cigarette after another... (Most are dead today. Cancer, lung desease, stroke, hearth attack, name it) Of course, when it's -30C outside, the windows weren't opened long and not too wide either No kitchen fan either in these days. Because of this, I never smoked.
Banning smoking in public places is not fair to smokers? Give me a break! I don't smoke so, when a smoker is around me, I'm not causing him any health problems. But if that smoker light-up, he's damaging my health! I'm sorry but someone's rights stop where someone else's ones start. People's health have priority on other's bad habits. This render the argument saying outside terrasse should be reserved to smokers totally illogical: why take away the right for non-smokers not to be exposed to second hand smoke in order to give a smoker the right to smoke? After all, the one causing health damages is the one who should be penalized, not rewarded.
Creating closed, ventilated sections for smokers? What about the peoples who will have to work there? They have the right not to smoke also. Saying the staff will be allowed to choose tending to these smoking section or not, like I heard before in Ottawa, is irrealistic.
About the guy who's having 4 Big Macs and an extra large fries beside me? So what? As long as he doesn't splash ketchup on me, he's not any health risk to me. (McDo ketchup can kill ya! ) And don't forget these peoples usually have diet drinks. Same with the guy at the VLT.
Anybody saying they'll stop going to strip clubs and bars because of a smoking ban is only showing how much of a slave cigarette turned them into. Think about it: You go to SC because of what? Because you can smoke there? Not really. You go for the girls, the ambiance, to see certain peoples... Try breaking each of the reason you go to bars into percentage and any one alone should be less than other combined. With a list of 5 reason to go to bars/SC, including smoking, smoking is only 1 out 5 possible reason to visit bars/sc. There's still 4 reason left! If somebody put enough weight to 1 reason alone and it overpower the 4 other together, we're pretty close to an obsession! With cigarette, it's a chemical-induced one.
Reason to "go out":
All stuff about comparing insurance costs and longevity is pointless. The fact is simple: SMOKING KILLS. No discussion about insurance rate, longevity, tax revenues, legality of the product or not, who's right have precedence, nothing will change that fact.
If tomorrow, by some legal snafu and loophole, I market a pill who will make you feel good, as long as you take 25 a day, would you take it? And when I tell you that once you start taking it, you life expectancy will decrease considerably with each pill, will you still take it? And when I add that your last years will probably be very painful and filled with illness, are you still buying? Wait! Isn't that what cigarette is all about? Not quite, with my pill, you're only killing yourself.
NOt their fault, it's the cigarette!Both my parents died of smoking-related illness. That stopped my brother from smoking cold turkey but it still took the death of the second one.
My sister is still a big smoker and just can't stop. Why? She have no clue! She's a nurse and see peoples dying of lung cancer, heart attack, strokes and all every day but still, she can't stop!
Myself, I remember the days as a kid around Christmas, when we were visiting one ou our old uncle. 10-15 adult, 8-10 kids, all packed in a 2 bedroom appartment, with all adult smoking one cigarette after another... (Most are dead today. Cancer, lung desease, stroke, hearth attack, name it) Of course, when it's -30C outside, the windows weren't opened long and not too wide either No kitchen fan either in these days. Because of this, I never smoked.
Banning smoking in public places is not fair to smokers? Give me a break! I don't smoke so, when a smoker is around me, I'm not causing him any health problems. But if that smoker light-up, he's damaging my health! I'm sorry but someone's rights stop where someone else's ones start. People's health have priority on other's bad habits. This render the argument saying outside terrasse should be reserved to smokers totally illogical: why take away the right for non-smokers not to be exposed to second hand smoke in order to give a smoker the right to smoke? After all, the one causing health damages is the one who should be penalized, not rewarded.
Creating closed, ventilated sections for smokers? What about the peoples who will have to work there? They have the right not to smoke also. Saying the staff will be allowed to choose tending to these smoking section or not, like I heard before in Ottawa, is irrealistic.
About the guy who's having 4 Big Macs and an extra large fries beside me? So what? As long as he doesn't splash ketchup on me, he's not any health risk to me. (McDo ketchup can kill ya!
) And don't forget these peoples usually have diet drinks. Same with the guy at the VLT.Anybody saying they'll stop going to strip clubs and bars because of a smoking ban is only showing how much of a slave cigarette turned them into. Think about it: You go to SC because of what? Because you can smoke there? Not really. You go for the girls, the ambiance, to see certain peoples... Try breaking each of the reason you go to bars into percentage and any one alone should be less than other combined. With a list of 5 reason to go to bars/SC, including smoking, smoking is only 1 out 5 possible reason to visit bars/sc. There's still 4 reason left! If somebody put enough weight to 1 reason alone and it overpower the 4 other together, we're pretty close to an obsession! With cigarette, it's a chemical-induced one.
Reason to "go out":
- Have a few smoke: you can do this at home.
- Booze: that is also possible at home, and cheaper.
- Peoples: you can invite peoples at home.
- Girls: Well, you can bring some at home but not as many and more expensive...
- Atmosphere: that, you can't recreate at home.
All stuff about comparing insurance costs and longevity is pointless. The fact is simple: SMOKING KILLS. No discussion about insurance rate, longevity, tax revenues, legality of the product or not, who's right have precedence, nothing will change that fact.
If tomorrow, by some legal snafu and loophole, I market a pill who will make you feel good, as long as you take 25 a day, would you take it? And when I tell you that once you start taking it, you life expectancy will decrease considerably with each pill, will you still take it? And when I add that your last years will probably be very painful and filled with illness, are you still buying? Wait! Isn't that what cigarette is all about? Not quite, with my pill, you're only killing yourself.
metoo4,
People have a choice it is really that simple, Club owners should be allowed to decide themselves if they allow smoking or not. If I own a club and decide that I will allow smoking you as a customer have a choice NOT TO COME IN. Don't tell me that other people are causing your health problems if you don't like people smoking don't go to a smoking establishment - No one is forcing you. As a business owner I should be allowed to determine what kind of LEGAL activity will take place in my club, if I want to allow smoking and run the risk of loosing business from non-smokers I should be allowed to make that business decision.
As for the outside terrace this is another business decision, and remember metoo4 this is MY business, If I choose to reserve my terrace for smokers as an attempt to keep their business this is my decision. Smokers are clients just like everyone else (better clients actually in this industry) and I along with many other people in this industry are going to do all we can to make them happy and keep them in our clubs buying our drinks.
If you aren't happy about the conditions of my outdoor terrace fine go somewhere else, besides you non-smokers are better off inside being protected from SMOG, THE SUN, AIR POLLUTION and all of the other terrible terrible things that are bad for your health and the government has yet been able to protect you from.
You will have absolutly no problem finding plenty of volunteers to work a smoking section in a club - trust me.
Anyway this is a bit of a sore spot for me as I am both a smoker and a club owner, this ban will affect business as I am involved in clubs in other cities and we did notice a loss of revenue, and no by the way it never came back.
If you drive a car then don't bug me about smoking! Try locking yourself in a closed garage for 5 hours with 100 smokers - sure you may feel like crap afterward but you will still be alive. Now lock yourself in a garage with 1 running car and see if you can make it to the 5 hour mark.
I'm a smoker, live in Toronto ... and after our ban, I felt the same way as most of you. But to be honest, I actually prefer the non-smoking atmosphere.
Yeah .. sometimes when you're wasted at a bar or club, and you really don't wanna go outside ... its inconvenient. But I actually prefer the non smoking environment .... really depends on venue. Sometimes its already stuffy enough, regardless of hundreds of people smoking at the same time.
As for restaurants .. I've never enjoyed the smell of smoke while I eat ... IMO, kills the flavour, sensation of the food.
But trying to ban smoking on patios or common public areas outdoors ... ridiculous.
Yeah .. sometimes when you're wasted at a bar or club, and you really don't wanna go outside ... its inconvenient. But I actually prefer the non smoking environment .... really depends on venue. Sometimes its already stuffy enough, regardless of hundreds of people smoking at the same time.
As for restaurants .. I've never enjoyed the smell of smoke while I eat ... IMO, kills the flavour, sensation of the food.
But trying to ban smoking on patios or common public areas outdoors ... ridiculous.
Excellent post spin! That's exactly the way I feel. Let the bar owners decide.
No one is being forced to go into a smoking establishment, and no one is being forced to work there. I do feel that smoking should be banned in restaurants though, even if I do enjoy a smoke after a good meal.
No one is being forced to go into a smoking establishment, and no one is being forced to work there. I do feel that smoking should be banned in restaurants though, even if I do enjoy a smoke after a good meal.
Smoking sucks!
If you leave it up to bar owners, we would end up with the status quo! I personally cannot wait for the new law. For all you smokers, Pfizer's new pill just got FDA approval:
UPDATE 3-US FDA approves Pfizer drug to help smokers quit
Thu May 11, 2006 4:14 PM ET
By Lisa Richwine
WASHINGTON, May 11 (Reuters) - U.S. health regulators on Thursday approved a smoking cessation pill by Pfizer Inc. <PFE.N> that helped about one-fifth of cigarette smokers quit the habit for a year in trials.
The prescription drug, Chantix, is one of several medicines the world's largest drug maker is counting on to restore earnings growth. Pfizer has forecast annual Chantix sales of $1.2 billion by 2010, but some analysts are skeptical.
Chantix works differently than older stop-smoking aids, most of which provide an alternate source of the addictive nicotine in cigarettes. The new drug targets sites in the brain affected by nicotine, the Food and Drug Administration said.
It may help smokers trying to kick the habit by providing some nicotine effects to ease withdrawal symptoms, and by blocking the effects of nicotine from cigarettes if they resume smoking, the agency said.
GlaxoSmithKline Plc's <GSK.L> <GSK.N> pill Zyban also is approved to help smokers quit, but how it works is unclear.
In two studies sponsored by Pfizer, smokers who took Chantix for 12 weeks were more likely than Zyban users to give up cigarettes. Forty-four percent of Chantix patients quit, compared with 30 percent who took Zyban.
Before treatment, the smokers had averaged 21 cigarettes a day for about 25 years.
A year later, however, there was much less difference between those who took Chantix and Zyban, although both groups fared better than placebo users, FDA officials said.
One study showed about 22 percent of Chantix users were smoke-free after a year, compared with 16 percent of Zyban users and 10 percent of those who got a placebo. A second study found no statistically meaningful difference between Zyban and Chantix users, said Dr. Curt Rosebraugh, deputy director of the FDA office that approved Chantix.
Smoking causes lung cancer, raises the risk of heart disease and contributes to other serious health problems. An estimated 44.5 million U.S. adults smoke cigarettes, and more than 8.6 million of them have at least one serious illness caused by smoking, according to government statistics.
The American Cancer Society welcomed Chantix as a new option. "But we've known for a long time that what happens in studies does not always happen in real life, so it remains to be seen whether that success rate can be maintained outside of the clinical trial environment," said Thomas Glynn, the group's director for cancer science and trends.
Nausea was the most common side effect reported, occurring in 30 percent of patients who took the maximum Chantix dose and 10 percent of placebo patients. Other side effects included headache, vomiting, flatulence, insomnia and unusual dreams.
The recommended therapy lasts 12 weeks. Patients who quit during that time can take Chantix for 12 more weeks to boost the odds of staying smoke-free, the FDA said.
The agency said it approved the drug under priority review rules that allow for quicker evaluations of medications that offer potentially significant benefits.
Chantix, known generically as varenicline, will be available in the second half of this year, Pfizer spokeswoman Shreya Prudlo said. The company has not yet set a price.
Pfizer is looking to new drugs to boost sales following a drop in demand for its painkiller Celebrex amid safety concerns and generic competition to many of its older drugs.
Some analysts questioned Pfizer's sales projections for Chantix. Bear Stearns analyst John Boris estimated about $500 million in sales in 2010, noting Glaxo had trouble convincing insurers to pay for Zyban.
Shares of New York-based Pfizer initially gained more than 1 percent after the Chantix approval but closed down nearly one percent at $24.81 on the New York Stock Exchange in a broadly lower market. (Additional reporting by Julie Vorman)
Techman said:
If you leave it up to bar owners, we would end up with the status quo! I personally cannot wait for the new law. For all you smokers, Pfizer's new pill just got FDA approval:
UPDATE 3-US FDA approves Pfizer drug to help smokers quit
Thu May 11, 2006 4:14 PM ET
By Lisa Richwine
WASHINGTON, May 11 (Reuters) - U.S. health regulators on Thursday approved a smoking cessation pill by Pfizer Inc. <PFE.N> that helped about one-fifth of cigarette smokers quit the habit for a year in trials.
The prescription drug, Chantix, is one of several medicines the world's largest drug maker is counting on to restore earnings growth. Pfizer has forecast annual Chantix sales of $1.2 billion by 2010, but some analysts are skeptical.
Chantix works differently than older stop-smoking aids, most of which provide an alternate source of the addictive nicotine in cigarettes. The new drug targets sites in the brain affected by nicotine, the Food and Drug Administration said.
It may help smokers trying to kick the habit by providing some nicotine effects to ease withdrawal symptoms, and by blocking the effects of nicotine from cigarettes if they resume smoking, the agency said.
GlaxoSmithKline Plc's <GSK.L> <GSK.N> pill Zyban also is approved to help smokers quit, but how it works is unclear.
In two studies sponsored by Pfizer, smokers who took Chantix for 12 weeks were more likely than Zyban users to give up cigarettes. Forty-four percent of Chantix patients quit, compared with 30 percent who took Zyban.
Before treatment, the smokers had averaged 21 cigarettes a day for about 25 years.
A year later, however, there was much less difference between those who took Chantix and Zyban, although both groups fared better than placebo users, FDA officials said.
One study showed about 22 percent of Chantix users were smoke-free after a year, compared with 16 percent of Zyban users and 10 percent of those who got a placebo. A second study found no statistically meaningful difference between Zyban and Chantix users, said Dr. Curt Rosebraugh, deputy director of the FDA office that approved Chantix.
Smoking causes lung cancer, raises the risk of heart disease and contributes to other serious health problems. An estimated 44.5 million U.S. adults smoke cigarettes, and more than 8.6 million of them have at least one serious illness caused by smoking, according to government statistics.
The American Cancer Society welcomed Chantix as a new option. "But we've known for a long time that what happens in studies does not always happen in real life, so it remains to be seen whether that success rate can be maintained outside of the clinical trial environment," said Thomas Glynn, the group's director for cancer science and trends.
Nausea was the most common side effect reported, occurring in 30 percent of patients who took the maximum Chantix dose and 10 percent of placebo patients. Other side effects included headache, vomiting, flatulence, insomnia and unusual dreams.
The recommended therapy lasts 12 weeks. Patients who quit during that time can take Chantix for 12 more weeks to boost the odds of staying smoke-free, the FDA said.
The agency said it approved the drug under priority review rules that allow for quicker evaluations of medications that offer potentially significant benefits.
Chantix, known generically as varenicline, will be available in the second half of this year, Pfizer spokeswoman Shreya Prudlo said. The company has not yet set a price.
Pfizer is looking to new drugs to boost sales following a drop in demand for its painkiller Celebrex amid safety concerns and generic competition to many of its older drugs.
Some analysts questioned Pfizer's sales projections for Chantix. Bear Stearns analyst John Boris estimated about $500 million in sales in 2010, noting Glaxo had trouble convincing insurers to pay for Zyban.
Shares of New York-based Pfizer initially gained more than 1 percent after the Chantix approval but closed down nearly one percent at $24.81 on the New York Stock Exchange in a broadly lower market. (Additional reporting by Julie Vorman)
Wow...great success rate. Compare that to the success rate of the tobacco companies in getting people addicted in the first place.
With those side effects I'd rather keep smoking. And those are just the known, or admitted, side effects.
Yeah...I have a lot of confidence in their testing methods.
No thanks.
Techman, I also have no problem with smoking being banned in restaurants and I'm with you on the pill - No thanks better with the devil you know than the devil you don't!
Cigarette Gestapo
Watch out everyone! Here they come. Now the gov't is hiring undercover smoking inspectors. They will hang out in bars and restaurants watching out for people who smoke. They will then notify the "proper Authorities" who will then issue a fine. They will not give anyone a ticket on the spot. Sounds very underhanded to me. No proof required, just the word of an "inspector" will be enough to issue the fine. Oh well, what do we expect anyways? LE can't catch home invaders, or the gunmen in recent club shootings, so they go after jaywalkers and now smokers. Anonymous smoking inspectors .... sounds like they are taking lessons from the OLF.
My main question is this...where do I go to apply for one of these jobs? Hanging out in bars and restaurants and having the gov't pick up the tab sounds like a great part-time job! Almost as good as when they had undercover vice cops go to clubs to get dances and then bust the girls for violating the fraternization laws. Another fine example of our tax dollars at work.
Watch out everyone! Here they come. Now the gov't is hiring undercover smoking inspectors. They will hang out in bars and restaurants watching out for people who smoke. They will then notify the "proper Authorities" who will then issue a fine. They will not give anyone a ticket on the spot. Sounds very underhanded to me. No proof required, just the word of an "inspector" will be enough to issue the fine. Oh well, what do we expect anyways? LE can't catch home invaders, or the gunmen in recent club shootings, so they go after jaywalkers and now smokers. Anonymous smoking inspectors .... sounds like they are taking lessons from the OLF.
My main question is this...where do I go to apply for one of these jobs? Hanging out in bars and restaurants and having the gov't pick up the tab sounds like a great part-time job! Almost as good as when they had undercover vice cops go to clubs to get dances and then bust the girls for violating the fraternization laws. Another fine example of our tax dollars at work.
Techman, they're probably the same kids hired by the OLF to protect us from over exposure to English!
Spin, can you change your clubs to cigar lounges that happen to have live entertainment?
Spin, can you change your clubs to cigar lounges that happen to have live entertainment?
mtwallet,
lol, my clubs are not of the "stripping" variety (I don't trust myself enough to run/own a strip club and neither does anyone else
) but from what I've heard you are going to start seeing some very creative concepts over summer.Will Not Happen Again
One thing that will not happen again:
A girl I REALLY like pulled out a cigarette just as we got into the booth; I asked her to not smoke. She then asked me if I would wait while she went out and smoked; I almost walked out on her even though I was eager to have her dance for me. I told her I would not wait, so she gave up and started to dance. And no, it did not strain the atmosphere - we still had some very nice dances (as always I spent too much on her).
One thing that will not happen again:
A girl I REALLY like pulled out a cigarette just as we got into the booth; I asked her to not smoke. She then asked me if I would wait while she went out and smoked; I almost walked out on her even though I was eager to have her dance for me. I told her I would not wait, so she gave up and started to dance. And no, it did not strain the atmosphere - we still had some very nice dances (as always I spent too much on her).
Get ready to get major bitchy attitudes from the girls once the ban is in effect. There's nothing worse than the symptoms of nicotine withdrawal to bring out the worse in an addict. As for the doc, who is a non-smoker, he'll be in a much better mood when he goes out and he might actually go out more....he avoids as much as he can places with a lot of smoke in the air.
As for the strippers with already bitchy attitudes, they'll use this as an excuse.
As for the strippers with already bitchy attitudes, they'll use this as an excuse.
Girls Attitudes
Hopefully this will pass as the girls in Ontario seem to have adjusted. Actually, I think some are smoking in their change rooms as I can still smell the smoke on some of them during dances in Ontario.
Hopefully this will pass as the girls in Ontario seem to have adjusted. Actually, I think some are smoking in their change rooms as I can still smell the smoke on some of them during dances in Ontario.
I have a question about the ban. Is the Casino de Montreal included in the ban?
The reason I am asking is because NJ passed a similar ban last month, and the only exceptions are cigar bars (and other similar establishments) that make more than 30% off tobacco sales, and the Atlantic City gambling casinos. The bill did not pass last year because the casino owners made a stink about not being exempt. Once the casinos were exempt from the ban, the bill passed.
I am aware of one difference, that the AC casinos are owned by private or public companies, and that the Casino do Montreal is owned by the government. But I wondered if that matters..
CK
The reason I am asking is because NJ passed a similar ban last month, and the only exceptions are cigar bars (and other similar establishments) that make more than 30% off tobacco sales, and the Atlantic City gambling casinos. The bill did not pass last year because the casino owners made a stink about not being exempt. Once the casinos were exempt from the ban, the bill passed.
I am aware of one difference, that the AC casinos are owned by private or public companies, and that the Casino do Montreal is owned by the government. But I wondered if that matters..
CK
Similar threads
