Depends on what they have. I usually will buy something I can hand the cashier if it's for a party that I'm going to, picking up a bottle of wine for a movie night, or something like that. If they have an expensive product that I've been looking for like Bunratty mead, Glenlevet 18, 37, or 40, or another such product I might go through the wait for the cashier to get it for me. For things I can pick up anywhere like Maker's Mark, Knob Creek, etc. no way.
It is their decision, and while it is to be respected it could backfire on them. I think like a business owner because I want to eventually get back into business, it takes years to build up a customer service reputation and only a bad decision or two to lose it, sometimes to never get it back. A customer could be offended if they see the company as making a decision for them, or if they feel slighted that their legal behavior is being disrespected by the company which could affect not only those tobacco purchases but send those customers down the road for all purchases including prescriptions. I probably would not make that decision myself and wouldn't publish it as "the right thing to do" if I did, too much potential blowback.
Yep. New York state is a perfect example, their cost per pack price is something like 10$ a pack and the result was an entire underground business in unlicensed sales, people would go to the neighboring states or local reservations and pick up dirt cheap tobacco products by the truck load and sell them at a margin that was lower than the licensed sellers but high enough for a healthy profit.
IIRC you were in the Lafayette area for a while. Prior to the state banning most indoor smoking the same people campaigning for that law would contract bars to have "smoke free Saturdays". They had to rent out the bar to get it done, that in itself should tell people the movement isn't as popular as advertised. One would think if the bar owner who's business is to know what the customers want has to be "bought out" for the night to prohibit smoking that he knew it was a loser.
Well.....even Obama's lil buddy had to chime in with it too.
CVS Tobacco Ban Earns Applause From Rahm.....
"I think this is an incredible ... bold decision, the right decision," Mayor Rahm Emanuel said after Wednesday's City Council meeting.
Emanuel said he had called CVS Chief Executive Officer Larry Merlo Wednesday morning to congratulate him on the move.
"He realized their mission is one of health care, not only as a pharmacy, but as a company," Emanuel said. "And you couldn't, in one aisle, be dealing with helping people on their health, and in another aisle be selling tobacco."
Emanuel called it "true corporate citizenship and responsibility," even as "it will no doubt affect their bottom line.".....snip~
CVS Tobacco Ban Earns Applause From Rahm - Downtown - DNAinfo.com Chicago
That is going to be the interesting thing to watch for. Investors can be fickle creatures so the question is when they watch revenues fall, do they stay on and ride it out or does CVS start to take a hit on the stock side as well? If they start bleeding from revenue and stock losses do they maintain enough leverage to recover?
When I was a heavy smoker I did under certain circumstances. If I was already going there to pick up other things and knew I was running low on smokes they were already there so I bought. Or if I was on the road and all there was in route was a CVS I would stop in to buy a pack.
Depends. Every business has a loss leader, in restaurants it may be the most popular menu item but one that compliments high profit items, like a crab pizza that pairs well with white wine or cocktails. In a grocery store it may be the meat discounted for the day that get's people into the store who may purchase everything else at markup, and if they brought their kids, the impulse selection at the checkout pads things a bit. Convenience stores make the least on gasoline, they want you to go in and buy chips, a soft drink, etc. all that have a higher markup than the grocery store.
The big problem is that the people who want the bans lost in the court of monetary opinion so they just lobbied to force their will on everyone else. It is that obvious, if the money was there to force business owners to ban use of tobacco in their establishments then it would have disappeared without all the legislation, most of the bar owners and restaurant owners I knew didn't smoke and in fact hated the smoking habit, yet, their bars and restaurants had....................smoking.