Beyond the Vodka Redbull

By Gamal Hennessy

The New York nightlife industry is extremely competitive. There are more than 1,000 places for people to choose from and new spots open up every week. Venues are constantly looking for ways to set themselves apart so they don’t lose business. While they are not universal, specialty drinks are becoming a tool in this arsenal in the same way that music, décor and exclusivity can be used to offer people a different type of experience. This is creating an environment where the visibility of the bartender is on the rise.

The economics of drinking
Recent history has not favored signature cocktails. In the era of bottle service bartenders were little more than unseen warehouse attendants, fetching bottles and filling carafes so shapely hostesses could deliver the generic cranberry, orange juice and coke with the marked up liquor. But that situation is changing. The soft economy has put a dent in the bottle service concept and it is unclear if it will survive the downturn. If bottle service is going the way of Merrill Lynch, then clubs and lounges will need new tricks to get people in the door.

Many new venues are opening with a unique menu of signature drinks to break away from the pack. In this system, the bartender becomes analogous to the DJ blending fresh juices, berries and flavored liquor in the same way a DJ blends songs and beats to create something different. Similarity between drinks at different bars is probably inevitable in the same way different DJ’s in the same genre can all sound the same after a while but the opportunity for a distinctive reputation exists with signature drinks in a way that doesn’t exist with bottle service.

Signature drinks can also be a good source of revenue in a down economy. These new drinks normally go for $12-$20 each (while this is exorbitant outside of Manhattan, it doesn’t raise many eyebrows here) so a person who has three of these creations can easily be spending $50 without the tip. Add snacks into the mix and a night of cocktails for two can bring in almost as much money as a couple having dinner. While it won’t completely replace the revenue lost from bottles (it would take five people buying five $20 cocktails each to replace one $500 bottle of Grey Goose) it can soften the financial blow.

Winners and losers
Signature drinks offer something to customers, bartenders and to the club owners. It also signals a shift within the bartending market. No comprehensive study has been done, but anecdotal evidence suggests that some older bartenders who learned on the job over a period of many years are being replaced by younger, professionally trained, and often better looking “mixologists”. Can the older bartenders learn to make the new style drinks? Absolutely. But when presentation counts as much as the taste of the drink the younger bartender has a distinct advantage.

Keep in mind that there is a specific market for specialty drinks. They are primarily geared toward women who are willing to experiment. Guys aren’t usually interested in Asian pear martinis or chocolate cosmos, and there are women who will cling to their vodka red bull like a crack head to a pipe. But nightlife caters to women. Women will go where the drinks are. Men will go where the women are. Everyone will spend more money. Any thing that will bring more women through the door is worth a try. So more places will probably come up with their own specialty drinks…

Are the Clubs Planning to Take on the Cops?

By Gamal Hennessy

The struggle between the nightlife industry in New York and local government might be moving from the blogsphere to the courtroom. A prominent nightlife figure has reported a lawsuit planned by local clubs against the NYPD. Is this the beginning of a new period of freedom for nightlife, or is the struggle about to take a turn for the worst?

The nature of the conflict
In the nightlife blog Good Night Mr. Lewis, Steven Lewis recently wrote that clubs have recently decided to file suit against the police department. According to the post, the clubs will claim that vice cops staged phony drug buys in their venues in an attempt to implicate the club in the crime. The clubs will then claim that the NYPD abused the Nuisance Abatement Laws (NAL) by selectively choosing to enforce the law in a way that would do the most economic damage to the venues. The combination of these acts results in a situation where the police are “ruining lives and business” and violating due process. The damages sought by the clubs in this suit are said to range in the tens of millions of dollars.

These issues have been simmering for some time. Local nightlife leaders have been aware of this problem since the NAL has been more strictly enforced by the police. While they don’t argue the merits of the law, they think the current enforcement of this law is a problem because it is largely politically motivated.

Robert Bookman, the head of the New York Nightlife Association sees an entity behind the police pulling the strings: “Its not police directly but the Civil Enforcement Unit; they’re not talking amongst themselves. The precinct has no control over it [the closings]; the cops who may have given you the underlying summonses have no control over it. There’s a unit called the Civil Enforcement Unit, they’re the ones who get these complaints from the captains, you know, 'This is a place we want you to consider for NAL.' And it’s the attorneys in this unit that put the papers together, who go to court, get the judge to sign it and choose to serve it almost universally on Friday night. Having said all of that, the situation is better now than a year and a half ago.”

The manipulation of the law might go even deeper than the Civil Enforcement Unit. There is a sense in certain sectors of the nightlife industry that larger real estate developers are trying to manipulate the NAL, the community boards, and using other tactics to reduce nightlife in New York City to make room for more housing construction. If the suit is filed, then all these players and their motivations could potentially be brought to light.

Timing is everything
If this situation has been going on for some time, why are the suits being contemplated now? According to the NYNA, the number of NAL closings has gone down since 2007. The police and the NYNA have made progress in working together to make nightlife safer during that period. In the past, individual clubs were reluctant to take action against community boards, police, or city hall because the backlash could close them down through votes against their liquor licenses, more raids or higher scrutiny from the DOH. So why go to court now?

NYN can only speculate on the actual timing of the suit. It is possible that the recent real estate slump and the political concerns swirling around City Hall make this a good time to go on the offensive with the police, whether or not they are initiating the abuse or just pawns for another group. It could be that the clubs found a way to avoid retaliation, giving them more freedom to act. It is also possible that the economic slowdown makes repeated weekend closures under the NAL impossible to absorb. If clubs are closed for too many weekends they might not reopen at all.

New York nightlife needs the NYPD to maintain the safety of its customers and workers. A protracted court battle between the two groups could lead to a more friction that would ultimately be detrimental to the people who enjoy the nightlife lifestyle. Hopefully, the announcement of a potential suit will induce both sides to come to an amicable agreement before the issue gets dragged through the courts. No matter which direction this goes, NYN will continue to follow the story.

Have fun.
Gamal

Dancers Claim Abuse at Dollar Dance Clubs

By Gamal Hennessy

In the outer boroughs, there are clubs that are different than the lounges or nightclubs you might be used to. These are clubs frequented by immigrant laborers and staffed by women who are paid, per dance, to dance with the patrons. A new report and federal lawsuit claims that these women are abused on several levels. Is the situation different in mainstream clubs, or is the situation just a difference of degrees?

A report in last week’s Associated Press explained that dollar dance clubs exist in various Latin American neighborhoods around the city. While it is not a strip club, women are paid to dance with men. Men pay $2 for a single dance or $40 for an hour of company. Prostitution is not supposed to be part of the job, but workers frequently have to be protected by security from over aggressive patrons who want more than just a dance and within their communities these women are often viewed as prostitutes.

A recent crime has pushed these clubs into the spotlight. In December of 2007, a 24 year old dancer named Adriana Valderrama was shot and killed near the Tulcingo Café in Queens. The ensuing investigation revealed allegations of sexual harassment and unsafe working conditions inside dollar dance clubs.

The perceptions and allegations surrounding dollar dance clubs are not limited to the outer boroughs. High profile spots like The Box are also currently facing allegations of sexual abuse and trading female attention for money is a common practice in modern clubs. They call it dollar dancing. We call it bottle service. One practice is explicit, the other is only implied. The prices might be different, but the end result is the same. People (men and women) come to the conclusion that sexually charged social interaction can be purchased.

This is not criticism of sexuality in nightlife, or a condemnation of buying a woman a drink. It is a critique against the concept of buying company. It is easier to buy a dollar dance than to actually approach a woman. It is a display of social value to buy a bottle for female attention, even if the tactic lacks subtlety. But the closer the connection we have between money and sex, the more nightlife will be perceived in a negative light. There has been a link between money and sex since money was invented, but managing that perception is crucial to the image of the city’s clubs.

Have fun.
Gamal

Source: Christian Salazar: Associated Press

Bloomberg’s Nightlife Record

By Gamal Hennessy

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to announce plans to run for a third term in office tomorrow. Various groups are weighing in before the official announcement and the outcome will be controversial no matter how it shakes out. Nightlife, as a distinct facet of the city, also needs to consider the implications of Bloomberg’s tenure. What has the mayor done to support or hinder nightlife during his term? Is nightlife better off with a new mayor?

To get a better picture of how the mayor has impacted nightlife recently, NYN went through all of its past coverage to find Bloomberg’s influence, even though all these events cannot be directly tied to him. Here is a sampling of his programs affecting nightlife since 2003.

Supporting the nightlife industry

October 2007: New York Nightlife Association and New York City Police Department create a new plan to improve security conditions after two separate nightclub murders.

October 2007: New York City launches multi-media campaign to attract tourists to various aspects of New York City, including nightlife.

February 2008: NYC expands its free condom offering to bars and restaurants in the face of rising HIV rates.

July 2008: Mayor signaled willingness to rescind the cabaret law, although that willingness has not been backed up by actions at this point.

Opposing the nightlife industry
March 2003: New York City institutes a smoking ban in bars, clubs and restaurants. While smoking rates have gone down citywide and anecdotal evidence suggests that non smokers now go out more, the ban has amplified issues between local residents and clubs.

June 2007: Mayor’s plan for congestion pricing in midtown threatened to create residual traffic jams on nights and weekends when the tax wouldn’t be in effect.

September 2007: Arguments between the city and local taxi drivers over GPS, credit card, TV screens in the back of all cabs boil over into a cab strike.

April 2008: The NYC Department of Health targets select gay clubs for violations while possibly ignoring a majority of others

Real Estate Issues
The mayor enjoys support in the voting community and in the business sector. Their basic argument is that the extraordinary economic times that we live in call for a mayor that has the business experience to see the city through this difficult time.

When you look at how business has fared in New York recently, it is worth noting that the real estate sector, which experienced a boom under Mr. Bloomberg, is in full retreat now after years of wild profit speculation and uncontrolled growth. It also makes sense to point out that the encroachment of residential real estate into formerly commercial areas where nightlife thrived added to the conflict between clubs and local residents who didn’t want to have their illusion suburban quiet disturbed while they slept in the middle of the city. A more balanced investment by the city between more residential real estate and more support for local nightlife might have been the wiser business strategy.

It is easy to see how Mayor Bloomberg’s term in office was more beneficial to New York nightlife than Mayor Giuliani’s, since Rudy would have preferred to close all clubs. It is difficult to say that his impact on New York nightlife has been wholly negative, given some of his actions. It is impossible to tell if nightlife would be given more support to thrive under a new mayor because we don’t know who the opposing candidate might be. But it is possible to see that he is willing to impose his own lifestyle on others and circumvent or rewrite laws to achieve his goals. If that kind of brazen cowboy attitude to power fails miserably on a national level with Bush/Cheney, what makes us think it will work better on a city level?

Have fun.
Gamal

Source: Michael Barbaro: New York Times

Give us your opinion on what’s going on. Use the comments space below to tell people what you think.