Talk:Punch Pubs

A bit of Balance

This article, up to today, read like a rather dry advert for Punch Taverns. Now it isn't. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 19:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Punch Taverns

An article that you have been involved in editing—Punch Taverns —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Tk420 (talk) 11:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that the stub Two for one pubs be merged into Punch Taverns. I think that the content in the Two for one article can easily be explained in the context of Punch Taverns, and the Punch Taverns article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Two for one will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. As there is current no mention of Two For One, although Two For One redirects to Punch Taverns, in the history section of this article it ought to be mentioned to prevent more duplicate articles emerging Tk420 (talk) 11:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Support Do you some drafting in mind? I think it should be very brief (and properly cited which the Two for one pubs article is currently not). Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 12:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

• I'd say No at the moment, as I'm not clear how non-notable this Two for One is. The stub claims that “before splitting up the brand, it was the largest pub chain in the United Kingdom”, which (if correct) merits expanding.

Also, it claims here TfO was a Punch/Spirit brand, yet this page says it included/applied to Marston's, which (AFAIK) isn't a Punch brewery. So what exactly was it? A pub/restaurant chain? A widespread meal deal? A corporate brand?

And what, before a merger is agreed, would you be planning to incorporate into the Punch page? Do you have a draft we can look at? Or are you simply planning to a blank and redirect (which I would oppose as a back-door deletion). Moonraker12 (talk) 17:54, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

PS: I've also sent a note to the editor who wrote this in the first place, to see if he/she can shed any light on it. Moonraker12 (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

• Hi there, I'm the original creator of the Two For One Pubs page. Thanks for letting me know about this, I'd be happy to try and shed some light on it. Obviously, wrote this one a while back now, so I'll try and remember what was going on but a lot of stuff's been long forgotten. Firstly, this was an early Wikipedia effort for me, before I really knew what was going on with citations or anything else. Thanks firstly to everyone who's tweaked with it and made it better thus far, but looking back I'd agree that it's in need of work.

In terms of what Two For One is/was, I've found a page on pub-explorer.com which is separate to the Marston's one (http://www.pub-explorer.com/themedpubs/twoforonethemedpage.htm) and is the logo and info I remember - which would indicate they might be different. But, I can't be sure. From trying to retrace my steps on Google, I can definately say that the Two For One from that page was owned by Spirit group, who called themselves 'The managed division of Punch Taverns' . At companies house now, Spirit isn't owned by Punch, and according to the website their old one diverts you to (spiritpubcompany.com) they've been sold to Greene King. Now, their website refers to the pubs Two For One were revamped as as 'Our Brands' - which would suggest Two for One was a brand Punch used and not a company outright (Although this may have changed as apart of the takeover). As far as Marston is concerned, they're still going with 'Two For One' although, the pubs I've seen use this as an offer with Marston's branding. Their website calls them 'Marston's Two for One Pub' .

So aside from that, and I'm afraid this is only heresay, Two For One was massive in terms of a branded pub chain. Annoyingly, I can't find where I'd got that it was the largest chain in the UK, although I wouldn't have pulled it out of the blue. However, I can see here that Spirit have about 1,200 pubs now (Of which around 70 are Taylor Walker, with the rest split between Chef and Brewer and brands which would've been Two For One.). With the conversion of Two For One around 2007, and the closest BBPA figure being 2010, when there were around 55,000 pubs in the UK. The likelihood is, 1,200 would have been higher 10 years back - so it is feasible that they'd have a majority in terms of a brand and outright directly managed chain (With most UK pubs being Independant run, or brewery sponsored and franchised with their own branding and menus). Anecdotally, I don't remember any others, so whilst I can't say it's true, if I read it on their website at the time I wouldn't disbelieve it.

Sorry I can't be of more use than that, but I'll try and go back in my internet history and find the exact page. Any more questions, fire away!

As far as merging is concerned, I'd say that I'm ambivalent either way. However, it would need cleaning up visa vi disambiguation & citation and should be linked more closely (Perhaps merged into) to Spirit's page (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_Pub_Company) than Punch. I'll be honest, I don't think I came across the Spirit page at the time of creation. It's going to be hard to get much more info than is already here or on the original as nothing seems particularly well documented, so I wouldn't anticipate a merger having to be reversed if the Two For One info started to dwarf the rest of the page. However, as importance outside of Wikipedia goes I'd say it probably warrants a page - just doesn't feel like it with the amount of info available! Sorry for rambling on a bit! Thanks! Samdod2427 (talk) 21:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Punch Taverns' annual reports for the years 2007 to 2009 refer to Two for One as being part of their 'Value Pub Restaurants', a portfolio rising in numbers to 223 pubs in 2009. That included 74 'Wacky Warehouse' pubs, so on the face of it no more than 150 Two for One. By 2010 Punch don't bother to mention Two for One in their annual report and in 2011 they sold their managed pubs to Spirit Pub Co. Spirit Pub Co is now part of Greene King. I think Two for One was transitory branding and I'd suggest deleting the page altogether./ Swinnow16 (talk) 11:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

• This looks non-notable. A brand name that was briefly used and dumped, and for which we have no reliable sources just a brief and unhelpful mention on an unreliable website. If there are reliable sources which talk usefully about this brand in relation to the Spirit Group, to Punch Taverns, and/or Marston's then the useful information, appropriately sourced, can be used in the relevant article, but it appears we don't need this article either as a standalone or as a redirect. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:22, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

I have removed the merge proposal, and put a PROD on the Two for one pubs article. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:29, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation page

Also: I have noticed there is no disambiguation page for Two For One. Does anyone think having one would help to prevent further duplicates for Two For One? Tk420 (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

You mention above (and here) preventing “more duplicate articles emerging”: what have you in mind, there? (I've taken the liberty of separating this from the merge discussion, as it seems another issue; I trust you don't mind) Moonraker12 (talk) 18:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I have created a disambiguation page Two for one (disambiguation) to help readers find what they are looking for. Tk420 (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Punch Taverns. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://archive.oxfordmail.net/2006/8/11/101701.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120729220835/http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/General-News/Spirit-shares-start-trading-after-Punch-demerger to http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news.ma/article/91283
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151222131904/https://www.convivialityretail.co.uk/downloads/cvr-completion-final-07-10-15.pdf to https://www.convivialityretail.co.uk/downloads/cvr-completion-final-07-10-15.pdf
• Added archive https://archive.is/20091214071927/http://news.parliament.uk/2009/05/mps-publish-report-on-pub-companies/ to http://news.parliament.uk/2009/05/mps-publish-report-on-pub-companies/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091029145445/http://www.oft.gov.uk/news/press/2009/127-09 to http://www.oft.gov.uk/news/press/2009/127-09

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:04, 17 September 2017 (UTC)