According to Eric Allen (Opinion, Herald, April 24), what wine, beer and liquor customers want is: good service and product knowledge, good product selection, low prices, keeping money local, keeping jobs local, convenience and keeping alcohol from minors. This, he contends, is what the current system of single store outlets provides. If that is the case, he has nothing to worry about with the change that would allow grocery stores to sell alcoholic beverages.

If the existing framework of single stores provides all the above benefits Allen suggests it does, any attempt to enter the market by the “big guys” ought to be crushed handily. I imagine City Market, Albertsons and Wal-Mart would study the market, see all the benefits the current system provides the consumer, decide they had no chance of competing and opt not to enter this line of business. So what’s the problem?

Why is it that stores like Kroeger’s Ace Hardware can survive in a market where Wal-Mart and Home Depot sell similar products? How is it local restaurants compete against behemoths like Applebee’s and McDonald’s and Pizza Hut? If the single store rule is such a good idea, shouldn’t we ban chains of any type – hardware supply, restaurants, grocery stores, gas stations, hotels. In that regard, how is it that The Strater is able to endure competition from the likes of a mega corporation that the Doubletree represent? Kroeger’s and The Strater seem to have figured out how to compete against the “big guys” without legislative protection. Why can’t our liquor stores?

Jeremy Coleman

Durango