Marsh Louise, Cameron Claire, Quigg Robin, Wood Sarah, Blank Mei-Ling, Venter Noeleen, Thomas Lathan, Robertson Lindsay, Hoek Janet, Sullivan Trudy
Social and Behavioural Research Unit, Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Biostatistics Centre, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Tob Control. 2022 May;31(3):438-443. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-056032. Epub 2020 Dec 3.
New Zealand's Smokefree 2025 goal aims to greatly decrease the availability of tobacco. One option is to cease the sale of tobacco from convenience stores. However, tobacco companies and retail trade associations oppose this move and have argued that customers who purchase tobacco drive footfall and spend more than non-tobacco customers. The aim of this study is to test the validity of industry claims about the importance of tobacco to convenience stores.
During November and December 2019, immediate postpurchase surveys were undertaken with customers on exit from a random sample of 100 convenience stores in two New Zealand cities. We estimated the mean number of items purchased, including tobacco and non-tobacco items, and mean expenditure on non-tobacco items.
Of the 3399 transactions recorded, 13.8% included tobacco, of which 8.3% comprised tobacco only and 5.5% included tobacco and non-tobacco items. The mean number of transactions containing both tobacco and non-tobacco items was 1.98, and 1.87 for those containing non-tobacco items only. Customers who purchased tobacco and non-tobacco items spent on average NZ$6.99 on non-tobacco items, whereas customers who purchased non-tobacco items only, spent on average NZ$5.07.
Our results do not support claims that tobacco drives one-quarter of footfall into stores or that customers who purchase tobacco spend almost twice as much as non-tobacco customers. Combined purchases of tobacco and non-tobacco items constituted 5.5% of transactions; the impact on a store's profitability of removing tobacco sales is unknown and could be the focus of future research.
新西兰的“2025年无烟”目标旨在大幅减少烟草的可获得性。一种选择是停止在便利店销售烟草。然而，烟草公司和零售贸易协会反对这一举措，并辩称购买烟草的顾客会带动客流量，且比不购买烟草的顾客消费更多。本研究的目的是检验行业关于烟草对便利店重要性的说法的有效性。
在2019年11月和12月期间，对新西兰两个城市随机抽取的100家便利店的顾客在离开时进行了购买后即时调查。我们估计了购买的商品平均数量，包括烟草和非烟草商品，以及非烟草商品的平均支出。
在记录的3399笔交易中，13.8%包括烟草，其中8.3%仅为烟草，5.5%包括烟草和非烟草商品。同时包含烟草和非烟草商品的交易平均数量为1.98笔，仅包含非烟草商品的交易平均数量为1.87笔。购买了烟草和非烟草商品的顾客在非烟草商品上平均花费6.99新西兰元，而仅购买非烟草商品的顾客平均花费5.07新西兰元。
我们的结果不支持烟草带动四分之一的进店客流量这一说法，也不支持购买烟草的顾客消费几乎是非烟草顾客两倍的说法。烟草和非烟草商品的组合购买占交易的5.5%；取消烟草销售对商店盈利能力的影响未知，可能是未来研究的重点。
