Singapore’s once-thriving nightlife is in crisis, with business operators blaming rising costs, restrictive regulations, and changing consumer habits for its decline.
In a Facebook post on 9 February 2025, Naz Arjuna, a prominent bartender and winner of the 2013 Giffard Asian Cup, delivered a harsh critique of government policies.
His comments came in response to a 7 February report by CNA Today highlighting the struggles of the nightlife sector.
“Let me first tell you who or what is to be blamed for all this destruction to our nightlife scene. It is the goddamn government,” Naz wrote, attributing the downfall to high alcohol duties, outdated licensing rules, and restrictive operating hours.
He dismissed claims that younger generations had lost interest in nightlife. “Don’t blame the Gen Zs for not drinking or the fact that people now work from home,” he said.
“People are still working in offices, but they now want to go straight back home instead of eating out or having a drink or two. Why? Because it’s too damn expensive!”
Naz pointed to Singapore’s high alcohol duties as a major barrier, explaining how they inflate the cost of drinks to unaffordable levels. “A 40% ABV bottle of vodka already costs $26.40 in duty before GST,” he said.
“By the time the costs are passed on to consumers, a bottle of spirits can cost over $300, and a single drink at a bar can easily be $20 or more.”
He argued that the government’s view of alcohol as a “luxury product” is outdated and called for a reduction in duties to help revive the sector.
The issue extends beyond alcohol costs. Naz described Singapore’s complex and restrictive licensing system as a barrier to creativity, noting that establishments need multiple permits for music, dancing, and live performances.
“There are so many technicalities in our entertainment licence. You can play music but not from Spotify. Guests can’t dance unless you have an Arts and Entertainment licence. Strictly no singing or DJs unless you have the public entertainment licence,” he said.
“Having so many laws on fun restricts spontaneity.”
The government’s refusal to extend alcohol-serving hours has further compounded the problem.
“The real drinking and sales surge usually happen after 10pm,” Naz said, explaining that current closing times prevent businesses from capitalising on peak hours.
This leaves operators struggling to cover costs, including staff transport after midnight, which can reach $30 per person.
“If we have to pay for their transport anyway, why not let us extend drinking hours and justify the cost?”
The result, Naz warned, is a dying nightlife scene, with iconic venues closing one after another.
Tippling Club, a renowned restaurant and cocktail bar, shut its doors in December 2024 after 16 years of operation. Sixteen Ounces Bar and Kitchen and Wine RVLT will also close due to rising overheads and declining customer numbers.
The Department of Statistics reported that revenue for nightlife venues fell from S$674.7 million in 2015 to S$284.7 million in 2022.
Naz also criticised the inconsistent enforcement of regulations.
“I’ve seen police shut down bars for being a little too loud or having a couple of fights outside, but all the nasty Thai discos in Sim Lim Square and Golden Mile Tower get green lights,” he said.
While he acknowledged that these “dirty” venues add a certain charm to the city, he called for fairer treatment of legitimate small businesses.
He also took aim at “archaic blanket sanctions” like the alcohol ban in Little India after 7pm on weekends and the restriction on coffeeshops selling alcohol after 10:30pm.
“The Little India riot was more than a decade ago. Surely, we are wiser and more prepared to handle such situations by now,” Naz said. “Why punish the whole nation?”
Naz’s post resonated with many in the industry, including prominent economist Donald Low, who agreed that the government’s role in the decline is often overlooked.
Low criticised the CNA Today article for “skirting the obvious solution.”
A commenter on Naz’s post also refuted claims that younger generations have lost interest in nightlife. “There’s actually a huge percentage of people, young and old, who want to go out for music experiences and see their favourite DJs,” they wrote. “The problem is that nightlife is priced out of reach and stifled by too many rules.”
The cost of a night out in Singapore is a significant deterrent. According to Naz, a typical Friday night can cost S$600, including transport, dinner, drinks, and supper. Many Singaporeans, he noted, prefer to travel to neighbouring countries like Johor Bahru, Bali, or Bangkok, where the same amount of money can provide a much more fulfilling experience. “For S$600, you can practically fly to a neighbouring Southeast Asian country and enjoy a better night out,” he said.
Despite efforts by the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) to promote nightlife, Naz argued that these initiatives largely benefit large venues like Marquee and Marina Bay Sands, leaving smaller operators struggling. “We’re not asking for handouts,” he said. “We’re simply asking for tweaks to the laws and taxes to help bring back the thriving days of our night scene.”
Experts agree that the decline of nightlife could have serious consequences for Singapore’s tourism and economy. Dr Lewis Lim, an associate professor at Nanyang Technological University, warned that nightlife is essential for a world-class city. “Nightlife adds energy, chicness, and a bit of that naughtiness that attracts tourists,” he said. Without it, Singapore could lose its appeal as a vibrant destination.
Naz concluded his post with a call to action, urging the public to advocate for change. “We need to make some noise,” he said. “Share this with those who matter, because if we don’t act now, Singapore’s nightlife will die.”
