From the American Wine Consumer Coalition. Tom Wark’s a busy guy.
Not sure when this report came out, so it may already have been covered here, but I thought it might be of interest:
http://www.wineconsumers.org/news-and-info/research/
Interesting that Washington, DC gets an A+. Lots of elected legislators and officials making sure they don’t have to put up with the same restrictions they won’t or can’t eliminate back home.
Thanks for posting. Only read my state (Connecticut) but there are several errors in that entry alone.
-Connecticut does not allow the sale of wine in grocery stores.
-Retailer to Consumer shipping is allowed.
-Corkage is allowed but the policy is up to the restaurant, most who discourage it or tell you it is illegal when you ask.
-Connecticut has minimum pricing and no case discounts for retailers. How is this competition among retailers?
Based on this I find it hard to believe this report has any validity.
I think I’ve seen Tom Wark post here. This should get some comment.
New York doesn’t seem accurate either.
There are errors about Wisconsin as well. Retailer shipping is permitted in Wisconsin, though there is a limit, i believe, of 2 cases/yr. The only time i have experienced enforcement (by the seller) is when ordering multiple cases at the same time. On those occasions, i have had to provide a different name to ship to.
Also, while BYOB is technically not permitted, enforcement only occurs when the restaurant chooses.
Many errors
I looked quickly, saw that Mass had errors, too, and dismissed it.
For one, it states that grocery stores couldn’t sell wine when in fact the Shaws in Back Bay does. So do cool little groceries like Formaggio Kitchen. And Dave’s Fresh Pasta.
It also states that corkage is allowed only in restaurants without a liquor license. I can’t say with any certainty what the law actually is in Mass, but this strikes me as quite inaccurate. Every restaurant I bring bottles to has a beer/wine license at the least (including two off the top of my head that list corkage fees right on the menu - yes, in Boston; PM me if you want to know which). A beer/wine license may not be quite the same thing as a “liquor license”, but I don’t think that’s what the report was suggesting/getting at.
But this is my biggest problem with “The 2013 State-by-State Report Card On Consumer Access To Wine”: it’s no such thing. It may well be a good ranking in terms of prohibitive laws of the various states, but as far as ranking “consumer access to wine”, it is in no way an indication of whether you can source good wine at good prices in those states.
Let me address two states I know very well. Mass (where I live) rates an “F” and a ranking of “#44”; Nebraska (where my daughter lives and where I visit very frequently) rates an “A” and a ranking of “#1”. How shall I put this delicately so as not to offend my brothers in Nebraska? Nebraska is an absolutely blackhole for wine. You can’t get nothin. It is a wasteland for the wine-lover. And, oh yeah, it’s also No.1!
I see that New York is given a “D+” and a ranking of “#30”. I tend to visit Manhattan more than Rochester, but that’s certainly a destination where I have no consumer access issues. None whatsoever. Quite excellent access I’d say. I tend to stock up whenever I visit. Quite impressive really. And compared to Nebraska…?
This report is flawed in conception and execution, apparently riddled with errors given our brief cursory views, and of no use to anyone who really wants to know about consumer access. It may have some utility when it comes to identifying prohibitive laws - a good thing certainly - but that’s only a small part of the equation when it comes to the question of consumer access.
+1. The fact-checking on this is ridiculously bad. It also makes no distinction between states that allow wine shipping but require a license and/or impose annual limits vs. states that do not regulate wine shipping. See e.g. New Hampshire, which received an “A+” despite the fact that many wineries do not ship to NH due to its restrictive licensing.
For a change of pace…
The Georgia entry is accurate.
Ohio says no government control, but we have minimum pricing which removes competition. Still, while they need to delve deeper, I think the overall report is interesting and the grades not so far off.
It says that SC does not allow shipments from retailers.
Um…
I NEVER get shipments from out of state retailers ![[whistle.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/87d24eb81ec6dc01d84f3d6c19fa9a357e90218e.gif "whistle"){kind=small}
However it also says that SC allows shipments from wineries (but like NH, doesn’t mention the restrictions). I have dropped quite a few mailing lists because they don’t ship here because of the licensing restrictions/fees.
Two clarifications on Minnesota.
Contrary to the report, Wine is not sold IN grocery stores. There are wine shops affiliated with grocery stores, but there must be a separate entrance, and, consequently, a separate checkout. Wine does not sit on a grocery store shelf.
Shipping from out of state retailers is hit and miss. I’ve been able to receive wine from out of state retailers with the exception of Binny’s in Chicago, who was contacted by some pencil-pushing gummint bureaucrat, and told to stop under threat of fine. I’ve read the law on this, and it’s fuzzy. And like many statutes, it’s inconsistently enforced.
Interesting. I just sent a link to this topic to the American Wine Consumer Coalition. I know I’ve seen Tom Wark post here, so I’m sure he’ll be interested.
Let me respond to a few thing. I guess, best to do so in order.
Minnesota: No, wine is not sold in Grocery stores as indicated by Brad. That’s been changed in the report. However, Shipping from out of state retailers is indeed banned.
South Carolina: Shipping from out of state wine retailers is indeed banned
Ohio: The report did not deal with minimum pricing or minimum markup. Where state control was concerned, we looked at whether the state controls the retail sale of wine. In Ohio, it does not.
Massachusetts: MA severely restricts the number of licenses chains may obtain to sell wine. As a result you will see chains selling wine in some, but will not be allowed in others. Also, MA does not allow or disallow corkage. It is governed on a local level, resulting in a number of municipalities that do not allow corkage/BYOB
Wisconsin: Consumers are banned from having wine shipped to them from out of state retailers/stores. The Statute that allowed shipping into Wisconsin (SB 485) reads: ELIGIBLE. (a) A direct wine shipper’s permit may be issued under this section to any person that manufactures and bottles wine on premises covered by any of the following: 1. A manufacturer’s or rectifier’s permit under s. 125.52. 2. A winery permit under s. 125.53. 3. A winery license, permit, or other authorization issued to the winery by any state from which the winery will ship wine into this state. 4. A federal basic permit for a winery under 27 USC 203 and 204.
New York. It is correct. Winery shipping is legal. Retailer shipping is banned. No wine in grocery stores. State does not control retail sales. BYOB is allowed. Sunday sales are allowed
Connecticut: The report was in fact incorrect with regard to Grocery store sales. That has been fixed. However, the state has consistently said that it’s direct shipping bill does not authorize consumers to have wine shipped to them from out of state wineries. In fact, Wine.com actually purchased a CT retailer simply to be able to ship wine to CT residents.
Someone also brought up the issue of wine availability in states, whether or not shipping is allowed from any source. It is the view of the AWCC that regardless of the selection within a state, if residents are banned from purchasing from out of state wineries or retailers, that is an arbitrary restriction that is anti-consumer at its heart.
Additionally, AWCC can not speak for wineries or retailers that ship wine into states where it is not legal to do so and therefore cannot grade a state based on whether or not a consumer has received shipments contra the law.
All that said, any errors you may find we would love to hear about them.
Thanks,
Tom Wark,
AWCC
Unfortunately, there is some bureacrat in MN who is closing down retail sales imported into MN from other states. I’ve had Binny and one LA store say they willl no longer ship to me. For a Burgundy lover this will be a death knell eventually as great Burgundy is the hardest wine to find under the best of circumstances. Most wholesalers here only care the garden variety stuff like Jadot. Bummer!
Oregon rocks. A+ grade. CA did just as well – so move there instead.
Commonly regulators will begin to enforce against out of state wineries or retailers when the get a complaint from some one about out of state shoppers sending in wine. That’s likely what happened in MN.
DC can be commended for just never have ever passed any laws about shipping. A few wholesalers tried to stop direct sales to retailers but the city council never even voted on the law. Heck they don’t even tax direct shipments. The only real restriction the council passed was against auctions. I think Bassins held a successful one and that was the last one ever.
Maryland got a D+. I’d give it a C. I can get almost any wine I want at a retailer and as for grocery stores, I’ve never seen that many wines/beer in a store in California that I would buy any ways so I’m not missing much.
Says no retail shipping to Colorado. Never a problem in 15+ years.
Dc did legislate (well - a regulation that had to be approved by the city councill) a few years ago, expressly making it legal to ship up to two cases per address per month (i think that is how it is worded). In any event, dc never tried to stop out of states shipments even before this reg. The last commercial auction was, I think, part of a christie’s weekend hosted at the madison hotel in 1981-1982. Broadbent led a tasting of margaux and two of the other first growths (can’t remember which) - two vintages, 1978 and maybe 1966.