I didnt/don’t see the issue with asking the general question here? I think Winebid is taking the question a bit too personally as I don’t think there ever was an accusation that Winebid trades in counterfeit wines as a policy. Should the title have been better from the start…ok, sure. (Now adjusted) if we can’t ask other wine lovers a question where else are we going to inquire? Certainly asking Winebid is not going to help as
“We will not provide consignor information or any of our own inspection details beyond what we put on the site”
I understand the need to protect your brand but it wasn’t the Winebid brand being questioned, it was a singular bottle. Not much wrong with that imo.
Musar is a such a complex, unique wine that it should be probably come with a warning from auction houses, since neophytes who don’t understand it might consider those aspects to be technical flaws.
About the bottle, not about Winebid motives. The accusation wasn’t that winebid was knowingly selling a fake. The original post didn’t accuse and I’m sure every auction house, even the best have unknowingly sold a fake somewhere. To act infallible and angry at the question of a singular bottle is paranoid. Come here and say we stand behind the bottle and here’s why and end the conversation.
It’s not paranoid to defend your company from accusations you were never offered a chance to comment on or defend. The OP dropped an accusation that they were selling a counterfeit bottle. It wasn’t an inquiry for help in checking it out. And it certainly wasn’t an inquiry to WineBid itself.
Ok Chris we are just going to disagree and that’s fine. If the mods felt it was out of line they can adjust. The op did and we all can agree it’s worded better now. I just don’t like the response, don’t like being told what we can and can’t discuss I guess. Defend your company sure, but as long as your here discuss the bottle then, no need to shut down The conversation. There’s was no accusation against Winebids moral compass and we got a response that acted as such.
“I’m really hoping someone from Broadbent Selections may see this and comment if I’m wrong (I’m at least 99% confident that none of the bottles I’ve had from Broadbent”
Fair enough. Except where were we told we couldn’t discuss it? That’s exactly what happened. The mistake was shown yet at the time Russ posted the original post and subject line were intact.
Given that really big thread about that really big case that still keeps popping up the subject of fakes is sensitive for an auction house. Therefore we should exercise some responsibility and care before announcing fakes in public forums like this. That’s not how this played out. A fake was announced in title and content. It wasn’t a question. It was stated as fact. And again, if someone has a question best to question to sellers first. At least give them time to respond before you announce to the world they are selling a fake.
After a reasonable inquiry then maybe another inquiry here would have been appropriate so it could be discussed before an accusation was made. Again, not what happened.
I almost called out the OP from the very start. But once I saw the replies I thought he would retract. He didn’t and thus the business in question saw fit to defend themselves. I’m not clear why that would raise an eyebrow. It’s a reasonable part of any discussion of their wares.
“I’m pretty disappointed at the thread headline and insinuations that WineBid trades in fake wines, which we most emphatically do not, or that we are not thorough in our inspection process, which we most emphatically are. So, to make public statements like “buyer beware” or insinuations that WineBid trades in fake bottles is very inappropriate, and I’d really appreciate that such insinuations are discontinued.”
It was not insinuated that Winebid trades knowingly in fake wines. It was a post that a wine on Winebid might be fake. Big difference. It said nothing that they do not try their best in their thorough inspection process. It made no general statement about Winebid. It was about 1 special wine.
CAn he honestly say he’s never had a wine returned or questioned And then pulled…ever. Ridiculous to Even think they have never sold a fake.
Sorry, I’m not sure why I keep posting on this honestly…Maybe I’m off base, wouldn’t be the first time either. Off to drink another Rose On this hot Evening
I’m not sure either. I thought Russ was right on with his response. He didn’t attack anyone. He just said he was disappointed that the title indicated his offering couldn’t be trusted, which is absolutely correct. I would be too, and it seems that even the OP was okay with this.
If the mods felt it was out of line they can adjust. The op did and we all can agree it’s worded better now. I just don’t like the response, don’t like being told what we can and can’t discuss I guess. Defend your company sure, but as long as your here discuss the bottle then, no need to shut down The conversation. There’s was no accusation against Winebids moral compass and we got a response that acted as such.![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}