The OP Kevin claimed that his card was charged. If that’s the case, then that would contradict the above statement. That would be the only real issue when it comes down to it. Otherwise it looks like someone who wanted something did not get what he wanted because there wasn’t much of it. And he is angry. Well, contrary to popular belief, there is more wine in the world than people actually consume. Surely there are other wines from comparable vintages/producers that will pop up in the future. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. This is life. Wine is not worth getting too upset over, unless it’s a debate over high alcohol or natural wines! ![[wink.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/04707e6a7bbb03e0153e349d8a9270d30e1e9525.gif "wink"){kind=small}
The crux of the question is, what happens when the “glitch” happens? Does the phone order win when more than one “order” has been placed for the same bottle, as apparently happened in this case? Do you work for Benchmark, Poppy?
It seems clear to me from Mike’s response, that it doesn’t matter whether it is a phone order or an internet order… first one in wins, simple as that.
I do not work for Benchmark, in fact, I work for a competitor of Benchmark… Heritage Auction Galleries.
You must have better reading comprehension skills than I do, because it is not at all clear to me. When these competing orders are “finalized”, isn’t it possible that orders put in by the staff are given higher priority? This is the only way that ordering by phone would be an advantage, as intimated by the OP. I would appreciate an answer from Mike because I like Benchmark and I actually want to know the answer for future purchases.
Mo -
![[foilhat.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/4/4156862bd5dc986048e5ebd4ef8fb6b10c738e94.gif "foilhat"){kind=small}
Is it POSSIBLE that a staff order will win even though it’s second? Sure. That contradicts what Mike said though. I see no reason Mike would lie and in fact, no reason for any retailer to prefer staff orders over web orders (or vice versa). A sale is a sale. If Benchmark wanted to give preferential treatment they’d segment their mailing list by interest group or length of time one’s been a customer, amount purchased, etc. And guess what? It would be their right to do that.
At the end of the day, this is just whining. Whenever you have a large retailer who sends out 50,000 emails and a small quantity of desirable wine you will see this. Not all of the time, but occasionally. Guess what? Life goes on. Suck it up and move on.
That doesnt make the pain of my “missing” 72 Swan any easier to bear.[/quote]
John, I remembered your tale of woe so I brought our last bottle to the “bored” meeting this morning. Alas, you were not there so I took it home. Unfortunately our neighbor in Trenton (and your winery neighbor) Guy Davis saw it at our annual Trenton Town Party tonight (remember Trenton–no longer a town, it’s an illusion") and we decided to open it in your honor. Don’t worry, he’ll tweet about it!
Mo, et al -
Re orders going into our system: it all goes through the same funnel. If a customer calls me to place an order, I place that order on the same system that you use while on the website - just on the backside of the software. We have no way of giving priority of one order over the other - the first one that goes into the website (and is finalized with the ‘place order’ button) wins. That is the only fair way we can do it.
Re credit cards and web orders: When you hit ‘place order’ on the website, the bottles that you purchased are pulled out of available stock, and your card is pre-authorized. A pre-authorization means that our system has looked at your account and has determined that there is enough funds to cover your order, however the charge is not finalized and no money is transferred. Once a web order is placed, our customer service team looks at the order to make sure everything is in order (this is where we catch a lot of credit card fraud), and then they post-authorize the transaction. Post-authorization means that the transaction is actually given final approval and the funds are transferred between accounts. If we do not post-authorize, the pre-authorization would fall-off in about 48 hours - depending on your bank.
Let me know if you have any other questions. If anyone would prefer to discuss how our system works over the phone, I’m available from 9am to 5pm PST @ 707.255.3500
John, I remembered your tale of woe so I brought our last bottle to the "bored" meeting this morning. Alas, you were not there so I took it home. Unfortunately our neighbor in Trenton (and your winery neighbor) Guy Davis saw it at our annual Trenton Town Party tonight (remember Trenton--no longer a town, it's an illusion") and we decided to open it in your honor. Don't worry, he'll tweet about it![/quote]
He just sent pics.
I just emailed him back with a picture of how we roll in HBG.
3 Old Barolos and some white truffles the size of tennis balls.
Bite me.
You’ve gotta love this forum! From the serious to the at times mundane, but always free speech! I see why people have moved from the other site and now reside here. Yes, I do concede a little advertising artistry to my title. I could have done otherwise but at 1226 views I did get people to take a look. Yes clearly we do at time disagree. As Alan pointed out ‘irresponsible’, I disagree.
Some as we are made aware are quite free with their wines and ‘see it as the new passing of the joint’ or “Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. This is life. Wine is not worth getting too upset over . . .” . . .And for others like me, wine is an obsession and we send our wine deliveries to our parent’s residence so our wives do not see the quantities and divorce us. Or consider that bottle of 1995 Chateau Montelena Estate Cab. opened in 2009 one of the memorable bottles of CA Cab. he opened that year and he seeks out and buys another for $105, then when he sees another online from the same co. at $85 he’s disapointed when he does not get it. Is obsession ‘irresponsible’ I disagree. But as pointed out above people are different and it’s ok to disagree just understand that people have a right to opinion.
My point was again to SAY that I’m going back to calling them by phone, and discontinue online purchases AS for years prior when phone ordering thru Nick and even prior to Nick or Mike (the guy whom Nick replaced, who went on to become a vineyard manager) I had no wines ‘bought out from under me’. HOWEVER, recently since ordering solely via online I’ve lost 2 bottles. And Mike check with Julie, the 1st loss a non important Sequoia Grove Reserve was charged via credit card, then caught later when arrangements were made for shipping. She politely apologized and said that my credit card charge would be reimbursed.
In response to Mo Kang, the CAPITALIZATION in my original text might seem to suggest that I was ticked off but my purpose was just to highlight my main intent for the OP. I did the same thing in the previous paragraph.
Finally, as this thread does show many Berserkers (myself included) view Benchmark as one of the best, and it seems that (Mike) Benchmark have/will review their online system and procedures. I’m hopeful that they will continue to be my site of choice when looking to find good deals for those hard to find wines of good provenance. AND THIS IS MY NEW INTENT.
There are no good old wines, just good bottles of old wines. said before
Kevin, not to 
but reading through this thread and your responses it seems to me you’re missing the primary difference between your online vs. phone experience with Benchmark.
When shopping online, you place a wine in your cart, then continue browsing to decide if you want any to purchase any other bottles. I’m going to assume when you call your order in, you don’t spend time on the phone browsing stock with the sales person, you simply finalize the order immediately.
In your scenario, you had the wine in your cart, but the “shopping cart” analogy fails because the wine is actually still on the shelf, free for others to buy. If you had decided you wanted to buy that bottle, and called it in right away, you might have gotten it. If you had decided to buy it, and spent some time browsing other stock online before calling in your order, the wine would have been gone, the only difference being you would have found out earlier that you lost the wine.
To Benchmark, clearly it’s a different customer experience when one learns immediately a wine is out of stock, vs. thinking an order is finalized and learning later the wine was gone. That’s the “glitch” and where the software should improve - recheck stock at the time the web user finalizes the order.
John, I remembered your tale of woe so I brought our last bottle to the “bored” meeting this morning. Alas, you were not there so I took it home. Unfortunately our neighbor in Trenton (and your winery neighbor) Guy Davis saw it at our annual Trenton Town Party tonight (remember Trenton–no longer a town, it’s an illusion") and we decided to open it in your honor. Don’t worry, he’ll tweet about it!
[/quote]
And now he has sent a pic of the “69-71 Lot Z”. You sir know well my penchant for this wine. You have repeatedly stated you had none, and in fact even said the only guy you knew with any lived in SoCal. Now, I have photo proof of that very wine being poured by you for the Trenton event. I have further verified the guy from SoCal was not present last night. My pain is searing and unending. Shame on you sir. Shame.
And just to be clear, I was only tweaking Mike S over the Lot 2 Swan Zin. I have bought a boatload of wine from those guy with few glitches.
To the OP (and apparently to me as well):
If I had control over the edit button, I’d say it’s time to change the title to something a bit more benign. When I first saw the thread title, I thought it was a Carolina Wine Company-level caution thread, which it is not. I haven’t purchased from Benchmark, but I’ve heard nothing but good things about them.
Just another reason to be angry with one’s parents.
May I suggest putting one Mr. Holdredge on (very large) retainer to draft some name-change docs?
I christen thee “Aaron Scheiner”
I asked MIKE for clarification. It is not obvious how a credit card can be charged or how an order confirmation (with a non-zero quantity) can be sent out and then canceled on “reconciliation” after the fact if there is no human intervention. As far as a retailer giving preferential treatment to staff-placed orders vs. anonymous web orders in cases where there is conflict-- I would think that this would be quite understandable. This is not contradicting what Mike said, and please do not imply that I accused Mike of lying. Yes, the original post was a bit of whining but if you don’t want to read whiny posts about things that don’t matter much in the big picture, stay away from wine boards! The only thing I have to whine about is people who inexplicably want to defend someone (Mike/BWG) who is not being attacked in any way (and in fact has gotten deservedly nice comments here), and those who answer questions posed to someone else, despite having no direct knowledge of the matter. 
Thanks Mike.
Well said.
As far as I can tell, “we” are yelling because Rod poured a 69-71 Lot Z without me, despite claiming repeatedly to have none. Why? Was there something else?
No, you directly implied that Benchmark might be favoring internally placed orders over web orders. And Mike’s clarification was simply a restatement of his initial post. What I don’t like is that innocent-seeming questions like yours can be restated by others to sound less innocent - that’s how rumors get started. And since this is much ado about not a damn thing, I commented on it.
If you just want Mike’s comments and no one elses, send a PM.