The issue is not just fraudulent bottles. Provenance is also important and I’m not sure I can trust their vetting process.
You would think.
Back in the 80’s & 90’s there were many discount electronic stores in NYC run by Syrian Jews and always one or another was getting caught with its pants down running bait & switch scams, mispricing, selling fakes and what have you. I knew a few people who worked as managers in some of them. Whenever they were on some “shame-on-you” or “9-On-Your-Side” type thing in the news or on TV, the result was a bigger rush of retail traffic, full of people figuring “There’s no way they’re scamming now.” Except of course they were, even more so because the pickings were even better and that was basically the business model. (Well that and keeping 2 sets of books, one for the guaranteed yearly IRS audit, the other to keep track of the cash.)
In the good old days, bought plenty of Burgundy and Rhone, probably 10-20cs.
The wines I have had, by and large have been pretty good to benchmark and I can’t complain for what I got them for.
It’s a shame to see what has happened to them (I know they are fine and making a ton of cash) but they are tarnished now in the wine community (again, I know they don’t care, they are making a ton of cash), but they were at one time a reference point for wine stores.
I won’t shop with them again, for not only what John has done but what he perpetuates, an unrealistic view of wine.
The crazy part is, John didn’t ‘need’ Rudy, he was plugging along at a good clip. He grew his family business to become one of the lead wine sellers in the country, but he got greedy.
It’s the same sort of dilemma for Rimmerman, you have to stay on top of your game, bigger, fatter, richer, more, new, shiny, rarer. For guys like these it’s not only good enough to be one of the best, but to be the best at any cost.
The issue is that there are only so many wines on the planet, so many styles, so many producer that are truly sought after, you can’t just make new 47’s or 61’s, (well… Actually you can). Eventually these business models run their course, so what happens?
They start stretching truths and exaggerating their product with rosey prose and marginal wine in order to perpetuate the smoke which is their business model. Not to say they don’t generally offer good wine, but they are willing to offer crap that they make really good margins on with little concern for the customer.
And… Their auction prices have gotten really high.
I know several people who work at acker and do some of the buying for the retail store and email offers, mainly for Spain and Germany. These are guys I have know for a long time and I trust them re sourcing of bottles, provenance, etc. they have no connection or association with anything to due to Rudy and the issues at auction.
That hardly means anyone should change their stance about buying wine from them in principal but if the concern is about what you are getting and in what condition, especially on the retail side, I think it is a much different scenario than what may be filtering through the live auctions.
I personally and not buying the types of wine worth counterfeiting and it a retail offer comes through from one is the sources that I know and trust then I will still buy on occasion.
At this point I just don’t want to give them my money. Even if I could get a 100% guarantee on provenance.
Agree. I was never a big customer for whatever reason. It’s been years since I purchased from Acker, so no big loss for them.
I agree. But rereading Charles’s original post, I think he may simply have been asking whether it’s safe to buy there. The rest of us raised the moral issues. I certainly wouldn’t worry about the retail wines, as they’re almost all current release. I certainly wouldn’t trust the wines they auction.
I have sold some wines through their auctions, and they wanted detailed information about my storage conditions beforehand. They also refused to sell a couple bottles of '91 Leroy Romanee St Vivant which had mostly lost the original hard wax capsules, which were notorious in that vintage for cracking and falling apart. So I think they are being very careful about authenticity and provenance now. The labels and capsules on Rudy’s bottles must have been a real “pro” job! 
I occassionally purchase a stray bottle or two from their online auction. Mostly older CaliCabs, seldom pay more than $50-60/bottle
Not in the past 6 months.
I came to wine buying pretty recently and have bought a case or so of assorted bottles from Acker. So far everything has been in good condition and tasted as expected. I find their auctions to actually have a lot of great deals - perhaps because people are avoiding them, means less competition and lower prices for those who still choose to trust.
Maybe I’m rolling dice loaded against me. But like I said, so far I’ve been very happy. And I don’t have the history to have the strong personal issues that a lot of you have with the principles.
No way. No how. Their complicity in the Rudy fiasco was such that I can’t fathom any situation that would make me ok with them seeing so much as a dollar of my money.
Were they the only purveyor of wine on the planet, I would drink other beverages.
I’d be very interested in how “Big Boy”, “King Angry”, and others who have purchased substantial amounts of wine from Acker would respond to this post.
No. Would be a great question for a poll.
David,
Happy to take the bait but first indulge me in how you have come to the conclusion that I have purchased “substantial amounts of wine from Acker”.
Ray, some years ago, I bought a bit of wine from them and claimed it from a warehouse in central New Jersey. While there, I saw a pallet with what appeared to me to be your name on it. Perhaps I misread the tag. Perhaps it wasn’t your wine. Perhaps what seems to be substantial to me is insignificant from others’ perspectives.
A long time ago, as a graduate student at Columbia U., I was taken by a slender book of essays by the then-star of the faculty, Lionel Trilling, “Sincerity and Authenticity”. While I enjoyed the wine that I purchased from Acker auctions, the experience of drinking it immediately raised questions in my mind about authenticity, having previously drunk a bit of wine over several decades. The commentary about the Rudy/Kapon transactions on this site, which I’ve read several years after my Acker purchases, has disgusted me.
So what do you make of it? Perhaps I’m wrong, and you did not source much wine from Acker. Still, you have a great cellar, you’ve bought lots of wine on the secondary market, and you love exceptional wine. I’m appalled that something that I’ve loved for 35 years or so has been compromised by inauthentic bottles. Maybe my unhappiness with Acker is misplaced, but that is the only source of bottles in my cellar whose authenticity is, in my mind, ambiguous.
My question is not a taunt. I have a high regard for you. In light of the information that has emerged, what do you think?
This started out as a question about one retailer, but turning in the direction of calling out individuals not directly involved isn’t a good idea, IMO.
Ditto.
+3. Also, DaveK, you have been asked to add your complete surname to your signature 3 times now. If you do not comply, your account will be suspended.
I’m with Jay, Frank and Jorge, and making comments like this really damages your case.
Wine should not be psychosomatic, EVER. If you think Silver Oak tastes like crap, then it’s crap. If you buy it for the label and wax poetic about it, but in the back of your mind, you say “meh, this really isn’t that good”, then who are you really fooling?
If you enjoyed it, who cares?
BTW, not that Ray needs my help at all, but to this day, I’ve never met a blind taster as good as Ray. The things he’s been able to identify are crazy.