I want guaranteed allocations, in case I can’t get to a computer right away. I probably should not abandon a class of middle school students so I can order wine.
I do not always take my full allocation–depends on available funds.
And that is fine.
Buyers can decide and the wineries can run the system they prefer.
I was only answering regarding having a personal preference.
Have to agree with the others here, and sharply disagree with Brian’s analysis that wineries spend, spend, spend. Almost exactly the opposite. It takes a lot of balls for schrader to go FCFS AND sit on your money for a year. A lot of these wineries that are FCFS are not shipping out your wine for a minimum of a month. If they can’t wait 2 weeks for payment but we have to wait 2 weeks minimum for shipment, then screw em. So many of these wineries have pushed their releases up, so they can catch the first wave of wine release spending dollars, even though the spring or fall shipping seasons then become further out. Sorry, that’s the one way street.
I wasn’t speaking directly to you but only throwing out my 2 cents (worth about 1 cent) on the topic- As for preference (as was the question in the OP), I too would prefer a guarenteed allocation but I surly don’t want to guarantee the purchase of that allocation… ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
In that case, I change my vote to “appreciate.”
I voted “want.” I almost never purchase my entire allocation. That said, it is true that “if I want it bad enough I’ll order on time” IF my memory and work schedule allows for that. Some offers sell out nearly instantaneously, which can be aggravating if it’s a FCFS situation. And, although I don’t “need” a week to think it over, I certainly like having time to think it over.
So my question is why should you be guaranteed something you don’t purchase all of?
I never said that. I don’t think a customer “should” be guaranteed an allocation, necessarily. That’s a business decision for each business to make. I would point out, however, that the very term “allocation” implies that certain product has been set-aside, or “allocated” for the given customer. FCFS offers are just that — Offers — not allocations.
Or
What’s in it for the winery if they have to re-release the wines you passed on in hopes of selling it to someone else?
Keeps happy customers happy. Customer relations. I believe it’s always a good idea for any business to make it as easy/convenient as possible for their customers to spend their money on the product/service being sold. Obviously, there are other interests at play, but separating the customer from their money should probably be at the top of the list.
When people feel they have missed out they often allocate their money to another offer. I’m obviously talking allocated wines, not something where you are offered 10 cases or more and there’s some sent to retail and restaurants. From a businesses perspective I would want my customers to buy what I offer them. I like Anton’s idea of basing allocations on purchase history. I buy “x” nottles of this every year and “y” bottles of that. You want a large format? Wishlist.
Going to be in a meeeting all day? Good thing you got a “save the date” email a week or two in advance so you could be sure to email the winery and secure your order if you were not going to be available. I’ve done that with Hardy in the past. It really works.
That’s a good idea about emailing ahead of time, although it does run counter to the buying system the winery is advertising. I could turn that good idea on its head and ask, "Why should you be entitled to purchase early based on your representation that you are going to be too busy to buy at the time the Offer opens? Is that an example of the “entitled” behavior you seem to be railing against? (for the record, I’m just playing Devil’s Advocate; I actually think emailing ahead of time is a good idea and does not reflect any sense of entitlement; of course, I also think “appreciating” guaranteed allocations are not reflective of any sense of entitlement)
What happenes when it’s not a vintage of the century? I think I’ll pass. Then they jab at the winery when wine goes to the second wave because they “couldn’t sell out.” Couldn’t sell out? Or were they too cheap to buy that allocation that had to be guaranteed?
Guaranteed allocations with no purchase obligation seems a bit one sided to me.
Good point, albeit one that doesn’t emotionally reasonate with me because I am vintage-adverse w/r/t the very few lists I am on. Many wineries will drop you if you don’t buy, so no one-sidedness there. Other wineries will adjust allocations based on purchase history (i.e.: Rhys), and that takes this behavior into account, as well, so not so one-sided there, either. If a winery’s wines are in such high demand that they can sell-through vis-a-vis a “list,” then I have to believe they’re doing a-okay, and we probably don’t need to be worried about their financial well-being. If that statement isn’t true, then I’d suggest the winery needs to take a long hard look at their financials and figure out if they can somehow make some changes that would allow them to be profitable.
First come first serve I usually avoid.
What’s wrong with how Cayuse does it.
They offer. U buy. U get offered again.
U can wishlist more. Next year it’s guarantees of wishlist Is granted.
U pass partially, it’s cut back to ur actual purchase. Totally fair.
If something unusual happens like massive cut In production then everyone’s allocation drops but u don’t lose your lot once the following years production comes back up.
Seems to work so well…
Let’s look at that.
Order barrels.
Buy fruit.
Hire a crew/custom crush client fees/winemaker
Pay lab fees
Put wine to barrel
Pay for artwork
Buy labels
Get labels approved
Order barrels
Buy fruit
Hire crew/pay custom crush client fees
Pay lab fees
Put wine to barrel
Buy glass
Buy corks
Buy capsules
Bottle your previous vintage
Pay your alcohol tax
Release wine for sale.
Store wine in temp controlled warehouse until weather is acceptable for shipping.
Two vintages in barrel before you even have an opportunity to sell a single drop.
Time to buy more fruit for vintage 3.
Pay shipping/fulfillment company. Pay salesperson/tasting room employee.
Yeah, theyre rolling in cash. Schrader is an outlier. Not all allocated wines are cash cows. Get a less than stellar score, wines don’t move fast enough. Release 3 wines because people want choices and they buy 2 bottles of the highest scoring wine and snub the other two. Then they complain you didn’t ship it right away during a heat wave and beat you up on the wine boards.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
As I am. I’m just trying to figure out the reasoning a customer has to want a certain quantity of a product held for them and not be obligated to buy it all or any. As a retailer I have 30 days from the day I order a product until it’s to be paid for in full. If my customers were like wine buyers I’d go broke…
I really don’t like Cayuse’s system. They initially only allocate one (maybe two?) wine - that is the only offer you get. Maybe you don’t like Grenache (or whatever) - if you pass, you will never get another allocation offer. If you buy, it may be years until you get an allocation for a wine that you really want.
Just to be clear, they aren’t “holding product,” just giving someone an early shot at it.
Do you sell people tools and tell them they can’t have them for 6 mos? Where’s your 30 day model for mailing list wines that you buy?
They hold my money, they can “hold” my product for a few days.
If you want to think of it as “holding product” then consider a guaranteed allocation as selling before the official release date - there! Not “holding product.” They are pre-selling product.
I have a life outside wine. Sometimes, it gets in the way of putting in a prompt order. I lost out on 2005 Saxum Rocket Block because of that. I lost out on the Next of Kyn original sign up because of that. Although I joke about how annoying it was, the truth is that it’s only fermented grape juice and I already own enough wine for the rest of my life, so why get upset about it. I appreciate it but I am not going to kill over it.
NOW I will kill over wineries that I have been buying from for a decade still not allocating me any of their special cuvee. I don’t like Constellation and did not like the fact that they bought Schrader. I was on the fence about continuing my allocation. I waited until the last offer and when I still got a ZERO allocation of Old Sparky, never having been offered even one bottle, I said F* them and stopped ordering. I came pretty close on Cayuse when they never offered me a Flying Pig despite a promise, but I decided that the way they handled the recent cork taint issue (refund with interest) was nice so I didn’t advise Mr. Dorland what to do with his wine.
PS - I did once order a FCFS allocation from my laptop while sitting on the dais and about to present as part of a Continuing Legal Education panel during the Bar Association annual meeting. I told the moderator that if she made sure my slot didn’t some up at exactly noon, I would share a bottle with her. She now tells the story to everyone as an example of multi-tasking,
I don’t feel strongly, except that, like everyone else, I don’t want an allocation email hitting at 10:00 am that has sold out by 10:24 or something.
This.
I only feel bad in the above situation when I find out that while they said it opens at 10:00 but it actually opened up at 9:00 or 8:00 or the night before. Then I’m a bit put off.