I often see people selling wine say that they are pricing % below winesearcher low. I’m wondering about the validity of using that method. Does the retailer quoting the low price actually have the wine? If you are attempting to sell multiples does the retailer have more than 1 or 2 bottles? And it would seem that the vast majority of what I look at is only available on pre-arrival, which amazes me that anybody is willing to accept, given so many being burned in the past. To me, it would seem that a more legitimate way of pricing wine would be to go below the advertised price the first legitimate retailer who has the wine in stock.
WS Low is an easy guide. Up to the buyer to buy or counter at a different price if they want it. You can filter out pre arrivals and other low numbers as a seller, too.
Winesearcher low is generally not that attractive a price for wine anyways. Typically a better pricing strategy would be to price at around auction price net of bp. Winesearcher pricing is just the lowest price that things AREN’T selling for.
4 Likes
I think it’s a fine guide for wines with plenty of availability in the market.
For many older or mostly sold through wines it’s usually a few retailers fishing for the end of the rainbow buyer who has to have it.
Not a fair comparison for sellers to use on that type,of wine imo
1 Like
Is that what you would sell wine for if you were to sell some?
1 Like
It depends on how quickly I’d want to sell it, or what I’m selling.
Many people price wine way too high on here, and it doesn’t sell. Things that are desirable and hard to get may sell for much higher lives. It just depends on what you’re selling. For the most part, it will be hard to sell things easily available at auction (like DRC) for prices higher than all in auction prices, because people can just buy it at auction.
For things like aged wines with good provenance, you may be able to get much higher prices, but you likely have to have a track record of selling those wines and having high quality/good provenance.
2 Likes
For the record, I don’t disagree with your statement that Auction markets are much better metrics to tie offers to, but I do question the suggestion to give up the entire BP, especially on desirable bottles. As you are regularly posting that you are buyer of choice wines, however, I do appreciate the effort to swing offers in favor of the purchaser.
I don’t know what you mean; I said sellers should list the wines for the same price a buyer would buy at auction, net of bp, although they may not get that much. For example, something like 2020 DRC RSV, auction reserve is around 2k, so 2340-2500 with BP. I would guess ~2300-2500 is a decent price to try to list for here. Wine searcher low is 3395, for reference.
Something super rare or desirable may go for close to wsp low or even higher, especially if it’s an old wine with well documented provenance from a high quality seller.
If the wine has a peg able auction value then to me the ave hammer price seems fair. The seller and buyer both win having not paid the 20%, seems reasonable to me.
If you want more than that then roll your dice and send it to auction.
But that’s not what you are suggesting. Unless I am confused.
Take your example. Net of buyers premium is hammer. The last two auctions are 2250 hammer, 2800 all in, much closer to wine searcher that you are stating. For the seller, listing here at your suggestion would be 2250 and the buyer would benefit from zero buyers premium. Somewhere between the hammer and auction all in would be a much fairer approach; call it 2600 as an example. The seller captures some of the arbitrage and the buyer captures some of the arbitrage, both do better than the auction approach.
It’s a wash for the seller and a win for the buyer. There should be some (albeit) modest concession on both sides (I think)?
If it hammers for $1k the buyer pays 1200 and the seller nets 800? (I realize some seller can pay less)
Fair, I act under the assumption that most auction houses will waive seller premiums for good clients.
Sure, but I’m also assuming if you are that kind of seller you aren’t peddling a few bits on WB 
And if you are selling to a local acquaintance you aren’t worrying about nickels and dimes because you have a cellar big enough that Acker comps your fees
That all depends how much you’re selling
Well, there were bottles listed here for 2500 that didn’t sell and went to auction, so obviously buyers disagree with you.
1 Like
You chose a good example to prove your premise… DRC RSV is the most challenging wine of the lineup with secondary market pricing rarely rising above a modest mark-up on wholesale. Also your 3300 wine-searcher number is incorrect. It’s $2895. Either way, I stand by my middle ground suggestion. Mutually beneficial pricing is a win all around.
I don’t think you’re going to be able to sell any commonly traded wine for much over auction. There are some wines where you obviously will, but a lot just depends on rarity. There’s a sea of DRC in the market. Rare wines like Bizot will probably fetch much higher prices both here and at auction.
Don’t disagree overall, but think there is greater flexibility on where the price lands on the auction continuum. But I am certain nobody wants to read us go back and forth any more, so cheers!
I’ve done a lot of comparative shopping in Denver (NYC or SF is probably very different), and using WS-Low as a baseline after factoring in taxes and shipping the high-quality local shops are averaging 30% higher in cost and big box local shops are 15% higher in cost. Some of the high-quality local shops can get especially egregious, starting at 50% average higher pricing.
Auction, in my experience at the roughly $30-$125 price point, typically seems to match up with WS Low less the auction fee.