the perils of sharing allocations

[Ron_Slye]

SQN and Cayuse are both available on the shelf locally so I think the list pressure varies depending on where you live.

I am assuming there is a bit of a mark up on both. Part of the list issue is getting the wine direct from the winery (i.e. provenance) and then the price. There are some wineries where secondary price is the same – and sometimes even less than – release price. My sense is that is not the case with either Cayuse or SQN.

[Charlie_Carnes]

Mark, you’re in Dayton, maybe you could Bob Pollard and the boys to share some with you.

But seriously, just buy less, if you get kicked, as others have said, more opportunities will arise.

[Brian_Tuite]

perhaps a dumb question, but why not just buy the quantity you want from those wineries?

^^ This ^^

@alan weinberg

gee, you might have to step aside and let someone who wants the wine buy it.

^^ This too ^^

[Chris_T]

Thoughts and prayers for the Dayton folks this morning.

I would do partial allocation, but if for some reason you don’t want to do that than do local pickup sharing. Worst case scenario sell on winebid to recoup the overpurchase

[B_Thorne]

Anyone who has allocations they’d like to share / pass on I’d be interested in taking/splitting it with you. Just let me know what you’ve got

[Ian_S]

3 pack minimums seem to be the norm now. If you only want a bottle or two, you have to divvy up with somebody else. Most of the desirable wines cost well above winery release prices, so it would be counterproductive to buy a single bottle aftermarket. If the winery catches you flipping just so you can afford to drink that product, then you get booted. Strange game, this allocated bottle thing is.

[PaulMills]

I too have dropped a lot of lists I used to buy from because I felt I was held hostage. Now I buy what I want and if there is a three pack (of one wine) minimum I skip it. My allocations have not been hurt on the lists I stayed on.

[markjchambers]

Thanks for all of the responses. I will likely do what most people suggest and just buy less. For the “black hat” posters, I am being selfish because I did put in my time. In most cases I waited many years to get on these lists and the idea of just letting them go is not appealing. But the idea of getting old isn’t appealing either. Thanks to the local posters, also. I could do a better job of networking locally - maybe using resources like the local AMWS chapter.

[PaulMills]

Lookong back at this post, I should have thought it was about losing your allocation for sharing it with the great unwashed. I do not see much of a peril in your case.

[Peter_Valiquette]

SQN and Cayuse are both available on the shelf locally so I think the list pressure varies depending on where you live.

I am assuming there is a bit of a mark up on both. Part of the list issue is getting the wine direct from the winery (i.e. provenance) and then the price. There are some wineries where secondary price is the same – and sometimes even less than – release price. My sense is that is not the case with either Cayuse or SQN.

I’m sure there is, but I don’t know how much since i’m not on either list. Retail Cayuse was around $130 and SQN was around $215.

[markjchambers]

Actually I think I was asking about the perils of shipping wine privately, but that was part of a larger question. I have no fear of sharing an allocation if I can do it locally. I don’t believe it is ethical to resell at a profit.Strictly speaking even sharing at my cost is probably illegal, but I don’t think anyone cares if people do it on a small scale.

If I shared with a friend, say in Vermont, I would worry about shipping. I don’t think I could tell a winery to ship half my order to Dayton and half to Burlington, so I would be the one sending the wine on to Vermont. There was a time when wineries I bought from wouldn’t ship to Ohio. There are several that I would like to buy from that still can’t or don’t, like K Vintners. I used to circumvent this by shipping the order to a friend in a wine friendly state, like Colorado, and asking my friend to ship it on to Ohio. He did it for a while, but then he got cold feet. He said he didn’t want to break the law and said I was taking a big risk. My shipment could be lost,
damaged or even confiscated and I would have no recourse.

So I guess I was wondering what other people do. Am I worried over nothing or am I being reckless.

[John_Z]

I’d agree with you Mark. I had considered trading/selling some of my bourbon but, wouldn’t feel comfortable shipping it out for the exact reasons you stated above. Keeping it local to the Cincy/Dayton area is about all I’d be up for. I guess it could be different if you have a very good relationship with the person your shipping out to.

[AndrewH]

Yes, like many here I have cut back on some lists recently. I used to get 60 plus bottles of Cayuse a year. Now I have scaled back a lot - not because I dont like their wines, but I was realizing that my cellar was getting close to 1/3 Cayuse. I love lots of other types of wines – French, Italian, German, South African. So now I spread my budget around a bit more – plus I have lots of Cayuse aging for future drinking, and still buy some of my favorites from them each year, Like you I have shared locally – that is easier than dealing with the risk of shipping. My sense is there is strong hesitation to scale back, but as many attest here, if you do, things work out pretty well!

Yep - similar issue with me for another winery. I’ve pared back significantly my list purchases from them, but I still have loads to enjoy from back vintages. I think I’m over the discomfort I felt when I started that strategy . . .

[Scott_G_r_u_n_e_r]

Of the lists you mention, Alban is the only one who is a hostage mailer.

In a sense you can call SQN eba release a hostage as it is essentially a six bottle bundle, and if you don’t buy you won’t get offered the next year.

Cayuse similar but in 3 packs.

You might contact HDH or similar retailers that do auctions/consignments- they will often arrange legal shipping, but in a consignment/auction setting plus fees there is no guarantee you even break even depending on the market and wine.

Most of the wine shipping I have done has been carefully repackaged to avoid the appearance of wine. Agree it is not a great option for more than a couple of bottles here and there.

[Gray_G]

Of the lists you mention, Alban is the only one who is a hostage mailer. You don’t really need to be on Alban to buy their wines at around release (unless one gets a big 100, but post Parker that’s even questionable). The other lists will let you buy what you want without punishment.

Robert

please define “hostage mailer” in regards to lists

being a good client is usually helpful in most business situations

thanks

[Nate_Simon]

Easy: don’t buy highly allocated wines.
Thank me later.

[Robert_M_yers]

Of the lists you mention, Alban is the only one who is a hostage mailer. You don’t really need to be on Alban to buy their wines at around release (unless one gets a big 100, but post Parker that’s even questionable). The other lists will let you buy what you want without punishment.

Robert

please define “hostage mailer” in regards to lists

being a good client is usually helpful in most business situations

thanks

I was thinking that Alban made you buy a package of wines rather than pick or choose just what you want. Thinking it over I’m not sure that was or is true though. It’s been 15 years since I’ve been on the their mailer. Apologies if I had that wrong.

[markjchambers]

To me hostage mailer is “buy everything you are offered or future allocations will be cut.” The most severe instance is where they throw you off completely. Rochioli is the only one that ever did that to me. If you truly want less, maybe having your allocation cut is a good thing - if they don’t take it to zero. Not a problem if the list is not hugely competitive. I got thrown off Alban 8 years ago and got back on pretty easily two years ago. But, if there is a 10-year wait to get on the list (like SQN) you hate to do anything to jeopardize your position.

[Victor_Hong]

To me hostage mailer is “buy everything you are offered or future allocations will be cut.” The most severe instance is where they throw you off completely. Rochioli is the only one that ever did that to me. If you truly want less, maybe having your allocation cut is a good thing - if they don’t take it to zero. Not a problem if the list is not hugely competitive. I got thrown off Alban 8 years ago and got back on pretty easily two years ago. But, if there is a 10-year wait to get on the list (like SQN) you hate to do anything to jeopardize your position.

Denying flexibility to your paying customers seems the height of both insecurity and arrogance.

[Gray_G]

To me hostage mailer is “buy everything you are offered or future allocations will be cut.” The most severe instance is where they throw you off completely. Rochioli is the only one that ever did that to me. If you truly want less, maybe having your allocation cut is a good thing - if they don’t take it to zero. Not a problem if the list is not hugely competitive. I got thrown off Alban 8 years ago and got back on pretty easily two years ago. But, if there is a 10-year wait to get on the list (like SQN) you hate to do anything to jeopardize your position.

I think of a hostage mailer or anything in business as buying the stuff offered while dangling the carrot of the wines you are not getting yet but want.

The ones you want, and may get in the future, or may be offered in the future if you buy the hostage wine, thus paying the ransom.

Paying the ransom is fatiguing to any customer


blah blah blah