Nearly all wineries, regardless of size, are pushing for greater DTC sales
SBC is not home to many mega wineries that do the majority of their sales through distribution
Rising tide concept here - all wineries will benefit with extra marketing exposure
Since I’m the worst spokesperson for the SBC wine community according to a previous poster, disregard all that I have to say and please listen to what this person has to say - seeing they are so involved with our entire region and have been very active in trying to elevate our entire region
Welcome back. You are the most sensible spokesperson for the Vintners. You listen and try to have an intelligent discussion.
Some points that need to be addressed.
If a BID is the greatest thing to hit the wine industry since the cork and glass bottle, why do you have to force folks to be members and support it? Why not let the knuckle draggers go their own way?
As you are aware a number of SBC small wineries do not have statewide distribution let alone national? How do they benefit from marketing outside Southern California?
The voting for the BID is a weighted vote, so the dozen or so large wineries determine the outcome. BIDS would have a lot more credibility if the vote was one winery one vote. The counter argument is the large wineries will contribute more which is correct, but it’s not their money-it is the wine consumer who is paying the bill.
Hey my friend - I’ve always been here Just waiting to get back on here without personal attacks from others - whether or not their posts were edited or not.
As you know, I am NOT on the Board but I am supportive of these efforts.
And yes., I do listen and try to have an open mind to all septic in life as possible. I just wish others did as well.
As far as why everyone ‘needs’ to be a part of this, why not? Shouldn’t this be ‘all for one and one for all’? If opposers don’t like the way the money is spent, they have an equal opportunity to join the Board and make changes from the inside. But you know what? So many SAID they wanted to be on the board, but when it was time to step up, most took a step back and didn’t want to make the effort . . .
Yep, some wineries do have distribution throughout CA and outside of the state, but the bottom line is that most of Southern CA does not even know that SBC IS wine country. I know that sounds crazy, but it’s true . . .
All BID votes are weighted in the same manner - regardless of whether it’s the wine biz or hotels or . . .
Let’s keep the constructive conversation going, without any name-calling.
Does it benefit me and my brand being out here talking about this? Probably not but I am who I am..
Here’s the question - where do you, for the winemakers and owners out there, make wine? Are you part of a community or not?
Many ‘complain’ about folks not looking out for their best interests - but don’t want to make the effort to fight for what they want and believe.
Every winery in a region has the opportunity to be a part of that community . . . And every winery within a region CAN benefit from comprehensive marketing as the entire region becomes more well known….
And that - again - is the problem. An assessment that generally benefits a region is an unconstitutional tax. The tax was subject to voter approval but that did not happen. A BID assessment is required to be levied in relation to the specific benefit delivered directly to a business in the district. There are supposed to be different levels of benefit. And businesses in Agricultural zoning are exempt from assessment.
You dont have to make wine to have an opinion on a bunch of businesses circumventing the process for levying a tax so they can squeeze out a few bucks from other businesses that disagree with them.
The worst thing about all of this is its going to be sold as a win regardless. Sales go up? Its because of the BID. Sales plateau or go down? Thank god the BID is keeping SB competitive, it could be worse.
When do you expect a report on the success of the Santa Barbara Wine BID? Are you happy with the efforts that have been funded thus far? Temecula seems to issue reports and post online what’s happening on a close to monthly basis.
Good question - not sure if Temecula started posting their info immediately at the onset of their BID starting or later. And as you know, I’m not on the Board and am not privy to all of the info.
They have shared some social media info thus far and have increased the amount of coverage the area is receiving in all kinds of publications, but we are stil in early days . . .
An interesting article - any idea of who wrote it? I’ve only recently noticed this website popping up - they did share the info on Flying Goat this past week.
It’s still early days - and with 4 wineries closing in the region - and sales declining in general - it’s really challenging to compare apples to apples here . . .
Hi Larry. The “all for one and one for all” ignores human nature, experience and history. In organizations where you have several large contributors and a lot of small contributors the staff naturally caters to the desires of the large contributors. To do otherwise is to commit financial suicide. That is why in California you have the Wine Institute and the Family Winemakers. This is not unusual to the wine industry. In my other life I did a lot of work with Chambers of Commerce and trade organizations that represented industries like horse racing, hotels, restaurants, private clubs, airlines, textile producers, injection molders etc. They were all dominated by the large contributors.
You are correct in trade organizations the board becomes dominated by the large contributors. This isn’t because the small contributors aren’t interested, it is because they don’t have the time. The large contributors have staff and can afford to dedicate the personnel to make sure their interests and desires are represented. In the wine industry harvest and winemaking is a 16 hours a day seven days a weeks for several months. For small producers it is the principals who are so occupied. The large producers have staff. As you are well aware, if one has a family that takes all the left over time during those four + months.
In our industry the interests and desires of the Vintners do not coincide with those of the smaller AVAs. I was one of the original founders of the Sta Hills Wine Alliance. We were all members of the Vintners and several had been among the founders of the Vintners and served as board members and officers. Why did we go through the time, effort and cost of creating the SRWA instead of working through the Vintners? We all knew the reasons and no one ever suggested working through the Vintners.
Finally, you have not addressed the legal argument-the First Amendment protects from government interference and coercion the fundamental right of the freedom of association which includes the right not to associate.
The First Amendment arguments are the reason for the Goldwater Institute interest in the SBC wine BID, basically that the government is compelling wineries to fund the organization (they also make an argument based on the takings clause in the Fifth).
You are the most sensible spokesperson for the Vintners. You listen and try to have an intelligent discussion. 
Just waiting to get back on here without personal attacks from others - whether or not their posts were edited or not.
