Problem with that TP is that the bloody beauracrats would drink the stuff before it got sold. Probably use the Screaming Eagle as a paper weight cause its got a nice label. Mind you can you see parliament (it's congress in the US isn't it?) with all of the representatives drunk. They'd probably get more done.

Problem with that TP is that the bloody beauracrats would drink the stuff before it got sold. Probably use the Screaming Eagle as a paper weight cause its got a nice label. Mind you can you see parliament (it's congress in the US isn't it?) with all of the representatives drunk. They'd probably get more done.

Edit: Bloody double posts.

[ 09-04-2002, 09:25 PM: Message edited by: Jeremy ]

GATC: Wait until the economy goes UP. The buyers will be back...for a good vintage that is.

There will always be buyers for collectibles. Dotcomers...or NOT. And, Wine is 1 that appreciates more than most.

The margin of profit is what offends people. A reasonable profit is in accord with good business practice and all, but a mark-up in the hundreds of percents is too much.

I would second GMTinJapan.
It's the old "legally right v. morally right" issue. People in general are opposed to those who try to corner the market on any items.
Have you ever been to a local car or antique auction hoping to come home with a deal, only to be outbid by some dealer who scoops up everything in sight? It's frustrating!

Frustrating? Yes. Immoral? No.

Somewhere there's a line between "what the market will bear" and "gouging," which is where the ethics and morals seem to come into play. But I can't see a bright line differentiating the two. An offensively high price to one person may be chump change to another. And it's wine, not an essential for life (can I get banned for saying that?), like electricity or running water.

While mailing lists are not a free and open market, neither are they monopolistic. No ten of us could corner the market on any of the cults simply by taking our full allocations.

Well, Mr.Jones and I have at least a case apiece of Melville's Carries' Block, and there are supposed to have been only 25 cases made, so it is quite possible to corner the market.

I don't think there's a thing wrong with it. To quote Austin Powers "Yea, Capitalism"

Personally, I prefer to drink the wine I buy but plenty of folks have been know to make substanial profit from the wine trade. To each his own, I suppose.

[ 09-05-2002, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: m-driver ]

Fair enough, GMT, but I still hold that cornering the market is close to impossible for the vast majority of mailing list wines. Is 4%(1 case out of 25 produced) cornering the market? Might be, if there's enough demand and that's the only stuff in circulation. Not that that would change my opinion re: the ethics of the situation. So how much do you want for that Carries Block?

GMT, I bought a case of the Carre's Block as well. I bought the futures based on Jones' post and it was strongly endorsed by the person at the Wine Cask as well as the people at the winery. I'm very glad I got it, but the 25 cases is the allocation that the Wine Cask got for their futures program. I believe that the total production was something like 325 cases, still a small quantity.

I have been selling a small portion of my Turley allocation (not sure if this will continue; seems the market isn't what it used to be).

From my point of view, the reason the wineries sell to a mailing list is FOR THEIR PROFIT. They cut out a wholesaler and a retailer, so they're getting MANY TIMES the profit vs. selling through normal distribution.

Yes, they are still pricing their wines too low if I can resell it for twice that. And I have actually suggested to them, against my own economic best interest, that they raise their prices. Why? So I could get more of what I like best.

Is it immoral for me to profit from what is essentially a scarce resource? Well, I sell my (scarce) talent to my employer for more than the average American salary. Yet I can't live on Fifth Ave (my talent isn't that valuable). That's capitalism.

In fact, having a secondary market for scarce wines does assure us of one thing-- that those NOT on the mailing list who really want to try a wine GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. They just pay more. Without the resales, I'd drink my whole allocation and at least a dozen people (so far in my own experience) would not have been able to taste a wine they've been reading about.

Jeremy, many of our legislators here in the U.S. are drunk a good portion of the time. Even in thier inibriated state, they still cannot make effective or decisive laws and piss away our tax money on ridiculous crap.

GATC: You ruined my day.......I knew it was too good to be true......

Tannin Pig: I will be happy to share.

Psycho-Rotie: If they were mashed on wine, it'd be OK, but they use "other things".

LCC, the value of collectables changes with time, but the one thing I noticed is that once something gets really hot and then the value falls, it never quite recovers to that same point. I'm not sure why, but it has to do more psychology than economics. Even if the economy recovers, I doubt that the margin that flippers made in the past will ever repeat.

I remember when the Japanese went crazy over Bordeaux's in the late 70's and early 80's when they had a lot of disposable income. The prices skyrocketed. Then it dropped so low that Bordeaux's were an excellent value in the late 80's and early 90's. They have recovered somewhat, but based on today's dollars, they are still below what they were in the early 70's before the prices skyrocketed and are still good values today.

As excellent wines start coming from places that did not produce excellent wines in the past, I can see CA cabs prices continue to drop for many many years as wise consumers refuse to pay. Even with the hyped up 2001 vintage, there are, and will be a lot of 98's, 99's and 00's on the shelves to keep prices at the current elevated levels.

Sorry, GMT. Still a very good wine for a very good price. I gladly bought it even after I talked to the winery to find out the real scoop. They anticipate an early sellout when it becomes available around December.

GATC: You make a good point. Time will tell.

It is an interesting point and one wonders where the ethics vs profit line is drawn. The only time I have priced over the top was a couple of years ago. I received 3 cases of Petrus 1990 from a friend in Paris. I marked it up considerably but it still sold by the end of the week !!!I've never done it since.
Psyco-rotie, it seems to be a world wide phenomenon. Polticians everywhere seem a little "distant" a little "lost" and a little out of touch. Much like drinking too much good wine.

[ 09-06-2002, 01:48 AM: Message edited by: Jeremy ]

I hope I didn't trigger this with my misintroduction of the word ethics in another thread, but the right line seems to have resolved all by itself: sincere wine lovers should have access to fine wine and speculators should buy land or gold or some other stuff... right?

Friends,

If a winery has a waiting list to get on their mailing list and they sell their wine almost 100% to the list and restaurants then I think selling it is not right.

I am on a waiting list for Bryant, I wish that all of the folks who sell their allocation would move along. All they are doing is making a profit because they got lucky enough to get on a mailing list early. I would enjoy each bottle with family and friends and I think that is how the winery would like it.

After than sell away. If a wine goes through the distribution channel or can be found at retail the gloves are off.

Eat, drink and be merry,
Russell

What about the family and friends of those who AREN'T on the list? Don't they deserve the chance to enjoy the wine??

"Lucky enough" to get on the Bryant Family mailing list before you or was it skill? It makes no difference where a wine is obtained (so long as it is not stolen). Whoever owns the wine can do with it what they will. Whether you will somehow "appreciate" drinking it more than the "lucky" guy who just stumbled on to the mailing list ahead of you is immaterial. Frankly, your entire assertion sounds like nothing more than rationalized jealousy.

So you're on the waiting list for Bryant and you wish those who don't want the wine would move along and get off the list?

Well, what about those who want 3/4 of their allocation?

And consider this-- you may be wayyyy down the list, so if one guy is selling and he drops off (per your suggestion) you still can't get the wine. But if he stays on and sells, you can buy it from him. At least you'd get the chance to taste it before committing to buying from the winery when you do get on the list.

The real gripe should probably be with the winery-- by selling below 'market' price, they're creating an artificial shortage, allowing others to resell for profit.

I tend to agree with Bacchus. Most people on these lists are going to sell a portion of their allocations, in this way reaching all the usual channels and becoming available to those not on the list.

Yet I still have a problem with the pure speculator. Sure it’s legal and their right to do what they want with the wine they bought, and yes I’m sure there’s some jealousy involved, but that doesn’t mean that I have to think it’s right.
As someone who loves wine I am offended by those who don’t, that take advantage of a system that was meant to benefit those that do.

If that’s wrong then fine, I’m wrong.

Bacchus,

What you're saying is, if it's a wine that's hard to get, & you want it, then other people who jumped on the list first and choose to resell it should let you buy it first as you're a winelover.

But to be fair, you add, if it's a wine that is readily available you don't care if people profit as you can easily obtain the wine.

How self serving can you get? Wine is not different from any other commodity, except that it tastes better.

People who resell wine do the market a favor. To continue using Bryant as an example. Bryant only makes so much wine. Their current vineyard can only produce x amount of cases. If everyone on the list kept and drank their wine, and remained on the list, you, or anyone else would never have the opportunity to obtain Bryant. By reselling wine, they are giving people a chance to obtain something they otherwise could not get. I'm sorry it's expensive. But the price is not determined by the seller, it's determined by the buyer.