CellarTracker and Wine Spectator Integration Conversation

So, other than financial considerations, I've always wondered why WS and CT haven't joined forces. Crazy

Despite a few attempts (epic fails) to create a cellar management application within their internal framework, WS has failed to gain any appreciable following for their cellar database management application.

CT has what is, by most arguments, the best cellar management software (freeware for those who are not inclined to contribute) extant.

What do you think? Eric, no reply expected.... Devilish

PH
Original Post
WS obviously has no problem charging twice for the same content like they do with their app, so why no do a $20 or $25 yearly charge to link to CT? It lets them squeeze a little more money out of their customers and the customers get the content they want where they want it.
I know most here would not see it this way but technically, at least in my book, Wine Spectator and CellarTracker are competitors in the tasting notes and cellar management arenas. Would you invite your competitor to work out of your facilities?

Let us not forget it could also be considered a violation of the TOS of the W.S. Forum.

My personal opinion? Love Eric and his product to death and wish they would integrate in some fashion but I'm definitely not holding my breath.
Would love to see the merge, but ....

WS does get their ratings out for the wines in the maga zine quite fast for the new Iphone link. eric would have to import them, but as WS owns the data, Eric would need to pay for it.

I have no problem using two systems now [three as I pay WS TWICE!!].
quote:
Originally posted by wineismylife:
I know most here would not see it this way but technically, at least in my book, Wine Spectator and CellarTracker are competitors in the tasting notes and cellar management arenas. Would you invite your competitor to work out of your facilities?


Joe, I get the competition thing. Eric's posts on the boards have never been commercial in nature that I've seen. Typically he's responding to requests for help with his product.

If WS had a comparable alternative for cellar management I'd understand their reluctance just a little bit more, but they haven't offered a viable option. Their best strategy would be to create a superior cellar management program and let Eric post to his heart's content.

It's WS's playground, and they make the rules. For them to forbid a well respected member of the boards from participating in discussions related to a product that many of use use and like comes off as a bit arrogant and heavy handed to me.

PH
The whole thing is nonsensical.

Sure, I come here for the social reasons and to learn some things. The more WS behaves like Apple the less likely I am to buy anything from them. Next thing they'll be suing someone over the use of the word "wine", claiming they have a patent on it.
PH - you'd have to ask Eric but it doesn't seem like there's any ill will towards him on the part of WS. He posts here. But as Joe said, to a large degree, they're competitors. If Eric ONLY had a cellar management tool, that's one thing, but he has a forum and links to the tasting notes of competitors and right now, I believe that WS is the wine mag with the largest circulation of any, so it makes perfect sense for them not to link, any more than Forbes would want to link directly to Business Week.

W/out knowing the readership, my guess is that Tanzer, Purple Pages, etc., are far smaller than WS.

It's not that there's anything wrong with any of the decisions and they're not that outlandish as far as I can see.

WS has figured out how to monetize their readership and in the end, they'll probably be one of the surviving mags - I don't know that all the others are as business-like. As someone pointed out, that's what allows them to host this site w/out directly charging for its use.
quote:
Originally posted by GregT:
PH - you'd have to ask Eric but it doesn't seem like there's any ill will towards him on the part of WS.

Agree, don't think it's ill will. If I recall correctly, WS and Eric had talked briefly about integration but nothing ever became of it. I'd love to know what happened during those discussions.

....to a large degree, they're competitors. If Eric ONLY had a cellar management tool, that's one thing, but he has a forum and links to the tasting notes of competitors....

I'm pretty sure that if you want access to professional notes from WS's major competitors when you're in CT that you have to be a paying member of those establishments' websites to gain full access. I see nothing wrong with Wine Spectator limiting access to their professional reviews to paying subscribers, just as they corrently are doing. The amateur notes available in the WS forums are available for free anyway.

As someone pointed out, that's what allows them to host this site w/out directly charging for its use.

I've limited most of my online wine forum participation to this one, but when dabbling in other boards over the years, I don't recall any that charged for basic access to forums. Are any other forums charging for basic access?



PH
I agree with what GregT posted.

I would also submit WS has been very magnanimous allowing the CT post here as they work out their new formats, name changes and other bullshit over the years.

If one is looking for a cellar management tool, CT is the market leader. I'm not looking for a cellar management tool, so CT is useless and has zero value to me, therefor I hope there are no changes in WS stance.
I wouldn't mind seeing it linked so that WS notes show up on CT. I use CT a lot but when I want a tasting note to get a feel for where a wine might be this is the place I check first. Really don't want to check through hundreds of tasting notes and come away with "Mmmmm. Yummy. 94 points" or "Outstanding! Love this wine! 88 pts", although lots of them are pretty amusing.

Happy to use one for cellar managment and one more heavily for notes.
quote:
Originally posted by GregT:
PH - you'd have to ask Eric but it doesn't seem like there's any ill will towards him on the part of WS. He posts here. But as Joe said, to a large degree, they're competitors. If Eric ONLY had a cellar management tool, that's one thing, but he has a forum and links to the tasting notes of competitors and right now, I believe that WS is the wine mag with the largest circulation of any, so it makes perfect sense for them not to link, any more than Forbes would want to link directly to Business Week.



Im not sure of this is really an apples to apples comparision. I would certainly have no expectation for WS to link directly to WA or any other wine magazine. However, if there is a platform where a large number of serious wine drinkers are and there are options to link to professional tasting notes I would want my notes as an option, even if its a for pay option.

Im suprised WS hasnt figured out how to monetize a relationship with CT yet.
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
I would also summit WS has been very magnanimous allowing the CT post here as they work out their new formats, name changes and other bullshit over the years.
Yikes. Extra bitter starbucks this morning? Razz

I get you don’t find the need or value in CT, but that seems a bit harsh no?
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
I would also summit WS has been very magnanimous allowing the CT post here as they work out their new formats, name changes and other bullshit over the years.
Yikes. Extra bitter starbucks this morning? Razz

I get you don’t find the need or value in CT, but that seems a bit harsh no?


Why?

Post CT questions, likes, bitches et al on the CT forum.

I would not go to CT to post about the WS.
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
If one is looking for a cellar management tool, CT is the market leader. I'm not looking for a cellar management tool, so CT is useless and has zero value to me, therefor I hope there are no changes in WS stance.


I don't completely agree with this, W+A. I don't use CT for cellar management but I think it's a great repository for my tasting notes. If I ever wonder whether I've tasted a particular wine I can easily look it up. I also appreciate being able to look up tasting notes of other reviewers I trust. It helps a lot when I'm considering buying a wine or assessing whether it's ready to drink.
quote:
Originally posted by Wine Canuck:
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
If one is looking for a cellar management tool, CT is the market leader. I'm not looking for a cellar management tool, so CT is useless and has zero value to me, therefor I hope there are no changes in WS stance.


I don't completely agree with this, W+A. I don't use CT for cellar management but I think it's a great repository for my tasting notes. If I ever wonder whether I've tasted a particular wine I can easily look it up. I also appreciate being able to look up tasting notes of other reviewers I trust. It helps a lot when I'm considering buying a wine or assessing whether it's ready to drink.


You do not agree I find it has zero value to me...sorry but I'm confident in my opinion, it has zero value to me. Razz Wink

If I want to know what Molesworth, Parker or any other professional thinks about a wine, I google Parker+ 1990 Las Cases, and there is Sir Robert's comments.

I care as little as anyone here about points. They just do not mean much to me. What a critic said about a wine 10 - 20 years ago means what today... or a critic saying this wine will be a 99 in 25 years from today means what? This said, if I do care I look it up. If I want to know what GlennK thinks about 1989 Guigal LaLa, I search this here and there it is.

I do appreciate professional wine reports on regions, new trends, winemaker changes etc., but again I'm one search away from that information.

Sorry you do not agree. Big Grin
I hope the ws editors dont respond to any kind of opinion-terrorism, such as some user who starts a campaign about why ws doesn't publish an article on some theme he dictates, eg. premox, such as if the rest of the world considered it to be the most important theme on earth, or others that give advice on how ws should interact with some tool they personally like, such as if it was god-given that everyone uses that tool.
Folks, please, I don't think this productive.

This is the WS's board. They have every right to give me, a producer of a commercial product, feedback on how I can and cannot participate here. Support for my product should be handled in my support forum.

I would love to collaborate with them someday, and maybe there will be an opportunity in the future. In the short term though, collaborating means respecting their perfectly reasonable wishes. For those that would like to see future collaboration, I think the more you whip a thread like this the less likely it ever is for anything to happen.

Again, my interactions with Marvin Shanken and Thomas Matthews have never been anything but professional and respectful. Please let's not push this any more.
In deference to EL's request, I'll make this my last post in this thread.....but:

The horse ain't dead. The issue remains valid and unresolved. I'd guess most of the people offering an opinion in this conversation contribute financially both to WS and CT. Our opinions should matter.

I have NO idea what the term "opinion-terrorism" means. I find the use of the word "terrorism," in this context to be distasteful and inappropriate. If you have a problem with a lively conversation regarding issues that are of interest to those who participate then please, feel free to opt out. Labelling it as any form of terrorism is just ridiculous.

PH
Well, Eric has his business to run and WS has theirs and I'm completely cool with the decisions of both of them. Eric said they've spoken so I'm sure they have, and I have no reason to doubt that the conversations were completely professional and cordial.

In the end, there's no reason to imagine one site should link to any other site, other than the fact that a particular user would like that.

But PH -

quote:
I don't recall any that charged for basic access to forums. Are any other forums charging for basic access?


Don't Bob and Jancis?
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
In deference to EL's request, I'll make this my last post in this thread.....but:

The horse ain't dead. The issue remains valid and unresolved. I'd guess most of the people offering an opinion in this conversation contribute financially both to WS and CT. Our opinions should matter.

I have NO idea what the term "opinion-terrorism" means. I find the use of the word "terrorism," in this context to be distasteful and inappropriate. If you have a problem with a lively conversation regarding issues that are of interest to those who participate then please, feel free to opt out. Labelling it as any form of terrorism is just ridiculous.

PH


Maybe i'm the only person who thinks that the discussion is rather agressive, which is different from lively.
Opinion-terrorism is asking questions like: "Why doesn't WS do what I want"?
Such way of asking questions leads to exactly the kind of agressive discussion in this thread.
quote:
Originally posted by GregT:
Don't Bob and Jancis?


I just found out about Squires. I used to visit ebob for free some time back until I lost interest in the pomposity. I do recall Jancis' site being inaccessible without payment.

Guess I failed in opting out of this thread... Bang

ML.... I still find your choice of words unfortunate.

Now, I'm really out.

PH

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×