Mailing lists: guaranteed allocations versus first-come first-served

In light of the, “Ouch!” thread and a few of us complaining about the sudden barrage of mailing list offers and the resulting pain in our collective wallets, I started thinking about the two distinctly different strategies when it comes to mailing lists. Wineries like Cayuse guarantee one’s allocation for a period of time before it’s open to wish lists, etc. Others, it would appear, are always on a first-come, first-served basis. The latter, if you’re not damn quick for some of them, result in missing out on a wine completely.

What drives a winery to do one versus the other? Is one model easier to manage than the other? I personally prefer (as would most, I’d imagine) the guaranteed allocation approach. Then again, many of these appear to require minimum purchases which really irks me.

Without question, allocating various wines among multiple people, each with different buying patterns and histories is way easier. No, wait a sec…

I personally have no problem with the minimum purchase but have a big problem with not guaranteeing an allocation. Have been a long term buyer of Myriad but just got shut out simply because I was not checking that email account yesterday. Why they can’t guarantee the allocation (even for 48 hours) is beyond me. Most wineries would appreciate the support in good and bad years but they can’t hold an allocation for 48 hours to accommodate the buyers busy schedule?

I guess you saw the SOLD OUT email.

Did you miss the Quivet also?

I believe in set allocations to the point that I would be happy to buy ‘subscriptions’ to my favorite lists where I guarantee I will buy my allocation, as well. (I do that with Alpha Omega and like knowing I will simply receive my wines each year.) I guess it’s like being in a winery’s wine club, only we are doing it at a slightly higher end.

I hate this rock concert ticket sale style of first come first served. After demonstrating my loyalty over time, I would like to think I warrant a guaranteed allocation. It seems to me that first come first served is a good way to lose a list member who just got aced out because he/she happened to be offline/working/whatever on a given release day.

There is a music festival I like that sells out quickly for the level of ticket I prefer. This year, acknowledging our yearly support, we were given a guaranteed ticket if we purchased in advance and didn’t have to sweat the crunch. It was lovely, no rush, no stress.

I like wineries that give me a window for my guaranteed allocation, it is greatly appreciated!

Hope that wasn’t overly iconoclastic.

Try Alban sometime. You get this “flash” email unannounced that says buy now or else.

Yikes!

On the plus side, if I missed a year it would save me in the long run because I would be highly likely to drop the winery.

I’m assuming that u are screwing with me on Quivet? Have not seen a recent offer.

I wonder what Jay Hack will have to say about this sort of thing.

I dropped them last year.

If I’m a winery, that is killer marketing research you just provided.

Sorry, no winery is worth the effort if they don’t hold allocations for a certain period. Other than Juge, I really cannot think of another wine where I would jump through hoops just for a chance to buy. For just about every wine, there are multiple quality alternatives. And many you can get in the grey market anyway. I’d dump them like a hot potato.

I am so looking forward to the day when Charlie admits that Juge always sucked and this was all just a social experiment.

Ha. I knew Juge before Fu was born.

And for all that seek it, it sucks. For those of us with Yak palates. Or Hipsters seeking trophy wines.

I think one of the advantages of the allocation method from the wineries point of view is that there is an incentive to buy every year in order to buy the next year. And if you don’t buy one year or get some special exception from the winery, then your allocation goes to someone on a wait list. Cayuse and its siblings can afford to do this as they have large wait lists. So in response to the argument that allocations may lead to lower sales, I am not sure that is the experience of wineries like Cayuse that have long wait lists. So they don’t have that downside, and they have the upside of cultivating loyal customers who buy each year.

I used to worry about missing out but now i just think about the other things I can use that money for, whether it be more wine or a new bike. While it does show that you appreciate your loyal customers who have been with you for years, it might also give the opportunity for new customers to give it a try without waiting ten years to get on the list. How many people have said they have moved on after waiting years to get on Cayuse or Saxum? What if they had the opportunity to get on it earlier by FCFS?

Your favorite retailer called and offered me your Rougeard allocation

First come first serve creates urgency. Most wineries don’t sell out immediately. If you are not positive your release will sell out why would you want to prolong the initial wave of sales? You are normally selling the wine to be be able pay your expenses incurred and get in the black. You want to creat urgency so people buy your product instead of someone elses since everyone releases in the same couple three week span.

Cayuse and Saxum have wait lists, they know they are going to sell out regardless.

What effort is there if you don’t have to act? Myriad released yesterday, I didn’t put out any effort and it sold out before I could buy any. Oh f*cking well. Next time I’ll either prioritize or risk missing it again.

this is an interesting marketing question. I suspect that the greater confidence you have in mailing list customers allows for a lock in period. I think it is more a symptom of mailing list anxiety to allow for FCFS. Perhaps the idea is that you will order the other wines if you get shut out on the higher scoring wine?

Turley has always been good to me for holding large allocations for a couple of weeks. I act as a pool buyer for a couple of other guys and we split the order (I usually get allocated about 4 cases…yikes…I can’t drink that much Zin every 6 months). They also do not have a hostage system, although I suspect I get offered the smaller production wines due to a long and heavy buying history.

Remember the old days of hostage ordering Kistler Chardonnays for a couple of bottles of Pinot? That was the final straw for me and I quit ordering the wines in part due to this system. Possibly also due to the change in my palate, as those popcorn Chard bombs got pretty boring after awhile.

Is there a correlation between higher demand/fixed time allocations and lower demand/FCFS wines? I believe so but cannot prove it one way or another. I am also detecting a trend of more active marketing of high cost cali cabs that may be failing to reach a market, despite limited production. I wonder how many $250- $300++ designer cabernets can exist in the market before there is a saturation point.