Is it right for Antonio Galloni to give early access to scores to those who pay $2000/month?

Is it right for Antonio Galloni to give early access to scores to those who pay $2000/month?

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

Is it right for Antonio Galloni to give early access to scores to those who pay $2000/month?

I’m voting no with the caveat that it’s his business and he can do what he wants with it just like it’s my money and I can spend it where I want.

2 Likes

No! I will never subscribe to another critic. They all have cash flowing in some way whether it is this crap, adds or some industry event!

Who are the six that voted yes???

Antonio stop voting on the poll

1 Like

You serious? “Is it right” as opposed to what? “Morally wrong”? :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

Gotta love this board flirtysmile

Right or wrong implies we get to decide how he runs his business. Vote with your wallet, not with a poll of aggrieved wine geeks.

Absolutely. If people are wanting to pay that sort of premium for his “intellectual property” then why would he not take it? Of course, I would shake my head at those who choose to, as well as those who choose not to BUT hold off buying until they see his scores some time later. Seems like a pretty victimless crime?

1 Like

I voted yes. I look at it this way: I pay to read reviews so, if he wants to give people who pay up early access, then fine. I personally wouldn’t pay for it as I get no added value from the earlier time to market but if someone does then great. I don’t understand the big deal.

Even if you think his scores directly move prices in a material way I don’t think it’s an issue: if it mattered enough you would just pay for it. A realization that, in effect, the value of his rating service is actually $2k/month not $20/month.

I voted yes. I look at it this way: I pay to read reviews so, if he wants to give people who pay up early access, then fine. I personally wouldn’t pay for it as I get no added value from the earlier time to market but if someone does then great. I don’t understand the big deal.

$2,000 a month. Still seems like a joke to me. Alex you can just go to Wine Searcher and see all of his ratings for free.

Right or wrong implies we get to decide how he runs his business. Vote with your wallet, not with a poll of aggrieved wine geeks.

David still think this type of business with reviews is wrong! Sets a dangerous slope for anyone with some influence in wine.

It is his business and he has the right to do as he pleases. He could probably lose his entire subscriber base and with only 50 subscribers at 2K a month, make as much or more money than he makes now. The math is in his favor.

Subscribers can also vote with their wallets.

I don’t subscribe to Vinous; I don’t find it worth it even at $20/m. I don’t know who would find this worth it.

[rofl.gif]

I did. It’s his decision to make and it’s your decision to make whether you want to keep your subscription or not. The 2k per month is a trade only rate unless one badly wants to pay that much.

I don’t own a shop and the value I get from the site and their reviews is worth my subscription at $200 per year. When it’s not worth my subscription, I’ll cancel it.

1 Like

38 now and I’m one of them. Any vendor should treat their best customers differently.

There’s a wine dealer that says he treats everyone “fairly” so he doesn’t give his better customers a sneak peak on his good deals. I find that frustrating and unacceptable as a consumer. Better customers should be treated special. Always.

of course, yes. Let him make money legally how he wants . . . just like everyone else here commenting on this. And if you’re a wine fan who has ever spent more than $150 for one bottle of wine and you still don’t think Vinous is worth $140/yr, then I really don’t think you’re checking out all that he offers and all the great content. It’s a bargain at that price imo.

Conversely, I think that wine dealer has integrity and understands value beyond how much someone can swing their wallet around.

But he needs subscribers to make the $24K per year worth it to a business, right?

Nobody would pay me a bunch of money to see my TNs early because nobody buys and reads my TNs.

I guess that’s not completely true, since scores move things off shelves even to customers who don’t subscribe, but there is some connection at least. Right?

2 Likes

Voted yes.

If other publication (excluding the one man band) would offer this “service” I think the responses and engagement would be less explosive, however in the case of AG, the strong negative reaction essentially comes from the strong perceived disconnect with the brand promise of what Vinous is and for who. That message has and continues to somehow get hammered but this new revenue stream seem to go against that idea.

If this is Vinous new direction and the perception of optimized commercialization focus prevails I can imagine its relevance will start to decline over time.

Side notes:

  1. Appreciate that vinous at least openly shared this new model.
  2. There are a lot of very valuable content on vinous disregarding the scores which none of us really cares about unless it brings up prices for our favorite wines (or cumulative with other critics, then prices goes up anyway).