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

WINE TALK
41

I think the point was that important analysts’ recommendations will move the market, so they are the inside information. That’s the same here, assuming he is important enough.

42

LOL, I had the same thought. Is it right? Of course it’s not right. But is it his right? Absolutely.

I’m trying to imagine what would have been said if Parker had done this, or if Wine Spectator sold early access to their WOTY.

43

meh. i think thats an issue of wording.

if the poll had asked “are you OK with galloni giving early access”… or “will you continue to subscribe now that there is early access” or “is it a conflict of interests…”

but whether its right or wrong is a much more debatable topic.

1 Like
44

Disappointed to not see a custom bespoke poll option available.

1 Like
45

I’m a Vinous subscriber and the preview plan doesn’t bother me in the least.

46

Oh, the lynch mob we would see . . .

Cheers

47

Ha, I’d love to see those custom bespoke options!

“Hey Tony, I’ll double the monthly if you publish my reviews starting at 95 points, place them at the very top of each publication release, and have a banner on the website for each new release.”

48

I think this just makes the point that Galloni isn’t a consumer advocate. He’s a Galloni advocate.

2 Likes
49

Is the concern that people paying $2,000 to be in the know going to buy up a highly rated wine before everyone else?

50

I applaud the proper use of ‘posit’.

Why don’t all let Galloni be Galloni, and everyone can be themselves?

51

when I worked at a big, multi-store chain, the shelf talkers alone moved enough wine to justify the 2k per month rate (and I’d imagine this chain was paying more given the amount of stores they have). When I have worked at independent stores, not once have they subscribed to a publication like that. Different customers go to different stores.

When I have worked in distribution, sometimes I’d mention scores but often I wouldn’t. But, I was also only using my consumer subscription to Vinous as there’s zero way any of the distributors I worked for could remotely justifying paying 24k per year.

People here are focusing on the gems and what their price increase may be, but that’s such a small fraction of where the value is in a publication like Vinous. We constantly have to remember that by merely posting on this forum, that all of us are a complete drop in the bucket of the wider wine world and this really won’t register as much as I think those on here and the Vinous boards realize.

1 Like
52

why can’t he be both? There is a wide breadth of coverage with some excellent reviewers. I really do have a hard time seeing how this decision really changes the market or what many of us pay for wines.

53

Interesting viewpoint although I honestly see it quite differently. What he is essentially saying to the industry is, “I have earned enough credibility with my consumers that when I award a high score to a wine, it moves markets.” He is creating a new revenue stream that is entirely dependent on maintaining the trust of his consumers (who might be a big more skeptical right now). If he goes full Suckling, this business dies overnight. At this point his incentives are completely aligned with the consumer - give consumers reviews and scores that the trust and rely on, he continues to move markets, and he makes more money from the trade. Inflate scores until they are meaningless and he is back to where he was previously but with fewer subscribers. I wouldn’t be surprised to see that this business line leads him to be even more conservative in scoring so that a high score carries even more weight.

54

but you can still use Galloni’s scores now on a shelf talker for the normal publication subscription fee. for the added $1900 to be justified, you would have to make that money up with the price difference you can charge by having that information three days earlier than you would have for the normal fee. sure, in a month putting a high galloni score on the talker will help sell a ton of wine. but will the three days advanced warning allow you to bump the price on a bottle so significantly that you can sell 2k worth of inventory before everyone else finds out the score?

55

If it didn’t, what would be the incentive for retailers to pay $2000 per month to access the reviews earlier? Apparently, Vinous believes retailers will be able to make more than that amount by having access 48 hours earlier than regular subscribers (i.e., consumers) and increasing prices accordingly. If they didn’t, there’d be no reason they would pay.

And if retailers make the extra money by increasing prices, that means customers are paying more for the wines. Seems pretty simple. And not very consumer friendly…which is how Galloni has marketed himself to current subscribers.

1 Like
56

Humans’ favorite pastime is commenting on and judging others’ choices. Maybe even more prevalent than usual in today’s society.

1 Like
57

Public figures place themselves in that position. They cannot have it both ways.

1 Like
58

I think it’s interesting some people say let Antonio do what ever he wants as long as it is legal but complain when wine shops wont show them favoritism because they are big spenders. When it affects someone they complain, if it doesnt it’s freedom to do.

59

I’d expect it will be mostly ITB people who will take advantage of this service. Then more of that wine is in fewer hands and there’s less competition. Pretty difficult to argue you’re a consumer advocate in that case.

2 Likes
60

The concern is the retailer/wholesalers will bump up the prices before everyone else see’s the review. This usually takes 1 to 2 days to happen right now. So every consumer will loose out on getting a great wine at a reasonable price. The only people that will know of the price increase, in the future, will be people who follow that wine in the market. [winner.gif]

1 Like