How to sell limited editions - the current reality

[jvd99]

Most SBers know Master of Malt ("MOM").  It's an online retailer based in the UK.  They seem to get every LE known to man and then some, mostly consisting of single malts, but also bourbons.  Not even 2 or 3 years ago, if you missed Pappy, BTAC or FR LEs, you could (hypothetically/allegedly) just order them online from MOM (putting legalities of this aside and not endorsing said behavior).  Now that the secondary market is in full force and flippers are universally despised, MOM has taken an aggressive stance toward selling their most allocated items which is set forth in a detailed blog post explaining their handling of a small 6 bottle allocation of Yamakazi 2016 Sherry Cask, a highly sought after bottling that is catnip for flippers.  The blog post is aptly named "Allocations, limited releases, bastards, speculators and gobshites"  and can be found here: https://www.masterofmalt.com/blog/post/allocations-limited-releases-bastards-speculators-and-gobshites.aspx#continue

In summary, MOM is trying to protect the people who will actually drink this highly allocated item.  In order to do so, they are sampling out 4 bottles via lottery so that up to about 90+ lucky people will have a chance to have a 3cl sample/taste.  One bottle will be sold at retail via lottery, however, and this is important, MOM will deface the back label to kill some, if not most, of the resale value in an attempt to thwart the evil flippers.  The last bottle will be auctioned, not defaced, and proceeds above retail price will go to a charity.  Presumably, the auctioned bottle will be sold in-line with the actual market (secondary) price thereby taking the flipper out of the equation yet again.

Many people have voiced their opposition to this policy on the MOM website, however, these complaints are most likely coming from the flippers.  I've posted this here in the general bourbon discussion area because MOM has stated in its blog post that this new policy will be applied to all highly allocated and super high demand releases, which I must presume includes the aforementioned LE bourbons.  

This policy is the most aggressive I've ever seen from a retailer to thwart the secondary market and protect the enthusiast drinkers.  What do you all think about this policy and would it work in the good ole USA or at your local retailer?  (not sure if its legal to sell samples here in the US though)

[starhopper]

The only problem I have is the 4 bottles being split between 90 people.  I would think that 3cl (1 oz) isn't much to enjoy and appreciate the bourbon.  I would rather they have a lottery for all 5 bottles and the lucky winners get to buy them at retail.  The last bottle being sold at auction doesn't bother me

Edited February 29, 2016 by starhopper

[petrel800]

While I won't question their pricing, they are welcome to charge what they want.  That said, their 3cl samples are sold at quite the markup.  While I appreciate they have a cost to break down these bottles to smaller bottles and there is some added liability since they are handling and labeling, but, they are making quite the mark up on the bottles.  So while its great they are going to "get more of it to the people," I don't think their motives are truly driven by good will.

Edited February 29, 2016 by petrel800

[starhopper]

17 minutes ago, petrel800 said:

...I don't think their motives are truly driven by good will.

I agree with that too.

Edited February 29, 2016 by starhopper

[jvd99]

I was most struck by the ruining of the back label on the full lottery bottle. 

[beasled]

I would like to interject with MoM's decision here, mostly because I'm UK based and have been using them for a good 3 to 4 years now, so their practices have remained unchanged... UNTIL they got the latest BTAC in. 

Now, for anyone unfamiliar with how Master of Malt normally release these kind of things... they used to announce things at 9am on Twitter, usually for a 12pm release. First come, first served. This was, I believe, a fair system. Yes, it meant that people missed out (don't they always) and yes it meant you had to be fortunate enough to either have access whilst at work (if you worked 9-5) or not be busy, but it worked.

However, this year they decided that they would put the items up on their site a week in advance with 'coming soon'. 

This led to: https://www.masterofmalt.com/blog/post/sorry-about-today.aspx

Now, by saying they're coming soon meant that it allowed a much larger group of people to turn up at the release time. This I noted was highlighed in the BTAC release map on BourbonR.com - http://bourbonr.com/blog/2015-buffalo-trace-antique-collection-release-map-2/ (do a search for 'Master of Malt' on the page).

"WilfredIV says: November 19, 2015 at 4:19 pm
FYI – Master of Malt is releasing their BTAC Antique stock tomorrow “Midday GMT Time”."

"CM says:
November 19, 2015 at 5:28 pm
Oh good. That should make it that much easier now that 8000 more people will be on there."

 

So, because of this, MoM have now decided that they are unable to release any limited editions in the old manner because it causes chaos when in fact all that's happened is that they have tried to generate publicity and failed to ensure that they have the site to withstand the onslaught. 

Mostly, I'm just pissed because what was once an effective way of being able to obtain limited releases from other countries is now looking like that's no longer possible. Also, there's an incredible bitterness I have for the fact that the world is free to order from the UK but if we want to order from outside Europe we get absolutely stung by the import duties, or don't even ship at all, like the US. I'm sure this is the case elsewhere...

Anyway, my point is that Master of Malt brought this on themselves by going from on the fly releasing to "hey look what we've got". Other small, independent shops in the UK managed to release the Yamazaki in question without crashing their site or causing mass hysteria through lotteries (and charity auctions??? christ on a bike). 

Rant over. 

 

Cheers all!

Edited February 29, 2016 by beasled

[JoeTerp]

I kind of like the approach.  I think anything to stop people from hoarding multiples and get more of the product out is a good idea.  The sample size is a little small (and although others have mentioned the substantial markup - I didn't bother to look it up, but I trust they're accurate).  

If the defaced label truly impacts sales on secondary I'm all for it.  I like the packaging and would prefer the bottle not to be defaced, but if that means that people who actually want to drink it get the product then it's relatively harmless.

[Paddy]

Is this thread about buying, or selling limiteds?  The thread title, How To Sell Limited Editions, reflects poorly here, IMO. 

[jvd99]

11 hours ago, Paddy said:

Is this thread about buying, or selling limiteds?  The thread title, How To Sell Limited Editions, reflects poorly here, IMO. 

You can make up your own mind about that.  The MOM blog post was clearly communicating a retailer's selling policy for limited editions - thus the thread title - but that policy naturally sets the parameters for the customers' ability to buy.  The topics are one in the same and I assumed that SBers would be able to discern that and comment on both sides of the argument in one thread. 

If you believe that a thread title, standing alone, reflects poorly on this message board because there's a remote chance that some yahoo may read the title without actually opening the thread and thereafter form a negative view of this message board, then IMO, I respectfully think you are over reacting.  Anyone who reads the OP would know instantaneously that I wanted to start a discussion on a retailer's aggressive stance toward selling LEs and its impact on the enthusiast consumer and flipper alike. 

Getting back on point, I think there's a lot to be said for the current state of buying and selling LEs if retailers are going to take a hard line on eliminating flippers because there are unintended consequences that could negatively impact the enthusiast consumer and is worthy of discussion. 

[PaulO]

I've thought for a long time that companies could bottle LEs in the standard 50ml "airline" type bottles and give a lot more people the chance to try these.  As it is now, I only see value brands in the small bottles.  I've come to realize that companies must like the free publicity and leverage that the whole LE circus has become.

As to altering the back label; may have the opposite effect in this case.  It goes to prove legitamacey and provenance.

[b1gcountry]

I would prefer to see the smaller bottles of limited edition Bourbon, and give more people a chance at tasting it.

[Paddy]

5 hours ago, jvd99 said:

You can make up your own mind about that.  The MOM blog post was clearly communicating a retailer's selling policy for limited editions - thus the thread title - but that policy naturally sets the parameters for the customers' ability to buy.  The topics are one in the same and I assumed that SBers would be able to discern that and comment on both sides of the argument in one thread. 

If you believe that a thread title, standing alone, reflects poorly on this message board because there's a remote chance that some yahoo may read the title without actually opening the thread and thereafter form a negative view of this message board, then IMO, I respectfully think you are over reacting.  Anyone who reads the OP would know instantaneously that I wanted to start a discussion on a retailer's aggressive stance toward selling LEs and its impact on the enthusiast consumer and flipper alike. 

Getting back on point, I think there's a lot to be said for the current state of buying and selling LEs if retailers are going to take a hard line on eliminating flippers because there are unintended consequences that could negatively impact the enthusiast consumer and is worthy of discussion. 

I realize you know I'm not questioning your intentions.  Just your wording of the thread title. 

Lots of yahoo's read the title, without actually opening the thread...

[The Black Tot]

I applaud their efforts.

Whether or not it means I can get a bottle (I don't want a Yamazaki sherry, but I'd say the same about a bourbon limited I DID want), there is no doubt that flippers can't do anything with this strategy.

I agree the samples should be priced more fairly.

I'm a customer of these guys when I'm in the UK. It's a good shop that makes an effort to get good allocations.

Despite this, yes, they were indeed dumb to pre-announce BTAC this year.

I had a seller who would only sell me a BTAC bottle, one, if I could demonstrate a talent, on the spot. Do a dance, tell a joke, etc. I told a joke for a Saz 18. It was a fun way to do it, I thought.

 

[jvd99]

what was the joke? - you're killing us with the suspense!

[The Black Tot]

Haha. It doesn't work without the gesticulation. Ask me when we're next sharing a bottle.

[beasled]

23 hours ago, The Black Tot said:

I had a seller who would only sell me a BTAC bottle, one, if I could demonstrate a talent, on the spot. Do a dance, tell a joke, etc. I told a joke for a Saz 18. It was a fun way to do it, I thought.

 

Couldn't help but laugh at this. If it's the shop I'm thinking of, I know the guys in there very well and they told me about doing this to some poor fellow when I went in to pick up mine.

[The Black Tot]

Yes, beasled, it was them I thought it was great.

I'll be the poor fellow who walks out with a Saz18 any day. I've got more jokes...

[smokinjoe]

Well, the Bourbon sellers market apparently is capable of a new low.  Demanding minstrelsy for the opportunity to then purchase a bottle...  

 

[b1gcountry]

If they make me sing, then the joke is truly on them. ..

[Paddy]

Armpit fart anyone?

[The Black Tot]

I'm confident that would have worked, Paddy

[Queball]

Lao-tzu , in the 12th verse of the Tao Te Ching, wrote:

 

Wasting energy to obtain rare objects only impedes one's growth

[The Black Tot]

Yes, but it is a lesser-known fact that Lao-tzu's whiskey collection was pathetic. They tried to keep this out of the press.

[Richnimrod]

6 hours ago, The Black Tot said:

Yes, but it is a lesser-known fact that Lao-tzu's whiskey collection was pathetic. They tried to keep this out of the press.

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!   That is a truly esoteric insight.   Thanx!

[glassjapan]

8 hours ago, The Black Tot said:

Yes, but it is a lesser-known fact that Lao-tzu's whiskey collection was pathetic. They tried to keep this out of the press.

Best.post.ever!