The method is completely unfair full stop. Go back to using the EP allocation system
Good, although personally I’d like to be able to choose that you do
But it must be based on the type of wines you buy. So if you want to get on the list for Rhone special offers you need to start buying some Rhone.
That would discourage experimentation which seems a bad outcome.
I dunno, I never got this offer and Rhone is by far my most bought wine. I guess I was either a) on a later batch email or b) the algorithm detected there’s no way I’d pay £150 a bottle for anything, even if it is half price
Or you got two other product-related emails…
It’s all a mystery to me.
In May I got:
Wine lover’s beer
as well as a few other general offers.
I wanted all of them but only ordered Hairy Leaf.
And that is the big issue of transparency. We’re you or I on the list? If not do we need to buy more Rhône or expensive stuff or hop around counter clockwise singing a nursery rhyme?
Like you I was unlikely to buy a £150 bottle, I just really dislike the system.
I think you just cracked it!
I didn’t get the Hairy Leaf - not a surprise as I’ve never heard of it (although I have bought Domaine Jones in the past) - so the algorithm got that right. But now I’m intrigued and have put it in the wish list - so perhaps the algorithm got it wrong.
Well, I’d never heard of it either, but I do buy mostly from Languedoc/Rhone I guess. Ah who knows. I’m not convinced there is in fact a highly skilled team behind all this, it’s just one guy in the basement with a bunch of darts and share numbers printed on the wall. “New offer out Terry, we need 300 random members to get it. Let’s. Play. Darts.”
Stay out of the black and into the red - there’s nothing in this game for two in a bed…
OK I’ll chip in.
First point: fairness is subjective. I’m sure this discussion has been useful to TWS to get different perspectives… mostly from those that missed out and who are thereby more likely to view the process as having been unfair.
Second point: getting the communication right to everyone’s satisfaction is an impossible task. At my work we have a team that deal solely with CRM and we use a large (and expensive) company who’s raison d’etre is using customer data to send emails with tailored content to different customers at the right time. We get it wrong with a much smaller set of products than TWS, so I can only imagine how hard it is with hundreds of thousands of bottles and active members to match up. You might think that a pic’n’mix opt-in is the answer, but that’s simply not the case. TWS has to cater for a wide spectrum of people who know what they want and people who don’t. On top of that, what people say they want and what people actually purchase are often quite different.
The real issue with this particular bottle is a purchase limit. Did they get it right this time? Clearly not.They also owned up to it, and acted quickly to rectify it. Did they make the initial decision on good data that up to this point has proven effective? It sounds like it to me. Hindsight is 20/20 and I’m sure future bottles will be handled differently.
The communications piece is a fascinating subject in light of GDPR. I believe it’s being raised at the AGM.
@danchaq - a useful summation but don’t forget the many opinions in this thread to the effect that this should have been treated as an EP offering i.e. a more controlled and unhurried purchase window.
Alternatively, I guess you could keep this a first come first served offer, but only determine the quantities per person once everyone had a chance to register their interest.
Sure, and there’s a chance that’s how it will be handled in future.
However, what would be the trigger for handling this particular wine differently than past vintages?
Until something like this quick uptake happens, it is difficult to predict at an aggregate level what new wine will cause this extraordinary amount of increased demand versus similar products.
Now they’ve got another data point (sales) and feedback (community comments) they can use that to help inform future decisions.
Indeed. Plain to see for a Rhone Ranger whose been waiting all his or her life to pick up a first growth of the region in a 10 vintage for half off.
But for a merchandising team who’s job it is to balance supply and demand across a product portfolio of 150,000+ items, it requires an understanding that this particular wine in an 8 vintage that’s not sold out for 6 years will now sell out in 3 hours in a 10 vintage. Big ask.
EDIT: I’m sure they’ll be on the lookout for the next time though (and likely for other regions as well)!
EDIT2: And they’ll have a better idea of how to handle future releases because of this very discussion, guided by member’s views rather than just their own ideas. Again, at work we’ve had to recruit people specifically for this purpose, so TWS having this community freely contribute to these discussions is invaluable to TWS and the membership as a whole. Nice work @robert_mcintosh for getting the Community to this place and to @laura for being a liaison in this particular thread.
May I just add that the market values quoted are based on a handful of cases put up for sale on wine trading websites (not merchants or merchant supported brokerage) as such should be taken with a pinch of salt. Also, I suspect TWS’ hands are tied (by the agreement with JL Chave) where they set the release price…
Saying all this I fully support the EP-esque solution or further restriction (to the single bottle if demand warrants) of allocation on a first come first served basis in the future.
UPDATE - actually having checked wine-searcher again… the landscape has changed on the 2015 and much larger quantity is offered around that price and also from merchants’ websites
UPDATE 2 - while checking the 2015, it struck me that the “market value” of the 2016 is £26 per bottle… I could have stopped there… however further investigation (one click further) reveals that that at price Pogo’s Liquor Inc selling the 2016 Crozes Hermitage White (not kidding) - it seems the internet is not infallible (similar to myself and TWS for that matter)
I am sorry @danchaq I made wholesale edits after you liked the post, feel free to withdraw the like…