That was my understanding too per the AGM questions.
it might well be…
I would bet heavily that the ability to express such granular preferences would not be part of this work. The time and money needed to consistently act on suce detail wouldn’t make it sensible.
For example, you might be able to say “I’m not interested in mixed cases” but that’s potentially all you can express a preference on.
(fwiw, I wouldn’t bet on that actually being an option)
In the example we discuss here, if one had opted-out of hearing about mixed cases they may well not have got this “Bestsellers under £5.99” email. But they might not have heard about the Platter’s SA case which was in such high demand. That’s going to upset some people.
There is no perfect solution. There will always be outliers and edge cases.
“I’m interested in fine wine but not interested in mixed cases”
What do TWS do if they have a mixed case of fine wine?
Coming back to this subject, I think the TWS did a great job with the title of this email. It basically told us everything we would need to know to decide if it’s relevant. Don’t want to hear about the bestselling wines? Delete. Not really someone who operates at the sub-£6 level? Delete.
Fully agree in the email - as I put earlier “what I love about email is - it has minimal cost to TWS and there is a delete button”
wrt the preferences - with use of AI (based on customer prior purchases) this wouldn’t actually be that difficult now…but that only knows what you have bought from the TWS and whilst in can give some interpolation within boundaries, its not aware of what you are fully interested in so will miss some opportunities.
The BBR system relies on the client selecting their preferences and as long as the marketing department use the same categorisation for their “missives” then all works well
It is known that targeted marketing is far more effective than random - perhaps that gain in sales would off-set any implementation costs…if not…just keep hitting delete
Yeah. But the issue is not hearing about stuff we would like until it’s sold out, surely?
Hi James, can confirm @Brocklehurstj is correct in his reply:
The new website replatform opens up a new world of possibilities for us when it comes to things like this. Evidently from the discussions we’ve had here, this kind of preference flexibility is long overdue, so sorry about the wait - but it’s in the pipeline!
On a somewhat related note, has anyone ever seen a link to a current Society wine in the big format - like
That doesn’t say bestseller? Something tells me it’s unlikely that sherry at £65 a half would sell like hot cakes, but what do I know?
As a sherry lover I’ve always been puzzled by the presence of the above on the WS list as the price is way above anything else - it is nearly three times the cost of the next most expensive sherry. I wonder why TWS doesn’t ‘fill that gap’ with some other interesting sherries - always accepting that they know the market better than me.
That’s certainly a start but it doesn’t say what time period they are using so I do not trust it. It should also state that it is determned solely by volume (litres) not units or value. It has to be factual and with sufficient information that one can rely on it being independent and honest.
I would suggest top ten (or twenty) reds, similar for whites and possibly for rosés, over three and 12 months up to a stated date.
@Kidman look at Bestselling book, Bestselling music, we are constantly told that things are best sellers without comparison. do people really fall for such 'salespeak". Best to learn about wines, experiment with new ones if you wish, be prepared to be elated/disappointed and make your way from there. Marketing is what it is!
‘Bestsellers’ means selling the most units, surely? I can’t think of any other scenario where that wouldn’t be the case - it certainly is with music, books etc. It might be useful if a timeframe was quoted here, but as long as that timeframe is applied consistently across all products then what does it matter? A month, 3 months, 6 months… I can’t see that it really changes anything.
I don’t get what all the fuss in this thread is about really. Just take the list for what it is. It is a list of the products that TWS sells the most of. You can assume that they are therefore popular and likely return good value for money, otherwise lots of members wouldn’t be re-ordering them. There is undoubtedly value in sharing it (although that value varies from person to person). You’re not interested in these wines? Great, move on and find some that float your boat. Not interested in which wines sell the most? Great, delete the email. Want to buy some crowd-pleasing wines you might not have tried before? Fantastic, here’s a list. Go nuts.
Of course, else it would be ‘highest revenue’ or 'most profitable"…but they aren’t as good for marketing another classic of vanity over sanity… I always like the ones that make the most profit !
New board asked why so much effort went into one particular project (that i’m still under NDA for…only 5 years to go!) as it was such a low volume for the business unit (less than 5% of our volume)…when I replied it returned 25% of our profit they no longer questioned volume related positions.
I tend to imagine members who have made the time and commitment to participate in this community aren’t always the target audience for these kind of offers. I’ve bought them before and been happy to. I do remember the very first case I bought at tws was a 15-bottle case of members’ favourites, and it was a great way to try some of the range and get some wines that had at least been flagged as popular, in a range of many hundreds. I may do this again, it’s a nice easy way of discovering new wines.
On the thread question “Why should I want…”:
If a wine is there that I haven’t tried then it’s useful to know that other members found such a wine to their liking.
On the discussion “Why bother us with this”:
My (not at all well hidden!) inner geek is interested in this information for its own sake.
I’d definitely prefer this information to be available than not
And if it weren’t available, someone, somewhere would complain about TWS and why it’s not telling us which wines are best sellers, and what has it got to hide… Blah blah blah. There’s no winning.
That was not the point the original poster made.
I didn’t say it was - I just raised the point that it is difficult to please everyone all the time. Not to mention please everyone some of the time. For every member who doesn’t care about a particular phrasing, description or information - another will find it valuable. So personally, if I come across an email I don’t care for, a message I don’t find relevant etc - I just delete. I don’t expect TWS to cater to my idiosyncratic wishes all the time.
@Inbar, a forum like this should have room for differences of opinion surely? I’ve often thought negativity or opposition to a certain thread is frowned upon here by a few individuals.
Absolutely! room for debate is what it’s all about. I just contributed my own opinion to this thread - and don’t expect others to agree.
As for negativity or opposition - I don’t agree with your observation. I think there’s been plenty of these, and as long as they are said respectfully and not from a ‘I know better than thou’ position- then I, personally, have no issue whatsoever with negative feedback.
No it shouldn’t.
There. Peace & harmony. Done.