The Auswine Forum

What do you guys think about Kay Bros pushing mailing list members to buy other 4 bottles of their wine to get miniscule allocation of two bottles of Old Block 6 shiraz. I am very much turned off by it and not going to buy anymore after many years of following Old Block 6 faitfully.

happenning more and more even in retail in NZ with certain cult wineries." Buy One bottle of 200x wine you want if you buy 11 bottles of 200x overpriced entry level wine we dont care about"

buy it elsewhere retail where you can buy the wines you want??

I don't think it is anything to get hung up about. Why not grab a few bottles of the 2004 Amery shiraz, drinking beautifully at the moment, and get your Block 6 as well? I think this kind of thing is fine if there are quality choices in the range, and if the winery is genuinely trying to manage allocation in low-yield years (which 2005 was for the Block 6 rows). Would you rather they doubled the per bottle price?

Kay Brothers Block 6 is available at a certain large liquor chain (Yes I checked if Gavin stocks it before posting my comment. He does not).

All sounding a bit DRC to me.

Shiraz Man wrote:Kay Brothers Block 6 is available at a certain large liquor chain (Yes I checked if Gavin stocks it before posting my comment. He does not).

Yes he does (or he did very, very recently):
http://forum.auswine.com.au/viewtopic.php?t=7238

I'm in agreement with pstarr here - at least the odd punter can actually get their hands on some Block 6 at a good price (even if now it is only two bottles/person and you have to buy another four from their other range). For a genuinely small production wine that's got to be better than paying a hell of a lot more, or having no chance of getting any at all no matter what the $$$.

Cheers,
Ian

Quote:

Kay Brothers Block 6 is available at a certain large liquor chain

I've seen it around at a couple of outlets in Adelaide but at a price far in excess of the mailing list price. Apparently Kay Bros. have a new agent who is pushing their stock at a retail level here in Australia. Keep in mind that they can probably get a lot more for their wine in the US - probably take their entire stock. My understanding is that Colin Kay wants to preserve some sort of loyal local base. But the economic pressures to make hay while the sun shines must be fairly strong.

Don't know if 2005 was a meagre vintage or not, but I'm quite happy with my two bottles, and I was happy to get some Hillside Shiraz and a bottle of their Tawny which is terrific stuff. I plan on sticking with the mailing list for as long as I can. The wine is worth the trouble.

Tristram

Tristram Shandy wrote:Don't know if 2005 was a meagre vintage or not,

Tristram

Lots of quantity and quality too.

For many years, I was buying six Hillside, six Block 6 and sometimes other stuff too. If I can only get two Block 6, I probably won't bother to order. There is so much good wine out there, I am happy to pass and let others have my huge allocation.

I prefer the way Rockies, Wendouree and Noon's allocate and look after long term customers.

My specific reference to yield in 2005 was to just the Block 6 rows, not the rest of McLaren Vale. The total Amery yields for 2005 were down 25% on 2004.

easier enough to buy in NZ even if there is basically only one retailer that deals with it. you can buy it in unlimited quantities with no bundling

however ive never bothered as it is $90!!

I ordered my 2, plus 3 Cuthbert, 6 Hillside and 1 Muscat. If I hadn't tried the Cuthbert I probably would have just bought 2 Block 6 and 4 Hillside.

I can see why mailing list members would get peeved with the 2-bottle limit when it is available (at a higher price) at retail, but there couldn't have been much at retail as most are sold out, except the one with the extra high price of about $20pb more than Auswine or the other one listing it. Maybe Kays need to offer it to retailers to move stocks of their cheaper wines?

Wait for the 2007 and 2008 vintage, there may not even be a Block 6, or if there is it it may be a half-bottle per person. (Just speculating worst-case here, actually Kays old vines are surviving well and they have a bit of re-cycled water too).

Red Bigot wrote:I ordered my 2, plus 3 Cuthbert, 6 Hillside and 1 Muscat. If I hadn't tried the Cuthbert I probably would have just bought 2 Block 6 and 4 Hillside.

I can see why mailing list members would get peeved with the 2-bottle limit when it is available (at a higher price) at retail, but there couldn't have been much at retail as most are sold out, except the one with the extra high price of about $20pb more than Auswine or the other one listing it. Maybe Kays need to offer it to retailers to move stocks of their cheaper wines?

Wait for the 2007 and 2008 vintage, there may not even be a Block 6, or if there is it it may be a half-bottle per person. (Just speculating worst-case here, actually Kays old vines are surviving well and they have a bit of re-cycled water too).

Just a note. retailers buy 'Kays' wines at a higher price than usual wholesale. We pay close to the mailing list price.

Hence the prices are significantly over mailing list price, and, well I can't speak for everyone of course, but for me, have the same margin/mark up as my other wines for sale.

As to quantities, yes Block 6 Shiraz is always tight, and always highly in demand. I had customers contacting me before release asking for

a case, cases, as much as I can have etc etc

If I didn't have a system to try to allocate it fairly, it would/could all have sold upfront to one customer.

All wineries with mailing lists face this same problem, and decide their own way of handling it.

Only one this for sure, if wines are 'allocated' the old saying holds very very true - You can't please all of the people, all the time!"

Seems very fair. Stops the cherry pickers and how many bottles do you need of a given wine anyway? Breadth not depth is the key to a good cellar.
GW

Seems very fair. Stops the cherry pickers and how many bottles do you need of a given wine anyway? Breadth not depth is the key to a good cellar.

all power to the cherry pickers. keep choice in the hands of the consumer.

and whether breadth or depth is the key to your cellar is totally dependant on what you like. well thats what the aussie red bigot will tell you anyway

Craig(NZ) wrote:

Seems very fair. Stops the cherry pickers and how many bottles do you need of a given wine anyway? Breadth not depth is the key to a good cellar.

all power to the cherry pickers. keep choice in the hands of the consumer.

and whether breadth or depth is the key to your cellar is totally dependant on what you like. well thats what the aussie red bigot will tell you anyway

The retailers in Japan are selling Block 6 2003 for 15,500yen (about A$155) and the 1998 for 24,000yen (about A$240). They aren't exactly selling like hotcakes, so I reckon the consumers and the cherry pickers here have decided that they are a little overpriced.

These days, I like a little more breadth to my collection of wines, so I'm mainly buying single or two bottle lots of the same wine.

Craig(NZ) wrote:and whether breadth or depth is the key to your cellar is totally dependant on what you like. well thats what the aussie red bigot will tell you anyway

Yeah, my cellar is about 5m broad, but only 3m deep.

pstarr wrote:I don't think it is anything to get hung up about. Why not grab a few bottles of the 2004 Amery shiraz, drinking beautifully at the moment, and get your Block 6 as well? I think this kind of thing is fine if there are quality choices in the range, and if the winery is genuinely trying to manage allocation in low-yield years (which 2005 was for the Block 6 rows). Would you rather they doubled the per bottle price?

If they are trying to allocate in a low yielding year, they should only reduce the number of allocation for each member not force you to buy some other wine(s) from their range. They have been increasing their price on Old Block 6 and Hillside anyway; this itself was off-puting. I think this is a clear consequence of being Parkerised. After being Parkerised, Kay bros is exporting more and more each year to USA.

ufo wrote:

pstarr wrote:I don't think it is anything to get hung up about. Why not grab a few bottles of the 2004 Amery shiraz, drinking beautifully at the moment, and get your Block 6 as well? I think this kind of thing is fine if there are quality choices in the range, and if the winery is genuinely trying to manage allocation in low-yield years (which 2005 was for the Block 6 rows). Would you rather they doubled the per bottle price?

If they are trying to allocate in a low yielding year, they should only reduce the number of allocation for each member not force you to buy some other wine(s) from their range. They have been increasing their price on Old Block 6 and Hillside anyway; this itself was off-puting. I think this is a clear consequence of being Parkerised. After being Parkerised, Kay bros is exporting more and more each year to USA.

Why are you using this ridiculous word, "Parkerized"? Kays have a proud history and tradition. They have not changed their wines or their winemaking to please Parker or any other critic.

Roger

TORB wrote:

Tristram Shandy wrote:Don't know if 2005 was a meagre vintage or not,

Tristram

Lots of quantity and quality too.

For many years, I was buying six Hillside, six Block 6 and sometimes other stuff too. If I can only get two Block 6, I probably won't bother to order. There is so much good wine out there, I am happy to pass and let others have my huge allocation.

I prefer the way Rockies, Wendouree and Noon's allocate and look after long term customers.

Agree, at the price level, there are much better samples out there

RogerPike wrote:

ufo wrote:

pstarr wrote:I don't think it is anything to get hung up about. Why not grab a few bottles of the 2004 Amery shiraz, drinking beautifully at the moment, and get your Block 6 as well? I think this kind of thing is fine if there are quality choices in the range, and if the winery is genuinely trying to manage allocation in low-yield years (which 2005 was for the Block 6 rows). Would you rather they doubled the per bottle price?

If they are trying to allocate in a low yielding year, they should only reduce the number of allocation for each member not force you to buy some other wine(s) from their range. They have been increasing their price on Old Block 6 and Hillside anyway; this itself was off-puting. I think this is a clear consequence of being Parkerised. After being Parkerised, Kay bros is exporting more and more each year to USA.

Why are you using this ridiculous word, "Parkerized"? Kays have a proud history and tradition. They have not changed their wines or their winemaking to please Parker or any other critic.

Roger

No doubt that Kays have a proud history and tradition. They sure haven't changed their style to please Parker. But before Parker tasted and rated Old Block 6, they were not selling to US market and anybody was able to get into the mail list and get their share of at least 6 botles of Old Block 6 without a price hike every vintage. Isn't that what happens to a wine after it gets 95+ ratings from Mr. Parker. That's what I meant.

Gavin Trott wrote:

Red Bigot wrote:I ordered my 2, plus 3 Cuthbert, 6 Hillside and 1 Muscat. If I hadn't tried the Cuthbert I probably would have just bought 2 Block 6 and 4 Hillside.

I can see why mailing list members would get peeved with the 2-bottle limit when it is available (at a higher price) at retail, but there couldn't have been much at retail as most are sold out, except the one with the extra high price of about $20pb more than Auswine or the other one listing it. Maybe Kays need to offer it to retailers to move stocks of their cheaper wines?

Wait for the 2007 and 2008 vintage, there may not even be a Block 6, or if there is it it may be a half-bottle per person. (Just speculating worst-case here, actually Kays old vines are surviving well and they have a bit of re-cycled water too).

Just a note. retailers buy 'Kays' wines at a higher price than usual wholesale. We pay close to the mailing list price.

Hence the prices are significantly over mailing list price, and, well I can't speak for everyone of course, but for me, have the same margin/mark up as my other wines for sale.

As to quantities, yes Block 6 Shiraz is always tight, and always highly in demand. I had customers contacting me before release asking for

a case, cases, as much as I can have etc etc

If I didn't have a system to try to allocate it fairly, it would/could all have sold upfront to one customer.

All wineries with mailing lists face this same problem, and decide their own way of handling it.

Only one this for sure, if wines are 'allocated' the old saying holds very very true - You can't please all of the people, all the time!"

All I am critising is pushing their other not so well selling wines using the demand for OB6. I would not have to say anything if they said "the allocation for this year is 2 bottles for person" But pushing other wines is just not acceptable. As far as I know a few wineries did the similar thing (Clarendon Hills is one I can remember now) But this practice will back fire soon or later.

They are not 'pushing' anything. If you don't want the wines then don't buy them. Quite simple. Are you a Parker point scoring wine chaser yourself and do you only want to buy Block 6?.. and if so why? If you don't then what is the problem as you will buy some other wines anyway. Apart from that the standard shiraz at $20 is a bloody good wine and outstanding value. They are just trying to implement a fair system so that everyone gets a little taste of the old vine magic - if they want it. Considering what it is the price of the Block 6 is very fair.
GW

ufo wrote:

Gavin Trott wrote:

Red Bigot wrote:I ordered my 2, plus 3 Cuthbert, 6 Hillside and 1 Muscat. If I hadn't tried the Cuthbert I probably would have just bought 2 Block 6 and 4 Hillside.

I can see why mailing list members would get peeved with the 2-bottle limit when it is available (at a higher price) at retail, but there couldn't have been much at retail as most are sold out, except the one with the extra high price of about $20pb more than Auswine or the other one listing it. Maybe Kays need to offer it to retailers to move stocks of their cheaper wines?

Wait for the 2007 and 2008 vintage, there may not even be a Block 6, or if there is it it may be a half-bottle per person. (Just speculating worst-case here, actually Kays old vines are surviving well and they have a bit of re-cycled water too).

Just a note. retailers buy 'Kays' wines at a higher price than usual wholesale. We pay close to the mailing list price.

Hence the prices are significantly over mailing list price, and, well I can't speak for everyone of course, but for me, have the same margin/mark up as my other wines for sale.

As to quantities, yes Block 6 Shiraz is always tight, and always highly in demand. I had customers contacting me before release asking for

a case, cases, as much as I can have etc etc

If I didn't have a system to try to allocate it fairly, it would/could all have sold upfront to one customer.

All wineries with mailing lists face this same problem, and decide their own way of handling it.

Only one this for sure, if wines are 'allocated' the old saying holds very very true - You can't please all of the people, all the time!"

All I am critising is pushing their other not so well selling wines using the demand for OB6. I would not have to say anything if they said "the allocation for this year is 2 bottles for person" But pushing other wines is just not acceptable. As far as I know a few wineries did the similar thing (Clarendon Hills is one I can remember now) But this practice will back fire soon or later.

I don't see a problem with what Kay Bros is doing.

Firstly, supply is short and demand is strong so rather than put up the price Colin is simply asking people to make up a 6 box with other wines. They are by no means the first with many wineries now forcing consumers to commit upto 2 dozen per year to remain on their mailing list - so I don't think what they're asking is unreasonable.

Secondly, with so many people trying to make a buck out of wine (by buying on a mailing list and reselling at auction) I think this will prevent such actions from happening as much.

Finally, I believe someone shouldn't be on a mailing list if all they want to buy from the winery is their premium wine (such as the Block 6).

Tony

tonsta wrote:
Finally, I believe someone shouldn't be on a mailing list if all they want to buy from the winery is their premium wine (such as the Block 6).

Tony,

So you believe that it's ok for the winery to expect people to buy wines they don't want just so they can remain on a mailing list?

FWIW, I have been on most mailing lists since well before wines from many of these wineries were in demand. In the early days, the wineries were bloody grateful to have mugs like me being prepared to purchase their most profitable, and expensive wines.

The original Rockford Stonewall members don't have to buy assorted stuff to get their allocation of Basket Press and or Black Shiraz. They just buy what they want and Rockford's appreciate the long term business relationship from the people that supported them prior to them becoming "fashionable."

TORB wrote:

tonsta wrote:
Finally, I believe someone shouldn't be on a mailing list if all they want to buy from the winery is their premium wine (such as the Block 6).

Tony,

So you believe that it's ok for the winery to expect people to buy wines they don't want just so they can remain on a mailing list?

Not at all, but I would have thought that by subscribing to a mailing list means you like the winery's style and more than one of their products i.e. not just the fashionable one...

I am relatively new to wine buying and so unfortunately I have not seen the ‘good-old-days' you describe. Therefore I can only comment on the reality facing people like me who want to purchase good wine at a fair price.

Consequently, I would rather see a winery doing this than push the price up 20% to accommodate for lower yields because you cannot expect them to take the hit on their bottom line.

I have tried to join various mailing lists without luck so I think those of you who are fortunate enough to be on some of the "prestigious" mail outs should be grateful.

I am certainly not looking to argue and ideally I think there should be no restrictions on purchases but the reality is that this is what is happening everywhere so why single out Kay Brothers.

Tony

Hi Tony,

Understand your position and I am not trying to pick an arguement, just present another side of the coin.

Good wine is like a bus, if you miss one there will be another just like it along in a few minutes. That's why I don't care if I no longer buy Block 6. There is far more great wine out there than I can possibly drink, let alone afford to buy. My problem is not buying all the terrific wine I come across. When you read my next Tour Diary, you will see what I mean.

TORB wrote:There is far more great wine out there than I can possibly drink, let alone afford to buy. My problem is not buying all the terrific wine I come across. When you read my next Tour Diary, you will see what I mean.

Stop teasing us and release it already!

cheers

Carl

tonsta wrote:

ufo wrote:

Gavin Trott wrote:

Red Bigot wrote:I ordered my 2, plus 3 Cuthbert, 6 Hillside and 1 Muscat. If I hadn't tried the Cuthbert I probably would have just bought 2 Block 6 and 4 Hillside.

I can see why mailing list members would get peeved with the 2-bottle limit when it is available (at a higher price) at retail, but there couldn't have been much at retail as most are sold out, except the one with the extra high price of about $20pb more than Auswine or the other one listing it. Maybe Kays need to offer it to retailers to move stocks of their cheaper wines?

Wait for the 2007 and 2008 vintage, there may not even be a Block 6, or if there is it it may be a half-bottle per person. (Just speculating worst-case here, actually Kays old vines are surviving well and they have a bit of re-cycled water too).

Just a note. retailers buy 'Kays' wines at a higher price than usual wholesale. We pay close to the mailing list price.

Hence the prices are significantly over mailing list price, and, well I can't speak for everyone of course, but for me, have the same margin/mark up as my other wines for sale.

As to quantities, yes Block 6 Shiraz is always tight, and always highly in demand. I had customers contacting me before release asking for

a case, cases, as much as I can have etc etc

If I didn't have a system to try to allocate it fairly, it would/could all have sold upfront to one customer.

All wineries with mailing lists face this same problem, and decide their own way of handling it.

Only one this for sure, if wines are 'allocated' the old saying holds very very true - You can't please all of the people, all the time!"

All I am critising is pushing their other not so well selling wines using the demand for OB6. I would not have to say anything if they said "the allocation for this year is 2 bottles for person" But pushing other wines is just not acceptable. As far as I know a few wineries did the similar thing (Clarendon Hills is one I can remember now) But this practice will back fire soon or later.

I don't see a problem with what Kay Bros is doing.

Firstly, supply is short and demand is strong so rather than put up the price Colin is simply asking people to make up a 6 box with other wines. They are by no means the first with many wineries now forcing consumers to commit upto 2 dozen per year to remain on their mailing list - so I don't think what they're asking is unreasonable.

Secondly, with so many people trying to make a buck out of wine (by buying on a mailing list and reselling at auction) I think this will prevent such actions from happening as much.

Finally, I believe someone shouldn't be on a mailing list if all they want to buy from the winery is their premium wine (such as the Block 6).

Tony

First of all, I have been on their mailing list long before OB6 received so much attention and havily bought all of their wine. In fact, I have 11 mixed cases of their straight Cab. Sav. , Shiraz and Hillside form various vintages in my cellar. I bought these on my free will based on the quality of the wines and vintages. So I suppose noone can blaim me for just running after their cult wine. Above stock in my cellar proves the fact that I am honest , loyal follower on their wines when it is left to my choice to choose which wine I will buy. I would have bought their wines this year again but I will not just because of the push. I know some members don't like this word but that's exactly what it is. While loyal mailing list members like myself are being pushed to buy some other wine while Kay Bros is selling the OB6 to US for more money. Lets say, one day OB6 looses its glamor in US market and Kay Bros can not sell it there, what are they gonna do ?
Secondary market is totally a different ball game. I don't think any wine maker will base it is wine pricing on secondary market prices. it is basicaly demand, supply and quality issue (in the eye of the wine buyer)
if we follow your reasoning, Drew Noon is silly to sell its wines for $ 25.00 even though they are snatched at secondary market for much higher prices. So he should increase his prices and also allocate less for each mailing list member.

**** Carl,

I have only just got back. Give me a chance. Anyway Brian is the hold up as he is proofing Chapter One.

If all goes according to plan, (and I have staff coverage arrange this time) - it will start flowing out in 8 days.

If its late I have a great excuse. You have heard the one about the dog that ate the homework..... in this case my ****ing cat Tokay, ate through the cable of the (expletive expensive) digital microphone that I use for voice recognition software. I should have a new one delivered tomorrow.

ufo wrote: I would have bought their wines this year again but I will not just because of the push. I know some members don't like this word but that's exactly what it is. While loyal mailing list members like myself are being pushed to buy some other wine while Kay Bros is selling the OB6 to US for more money. Lets say, one day OB6 looses its glamor in US market and Kay Bros can not sell it there, what are they gonna do ?

It's your choice to feel pushed, but you probably would have bought some of the other wines anyway, the vintage is quite good and so are many of the wines. The old "cutting off your nose to spite your face" saying comes to mind. I chose to still buy because the wines are good. It's Kay's choice to market there wines any way they see fit, the market will tell them if they got it right and they will adjust accordingly. If the bottom falls out of their US market they will sell it all elsewhere and if the prices drop and allocations increase in a good vintage then I'll be in there buying.

ufo wrote: Secondary market is totally a different ball game. I don't think any wine maker will base it is wine pricing on secondary market prices. it is basicaly demand, supply and quality issue (in the eye of the wine buyer)
if we follow your reasoning, Drew Noon is silly to sell its wines for $ 25.00 even though they are snatched at secondary market for much higher prices. So he should increase his prices and also allocate less for each mailing list member.

Um, I think Grange and HoG and probably quite a few others are priced according to the influence of secondary markets. Many people think Drew Noon is crazy and from any commercial perspective he certainly should increase his prices, but I think he strikes a pretty good balance in looking after loyal customers.