New Jersery Wine Shipping Coming?
December 17, 2007 – 8:41 am“The more we restrict trade, the less quality of services you get and the higher the price to the consumer, and it damages the economy.”
State Senator Raymond Lesniak, NJ
The good Senator is correct. However it will be important to see just how correct he intends to be. New Jersey is on a path to consider legislation that would allow New Jersey residents to purchase and have shipped to them wine from out-of-state. This would mean overturning the ban on New Jersey wineries from shipping their wine direct.
The real question i whether or not the Senator, the New Jersey wineries and the out-of-state wineries, all of whom will support opening up New Jersey to wine shipments will be willing to settle for average service for consumers and keeping prices high by prohibiting out of state retailers from shipping into New Jersey when the introduce legislation in 2008.
The only justification for writing legislation that allows out-of-state wineries to ship to NJ but not out-of-state wine merchants is a desire to protect NJ wine distributors from competition, a justification that finds no support in logic, fairness or good public policy.
Between 2000 and 2006 New Jersey distributors have given over $600,000 to New Jersey political campaigns. They’ve done this with the intent to influence state politicians to keep in place the purely protectionist measures that keep them enormously profitable while keeping New Jersey consumers paying higher prices for wine and have much less access to the products they want.
In order to prevent the State from passing legislation that only allows out-of-state wineries to ship into New Jersey and preventing New Jersey citizens from purchasing also from out-of-state retailers it will take both NJ wineries and retailers to stand up for their fellow citizens and it will take out of state retailers and wineries to make the case that fairness and good sound economic policy demands that New Jersey citizens should have access to all wines that are available, not just those from wineries choosing to ship wine and those that New Jersey distributors will allow them to buy.
3 Responses to “New Jersery Wine Shipping Coming?”
What is it about dealing with wineries that makes service “average”? I feel that dealing with the winery directly ensures much more detailed information about the products versus a retailer who might know just some of the information.
In addition, not all wineries charge exorbitant prices. In fact, I am aware of many wineries’ clubs that offer generous discounts to their members. There are also wineries that offer free shipping on case buys and other incentives to deal direct.
I support retail in every way, but to demean wineries as a whole with comments like this is simply incorrect and self-serving. I hope New Jersey opens the door to out of state retailers who can offer a compelling reason for consumers to buy from them.
By tanni on Dec 17, 2007
I am a California winemaker, but I have a home at the Jersey Shore. I think it is a little silly that I cannot even send my own wine to my own house.
I agree that competition will be good for everyone and the distributors will also continue to prosper. The industry needs the distributors and they fulfill a vital role.
The other blockade that comes up in this debate is the underage shipping issue.
The reality is that we need to enforce the 21 year old signing requirement and that should do it. My wine retails for $52 per bottle and appeals to the real wine afficiando. When you add in shipping costs, I don’t see 15 year olds ordering Fulcrum Pinot Noir directly from me.
More choice is a good thing.
By David on Dec 18, 2007
What does this mean to us in Texas?
(From Wine and Spirits Daily)
TEXAS COURT DECISION RESULTS IN HOLLOW VICTORY
In what was neither a complete victory nor defeat for out-of-state retailers and Texas wholesalers, Judge Sidney Fitzwater of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that Granholm offers protection from discrimination to both wineries and retailers. In other words, he ruled that Texas law barring out-of-state retailers from shipping directly to consumers is unconstitutional. The judge interprets that Granholm requires Texas to allow both in-state and out-of-state retailers to ship directly to Texans or none at all. This part of the ruling is a victory, but perhaps a hollow victory, for the Specialty Wine Retailers Association (SWRA) and here’s why. The judge wrote that the State of Texas has the option to force out-of-state retailers to purchase wine from Texas wholesalers, so he’s basically leaving the decision up to the state.
“The court concludes that Texas’ ban on the sale and shipment of wine by out-of-state retailers to Texas residents is unconstitutional, but it also holds that the requirement that wine retailers–including out-of-state retailers–first purchase such wine from Texas-licensed wholesalers is constitutional.”
However, it’s worth noting that the judge dismissed arguments by wholesalers that barring direct shipments from out-of-state retailers would help prevent minors from accessing alcohol and ensure proper tax collection.
In the unlikely even that out-of-state retailers start purchasing wine from Texas wholesalers, we’re pretty sure things would get chaotic fast. Plus, is it even legal? We smell more court dates and legal wrangling to figure this thing out.
In all, the language of the decision does not bode well for wholesalers nationally, but Texas wholesalers managed to dodge a bullet. The decision will likely affect similar retailer lawsuits in New York and Michigan. A New York court recently ruled that Graholm doesn’t apply to retailers, while a Michigan court decided Granholm does apply to retailers.
By Dan on Jan 15, 2008