Vinomofo Wine Deals

[Daver6]

While I actually agree with this I would note that the admins aren't the people who have purchased wine from VinoMofo (and would potentially have to comply with any T&C's because they were never a party). Hence they have no particular reason to stop any naming.

Personally I don't think the T&C's have a hope in hell of being enforced but those who actually purchased and are disclosing have more skin in the game and as such I wouldnt be relying on the defence that "the forum admins said it was OK".

What is the absolute worse VM can do if the draw the connection between your name here and your VM account? Stop selling to you? Take you to court? I don't think VM would really want that sort of notoriety.

Sounds like it would be cutting their nose of to spite their face. Would then just encourage that person to publicise their findings even more widely.

 

[beefarmer]

If it's a Churchview Chardy then I'm guessing it's the Bartondale, not sure that it's been on VM though.

churchview..correct. st john is your patron saint today

 

[beefarmer]

If it's a Churchview Chardy then I'm guessing it's the Bartondale, not sure that it's been on VM though.

i personally like a little detective work......the bartondale is over forty bucks so missed the call. I know the good doctor ralph was talking about inconsistencies and red herrings in VM's descriptions, but they do nail it very often. However, after doing the obligatory google search for said wine reviews, you could still possibly come acropper. this week i have had my first return..... so with the impending credit, a w.a. riesling will replace the vic shiraz.

 

[burmans]

What is the absolute worse VM can do if the draw the connection between your name here and your VM account? Stop selling to you? Take you to court? I don't think VM would really want that sort of notoriety.

Sounds like it would be cutting their nose of to spite their face. Would then just encourage that person to publicise their findings even more widely.

I largely agree with your thoughts, but my point is really that as the person who bought the wine its largely your own view of what could happen to you that matters, admin doesnt have skin in the game, I'm not the one who "might" be barred and/or taken to court. Some would probably rather not take that chance.

So while I personally probably would have no problem with disclosure, I can understand and respect why someone else might have a different view.

 

[Rocket09]

churchview..correct. st john is your patron saint today

Which one was the Churchview?

 

[beefarmer]

Which one was the Churchview?

i think that the w.a. riesling today is the one......everything matches from what i remember hours ago. sipping the last bit of glenloft 11 as i type. now, i have had two of their products recently and so thru pedigree, i went for this. what i find interesting is the 8 per cent alcohol. this i found out a little later, however considering the flavour of the johny chardy, it's definately worth a try. once again, if you dont't like it , return. my texture of choice is medium to full, and we shall see. i have a little feeling that my stocks are quite adequate and it would take something really good to get snapped up. now, who hasn't said that before...while i remember, i think it was cruiser who couldnt remember a purchase recently....i too nearly in the same boat..it's been a two week extravaganza. while i type, i also had the 35 bucker heathcote shiraz 2014 down to ten fifty....i really appreciate the tasting notes for that one - pretty much spot on, and i have to say, a little different. much vibrance in the palate, nice youngish fruit - yes i know it's a 14 but you can have old berry flavour....quite a chalming vino . and i have to say, female winemakers are pretty good and have altered tasting palates for me at least. i think they have made some serious inroads and made wine softer with more finesse. now, back to the lamb shoulder on the webber. cheers and happy buying

 

[Daver6]

I largely agree with your thoughts, but my point is really that as the person who bought the wine its largely your own view of what could happen to you that matters, admin doesnt have skin in the game, I'm not the one who "might" be barred and/or taken to court. Some would probably rather not take that chance.

So while I personally probably would have no problem with disclosure, I can understand and respect why someone else might have a different view.

Very good and valid points you make and I totally concur. Now, less talk and more drinking

 

[beefarmer]

Very good and valid points you make and I totally concur. Now, less talk and more drinking

i have already had the Glenlofty 2011 shiraz, The Chalmers Arturo shiraz , a graysonline barratt merlot 2010 and another grays Chris Hill mclaren vale shiraz 2012..how much more drinkin could a poosibly do????.......you are right, finish it off with a vintage port.

 

[penegal]

I see it as more of a case of... "please don't speculate in public because this thread is one of the top google hits now".


I can absolutely see where VM is coming from. They agree with winemakers not to disclose the identity of the wine they are selling. But in order to sell any "Secret deals" wine they need to disclose some quantity of information (e.g. enough information to get customers to think that the product is worth buying). An informed buyer can speculate (with some accuracy) as to what is being purchased. I think Vinomofo would just prefer that speculation isn't published so high in the google results, as it potentially impacts their ability to negotiate with winemakers.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

I see it as more of a case of... "please don't speculate in public because this thread is one of the top google hits now".


I can absolutely see where VM is coming from. They agree with winemakers not to disclose the identity of the wine they are selling. But in order to sell any "Secret deals" wine they need to disclose some quantity of information (e.g. enough information to get customers to think that the product is worth buying). An informed buyer can speculate (with some accuracy) as to what is being purchased. I think Vinomofo would just prefer that speculation isn't published so high in the google results, as it potentially impacts their ability to negotiate with winemakers.

penegal - the voice of reason - well I never!

So much for that theory that the lack of sleep can impact accurate thought processes!

 

[penegal]

penegal - the voice of reason - well I never!

So much for that theory that the lack of sleep can impact accurate thought processes!

Or excessive wine consumption?

 

[admin]

While I actually agree with this I would note that the admins aren't the people who have purchased wine from VinoMofo (and would potentially have to comply with any T&C's because they were never a party). Hence they have no particular reason to stop any naming.

This is not correct. I have purchased wine from VM. I have also had discussions with them regarding some of the posts on this thread so they know my name and that I am "admin". Even with this knowledge they are happy to take my money (and I am happy to take the wine).

Regarding the broader question of AFF members posting their opinion of what a secret deal is: As I have said many times, there is nothing in the AFF TOS which prevents this, so from an AFF perspective the post is legitimate. VM might (and I stress "might") prefer our members to be more discreet, but they have no influence on AFF's editorial policy. They certainly have influence on their T&C's and may decide to enforce them. But do you really think they will refuse business? Or take any kind of legal action against their customers, which will be difficult to succeed and face media backlash?

 

[tgh]

I agree with the thrust of Admin's post , but point out that it's our own butts we may be kicking,
VM has been spectacularly successful and it's hard to believe that there is enough wine available to continue the kind of deals to which we have become accustomed.
ANYTHING that impinges of their buying power.. also impinges on our buying power.
I think the speculation here is very very positive for VIM , ie the google hit list , and bad for us as customers.
Imho , We should continue the riddle game here but we also need a private list … with historical data ( but don't forget to invite me )

 

[Tannin]

All valid arguments but keep in mind that Vinomofo can only buy so much wine, and there's an increase happening in the "I missed out" posts. Sometimes less is more.

 

[DrSammyLee]

Imho , We should continue the riddle game here but we also need a private list … with historical data ( but don't forget to invite me )

Forum posting is quite inefficient for this kind of stuff. I'm working on my own searchable spreadsheet to make things easier. I mean for good/bad, you can find what some of the deals are just by looking through older posts, but that requires too much effort

 

[burmans]

This is not correct. I have purchased wine from VM. I have also had discussions with them regarding some of the posts on this thread so they know my name and that I am "admin". Even with this knowledge they are happy to take my money (and I am happy to take the wine).

Yes, I actually thought when I reread this that you might have purchased wine yourslf. But I think you are perhaps confusing your role as a consumer vs. as admin. As a consumer you do have a contract with VM, as admin you are just administering this site and this sites TOS (as opposed to publishing advice and indemnifiying other users against their costs if they get taken to court - or at least I'm assuming you arent doing that). Pretty much as you indicate yourself in the second para.

As for your question, no I dont think they will do this, but it is certainly not unknown (albeit unusual) for companies to do this. But I still dont see what I think is relevant to the actions of others, if they are concerned they are perfectly entitled to keep this info quiet.

 

[beefarmer]

Just one comment vinomofos - don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs !

 

[Daver6]

Just one comment vinomofos - don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs !

Just thinking out loud here...

So lets assume the wineries aren't happy with their product being outed. They still need to move their product at below RRP (otherwise they wouldn't be selling via VM). They certainly aren't going to just sit on stock. They will either continue with VM or go through another secret style reseller. If the latter, as consumers the product is still available at a similar price and the product will continue to be outed.


This leaves three options as I see it:

1) Wineries stop selling cheaply and sit on excess stock.
2) The wines will still be available either via VM or someone else on the cheap.
3) Wineries will have to adjust RRP to meet demand.

I can't see option 1 ever happening. Option 2 or 3, consumers win.

 

[tgh]

consumers win.

this utopian environment only lasts until enough wineries go broke to level up the supply….

 

[amaroo]

Don't underestimate the pressure applied by the retailing whales. Some wineries would be $itting themselves when the next buyers meeting rolls around.