Using this picture in no way implies that FedEx is a badly-run company that doesn’t care about its customers, and that drivers dumping packages is a common occurrence.
No one who has had wine delivered by FedEx should be surprised, but FedEx sure seemed to be
Blog regulars know this story all too well – a wine shipment never arrives at their home, and FedEx (or UPS) claims to know nothing about what happened.
So you can imagine my lack of surprised when I saw this on Thursday: A FedEx driver had dumped hundreds of packages into a ravine in Alabama. Local police, who are investigating, told the New York Times that the driver had done it at least six times, though they aren’t sure if the driver wanted to steal the items or if dumping them was easier than delivering them.
But not to worry: “The security of our customers’ shipments is a top priority and we are committed to treating our customers’ packages with the utmost care,” a FedEx spokesman told the Times.
Yeah, and I’m drinking $150, 98-point, 15.2% Napa cabernet sauvignon for dinner tonight.
The problem is not that FedEx or UPS packages go missing. Of course they do, as the Times story noted – a stunning number, almost 2 million a year by one estimate. And, of course, there was the obligatory reference to porch pirates.
The problem, as has been demonstrated on the blog as well as in the piece I wrote for Pix.wine, is that the delivery services don’t care. And each knows that there’s little any of us can do about their lack of interest, since the two companies control the private delivery business in the U.S.
The question to ask (and which, sadly, the Times reporter did not): How could the driver dump packages at least six times and not have FedEx notice? I’ve been told that delivery packages are scanned at least three times: When they arrive at the facility where they will be loaded on the truck, when they’re loaded on the truck, and when they’re delivered. And the truck is also scanned when it returns to the facility to make sure nothing is left on it by mistake.
One would think, with all that cyber-tracking, that FedEx would have noticed something was amiss after the second or third time the driver didn’t deliver the packages. But what’s the point? Then they’d have to do something about it.
How many of us have had to resort to this to get wine deliver?.
Apparently, wine drinkers aren’t the only ones fed up with Fed Ex and UPS
Imagine my surprise when I saw this headline: “A wave of e-commerce logistics startups is threatening to break the UPS and FedEx duopoly”
Apparently, wine drinkers aren’t the only ones who are fed up with the way Fed Ex and UPS control the delivery market. The story reports that “a slew of new players, juiced by millions in venture capital funding, is entering the package logistics fight to see if they can’t can’t change a decades-old power dynamic.”
Look past the fancy writing, and you’ll discover that UPS and Fed Ex have lost market share, that their on-time and delivery performances are declining, and that they’re even telling unprofitable customers to look for another company to deliver their packages.
That’s the good news. The bad news? For one, the story doesn’t specifically mention wine or alcohol delivery – and especially its particular and infuriating delivery requirements. For another, all the fancy writing (yes, the story even mentions unicorns) details more hopes and dreams than actual, concrete solutions. After all, just because someone throws venture capital money at a problem doesn’t mean the problem will be solved.
Still, this is the best news wine drinkers have had in a very long time. As, as I joked with the editor of the Pix piece, any news is better than chasing the delivery truck down the street.
“OK, now let’s make this clear — toasty and oaky are out.”
This week’s wine news: Wine Scholars Guild says it will try to make winespeak easier to understand. Plus, DoorDash expands booze delivery and a look at the supermarket wine store of the future.
• No more toasty and oaky? The Wine Scholar Guild, a leading wine education group, says it wants to change the way we talk about wine. Or, at least I think that’s what it wants to do. The story describing the effort is so full of PR-speak, education-speak, and some -speak that I couldn’t decipher, that it’s difficult to say for sure. To quote: The project would “empower the individual to taste and describe wine with an enriched and universal lexicon.” In addition, it would “dive deeper into assessing the qualities of a wine’s building blocks” and look “into the nature of a wine’s personality.” Sigh. This is probably worth a separate post on the blog; I’ll try to follow up and see if I can make any sense of it.
• Bring on the booze: DoorDash, the restaurant delivery service that has branched out to groceries and clothing, is expanding its alcohol delivery effort. Customers will be able to place orders for beer, wine, and spirits (with or without food) from participating local restaurants and supermarkets in select markets in 20 states. We’ll ignore for a moment the company’s infamous reputation (and that the Wine Curmudgeon has all but stopped using it, since half my orders are wrong in some way). Instead, let’s focus on what this news means: Another chink in the armor that restricts alcohol sales in the U.S. That the company would have done this two years ago is doubtful. But the pandemic changed all that, and that DoorDash thinks it can make money with wine delivery speaks volumes.
• Even in Iowa: We’ve written a lot on the blog about how important supermarkets are to the future of wine, and here’s one more example — a regional grocer has built an upscale market in suburban Des Moines, Iowa, with “a Hy-Vee Wine & Spirits department offering a walk-in beer cooler, a walk-in wine room and a walk-in humidor.” In Iowa? In addition, the story reports that building the store required a $26 million investment, and that it is its “first entirely reimagined grocery store.” What does that say about what Hy-Vee’s bosses think about selling wine in supermarkets?
Happy birthday — now let’s drink my birthday wine.
This edition of Ask the WC: Wine as a birthday present, plus buying larger bottles and making sense of on-line wine
Because the customers always have questions, and the Wine Curmudgeon has answers in this irregular feature. You can Ask the Wine Curmudgeon a wine-related question by clicking here.
Hi, WC:
I can’t find anything on the blog about buying wine as a birthday present — lots of wine for holidays and Christmas, but not birthdays. How did you miss that? Birthday shopper
Dear Birthday:
That’s a good point, and one would have thought I’d have touched on the subject once or twice in almost 14 years. General guidance — buy someone what will they like, and not what you think they should like. Plus, of course, bubbly. More specifically, wine for a birthday (or similar special occasion) is about memories — reminding someone about a wonderful experience they once had or something they did with you that neither of you will ever want to forget. I can buy a certain bottle of sparkling wine, and still remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I drank it.
•
Hello, Wine Curmudgeon:
A friend sent me this article about wine in larger bottles. Needless to say, it didn’t make much sense to me. Can you explain? Confused
Dear Confused:
Ah, the wine geek larger bottle story. No wonder you were confused. The wine geek theory goes that the world’s best wines last longer and age more gracefully if they’re in larger bottles, as opposed to the standard 750 ml bottle. So most of the information in the story doesn’t apply to most wine drinkers, since we don’t regularly spend $100 for a bottle of wine, regardless of size. Besides, as happens very time I buy a 1.5-liter bottle of the La Vieille Ferme rose (which is the equivalent of two standard bottles), I drink too much of it. And I’m a professional and should know better.
•
Hey WC:
I’m a fairly traditional wine shopper, which means I either buy it at the market or at Costco or a chain retailer. So, needless to say, I’ve been confused by this on-line and delivery stuff. Do you have any words of wisdom? Retail shopper
Dear Retail:
The biggest problem with on-line wine (save for delivery charges) is that you can’t read the label — so no idea about alcohol levels, the grapes in the blend, and he importer (if there is one) without a lot of Googling. And there’s no guarantee about vintage, either. Otherwise, it’s not that much different. I wrote a post about it here; just find a decent on-line retailer and go from there.
This week’s wine news: Sommelier arrested for arson, plus wine delivery’s future and hat etiquette — because hats matter in cheap wine
• Arson charges: Caleb Ganzer, a former Food & Wine magazine sommelier of the year and a partner in a well-regarded Manhattan wine bar, is facing arson charges. The New York Times reports that New York City police arrested Ganzer last week and charged him with two felony counts of arson and several other crimes in connection with three fires, including two at outdoor dining sheds in Manhattan. There was no indication of motive.
• Bring on delivery: Wine retailers continue to see delivery — jump-started by the pandemic — as key to success in whatever becomes the new normal, says Market Watch magazine. The “emergence of on-demand delivery has resulted in added sales, while consumers have quickly become enamored by the convenience and reduced-friction transactions the services offer.” Delivery has always been something small retailers had mixed emotions about, since it usually offered as much aggravation as it did profit. But better websites, third-party delivery services like Drizly, and relaxed state laws have reduced the former and offered more of the latter.
• Hat hair: The WC doesn’t want to hear this isn’t a wine item — how can I spread the gospel of cheap wine without knowing hat etiquette? And, of course, how to fix hat hair? Fortunately, The New York Times’ Ask Vanessa column solves all. I knew most of the etiquette; it’s the hat hair stuff that was a revelation: Use “dry shampoo, also known as hair powder.” Who knew, given the long, sordid history of hair powder? Her advice? Excuse yourself to powder your hair, sprinkle hair powder into your hands and scrunch. Who knows? Maybe I can get an endorsement deal.
“Those poor saps in 2020. They’re stuck with the laws that were designed to keep speakeasies from opening, even though speakeasies don’t exist in 2020.”
Will the success of e-commerce and restaurant delivery during the pandemic eventually make it easier for us to buy wine, beer, and spirits?
This is the second of two parts looking at how the coronavirus pandemic has changed the way we buy wine. Today, will the pandemic lead to changes so it’s easier to buy wine on-line? The first part – finding value when buying wine on-line – is here.
Wine is being shipped to our homes, and we don’t have to sign for it. That used to be a felony in many states. We’re ordering wine from restaurants and liquor stores over the Internet, which was not only illegal in some states, but almost impossible to do even where it wasn’t.
All of this is because of the coronavirus pandemic, as state liquor cops relax enforcement of many of the laws that make up the three-tier system. Their goal is to help restaurants and retailers stay in business, and so the economic benefit outweighs enforcing the law.
Which raises a question about the future of the three-tier system, the set of state laws that govern how we buy alcohol in the U.S.: Will the success of Internet sales and restaurant delivery during the pandemic lead to changes that will make it easier for us to buy wine, beer, and spirits?
The answer, after a week of reporting, is almost certainly. Once the pandemic ends, say those I’ve talked to, it will be difficult for state regulators to return to the strict, Prohibition-era system that defines U.S. liquor laws. And that means more flexible e-commerce and home delivery regulations.
“My crystal ball is not particularly clear on this,” says Jason Haas of Paso Robles’ Tablas Creek Vineyard, one of the most thoughtful and erudite people in the wine business when it comes to discussing three-tier. “But I think it is clear that we as a society are not against lifting the restrictions. The fear was always that, if we did, the unknown might happen, that it would hurt business and alcohol would flood society. And those arguments would sound really silly after all of this.”
E-commerce and home delivery have traditionally been a tiny percentage of U.S. wine sales. Wine.com, the only truly national e-commerce wine retailer, does less than $150 million in sales each year, barely noticeable among the $70 billion U.S. wine market. Even the so-called DTC market, where wineries sell directly to consumers, accounts for just single percentage points of that $70 billion.
And that’s because the three-tier system was set up to make it difficult to do anything other than buy wine in a restaurant or retailer. And that’s because the goal of the three-tier system, which took effect when Prohibition ended in 1933, was to keep Al Capone out of the liquor business. I’ve written extensively about why this happened, on the blog and in the cheap wine book, but the reasons almost don’t matter anymore. It’s enough to know that even though this is the 21st century and Al Capone has been dead for 73 years, we’re still stuck with a liquor regulation system that makes no sense in the Internet age.
But maybe not for much longer.
“The genie is definitely out of the bottle,” says Cameron Hughes, whose self-named winery has been one of the country’s pioneers in DTC sales. “This shows we can operate successfully without ruining the intentions of the three-tier system, so why should have to sign up for it again once the pandemic is over?”
And the wine industry executives I talked to aren’t the only ones who think change is coming. The Wine & Spirits Wholesalers Association, which has lobbied successfully on behalf of three-tier for almost 90 years, is apparently worried, too. It warned U.S. consumers about “black market liquor” shortly after many states eased three-tier delivery restrictions. That the only thing most of us know about black market booze is from old movies is irrelevant to the wholesalers; they’ll do almost anything to save the system that gives them a constitutionally protected monopoly to distribute alcohol.
Coming next
“Relaxing the rules has always been the goal,” says Matt Crafton, the winemaker at Napa Valley’s Chateau Montelena. “So why not make that permanent?”
So what might happen – or not – once the pandemic winds down? Any changes probably won’t happen immediately, but even later rather than sooner will be a welcome change:
• The law that requires every wine sold in the U.S. to have a distributor won’t change, so the wholesalers trade group can rest easy.
• More and easier home delivery from retailers, restaurants, and wineries. It’s possible the rules will be changed in various states so that more wine shops and restaurants can take Internet orders – and how much better would it be to order wine with your takeout food? The catch here is restaurant pricing. Will restaurants realize they’ll have to improve on their three and four to one markups to be competitive?
• The end to signing for wine deliveries, the hassle that the delivery companies hate as much as consumers do. So far, the republic hasn’t ended without signing for wine, and, says Hughes, “in the 21st century, there has to be a better way for Fed Ex and UPS drivers to deliver wine than to check ID.”
This week’s wine news: Total Wine takes on wine delivery, plus an IHOP that sells wine and the British government sticks it to wine drinkers
• Home delivery: Total Wine, the chain that wants to become the first national wine retailer, will offer same-day and scheduled delivery in select markets. Currently, the chain only does this kind of delivery in 13 cities in Virginia. The news release, written mostly in tech-speak, is difficult to understand, but the implication is that Total will roll out delivery where it’s legal as soon as it can. What makes this different from the recent rush of retailers announcing delivery? That Total isn’t doing delivery through a third-party service like Drizly or Instacart, but will apparently provide the service itself. That’s a tremendous undertaking in this era of outsourcing, but also speaks to Total’s close to the vest approach toward retailing.
• Wine with your Rooty Tooty Fresh ‘N Fruity? A Phoenix IHOP has added a full-service bar, serving beer, wine, and cocktails. So yes, IHOP mimosas with your pancakes. The chain normally doesn’t let its franchisees do this sort of thing, but the IHOP is in a former Lone Star Steakhouse, and the bar was already in the restaurant. So why not take advantage of the situation?
• Raising wine taxes: The British government, trying to balance the budget while it leaves the European Union, has found one solution: Raise the import duty on wine. The Financial Times reports that the new rate will increase the cost of a bottle of wine by 7 pence (about a dime in U.S. dollars). What makes this story so odd is that the government isn’t raising the duty on beer or spirits, even though wine is now the most popular alcoholic beverage in the United Kingdom and it’s the sixth biggest wine market in the world.
This week’s wine news: Total Wine takes on wine delivery, plus an IHOP that sells wine and the British government sticks it to wine drinkers