Comments on: This Changes Everything? The Washington Costco Initiative

By: bill

bill — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 22:33:32 +0000

#1 on Wine Spectator wow that must mean it’s great.

By: Mike Veseth

Mike Veseth — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 14:40:47 +0000

Thanks Bjorn. That makes sense. A public utility should provide the product efficiently after it collects the required taxes.

By: Björn W

Björn W — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 14:25:33 +0000

Something to note on the swedish model is that, contrary to popular belief, Systembolaget has a quite low mark-up, especially on wines and spirits.

The pricing scheme is transparent and published on their website – everything has a mark-up of 19 % + a set mark-up of 50 US cents on wine, 39 c on spirits and 12 c on beer.

The reason prices (on low-end products) are so high in Sweden is the alcohol excise taxes (2.4 USD on a bottle of wine) and 25 % VAT (added on top of everything, so mark-up and alcohol tax is taxed yet again).

By: Mike Veseth

Mike Veseth — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 15:48:14 +0000

#1 on the Wine Spectator 100

By: bill

bill — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 15:34:17 +0000

Columbia Crest makes wine to a high standard. That’s rich!

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 02 Oct 2010 18:34:00 +0000

I agree with Grimaldi…. please look into the affects these bills would have on the smaller wineries who are putting out some amazing products.

The big outfits want high volume discounts and the ability to carry credit (which currently isn’t allowed) This would have a significant impact on competitive advantage for the larger wineries.

Keep reading the fine print here… the affects could be very detrimental.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Sat, 02 Oct 2010 16:18:09 +0000

Two counter-points to the Swedish model. 1.There’s no correlation between retail price / availability and alcoholism or abuse. 2. Correlation does not equal causation. Even if there was a statistical link between price and alcoholism, low price does not cause people to abuse or become addiction. Illicit drugs are very expensive, have stiff legal penalties associated with all facets of production, sale, and use — yet they are widely abused. Rates of alcoholism in Washington, which has the highest prices on liquor thanks in part to our state system, are not significantly lower than other states. The notion that rates will skyrocket is nothing more than a scare tactic used by those who oppose these initiatives that do not hold any water when applying critical thought and analysis.

By: Grimaldi

Grimaldi — Sat, 02 Oct 2010 02:48:16 +0000

Terrible initiatives, both of them. Fact is that the state should get out of the liquor business, but this is not the time or the way to do it. Both initiatives are poorly written and give way too much power to the people who wrote them (surprise). Plus they’ll cost our cities and counties an enormous amount in lost revenue, and that means more cuts to health and public safety services.

I’m voting no on 1100 & 1105

By: Paul Ahvenainen

Paul Ahvenainen — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 15:16:34 +0000

The idea of trying to distance wine or beer from spirits didn’t work before prohibition, and won’t work now. I am involved in the production of both wine and spirits, and was involed in brewing some years ago. Over the last 30 years i have seen both the fun side and the dark side of adult beverages. The difference isn’t in the drink or where its purchased, it’s in the drinker.

Those of us who make our living in this great business need to hang together, or we will all be hung separately.