Why Is The PLCB Lowering Spirits Instead of Selling Them?

Philadelphia

The PLCB shut down the State Store System of Stores because of the COVID-19 pandemic. They are the ONLY control state to do so (other than Utah, temporarily, because of an earthquake that happened concurrently). Liquor stores remain open in other states (because a lot of them sell booze in grocery stores, you know, like normal people do); beer distributors were literally classified as "life essential" by Governor Wolf in yesterday's shut-down-the-state order; and of course, as we pointed out recently, we were told by the state that we didn't need the State Store System of Stores because "Individuals can still buy wine and beer at grocery stores with PLCB licenses."

Wilkes-Barre

We have encouraged the State to leave the stores closed. The Distilled Spirits Council of the US and American Distilled Spirits Association has pointed out that the current instruction leaves the citizens unable to buy spirits (a completely legal product in Pennsylvania and the United States), and suggested the state at least temporarily allow the sale of spirits at the grocery stores and beer distributors that remain open...somewhat heroically, and I'm not kidding about that.

Allentown (the sawdust is a nice touch)

I've been talking to wine and spirits wholesalers who work with the PLCB to supply their warehouses. They're ready, willing, and able to supply spirits to the grocery stores, convenience stores, and beer distributors that are already open and selling. What's more, they're also ready to supply the restaurants and bars who are eager to do take-out beer and wine and spirits sales, just to keep their people employed, to literally keep their businesses from failing. Not closing temporarily: failing. The wholesalers know that they can find drivers to do the work. The PLCB has said they could do this (click the link, and scroll down to the 7th paragraph), but have never shown a bit of initiative toward action on it.

Williamsport

Has there been any indication that the PLCB is even considering any of this? At least the legislature has decided to come back to work remotely and get something done, but you have to believe this isn't going to be high on their list -- and I'm not suggesting it should be. But as we saw when the Board decided that it could simply "interpret" the hated Case Law right out of existence by declaring a six-pack to equal a case, the courts give the PLCB very broad latitude indeed on "interpretation" of The Almighty Liquor Code (had we mentioned that the PLCB has its own courts?). They could easily rule on all of this stuff, and let the Legislature catch up.

Also Philly

No. The Board, the Governor, the Department of Community and Economic Development have done nothing about this, none of the really easy steps that would take some of the stress off businesses, and extend some fairness to the folks in the spirits production chain (who also need gainful employment), and let those of us who might want a whiskey sour or Bloody Mary (or quarantini, which is apparently a thing) buy a bottle or two.

What are they doing?

Harrisburg

They're boarding up State Stores as a precaution against looting. 

In a state where the last large scale riots were over fifty years ago, the PLCB decided to raise public morale with this amazing display of optimistic trust. Because nothing says "it may be rough, but we're going to get through this together" like boarding up your store...in Williamsport. 

This lack of leadership, lack of understanding, lack of common good sense is just another example of what an awful mistake having this all-too-independent state agency in charge of retail stores has been. The Legislature should, in the spare ten minutes it would take, use this opportunity to say, 'Okay, that's enough. You had your chance, more than enough chances, and that's it. Game over, PLCB. You're done.'

Even better? It really would only take ten minutes. The Legislature actually drew up plans back in 1987 to end the State Store System of Stores and those plans, never enacted, are still available online in the Pennsylvania Code...ready to roll.

Here's the plan; your predecessors already did the work for you. Literally all you should have to do is change the dates and vote.

Because all the PLCB is going to do in this crisis is protect themselves. Apparently they think Pennsylvania is France. We deserve a lot better than this.

Paris

The PLCB Hiding Failure Once Again - UPDATED!

Back in October of 2015 the PLCB came out with a new magazine called "Savor." It was supposed to be a quarterly guide to premium Wine & Spirits. You can see a copy of it here. See anything odd about that front cover? Neither did the PLCB, and that may have come back to bite them. They apparently didn't do any due diligence or research to see if the name was taken or if it would infringe on a current publication.

While it's mostly speculation on my part, I suspect the people at Saveur Magazine did take notice that Savor, while spelled differently, was pronounced largely the same, also covered wine and food, and would therefore infringe on their trademark. Normally in business there would be some kind of damages for use of improper use of a trademark, but I can't find anything that shows any were paid. There may have just been a curt cease-and-desist letter, and the PLCB may have taken the smart option for once and pulled the plug, but... These things take forever to work out so there may be nothing to find yet.

However, the telling fact is that I can no longer find ANY mention of Savor anywhere official, and I've always thought my Google-Fu was pretty good. Nothing on the FWAGS website, any search for "Savor Magazine" takes you to the PLCB Taste magazine listings. Savor has disappeared except for the actual link I posted above. Maybe one of you readers can find more than I did.

Nobody will notice - go with it!

So, here it is the beginning of April and of course, a quarterly magazine would be out by now since the first quarter of the year ends on March 31st. No Savor to be found anywhere. What happened to it will probably never be known -- the PLCB tries to bury its failures when it can; the wine kiosks being a rare exception that they seemed oddly proud of -- but what is known is that it is another case of PLCB failure added to the long list of poor business decisions they have made since inception.

By the way...there's more amusement to be had. Check the masthead of that issue of Savor: the PLCB got Philadelphia's MetroCorp to do Savor. They're better known as the publishers of Philadelphia magazine, and that's no surprise: the PLCB and PhillyMag do booze events together, which maybe explains why PhillyMag is a lot less pro-privatization than ... well, almost any other Pennsylvania publication, except maybe Taste. So are we back at audit time? How much did the PLCB blow on this contracted disaster? I'm going to try and find out but maybe like with TableLeaf, nobody in the PLCB will remember and there won't be any paperwork left to check.

UPDATE:

Unlike the 40 days it took the PLCB to answer my questions about negotiations the PLCB was much quicker with this inquiry. Their answer to what happened to Savor Magazine is that; "Savor magazine was renamed Premium Collection. The Spring/Summer edition is anticipated to be available around the middle of June." Great, that doesn't tell me what happened just what is going to happen. So the next question is if Savor was renamed because of the trademark infringement I speculated about above. 

They wouldn't outright admit to that but came up with this answer; "The PLCB has determined that a new name for its quarterly publication focusing on premium products – “Premium Collection” – would both align the publication more closely with our Fine Wine & Good Spirits Premium Collection luxury brand and avoid any confusion with another business." They couldn't determine that there would be confusion BEFORE they published?  This is pretty much double speak for "Hey we got a Cease And Desist order from another publication and since there wasn't a chance in hell we would win we decided to change the name and it took us too long to come up with "Premium Collection" so the publication date had to be pushed back." Is there any doubt? As Paul Harvey used to say, Now you know the rest of the story.

Privatize.

More PLCB convenience

On  April 16th, 2011 the PLCB increased convenience, affecting the 4,200 residents of Renovo and the immediate surrounding area, by closing the State Store in town. They decided it was much more convenient — for the PLCB, apparently — to have the residents drive a minimum of 55 miles round trip to the State Store in Loch Haven: the only State Store in all 900 square miles of Clinton County, the only State Store for all 40,000+ residents of that county. 

Of course, the PLCB has said they are "actively looking" for a replacement spot in Renovo. I'm pretty sure that after five years some lard-assed PLCB real estate drone could have walked to every building in Renovo and the surrounding area. So I have to question on how "actively" they are "looking," or if they are just "actively" running their mouth trying to obfuscate the fact they aren't really doing anything. Last year I suggested the empty store at 112 St. Clair Street and Third St. in Renovo, which has parking and a loading dock, but no one "actively" did anything, and now it isn't available.

So how fair is this? Let's look at it the PLCB Way. The Almighty Liquor Code favors quotas: so many bar and restaurant licenses for so many residents, so many beer distributors and importing distributors per so many citizens...that sort of thing. Once it was one "R" license (a 'bar license,' roughly) for every 1,000 citizens, now it is 1 for every 3000. Apparently we don't need as many restaurants with beer and wine anymore; when did that change? What about State Stores? 45 years ago, there was one store for every 15,608 citizens. As of today, there is one store for every 21,225 citizens. Population went up, number of stores went down a lot, almost 25% down. That makes it more convenient for the PLCB and their ever-increasing operating costs, but what about you?

Based on that current ratio, Clinton County should have two State Stores, but they don't, and after five years they still don't (and of course, they're still screwing around with where they're going to have that one store!). I have to give the citizens credit for being so patient. Looking at the U.S. average, Clinton County should have seven liquor/wine stores, and they probably would under privatization, despite what the PLCB and its lockstep lackeys in the Legislature keep saying about a vast booze desert in upstate if privatization takes place.

It's a simple proposition. Renovo has two area grocery stores, one area beer distributor, and three area drug stores. Do you think any of those would have liquor and wine if allowed? You bet they would, because they know how to run a business already. Would the selection be better than the State Store? I guarantee it, in writing, and I'll eat my computer if I'm wrong! I'm not worried, it's an easy bet. Any selection is better than what the PLCB is providing now in Renovo: zilch, squat, zero, nada, nothing.

As long as we have the police-enforced monopoly State Store System, there will be less service in rural areas, because only the with the featherbedding incompetence of an institutionally corrupt and directionless agency like the PLCB can a state-backed complete monopoly not break even with the only liquor store in town. Privatization will at least allow somebody to provide what the PLCB won't, or can't. Privatization will bring small stores, large stores, specialty stores, and CONVENIENT stores. Will they carry everything? Of course not, but they will carry more than a closed store or a store that currently doesn't exist. A win for Clinton County! 

You have to wonder why Clinton County's representative in the House, Michael "Mike" K. Hanna, consistently votes against privatization. Is it because of the tiny handful of votes represented by the employees of the State Store in Lock Haven and their families? (Er...in Lock Haven for now, that is.) Or is it because he doesn't think his constituents can handle more than one liquor store? Or is it because he likes inconveniencing the thousands of tourists, hunters, and fishers that visit Clinton County every year, the hundreds of people who are working in the gas fields in Clinton, and the students (of legal age) and faculty at Lock Haven University? Because he does vote consistently against privatization (of course he does, he's the Democratic whip). If you live in Clinton County, why don't you ask him why he keeps voting against your convenience?

The PLCB vs. Real Business

Retail exists for the benefit of the consumer. The PLCB exists for the benefit of the people working at the PLCB. The consumer doesn't even enter into it, as admitted by the PLCB when they said they don't try to get the best pricing, they just pay whatever the producers ask. Now they say they want to "negotiate" as part of "modernization"; they aim to keep the difference between what they now pay and the lower price to maintain their bloated structure, not to lower prices for you and me. As if!

We deserve better. The State Store System had 82 years to prove their case, and the court of the public has said they failed. Just ask the people of Clinton County how well they are doing their job.

END IT, DON'T MEND IT. 

Pennsylvania isn't even a good liquor control state Pt. 2

In the first part of this story, we showed that even the other control states didn't think much of the PLCB, pretty much shutting them out of the "best practices" awards at the NABCA convention (National Alcohol Beverage Control Association; yes, it's real). Maybe it's because Pennsylvania doesn't even pay attention to what other control states are doing.

Imagine you are a slow, lumbering dinosaur from the Prohibitioneaous Era, just doing your own thing, not really paying any attention to what the world around you is doing; why should you, you've got the world to yourself! About 40 years ago, you get this itch. It isn't so bad, so you just ignore it, but it gets a little worse each year. Finally you decide to see what it is, and you plod over to the dinosaur doctors at Stateways (where all the dinosaurs go!). They tell you that you need to paint yourself different colors, and maybe put some State Approved plants around where you hang out to hide your huge bulk and ungainliness. Maybe change your name from Huge Lizard to Fine Green Friendly Lizard so that people might forget how big dumb and slow you are. That should help, they say. and also you should pay some attention to what the other lizards are doing and not just wander off and do whatever you want to any more.

I'm a dinosaur too!

But you're the biggest dinosaur in the land, and nobody can tell you how to do things! You've been doing the same thing forever, and in your mind it has worked just fine. (Remember that dinosaurs have little tiny brains for their size). So while the other dinosaurs finally figure out what all those bothersome little ants want (the customers), you continue as you were, because you know best. And you never see the comet.

And so it goes with the PLCB.  For example, the other control states (why can't we be more like New Hampshire?) finally figured out what the new hot brands of vodka are, ones that the people want to try, and put out a list. Now I can't imagine how long it takes a bunch of bureaucrats to figure out what is "hot" compared to the free market (maybe they chipped in and got a subscription to Market Watch), but they did and published it in the March 10th issue of the control state magazine (18 readers and dropping!).

You won't be surprised to learn that the PLCB has ONE of the five hot brands listed. Is it something new and unusual that their buyers discovered? Of course not. It is Elyx, a high-end variant of Absolut, and while it's admittedly excellent and quite different...it's garnered a ton of press, and is a variant of the largest selling imported vodka in the PLCB inventory. I bet that took some real effort on the part of the PLCB to pick it out.

The PLCB knows whats hot!

If you are curious, the "hot" vodkas picked out by the control states (except PA) are:
1. Goral Vodka Master.
2. Absolut Elyx Vodka
3. Bombora Vodka
4. Black Death Vodka
5. Danzka Vodka

Remember how the goal of the PLCB is to be better than Utah?  Utah carries two of these. Want to guess how many are available in the private stores across the Delaware river?

When Macy's doesn't have the color you want: you go to another store.
When Boscov's doesn't have the style you want: you go to another store.
When Giant doesn't have the meat you want: you go to another store.
When Mattress King doesn't have the mattress you want at the price you want to pay: you go to another store.
When the PLCB doesn't have what you want...you have to (illegally) go to another state!

Private business, private retail, is how America shops for everything else. When will Pennsylvania see booze normality?

Friday Night 7PM

What serves you better?

This Pennsylvania state store?

Or this grocery store in Texas?

How about this grocery store in Wisconsin?

Perhaps this one in Iowa!

 

This grocery in Springfield, Mo. is kinda nice too, and like the others, it's open Friday evenings!.

And somehow they get along with no separate entrances, no separate checkouts, and no government employees. This is NORMAL to most people. To be fair, the PLCB does have some liquor stores inside grocery stores (staffed by them, run by them). After over 30 years of trying to get the program accepted, there are fewer than 20 in the whole state, and they call that a success. Grocery stores know that having liquor and wine and beer sales is good for the bottom line. They also know that having a state store inside, that doesn't pay them as much rent as they make selling other things in the same space, isn't.

Maybe ANY local liquor store that would be open in a private system would work. Remember, the PLCB goal is to be better than Utah, not the other 48 states.

The PLCB will always fail the consumer compared to private business.

World Class? The PLCB doesn't even carry the top selling liquor in the world.

Edit: It turns out that the PLCB does carry one brand under the ByeJoe brand name as an SLO (qty 6) and it is listed as "DISTILLED SPIRITS - OTHER (IMPORT)" rather than Baijiu which is the same as listing Jim Beam as Corn Whiskey and not Bourbon. The point of the blog remains true.
******

When you are the arbiter of everything liquor you have to be extraordinarily aggressive at supplying the wants and desires of ALL the population. If you're the only source, after all, they have no other recourse, so you need to go out there and get the products the public wants and not what you feel like supplying!

Or you can just be extraordinarily passive and only do the minimum because you don't have to put forth the extra effort. You don't want to keep track of all those things because you have a hard enough time with what you do carry.

We live under the latter here in PA. Case in point. The PLCB doesn't carry the largest-selling liquor in the world.  Nowhere in the entire state: not on the shelf, not SLO, not on the crappy website. If you visit other states, does every private liquor store carry it? Certainly not, but then, they don't have to fill the wants of an entire state, either. Do other states carry this item that the PLCB has deemed not worthy to offer the citizens? You better believe it. I found it in New England, the mid-Atlantic, the South, and the West without too much trouble; in private stores, I might add. The control states like Pennsylvania fared pretty poorly.

You may be wondering how the PLCB can claim to be "world class" in their selection (which they claim often) when they don't have the wold's biggest-selling category of spirits. Simple: they aren't, since there are hundreds of stores in the country that carry more products on the shelf than any state store. The PLCB fudges their numbers claim by counting items you can order from private distributors....just like anyone in the real world of retail can do too. The fact is that the PLCB's on-the-shelf selection is beaten soundly by many stores all over America including many in other control states.

Have you figured it out yet? You may have: the mystery product is Baijiu, the largest-selling liquor in the world not only by volume, but value too. It's acknowledged as the national drink of China. There are seven times as many ethnic Chinese in Pennsylvania as there are ethnic Japanese, but you'd never know that looking at the shelves of the state stores. Perhaps Chinese restaurants, of which there seem to be quite a few around, might want to serve traditional liquor with their meals...just not in Pennsylvania where they have no selection, no choice, no freedom, and no voice in changing things.

Sorry, you'll have to go to Jersey. Again.

Lack of selection and market knowledge is one of the many prices that Pennsylvanians pay for by keeping the PLCB. Another is agility or the ability to spot trends and market forces and react to them. When you are a government agency more interested in how many more years you have to hang on until retirement, keeping up with or leading your competition doesn't enter the picture. You have no competition and don't care if you keep up with the private sector, because your citizen prisoners can only buy what you decide to let them buy anyway.

You'll get what we allow you to get when and if we allow you to get it.

The time has come to rid ourselves of this third-world class mistake and let the free market satisfy the wants and needs of the consumer, like they do for almost everything else you buy.

Pennsylvania isn't even a good Liquor Control State

Seventeen states are considered "Liquor Control" states with only two, Pennsylvania and Utah, fully controlling wine and liquor sales from warehouse dock to retail counter. Pennsylvania is by far the largest system, mainly because of the wine monopoly, and because it has the largest population; not because the PLCB is doing anything special or inventive, or God forbid, efficient.

In fact, even their peers in other control states say they aren't doing anything special or innovative. In December StateWays Magazine* gave out their first ever "Control States Best Practices Awards" and the winner of the "Best of the Best" was not the PLCB, It was the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The winner for "Best Technological Innovation" wasn't Pennsylvania either even after the millions spent in cost overruns; it went to New Hampshire and Iowa. Iowa won for their web portal ordering system, which is sorta like the one that the PLCB is working on rolling out, only theirs is in place and working. Kind of like the way SEPTA keeps promising a farecard system (like the ones other transit systems have had for decades); maybe it's a Pennsylvania problem.

The PLCB pretty much got smoked. They didn't win "Best Retail Innovation," that was Idaho who didn't spend over $4 million to come up with "TableLeaf" like PA did; or "Best Enforcement Program," which went to little Montgomery County, Maryland. Probably never having your state stores checked for underage compliance by the police had something to do with that one. The PLCB did tie for "Best Responsible Consumption Program" with North Carolina, but hasn't achieved the results that NC has so far. That could be because North Carolina spends a lot less on advertising and more on education than PA for their size.

Want the best wines? Better figure on taking a trip.

StateWays also has their own Best Wines of 2015 listing. They don't say if their selections are available in control states or not, but a quick check of the top two in each category shows that the Pennsylvania State Stores:

• Don't have the top 2 Malbecs
• Don't have the top 2 Sauvignon Blancs
• Do have the #1 Rose, but only SLO (minimum quantity 12) and priced 7% higher than the magazine lists.
• Do have the #2 Rose...in five of the 603 stores at only 9% higher than the magazine lists.
• Don't have the top 2 American Cabernet Sauvignons
• Does have the #1 Merlot, but as SLO only (minimum quantity 12) at 71% higher ($50 ea) than the magazine price.
• Doesn't have the #2 Merlot

So this quick look shows that the PLCB stocks 1 in 10 (at 5 stores) and can get 2 others if you want to pay more, sometimes A LOT more. (We're always told by the State Store Apologists that these SLO and allocations are set by the suppliers, not the PLCB: really? Then why don't they set them for the other control states?)
 
Of course, the free market doesn't think PA is up to snuff either. The The American Wine Consumer Coalition ratings show PA ranked 47th with an "F" grade for Consumer Access To Wine, joining the large group of control states at the bottom of the ranking. All our border states rate  higher, though, including the two bordering control states, Ohio and West Virginia. Who would have thought getting wine is easier in West Virginia?

Simply, we deserve better, and to be clear: better is not more PLCB, or a different flavor of PLCB, or a "modernized" PLCB. Better is NO PLCB. Tell your legislators: full privatization, no half-measures.


*StateWays is written for commissioners, board members, headquarters personnel, and retail store managers responsible for buying beverage alcohol in the control states, according to themselves. 

Run like a business? Really?

We're told to look at the PLCB as a business, as one of the largest alcohol retailers in the world. Well, okay...then let's do that, by comparing the PLCB to one of the largest alcohol retailers in the world: Total Wine & More.

Here's how Total Wine runs their business: Hire people to run your business who already have experience with large retail operations, ideally ones who have actually run businesses larger than you currently are so they can guide you toward growth. Hire people that already fit your business model, not ones you owe a favor to or who "contributed" to your cause. Find executives with experience in the product you sell or the sales model you use. Staff the stores with people that work toward company goals. Make sure there are enough qualified people on duty to cover store hours. Finally, provide a compelling reason for people to go to your stores and not the competition's.

Here's how the PLCB does it: Fill your 'business' with political hacks who have no experience running any business even remotely close to the size of the PLCB, nor any firsthand knowledge of retail or wholesale liquor or wine. Mix with a "we don't care what you want" attitude and staff with people who are almost immune to being fired and get promoted based on time in grade, not product knowledge or performance. Stir in a large amount of "We've always done it this way," toss in a goodly amount of graft and nepotism, and you'll have something that resembles the PLCB.

Drilling down, let's look at the comparative qualifications of the PLCB board chairman and Total Wine's chairman, and see how they stack up.

PLCB Board Chairman Tim Holden

Education: BA Sociology, Bloomsburg University
Work Experience:

• Probation officer
• Real estate Broker
• State Representative
• U.S. Congressman 
  1. Vice chairman House Agriculture Committee 
  2. Chairman of the committee's Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Energy and Research
  3. Member Livestock, Dairy and Poultry subcommittee
  4. Member Transportation and Infrastructure committee.

"Congressman" is a pretty impressive entry on a resume, to be sure, but...Agriculture? Poultry? Transportation? Conservation? Where's the booze, Tim? For that matter, where's the retail? He does have a nice smile, which always helps in retail.


Total Wine & More Board Chairman Adrian Bellamy

Education:

• Bachelor of Commerce, University of South Africa
• Master of Business Leadership, University of South Africa

Work Experience:

• Chairman and CEO of Edgars Stores (clothing)
• Chairman and CEO DFS Group Ltd. (leading luxury retailer)
• Executive Chairman of The Body Shop International (global personal hygeine retailer)
• Chairman of Reckitt Benckiser PLC (Major consumer product manufacturer, $13B revenue)
• Chairman of the Board for Williams-Sonoma Inc. (renowned houseware retailer, $4.5B revenue)
• Board Member of Action (Netherlands-based value retailer)
• Board Member River Island (London-based fashion retailer)
• Previous Board Member
  
  1. Robert Mondavi Corp (wine)
  2. South African Breweries Ltd (beer)
  3. Starbucks Corp. (coffee; retail)

Nice smile. This is a simply stunning business resume, based solidly in retail and consumer products; experience with the wine and beer industry. Bellamy is clearly a major player in worldwide retail.

Those are pretty close — "congressman," after all — but I have to give the edge to Mr. Bellamy. This isn't a blast against Mr. Holden in particular. He's no more qualified than any of the other PLCB board members of the past 82 years, and just happens to be in that position now as I write this. I could do the same for the other Board Member Michael Negra (who does have significant business and retail experience, if not in booze) in comparison to the rest of the Total Wine Board, but you can follow the links and see for yourself. If this really is one of the top wine and spirits sellers in the world, you would expect it to be run by top management. It simply is not.

We residents have been hearing the lip service about how the PLCB wants to run more like a business. One of the first things you do to move toward that goal is to hire people who know and understand the business you are in, something the State has consistently failed to do. Given the newest PLCB Board member to be nominated, whose qualifications appear to be that he worked for Governor Wolf, gave money to Governor Wolf's campaign, and is a personal buddy to Governor Wolf, that pattern of willful failure will likely continue.

Privatization allows entrepreneurs to use their vision, drive, and work ethic to grow their businesses. Monopoly does not. The choice is simple and has been made by everyone already. Private business is how you buy practically everything else (and it's how you buy wine and spirits as well, apparently, if you live within ten miles of the border). It works, if it didn't, we'd have state-run gas stations, grocery stores, pharmacies, and other retail.

So here's to 2016, may it bring an end to outdated policies from the 1930's. We get closer every time, and as the PLCB supporters themselves admit: we only have to win once. Because we'll never go back.

PLCB Provides Value? Don't Bet On It

The Wine Spectator put out their list of the top 100 value wines broken down into 6 categories.  You can see the lists here. Who wants to guess how well the PLCB at selecting those wines?

Read on.

Now I didn't check all 100 but took the top five of each category and went from there.  Even with the PLCB's new and improved search function I checked most of them multiple times to be sure but that doesn't mean one or two were entered in some weird way that only the PLCB can understand. I will say this, only a few were above the suggested retail price.

1. Light White

• 1 in stock,  Don't get too excited the one in stock is in less than 20% of the stores
• 2 available SLO
• didn't stock 2

2. Rich White

• 1 in stock (at 5% of the stores) 
• didn't stock 4

3. Elegant Reds

• 1 in stock
• 1 maybe in stock but the PLCB didn't list the vintage
• 1 available SLO
• 2 not in stock

4. Big Red

• 1 maybe in stock but again, the PLCB didn't list the vintage
• 4 not in stock

5. Rose

• 1 in stock
• 4 not in stock

6. Sparkling

• 2 in stock!
• 3 not in stock

Remember that in PA not in stock means your are never going to see it not that they happen to be out at the moment.

Extrapolate that out and our State Controlled Monopoly with all that buying power and supposedly well trained (but under certified) buyers would have managed to stock maybe 25%, might be able to get an additional 10% and for 65% of the wines listed missed the boat completely.

If you hurry there is still time to get these well rated value wines......out of state.

Have a great New Years!

Our Goal Is To Be Better Than Utah

The PLCB put out their Fiscal and  Retail Year In Review booklets the other day. Nice to see that they have a goal, and I quote:

"Be recognized as the best-in-class wine and spirits retailer, distributor and regulator in the United States."

Which means that they want to be better than Utah...the only other state (or company) that retails, distributes, and regulates wine and spirits.

They might have to try harder to beat Utah...

The Annual report starts off with listing the Board Members and Directors including my fav, Faith Deihl, who hasn't worked their for a few months now. Don't want to confuse the public by being accurate, after all. It then goes into the whiny phase saying that if the government didn't make them account for all their liabilities, they would have made lots more money. Sorta like you saying your budget is fine until you have to pay your mortgage.

They continue saying how sales went up 4.2%, but what would have been the net (if they didn't have to account for all the stuff they have been ignoring for decades) only went up 2.5%  In other words, even without the accounting changes, expenses went up faster than sales...again.

Continuing to obfuscate reality they almost brag about having 134 different PA wines. However, there are more than 200 PA wineries with well over different 1100 wines and the vast majority of PA wineries aren't carried by the PLCB. The truth has gotta hurt. They also didn't mention why the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs received 48% less this year, with funding dropping to $1.7 million to educate and prevent problem alcohol use.

The total number of stores went down by one to 603, but since those little One-Stop Shops went up by three, that means four real stores closed. But after 35 years the One Stop Shops hit their highest level ever - eighteen! The PLCB calls that a success.

Another point they don't seem to want to bring up is that Service & Demeanor inquiries went up by 8.4% in just one year. No breakdown this year if they were good or bad. Privatization must be having some effect since salaried employee turnover is up 7% along with intermittent clerk turnover also up 7% to almost 40% now. Finally, the PLCB itself shows that over 45% (an increase over last year) of  their entire workforce are classified as part time or seasonal (page 43), which are hardly "family sustaining" jobs.

Something else they don't say is that while the PLCB offers employees four wine courses, none are recognized by any established certifying agency. Sorta like getting a degree from an unaccredited online school. There still isn't a Sommelier in the entire wine selection process, which one would think should be a requirement when selecting wines for the entire state.  As I pointed out in another post, the PLCB now has 80 "wine specialists" for 603 stores, while Total Wine averages 5 PER STORE. Oh, PLCB, you got a ways to go to be best at anything.

While they try to explain it away, the single most important thing in the entire annual report is:

• Lower operating income of $111.5 million represents a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 1.8 percent since fiscal year 2010-11. Operating income has been adversely affected by dramatic increases in benefits costs in excess of sales growth, specifically in the following categories: pension (up 105.6 percent), workers compensation (up 520.6 percent!) and retiree healthcare (up 29.6 percent).
This isn't going to go away either.

Of course, the Retail Year in Review is mostly useless since it only describes what sales are in a police-enforced monopoly where the unqualified select what is allowed to be sold, so that certainly biases what sales would be compared the free market.

Wine spectator's Top 10 - Or The PA Wine Desert Pt. 3

Time once again to see how the PLCB with all their highly trained wine people did compared to some folks who really are highly trained. The Wine Spectator Top 10 is coming out. As they count down, I'll be checking to see if PA somehow managed to luck out and actually have some of these wines available.

Let's finish the top 10:

# 6. Bodegas Aalto Ribera del Duero 2012, 2400 cases
NOT AVAILABLE IN PA

# 5.Mount Eden Vineyards Chardonnay, Santa Cruz Mountains 2012 1986 cases
SLO ONLY CASE OF 12 (Oh, the PLCB price is 11.5% higher than list price too)

 

# 4.Il Poggione, Brunello di Montalcino 2010 18,000 cases
Currently available in 21 state stores

# 3.Evening Land Pinot Noir Eola-Amity Hills Seven Springs Vineyard La Source 2012 1176 cases
NOT AVAILABLE IN PA

# 2. Quilceda Creek Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 2012 4125 cases
Currently available in 9 state stores, PLCB price 41% ABOVE list of $140!

# 1.Peter Michael Cabernet Sauvignon Oakville Au Paradis 2012 1785 cases
NOT AVAILABLE IN PA

So there you are, the PLCB stocks 2 of the top 10 if you want to pay a 40% premium for one of them and they say they can get another provided you want to buy a case and pay 11% more than list.

The question isn't if you can find any or all of these wines in one store. The question is can you find them in entire states and the answer is of course, yes.  In places that have to live by their knowledge of not only wines but of their clientèle there are a number of stores where more than 2 of the top ten can be found and states where they ALL can be found.

Until next time, I'll see you out of state.

A PLCB Mystery - The Case (or Ten) Of The Missing Four Roses

Ever watchful, our intrepid sleuth is always on the lookout for ways the PLCB pays lip service to taking care of the citizens. 

On August 21st, Four Roses sent out a press release listing what this year's Four Roses Limited  Edition Small Batch will be, and more importantly, how MANY they planned to make. There was to be a release of about 12,600 bottles total. From what I have learned over the years, about 80% stay in the U.S., and the remainder are for the rest of the world. Can I prove it? No, allocation is a very closely-held card by the distillers and distributors, since there is always somebody who will take issue with it. Needless to say, like any other business, good customers usually will do better than ones that are more difficult (I bet you can see where this is going).

So about 10,000 bottles of this year's Limited Edition were destined for U.S. customers. Dividing up by state would yield 200 bottles per state. Great for North Dakota and Rhode Island; not so good for the rest of us. Allocating by population is a more fair way to guess, and with 4% of the U.S. population, Pennsylvania would get about 400 bottles.

So how many did we actually get? 24 bottles were announced to be sold in a lottery; registration ran from 8 a.m. Oct 26th to 11 p.m. Oct 31st. (No surprise that it didn't actually open until about 8:30 a.m.) But wait!  There's more! Right after the lottery was announced, I wrote a letter to the PLCB asking where all their buying power was and why they had such a poor relationship with the distributor that we got well below what we normally would have. Imagine my surprise when 3 days later, the PLCB announced they had gotten another 42 bottles to raffle off, for a grand total of 66, of which 16 would go to licensees.

No. This is not for you 
silly PA consumer.

Is that fair?  We'll never really know, because we won't know how many bottles the PLCB really had, since they had it listed as an SLO item in August, weeks before the lottery announcement. However, if you called and tried to order it you were told it was a "licensee only" item. So how many were sold to the bars and restaurants the first time, before they got ANOTHER chance? Why did the state get so few to begin with? Is this an indication of what is really thought of the PLCB? Or did the public just get screwed by the PLCB because a normal amount was allocated and they sold it to licensees first?

Also, who is watching all these lotteries?  The PA lottery is certified by outside public firms, the PLCB lottery is...what? I haven't seen or heard about any safeguards in place. Who checks to make sure this is all on the up and up? Are we just supposed to believe them? I'm not saying it isn't legitimate, but I am saying it is hard to believe, when the transparency at this agency is like looking in the Susquehanna after a rainstorm. They certainly haven't done anything to earn my trust so far.

Get rid of the state store system and move Pennsylvania back to normal.



P.S. For those keeping track we reached a small milestone. This is the 400th post of the blog.  It took us seven and a half years to get to this point.  Here is hoping that our job will be done long before we reach 500.

Wine spectator's Top 10 - Or The PA Wine Desert Pt. 2

Time once again to see how the PLCB with all their highly trained wine people did compared to some folks who really are highly trained. The Wine Spectator Top 10 is coming out. As they count down, I'll be checking to see if PA somehow managed to luck out and actually have some of these wines available. Here are the next two,

Let's begin.

# 8. Masi Serègo Alighieri Vaio Armaron 2008, 3750 cases
NOT AVAILABLE IN PA
There is one that is close but it is a Classico Riserva Costasera 2008 and this one is not

# 7. Kupe Single Vineyard Pinot Noir 2013
NOT AVAILABLE IN PA

I've included a picture so if you want to go to New Jersey, New York or DC for the MASI or just New Jersey and New York for the Kupe.


PLCB  ZERO FOR FOUR

Wine spectator's Top 10 - Or The PA Wine Desert Pt. 1

Time once again to see how the PLCB with all their highly trained wine people did compared to some folks who really are highly trained. The Wine Spectator Top 10 is coming out. As they count down, I'll be checking to see if PA somehow managed to luck out and actually have some of these wines available.

Let's begin.

# 10. Klein Constantia Vin de Constance 2009, 2500 cases
NOT AVAILABLE IN PA

# 9. Clos Fourtet St.-Emilion 2012, 3500 cases
NOT AVAILABLE IN PA

I've included these pictures so you know what to look for if you go to New Jersey, New York or DC since they have them in stock

Modernization won't do what the people want; Part V

This is just a reminder that what the PLCB says, and what the PLCB does are not always the same thing.

"Beginning January 2, 1934 and continuing as rapidly as alterations can be completed, 240 liquor stores will be open in Pennsylvania at convenient places to serve the public." (PLCB statement issued on the opening of the first 64 stores)

That statement, made almost 82 years ago, shows the failure of the entire State Store System. Is not making stores "convenient to the public" part of every modernization plan you have ever heard? They have been promising to do that since Day One and have failed miserably, especially considering that they have had over 80 years to complete the task.

Is having 25% fewer stores more convenient? Is stringing the public along for eight decades more convenient? Is having one or two stores in entire counties more convenient? Is having the PLCB at all more convenient?

Since the Liquor Code was created in 1951, the PLCB has had total non-legislative control over store size, store location, and hours of operation (except Sunday). If they wanted larger stores, they have had 64 years to lease them. If they wanted "more convenient" stores, they have had 64 years of total control of placement to do it. If they wanted to be open anytime from 7 a.m. to 2 a.m., they could do it. They have done none of it.

So don't believe me: believe the PLCB and ask yourself if they have managed to accomplish what they said they would do over the past 82 years?

The difference between the PLCB and freedom

Pennsylvania State Store 1945, an historic mistake

Barrel House Liquors built 1945, possibly an historic landmark

Who can answer this?

As reported by numerous papers...

If, as Governor Wolf is suddenly proposing, leasing the State Store System to a private management firm "is a way to make the liquor stores more profitable and provide better service to consumers"...can the Governor answer the following seemingly obvious questions about this latest example of Wolfonomics?

Wouldn't a fully private system provide even better service to consumers?

Wouldn't a private system that puts wine and liquor INTO grocery stores -- on the shelves -- be even better than a system that puts it somewhere in the vicinity of grocery stores?

Wouldn't a private system that allows for different levels of service -- small neighborhood stores, wine or whiskey specialty stores, huge discount mega-stores -- be even better than only one that provides only one level of service, for every store, in the entire state? (Keep in mind: it would still be illegal to go across the border.)

Wouldn't a private system that stocks more items than the entire State Store System stocks (and actually has them, instead of just listing them online) now be even better for consumers?

Wouldn't a private system that at least triples employment (as shown by the experience in Washington State and Alberta, which both fully privatized their monopoly systems) be even better for the state and the citizens that are employed than a system that limits employment and doesn't allow any small businesses?

Wouldn't a private system that triples or quadruples convenience (as measured by number of stores) be even better for the consumer than one that will still limit convenience to fewer stores than there were 40 years ago?

Wouldn't a private system where many suppliers try to bring their product to market be even better than one person or department selecting for the entire state? (In case you missed it, this is what happens when one person has that police-enforced monopoly power.)

Wouldn't a private system be even more responsive to consumers needs and wants, since the individual stores would have to compete for your business, rather than you still having no other choice than the monopoly State Store System...whatever the new name they slap on it is?

Wouldn't life just be far better if Pennsylvania had a normal liquor retail market without the state being involved in retail and wholesale at all?

You bet it would.

Wiretaps - The most fun you can have with the PLCB

Wiretaps are a wonderful thing.  How I envision the FBI caught the PLCB Marketing Director and who knows how many more. 

MD = Marketing Director
S = Salesman

S: Uh,,,,hello.  Is this the marketing director of the PLCB?

MD: It is, how may I help you?

S: Well, I've got some wines I'd like to talk to you about.

MD: What type of wines?

S: These are pretty good wines that I'm sure you'd like if you tried them.

MD: Sir, there are forms to fill out and deposits to be made.

S: I understand that but if YOU were to try them then I think we could reach an agreement.

MD: I'm not against giving new businesses a chance.  Do you golf?

S: Not well

MD: I'm sure we could meet up on the course to discuss your wines and then sample them after a round or two.

S: That would be great!

MD: I know of a nice little course down in South Carolina that I have been to before. Would that be OK?

S: Ahh....Sure, they have some great courses down there.

MD: Have your driver pick me up at 8 Thursday next week and I can leave from Philly, First Class of course.

S: Of course. We'll have a car and room waiting for you too.

MD: Can I bring a guest? My boss might want to come.

S: I think we can handle that.

MD: There will be some expenses too I'm sure.

S: No Doubt, Will a thousand or two cover it?

MD: Two should cover them.

S: We'll settle that up on the course then.

MD: Good, I'm sure that the PLCB will welcome your addition to our inventory as soon as I get back. Oh, and I'll need a couple of cases to stock our "Tasting Room" with so the Board and other Directors can try it too.

S: Just let me know when.

Bursts of laughter are then heard on the tape presumably from the agents involved.



Corruption causes prices to be higher then they would be otherwise.  So if you don't see prices going down at the local state store - guess what.......

END IT, DON'T MEND IT

Ex-PLCB official pleads guilty to taking kickbacks, bribes

Was There any Doubt?

"Ex-PLCB official pleads guilty to taking kickbacks, bribes"

Now...Who's Next? 

FBI continues investigation

Will it be Joe Da CEO? His Pal PJ? Will we actually see some legislators caught up in this? 

Stay tuned...the Grand Jury will return.

(Edited to add FBI link.)

The only number you need to know

Do  you want to know how crappy our State Store System is? All you need to know is this single fact. The number of States, Counties, or localities looking to move toward a system like the Pennsylvania liquor system:

NONE, NADA, NICHTS

Since the bad decisions made at the end of Prohibition, no state has ever shifted from a private free market system to a state-run liquor monopoly. Not once, not ever.

Our system is so good that nobody wants it. No one else believes in it except Utah, the only other state that is like us. Even they are somewhat better off since you can buy beer in grocery stores there! Alabama is looking to change, Montgomery County in Maryland, a "control county," has passed a partial privatization this year, Literally hundreds of towns in Texas alone have "gone wet" and even some here in PA, like Antrim Township.

The truth is that most people do not want to live under the quasi-prohibition model of the PLCB, be they in Pennsylvania or even under the more liberal versions found elsewhere. People want to be able to choose what they want and not what some bureaucrat in the capitol decides they should be allowed to have.

We don't want the corruption monopoly brings, either. Graft and corruption is not limited to the PLCB. North Carloina has its share too. Even 40 years ago there were charges and nothing really has changed since then. PA is no different. 5 senior members charged with graft, longstanding nepotism, junkets and "tastings" for members that have no qualifications to select mouthwash let alone wine for the entire state. 

Painting the PA liquor jail cell a nice bright color, putting up new drapes, and calling it "modernization" will not change the way the system works. The state charging more is no better than anybody else charging more, except that in a free market you can shop somewhere else. You don't have that choice in PA; it's the State Stores...or the State Police.

The State Store System does nothing for the citizens. It limits job creation, tax collection, selection, service, choice, and  entrepreneurial  drive of small businesses.  I think we can do far better: don't you?


END IT, DON'T MEND IT!