Right? At that point, you’d be passing your allocation down like a family heirloom. The idea definitely highlights how different the DTC landscape is in the U.S. compared to France or Italy.
Hey Heather! Great article, it's cool to see you ponder the allocation model. My company's wine commerce platform, Offset Commerce, powers Saxum’s allocation sales, along with hundreds of other wineries that use allocations as one of their primary DTC sales models.
Feel free to reach out directly if you want to pick our brains on this space – allocations aren't just for the high-end with far more demand than supply – we’ve seen many small winemaker-owned producers benefit operationally from the allocation model because it compresses sales/customer service into distinct periods of the year, which can align with wine’s seasonality, and can be kind to small teams with far too much on their plate.
You touch on many valid points! I'd personally love to see more communication from allocated brands outside of offer season (we're seeing movement here!). There are also variations to the model, such as intro offers, that allow a purchase upon sign up – allowing the customer more immediate gratification and the producer a chance to learn if new list members are motivated to buy (more on that model here: https://offsetpartners.com/offset-resources/should-you-add-an-intro-offer-to-your-allocation-strategy).
I should clarify, though, that in this article I was mostly venting about the waitlisted “cult winery” allocations—the kind where you sit on the list for years and get little to no communication in between. That’s a very different experience from the type of allocation model you’re describing here.
For example, I work with Brave & Maiden Estate, which runs an allocation-based membership program. There’s no discounting, but the perk is guaranteed access to a set number of bottles (6 or 12) and first, and sometimes only, access to certain wines. Their red blend, Bequest, has received 99 points in a past vintage and never makes it past Members, so we've even had to limit how many bottles people can purchase occasionally. But people who aren't Members can still come enjoy a tasting and purchase the wines that make it past the Members. That kind of allocation feels more like a relationship, where members are rewarded with access and exclusivity rather than just waiting in line.
I do love your point about variations on the model and how they can be kinder to small teams while still engaging customers. I think that nuance is what’s missing from my original article: there isn’t just one allocation model, and not all of them function (or feel) the same.
I've been on the list for Sin Qua Non since 2006. At this point I laugh each year when I receive the "sorry" email. I allocate my wines simply because I have little yield and I tell customers immediately if they can expect a bottle based on a few assumptions, like typical weather and me not breaking an arm skiing : ) So I think allocations can work if the winery is transparent. But being on a wait list for near 20 years without any update like, "Hi Chris, you moved up 10 spaces on the list this year, you are inching closer." Or a real time list online that customers can keep an eye on, would be the chef's kiss.
A 20-year waitlist is bonkers! What, do they only make two cases a year??? I would really love to know if their members are really that loyal/they don't have much loss, and/or if they have *that* many people on their waitlist?
And yeah, I agree. Letting people know where they are at on the list at the bare minimum would at least make the wait feel less like you are an afterthought. Even just a "hey, we know this is a long wait, and we really appreciate you sticking around."
A real-time list would probably work to get *more* people on the list. People LOVE a countdown.
There is some talk about "gamification" of these lists with newer consumers. Capture the email, get them to wait, keep them informed, then give them a taste, allow a re-order, then make them wait. Make them feel as though they are part of something, but don't allow full access, getting them to buy in more and stair-step them up to more and more until they level out or break, then replay the game.
I’m not on a list, either for allocations or in waiting. Part of this is budget, and as you say, transparency. I do think there is a way to do these lists well however. For instance, if there is waiting time, or other restrictions, it should be a transparent reason for it, which ultimately should boil down to genuine supply constraints. I suspect for some that’s not always the case as they look to maintain the appearance of high demand which a lengthy wait conveys. If SQN was all of a sudden available like any other wine club, would we not make assumptions about quality? Why is it now so easy to get these wines? And therein I think lies a pitfall with the model as well. Unless you can manage your storytelling well, you can get stuck with a model that at some point no longer makes sense.
I'm inclined to agree. I think you might pigeonhole yourself if you end up with a large vintage and a lot of inventory, but have only ever positioned yourself with a multi-year waitlist. But maybe they have a game plan for those vintages, like holding back a handful of cases and doing limited releases of library wines as a sort of "special release" during low-yield vintages.
I do agree though that there needs to be some kind of transparency with these waitlists or you risk your relationship with future customers.
A couple things here, first, as you pointed out from your IG DMs, a wine like SQN, Cayuse, Saxum all have secondary markets. As long as they have a rich secondary, the primary offering will be allocated.
Secondly, Saxum has a pipeline, as did Foxen, Brave, Cayuse, etc through the wholesale market, generally restaurant only, but long time bottle shops have been able to secure an allocation as long as they have a good relationship with the supplier. Country Clubs have been playing this game with their members for years. If said restaurant wanted to re-sell to their best customers they could and often do. Is it access to everything? No. But if a customer wanted a few trophies for the case, it was obtainable.
I think your Birkin bag example is a good one. Scarcity works if the quality is there. Will it work on this next gen of buyers in the wine world? I mentioned gamification (in another comment) of these models is being experimented with, at least from some of the reading I've been doing. But you're right, Boomers are aging out, not buying as much, and as a result letting their clubs go.
Could you imagine if some European wineries operated solely with direct-to-consumer programs, there would be waitlists for half a century or more!
Right? At that point, you’d be passing your allocation down like a family heirloom. The idea definitely highlights how different the DTC landscape is in the U.S. compared to France or Italy.
I recall visiting Maria Teresa Mascarello in Barolo, and passing by a German father and son walking out the door who were doing just that!
Hey Heather! Great article, it's cool to see you ponder the allocation model. My company's wine commerce platform, Offset Commerce, powers Saxum’s allocation sales, along with hundreds of other wineries that use allocations as one of their primary DTC sales models.
Feel free to reach out directly if you want to pick our brains on this space – allocations aren't just for the high-end with far more demand than supply – we’ve seen many small winemaker-owned producers benefit operationally from the allocation model because it compresses sales/customer service into distinct periods of the year, which can align with wine’s seasonality, and can be kind to small teams with far too much on their plate.
You touch on many valid points! I'd personally love to see more communication from allocated brands outside of offer season (we're seeing movement here!). There are also variations to the model, such as intro offers, that allow a purchase upon sign up – allowing the customer more immediate gratification and the producer a chance to learn if new list members are motivated to buy (more on that model here: https://offsetpartners.com/offset-resources/should-you-add-an-intro-offer-to-your-allocation-strategy).
This is a really thoughtful perspective!
I should clarify, though, that in this article I was mostly venting about the waitlisted “cult winery” allocations—the kind where you sit on the list for years and get little to no communication in between. That’s a very different experience from the type of allocation model you’re describing here.
For example, I work with Brave & Maiden Estate, which runs an allocation-based membership program. There’s no discounting, but the perk is guaranteed access to a set number of bottles (6 or 12) and first, and sometimes only, access to certain wines. Their red blend, Bequest, has received 99 points in a past vintage and never makes it past Members, so we've even had to limit how many bottles people can purchase occasionally. But people who aren't Members can still come enjoy a tasting and purchase the wines that make it past the Members. That kind of allocation feels more like a relationship, where members are rewarded with access and exclusivity rather than just waiting in line.
I do love your point about variations on the model and how they can be kinder to small teams while still engaging customers. I think that nuance is what’s missing from my original article: there isn’t just one allocation model, and not all of them function (or feel) the same.
I'd love to talk to you some more about this!
I've been on the list for Sin Qua Non since 2006. At this point I laugh each year when I receive the "sorry" email. I allocate my wines simply because I have little yield and I tell customers immediately if they can expect a bottle based on a few assumptions, like typical weather and me not breaking an arm skiing : ) So I think allocations can work if the winery is transparent. But being on a wait list for near 20 years without any update like, "Hi Chris, you moved up 10 spaces on the list this year, you are inching closer." Or a real time list online that customers can keep an eye on, would be the chef's kiss.
A 20-year waitlist is bonkers! What, do they only make two cases a year??? I would really love to know if their members are really that loyal/they don't have much loss, and/or if they have *that* many people on their waitlist?
And yeah, I agree. Letting people know where they are at on the list at the bare minimum would at least make the wait feel less like you are an afterthought. Even just a "hey, we know this is a long wait, and we really appreciate you sticking around."
A real-time list would probably work to get *more* people on the list. People LOVE a countdown.
There is some talk about "gamification" of these lists with newer consumers. Capture the email, get them to wait, keep them informed, then give them a taste, allow a re-order, then make them wait. Make them feel as though they are part of something, but don't allow full access, getting them to buy in more and stair-step them up to more and more until they level out or break, then replay the game.
I’m not on a list, either for allocations or in waiting. Part of this is budget, and as you say, transparency. I do think there is a way to do these lists well however. For instance, if there is waiting time, or other restrictions, it should be a transparent reason for it, which ultimately should boil down to genuine supply constraints. I suspect for some that’s not always the case as they look to maintain the appearance of high demand which a lengthy wait conveys. If SQN was all of a sudden available like any other wine club, would we not make assumptions about quality? Why is it now so easy to get these wines? And therein I think lies a pitfall with the model as well. Unless you can manage your storytelling well, you can get stuck with a model that at some point no longer makes sense.
I'm inclined to agree. I think you might pigeonhole yourself if you end up with a large vintage and a lot of inventory, but have only ever positioned yourself with a multi-year waitlist. But maybe they have a game plan for those vintages, like holding back a handful of cases and doing limited releases of library wines as a sort of "special release" during low-yield vintages.
I do agree though that there needs to be some kind of transparency with these waitlists or you risk your relationship with future customers.
A couple things here, first, as you pointed out from your IG DMs, a wine like SQN, Cayuse, Saxum all have secondary markets. As long as they have a rich secondary, the primary offering will be allocated.
Secondly, Saxum has a pipeline, as did Foxen, Brave, Cayuse, etc through the wholesale market, generally restaurant only, but long time bottle shops have been able to secure an allocation as long as they have a good relationship with the supplier. Country Clubs have been playing this game with their members for years. If said restaurant wanted to re-sell to their best customers they could and often do. Is it access to everything? No. But if a customer wanted a few trophies for the case, it was obtainable.
I think your Birkin bag example is a good one. Scarcity works if the quality is there. Will it work on this next gen of buyers in the wine world? I mentioned gamification (in another comment) of these models is being experimented with, at least from some of the reading I've been doing. But you're right, Boomers are aging out, not buying as much, and as a result letting their clubs go.