 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
435 Franklin St
Ithaca, NY 14850
(at the corner of Route 13 and Third Street in the "Franklin Market")
tel: 607-330-1056
fax: 607-330-2553
HOURS:
Monday - Thursday:
11am - 8pm
Friday and Saturday:
10am - 8pm
Sunday: Noon to 6pm
Red Feet Blog
On the Proposal to Sell Wine in Supermarkets
1) Governor Paterson’s proposal leads only to a one-time gain while being fatal to 1,000 businesses. Why transfer wealth from small to big business? Have you calculated all the costs of those 1,000 businesses not making it and the added expense of administering this proposal? Isn’t our goal to promote small business and entrepreneurs? Since the gain in revenue is not sustained, you are just trading one culture for another, rather than realizing a true gain. The federal government has stated that they want to help small businesses, but this misnamed proposal actually defeats us by creating insurmountable big box competition that reduces our sales to where we cannot stay open, creating unemployment, vacant real estate and reduced sales taxes. If that negates the gains from new licensing fees, why do it, considering that any gains are a one-time occurrence and only a tiny portion of the budget gap?
2) Supermarkets say that selling wine in more outlets will help New York wineries, but there’s absolutely NO OBLIGATION that supermarkets sell ANY NY wine. In other words, they can say whatever they want and not follow through. There should be a requirement that they sell 75% to 100% NY wine and then the proposal would be guaranteed to help NY wineries. Otherwise, they will focus on large scale wines from inexpensive parts of the world, possibly mass-produced, in great volume, with continuity and possibly on private labels that they import. NY wines are not likely to be good sellers for them because they are not as good of values, are small scale producers and are not well known.
3) Many of the Governor’s proposals show that he does not understand our business. We do not make much money on liquor; therefore, giving us the exclusive right to sell liquor does nothing for us. Being able to sell wine to restaurants and bars does nothing for us because these establishments want to buy from distributors at wholesale prices, not retail prices, unless they are in a severe pinch. Having the right to sell cigarettes, chips, crackers, lottery tickets and permitting an ATM machine will only create a seedy reputation for us and does not complement fine wine, nor does it bring in any substantial income or symbiotic customers. We must have fully equal product lines and rights that supermarkets have and be able to sell meat, cheese, bread, condiments and prepared foods that go with wine. However, we do not have accessible money or space to start new businesses anyway to compete with big box and chain stores when that is not part of our business plans. The Medallion system that was proposed is of no use considering that thousands of new licenses will be allowed. There is no need for anyone else to enter the market at this point. If new stores want to open, they will logically wait three years until our medallions have expired to enter the business for free after all of the fall-out of the supermarkets’ domination is clear.
4) Why were we prevented from growing and owning more than one business for 75 years , for collective buying and why were we required to prove that our retail licenses would “serve the public need and convenience “ (prove that a need existed) and now all supermarkets, big box hypermarkets, convenience stores and bodegas are suddenly given the privilege of opening dozens of stores within the state, collective buying and using their corporate power to dominate the business? In other words, we have been purposefully held down and are now ill-equipped to handle the much larger and more resourceful competition that have their own distribution channels.
On the Proposal to Sell Wine in Supermarkets
1) Governor Paterson’s proposal leads only to a one-time gain while being fatal to 1,000 businesses. Why transfer wealth from small to big business? Have you calculated all the costs of those 1,000 businesses not making it and the added expense of administering this proposal? Isn’t our goal to promote small business and entrepreneurs? Since the gain in revenue is not sustained, you are just trading one culture for another, rather than realizing a true gain. The federal government has stated that they want to help small businesses, but this misnamed proposal actually defeats us by creating insurmountable big box competition that reduces our sales to where we cannot stay open, creating unemployment, vacant real estate and reduced sales taxes. If that negates the gains from new licensing fees, why do it, considering that any gains are a one-time occurrence and only a tiny portion of the budget gap?
2) Supermarkets say that selling wine in more outlets will help New York wineries, but there’s absolutely NO OBLIGATION that supermarkets sell ANY NY wine. In other words, they can say whatever they want and not follow through. There should be a requirement that they sell 75% to 100% NY wine and then the proposal would be guaranteed to help NY wineries. Otherwise, they will focus on large scale wines from inexpensive parts of the world, possibly mass-produced, in great volume, with continuity and possibly on private labels that they import. NY wines are not likely to be good sellers for them because they are not as good of values, are small scale producers and are not well known.
3) Many of the Governor’s proposals show that he does not understand our business. We do not make much money on liquor; therefore, giving us the exclusive right to sell liquor does nothing for us. Being able to sell wine to restaurants and bars does nothing for us because these establishments want to buy from distributors at wholesale prices, not retail prices, unless they are in a severe pinch. Having the right to sell cigarettes, chips, crackers, lottery tickets and permitting an ATM machine will only create a seedy reputation for us and does not complement fine wine, nor does it bring in any substantial income or symbiotic customers. We must have fully equal product lines and rights that supermarkets have and be able to sell meat, cheese, bread, condiments and prepared foods that go with wine. However, we do not have accessible money or space to start new businesses anyway to compete with big box and chain stores when that is not part of our business plans. The Medallion system that was proposed is of no use considering that thousands of new licenses will be allowed. There is no need for anyone else to enter the market at this point. If new stores want to open, they will logically wait three years until our medallions have expired to enter the business for free after all of the fall-out of the supermarkets’ domination is clear.
4) Why were we prevented from growing and owning more than one business for 75 years , for collective buying and why were we required to prove that our retail licenses would “serve the public need and convenience “ (prove that a need existed) and now all supermarkets, big box hypermarkets, convenience stores and bodegas are suddenly given the privilege of opening dozens of stores within the state, collective buying and using their corporate power to dominate the business? In other words, we have been purposefully held down and are now ill-equipped to handle the much larger and more resourceful competition that have their own distribution channels.