Big Money and Lies vs Direct Shipping
Misinformation campaigns are targeting American legislators, aiming to stifle competition and hinder the growth of small American family businesses.
Wholesalers are misinforming legislators and the public as they lose their grasp on outdated business practices as modern consumers expect more.
Their example of a 57-year-old South Carolina legislator sounding the alarm about underage purchases demonstrates the problem, just look at his picture. And, more verifications happen in an online transaction than the legislator seems to realize.
The WSWA has a powerful lobby that is fighting against modern, safe and responsible direct sales. I recently read a press release from the WSWA where they said lawmakers and regulators are raising concerns about the direct shipping of spirits. While legislators may be sounding the alarm in a few states, it’s based on biased misrepresented information. The largest spirit producing state in the country, Kentucky, saw past this rhetoric a couple of years ago and opened up to direct shipping of spirits and have recorded no issues.
In the press release, the WSWA highlighted the recent floor presentation by South Carolina State Representative Weston Newton. He brought with him a bottle of Maker’s Mark (Whiskey), which he had delivered to his office. He stated all he had to do was type in his credit card number to purchase this bottle. Well, that is NOT exactly true. Here are a few basic steps he may not have logged as important but will have undertaken during the transaction.
Entered his email address.
Entered his full name.
Entered his address, so they knew where to deliver.
Entered his credit card and billing address to pay.
At this point, an online seller has all the information they need to be able to (in the background) electronically verify the buyer’s age and it is easily achieved without it appearing cumbersome to the consumer. Rep. Newton not recognizing that these age checks take place in the background for online purchases are a feature, not a bug (failure), like he may have thought. You can reference this whitepaper on minors attempting to, and not achieving online purchases. Compliance rates of retail establishments are a constantly stepped over fact that the WSWA does not mention in the three-tier process.
The main comment of Rep. Newton, referenced by the WSWA, was that the delivery driver never asked for proof of age upon delivery. Here is a picture of State Representative Weston Newton with his bottle of Makers Mark.
Like liquor stores that take a challenge 40 common sense approach to checking the age of the purchaser, the delivery driver did not check the ID of Rep. Newton when delivering to this law firm. For reference, Rep. Newton is 57 years old. Ask yourself, how often would Rep. Newton have his ID checked at a liquor store and would he have the same response of taking it to the legislators if he was not asked at a retail outlet.
As always, it's important to note that Rep. Newton has received direct political contributions from the following organizations:
South Carolina Beer Wholesalers Association
Wine & Spirits Wholesalers Association Of South Carolina
Southern Wine & Spirits
Diageo
Anheuser-Busch Co
Bills Liquor Stores
Who is paying the cost of this misinformation? Once again, the US taxpayer. The same people who voted for these legislators to represent their interests. Note, corporations cannot vote for legislatures or laws, yet they continue to have massive sway in the direct sales space with all their lobbying dollars.
The WSWA noted the millions in unreported tax revenue (without providing any evidence) but failed to discuss the many millions the states are now receiving (well documented by the states themselves) from the successful implementation of direct shipping since their adoption post Granholm.
Due to these alleged unreported tax revenues, they have convinced some major states to oppose the expansion of direct shipping for spirits for 10 years, with no logic or evidence to prove that direct shipping cannot or does not work. , for some it will be another 10 years the American consumer, small businesses, and state governments have to suffer because the states don't know how to use the modern technology that is more controlling than the current brick and mortar processes in place today. Remember Prohibition did little to reduce alcohol production or consumption, it just drove the industry underground. Industry efforts should not go towards leveling down direct shipping but leveling it up. The best way to manage direct sales is to legalize, tax, and manage the channel, not shut it down for good. Nobody, other than the wholesale channel (known as the three-tier system) of course, stands to benefit.
The WSWA goes on to list old and inaccurate information and prove exactly why many legislators are confused and ringing the alarm on spirits shipping. The WSWA reiterates the Massachusetts wine direct shipping data about minors buying online and the recipient not being asked for proof of age. MA provided no evidence that an actual 15-year-old made the purchases, and provided no evidence of who the package was handed to when it was delivered. In all likelihood, it was a state agent, who may have appeared very much over the legal drinking age.
We didn’t feel right by how the MA data was being presented so we asked for it ourselves. We pointed out in our article that Gallo and many other large producers shipped DTC into MA. They were doing so because it is a safe and effective way to ship to consumers who want their products and evidently the wholesale channel (one of the three recognized sales channels) was not fully working for them to meet consumer demand.
The National Direct Shipping Bill of Rights is a commonsense approach to direct sales of all beverage alcohol products. The Bill of Rights is gaining traction within the beverage alcohol industry due to its effectiveness. When legislation references direct shipping, this document serves as a valuable resource for legislators nationwide, showcasing successful systems that are already accepted by states.
The WSWA lobbyists have considerable power, backed by funding from large wholesale wine and spirit distributors. This financial power fuels Political Action Committees (PACs) across the nation, with the goal of maintaining the status quo. The persistence of outdated laws can be attributed to these influences, rather than any logical necessity. Having faced pushback in the wine sector, the WSWA has shifted its focus to spirits. This pivot raises questions about the organization's ongoing relevance to its members. Far from fostering industry-wide growth, the WSWA seems to be deliberately constraining the market, thereby hindering the expansion of domestic American producers.
I ask, why does one channel, a channel that actively invests in and promotes international products and companies, have so much sway over American producers – the ones who are actively trying to grow their businesses, increase employee count, and recirculate money into their local economies. US legislatures by accepting the WSWA misinformation are actively rooting against their constituents to the benefit of international companies. I cannot put that more clearly.
Take a close look at the steps Weston Newton went through to make his purchase and then an even closer look at his picture and ask yourself, what is wrong with the rhetoric the WSWA put out to confuse legislators. Who is funding such legislators? And when will people start to realize, the anti-direct shipping narrative is anti-competitive and un-American.