The Bar Towel

SteelbackGuy wrote:
Transfers are simple, and there are no set of rules that are carved in stone. Basically, they just have to make sense.

................

If someone is really pleasant and has a good rapport with me, I'll transfer a bottle to London from Mooseonee if they want.

But nearly all transfers 'make sense' if you order enough, right? So if I want a bottle of ST Choklat, and it's all I can afford, your store could order a case (or f--k it, get two) and just sell it in the store on the assumptions that a) the store lacked the item people should have access to anyway and b) if that one customer will buy it, twelve or twenty will (in a town of thousands of people.) Those aren't bad assumptions to test out.

This is the only way a state-controlled monopoly can function. Otherwise the main excuse not to do it - 'lack of demand' - is hollow and self-fulfilling prophesy.

Empirically, every time I hear people ordering a case and only buying part of it, the rest moves pretty fast. The LC does not have the right to be myopic about transfers when they also control the big picture.

Belgian wrote:

SteelbackGuy wrote:
Transfers are simple, and there are no set of rules that are carved in stone. Basically, they just have to make sense.

................

If someone is really pleasant and has a good rapport with me, I'll transfer a bottle to London from Mooseonee if they want.

But nearly all transfers 'make sense' if you order enough, right? So if I want a bottle of ST Choklat, and it's all I can afford, your store could order a case (or f--k it, get two) and just sell it in the store on the assumptions that a) the store lacked the item people should have access to anyway and b) if that one customer will buy it, twelve or twenty will (in a town of thousands of people.) Those aren't bad assumptions to test out.

This is the only way a state-controlled monopoly can function. Otherwise the main excuse not to do it - 'lack of demand' - is hollow and self-fulfilling prophesy.

Empirically, every time I hear people ordering a case and only buying part of it, the rest moves pretty fast. The LC does not have the right to be myopic about transfers when they also control the big picture.

While this is true, and I agree with what you are saying, sadly, stores have a SKU count maximum. And when those numbers get too high, you start getting calls from head office as to why you have too many skus. Plus, stores are also plannogrammed, so there is very little discretionary self space. If you started ordering cases for everyone that just wanted one or two bottles, eventually you end up being over stocked and the managers are forced by their bosses, to cut skus. So an easy way to avoid this is to not participate in transfers where you have to roll out the rest of the unpurchased stock.

Almost a year ago, I ordered in a case of St Louis Geueze for a guy cause he wanted to try it. He bought one bottle, and we 've only sold one since. So now we still have all the Geueze that just sits there.

SteelbackGuy wrote:

Belgian wrote:

SteelbackGuy wrote:
Transfers are simple, and there are no set of rules that are carved in stone. Basically, they just have to make sense.

................

If someone is really pleasant and has a good rapport with me, I'll transfer a bottle to London from Mooseonee if they want.

But nearly all transfers 'make sense' if you order enough, right? So if I want a bottle of ST Choklat, and it's all I can afford, your store could order a case (or f--k it, get two) and just sell it in the store on the assumptions that a) the store lacked the item people should have access to anyway and b) if that one customer will buy it, twelve or twenty will (in a town of thousands of people.) Those aren't bad assumptions to test out.

This is the only way a state-controlled monopoly can function. Otherwise the main excuse not to do it - 'lack of demand' - is hollow and self-fulfilling prophesy.

Empirically, every time I hear people ordering a case and only buying part of it, the rest moves pretty fast. The LC does not have the right to be myopic about transfers when they also control the big picture.

While this is true, and I agree with what you are saying, sadly, stores have a SKU count maximum. And when those numbers get too high, you start getting calls from head office as to why you have too many skus. Plus, stores are also plannogrammed, so there is very little discretionary self space. If you started ordering cases for everyone that just wanted one or two bottles, eventually you end up being over stocked and the managers are forced by their bosses, to cut skus. So an easy way to avoid this is to not participate in transfers where you have to roll out the rest of the unpurchased stock.

Almost a year ago, I ordered in a case of St Louis Geueze for a guy cause he wanted to try it. He bought one bottle, and we 've only sold one since. So now we still have all the Geueze that just sits there.

Don't worry too much about that one, any store that has it can't sell it.

mintjellie wrote:

SteelbackGuy wrote:

Belgian wrote: But nearly all transfers 'make sense' if you order enough, right? So if I want a bottle of ST Choklat, and it's all I can afford, your store could order a case (or f--k it, get two) and just sell it in the store on the assumptions that a) the store lacked the item people should have access to anyway and b) if that one customer will buy it, twelve or twenty will (in a town of thousands of people.) Those aren't bad assumptions to test out.

This is the only way a state-controlled monopoly can function. Otherwise the main excuse not to do it - 'lack of demand' - is hollow and self-fulfilling prophesy.

Empirically, every time I hear people ordering a case and only buying part of it, the rest moves pretty fast. The LC does not have the right to be myopic about transfers when they also control the big picture.

While this is true, and I agree with what you are saying, sadly, stores have a SKU count maximum. And when those numbers get too high, you start getting calls from head office as to why you have too many skus. Plus, stores are also plannogrammed, so there is very little discretionary self space. If you started ordering cases for everyone that just wanted one or two bottles, eventually you end up being over stocked and the managers are forced by their bosses, to cut skus. So an easy way to avoid this is to not participate in transfers where you have to roll out the rest of the unpurchased stock.

Almost a year ago, I ordered in a case of St Louis Geueze for a guy cause he wanted to try it. He bought one bottle, and we 've only sold one since. So now we still have all the Geueze that just sits there.

Don't worry too much about that one, any store that has it can't sell it.

I can imagine. But it doesn't bode well if you bring in a product for a transfer, then it isn't picked up, and you have to shelf it.

Maybe the LCBO shouldn't purchase shitty artificially sweetened lambics in the first place.

mintjellie wrote:Maybe the LCBO shouldn't purchase shitty artificially sweetened lambics in the first place.

Ha ha, yes not like a case of Rochefort just sat there, it would likely not. There's something to be said for world-class products that would virtually sell themselves. St. Louis is awful wretched stuff, whoever selected it for the LC has more interest in 'product profiles' than in appreciating beer. [image of dead horse.]

The LC having bad products and 'plan-o-grams' and artificial SKU limits is all no excuse for any responsible Monopoly to just stop functioning for the consumer. They really need to get their head out of their ass. I am a bit hopeful that a slowly improving selection will facilitate this happening - more sales, more transfers, more receptive store attitudes, and more people discovering the good stuff.

It's hard to build enthusiasm (and in-store support) with Chapeau Exotic and the like (duh!!)

Belgian wrote:

mintjellie wrote:Maybe the LCBO shouldn't purchase shitty artificially sweetened lambics in the first place.

The LC having bad products and 'plan-o-grams' and artificial SKU limits is all no excuse for any responsible Monopoly to just stop functioning for the consumer.

Amen brother!
I hear ya. LIke I said, I don't agree with it. But you guys ask questions, and I just tell you the answers!

Yep I know Len, you just showed a really class example of why refusing orders doesn't make sense. I mean in future you will not order sh-t, you can instead pretend to act like a world-class retailer stocking the good stuff.

Sorry man, it''s too much fun...

If I'm ever in London, I would love to stop by your LCBO location.

mintjellie wrote:If I'm ever in London, I would love to stop by your LCBO location.

Please do.

And if there is a beer you want, I'll get it in for you. Just don't look on the shelf. I keep the good stuff hidden in the back with my name on it.

SteelbackGuy wrote: And if there is a beer you want, I'll get it in for you. Just don't look on the shelf. I keep the good stuff hidden in the back with my name on it.

Hopefully not all of it! But I think I know what you mean, because you say you also tirelessly promote the good stuff to new people.

I never met Len, it would be great to show up and mess with him a while as a joke before introducing myself. I suggest everyone does that!

I just requested to transfer ST IPA and La Fin Du Monde. My store never has any good stuff and I was a little tired of traveling to other locations. I wanted something within walking distance. I knew that there would be a minimum number of cases that have to be ordered so that the transfer is feasible, but my idea was for them to essentially put it on the shelf and allow me and others to buy it gradually. Anyhow, I know that unless this manager is told otherwise by someone at the BO, he will continue to enforce his rigid policy. I argued with him for 5 minutes and he wouldn't budge, so I had to take 4 cases of IPA and 12 bottles of Du Monde, which ended up costing me more than I wanted to spend. Sure, I could have returned it to some other stores, but that's just silly. The excuse he gave me was that the store does not list the beers I've ordered. I personally believe he does this to discourage transfers in general, since its more work for him and the store is very small.

BTW. Belgian you have a pm regarding La Trappe Quad. Please have a look if you see this.

Lukie wrote:I just requested to transfer ST IPA and La Fin Du Monde. My store never has any good stuff and I was a little tired of traveling to other locations. I wanted something within walking distance. I knew that there would be a minimum number of cases that have to be ordered so that the transfer is feasible, but my idea was for them to essentially put it on the shelf and allow me and others to buy it gradually. Anyhow, I know that unless this manager is told otherwise by someone at the BO, he will continue to enforce his rigid policy. I argued with him for 5 minutes and he wouldn't budge, so I had to take 4 cases of IPA and 12 bottles of Du Monde, which ended up costing me more than I wanted to spend. Sure, I could have returned it to some other stores, but that's just silly. The excuse he gave me was that the store does not list the beers I've ordered. I personally believe he does this to discourage transfers in general, since its more work for him and the store is very small.

BTW. Belgian you have a pm regarding La Trappe Quad. Please have a look if you see this.

do you mean 4 6-packs of the IPA or 4 24's?

Lukie wrote:I just requested to transfer ST IPA and La Fin Du Monde. My store never has any good stuff and I was a little tired of traveling to other locations. I wanted something within walking distance. I knew that there would be a minimum number of cases that have to be ordered so that the transfer is feasible, but my idea was for them to essentially put it on the shelf and allow me and others to buy it gradually. Anyhow, I know that unless this manager is told otherwise by someone at the BO, he will continue to enforce his rigid policy. I argued with him for 5 minutes and he wouldn't budge, so I had to take 4 cases of IPA and 12 bottles of Du Monde, which ended up costing me more than I wanted to spend. Sure, I could have returned it to some other stores, but that's just silly. The excuse he gave me was that the store does not list the beers I've ordered. I personally believe he does this to discourage transfers in general, since its more work for him and the store is very small.

BTW. Belgian you have a pm regarding La Trappe Quad. Please have a look if you see this.

Call the LCBO and complain. He shouldn't be a manager.

There is a lady at my local LCBO who has been very good to me when it comes to ordering stuff in. I live in Belleville and my local store gets a small percentage of the new releases.

As a point of respect for her and what she has done for me, I always take the order as it comes, and if that means 24 bottles, so be it. Otherwise, the burden is on her to sell the remainder of the order, and since the beer was not originally designated to her store, there is a good chance she will have some difficulty selling it.

That's JMO. She has been very good to me and I don't want to disturb the balance of our relationship by making her life more difficult.

Cheers