RMW Auctions to adopt "Ethical Policy"

[eelbrook]

No-one will be allowed to auction a limited edition whisky within a year of its release.

Intriguing. Plenty of whisky producers, bottlers and indeed retailers are arguably immorally greedy with their pricing of certain new releases, but this is only to be expected in a supply and demand economy.

But individual re-sellers who do exactly the same are "unethical" flippers.

Interesting

[opelfruit]

I think that's a fair move.

Original supply is put out in limited release at high prices to get a big draw on profit, but that's their business. They exist to make money for their shareholders and they produce the liquid - it's theirs to sell.

Individuals buying up all the stock with the sole purpose of flipping it is immoral. They are taking fair supply intended for the wider market out if circulation and forcing prices up. It stops others from buying for collection or consumption and the only way to get one is when they put it back on at auction for higher prices. It's exactly the same as people who buy up gig tickets and resell for many times more; a practice which is already being clamped down on and has recently picked up attention from the government.



Of course. It's free market and the distilleries could donmorr by restricting sales to 2 bottles (or other arbitrary number) to help avoid the mass buy up. But i guess they do have an interest in auction prices going high as it helps them justify a price increase for the next release.......
_________________
"Too much of anything is bad, but too much good whisky is barely enough."

[Forbes]

An interesting move by RMW but unless the other major whisky auctions adopt the same policy it is pointless.

[eelbrook]

Even if all of the other auction houses adopted the same "ethical stance", I don't believe that will deter individuals who "invest" in whisky.

Yes, their cash will be tied up in a bottle for a year and not for a couple of months. But, with interest rates at virtually nil, that won't be any big hardship for many.

And there will be just as great (if not greater) a "feeding frenzy" when bottles celebrate their first birthdays and hit the auctions. Simply, it is just delaying the inevitable.

[opelfruit]

I'm not so sure.

Most of the big prices happen shotly after a release with everyone dying to get a bottle, once they sell out they appear on auction for big bucks. It's a fast turn aroind and easy money. You make those people hold their bottles for a year and it's tying up funds and thrybneed to store those bottles. You've gone from a quickly flip to a drawn out holding of assets for a potentially smaller return.

Let's say, for arguments sake, £200 profit on a bottle in 2 weeks or "maybe" £200 (but also maybe £150 or so) over 52 weeks......thats a big difference. Over many bottles?
_________________
"Too much of anything is bad, but too much good whisky is barely enough."

[eelbrook]

We'll agree to disagree lol. The reality is that individuals after a quick sale can still go to Scotch Whisky Auctions, where they'll get immediate listing and save the 5% & VAT commission that RMW Auctions intends to charge sellers.

I get the impression though that there are fewer and fewer quick-flip whiskies coming to the marketplace nowadays. Yes, they're still there (eg Arran Exciseman), but they're few and far between.

[Innes]

Given RMW's "Ethical Policy" I had to laugh when I saw their background image for their RMW auction web site http://www.royalmilewhisky.auction/



It clearly shows a bottle of Jura Tastival 2017, which would not be able to be auctioned on their site until next year according to their "Ethical Policy"

cheers to William for posting the pic

[Fergie]

Well spotted Innes

[unblended]

as Fergie said well spotted

have you spotted most auction sites have the serendipidy as ardbeg totally incorrect shall we say misleading if it was 80% glenmoray would they call it glenmoray serendpidy I don't think so

the macallan private eye as bonded in 1961 where only a small amount is from 1961 and most of the whisky is from the teens thirteen to nineteen again misleading

can be a bit of a minefield

we will have to wait and see what happens

richard

[Blackadder]

They may struggle to compete against other cheaper already established auctions. Sellers wont want to pay the 5% + vat and hope RMW can attract bidders.

[eelbrook]

I think that RMW Auctions "ethical" policy will also be unattractive to individuals who've missed out on a new release and want to get one.

[Acksboy]

Fully agree with this.

I won't deny that i like to keep an eye out for certain limited editions and may indeed sell it on at some point, however this wouldn't be my primary intention when buying said bottle (its more of a show off for the collection).

Very surprised by last months Scotch Whisky Auction where i saw 18 bottles of the latest Rebus Highland Park release selling for £55+ when you can still buy bottle from their website for £30! Its complete madness what this kind of carry on does to the price of some releases.

[ziggsteruk]

I’ll be interested to see what RMW consider to be a ‘limited edition’ because there have been plenty of bottles getting flipped that aren’t limited, or are slightly limited, and there are limited releases that nobody in their right mind would bother flipping. Keeping a list, updating it and remembering when bottles reach their 1-year anniversary could be an overhead they’ll regret, and one that puts off other auction houses from adopting.

Also I can see RMW getting slated with bad reviews from legitimate people trying to sell bottles on their ‘list’. Someone inherits an Arran Exciseman from a dead relative but they don’t like whisky, or an owner of the latest Ardbeg committee release gets made redundant and is forced to sell their bottle. If RMW tell them they’re ‘unethical flippers’ I don’t see the fallout helping the auction’s reputation. I get what RMW are trying to do here but I think it’s flawed and short sighted.

[opelfruit]

[eelbrook]

RMW Auctions may well have in-house systems sophisticated enough to deal with the 'mechanics' of its ethical policy.

But I simply don't believe that this policy, even if applied by all auctioneers, would make any difference to the incidence of re-selling or secondary market prices.