Washington privatization, a year later.

Yeah between the stock shortages in scotch and the price hike it is really getting expensive to drink Laphroaig. You might as well drink Ardbeg at that price.

 

wow, I didn't realize that Oregon was that competitive on some of those.

 

Wow. Didn't this used to be like $45? One of my favorite single malts. Love that peat and smoke.

 

I'm sensing an opportunity for us Oregon traders. (The few that exist.)

 

We have Total Wines now, so that's cool I guess. Otherwise it hasn't affected beer and wine like it has liquor.

 

I'd happily pay that tax to get some Pappy. Where'd you find it? (I understand if you don't want to share that info, though.)

 

I actually had to win a raffle for the pleasure of purchasing it. I bought it at Downtown Spirits a few months ago. It was apparently the only bottle they got in.

 

Just buy Jefferson's presidential select 18 it is pappy (like actually) but half the price

 

In addition to the complaints already cited, because my main local carries hard alcohol as well, and because they have to pay more for the bottles of booze they like to carry, beer prices went up, so I'm not a fan.

 

I'm a spectator to the changes in Washington, but it seems to me a good example of how to do privatization wrong. If they hadn't required that it be revenue neutral for the state, most of these complaints wouldn't be happening. I mean, you introduce private retailers and insist that the state still gets paid; is anyone at all surprised prices went up? I don't think anyone will really be able to fairly judge how well it really worked until after those payments expire.

(FWIW, I lived in California for a while, which was fully privatized and sold liquor virtually everywhere, and it was great. Convenient and good prices.)

 

Last December I bought a bottle of plain ol' Bulleit Rye for my hosts that were putting me up in Seattle and cringed as it was rung up at one of the ex-State stores for $47. I was warned that it would cost more than the $27 I pay in Michigan but I figured like 5 or 8 bucks more. Now I'm throwing a MI purchased bottle in my checked luggage before heading out to Seattle. My friend explained that it's way cheaper to drink liquor at a bar than at home.

 

You learned an important lesson. Before I retired I routinely brought liquor home with me in checked luggage on my frequent trips to California. WA was never a destination place to buy the hard stuff.

 

Not a fan of your main local?

 

This is a very good observation --- which often happens when neutral parties make observations.

For many, the issue wasn't about getting more liquor at reduced prices. It was simply to get the state out of the liquor sales business. There were many who kind of hoped prices would go up. These folks weren't too thrilled with the idea that liquor was going to invade our every retail space and thought higher prices (and more revenue for the state) was a reasonable trade-off for expanded access.

 

Funny thing about these initiatives is they can be voted down many times as this was. But the money interests just kept trying until they got it passed. It only needed to pass once.

 

I was firmly in favor of it, government does't belong in any retail. As consumers, it was our fault for not keeping a closer eye on our lawmakers, to prevent these new higher taxes.

 

I buy such little liquor that the price gouging isn't really that important to me - the HORRIBLE selection of fine bourbon/scotch is a big issue though. Unless I just haven't turned over the right stone yet, the selection is as bad as I have seen anywhere.

 

Ha, Ha. I meant to say that I wasn't a fan of the change in laws. Tom @ Jones was simpy trying to bring a little extra money into his bar by making classic cocktails (no Appletinis, etc), but the law change wound up costing him money instead. I don't blame him, I blame f-ing Costco!

 

Wine actually was part of I-1183, even though they were not under the same control as liquor...

Beer laws and wine laws used to be basically identical... now they are nothing alike.

 

Overall liquor prices are now higher than they were prior to privatization due to the $130 million in new taxes that I-1183 imposed on the distributors. In everyone's rush to get the state out of the alcohol business, no one bothered to read and understand the initiative. Washington already had the highest liquor taxes in the country and we added $130 million over two years, on top of that.

Fortunately beer was not part of this fiasco. If you are seeing higher beer prices and they are being blamed on I -1183.... shop elsewhere.. There were NO changes in the beer laws due to I-1183, anyone telling you different is lying or ignorant.