Bottom line: The liquor board meets again June 14, 2012 to continue hearing from the public.
The dispute: Is it cool for a guy whose wife runs Wegmans to own the liquor store and use a local lawyer as a minor partner to hold the license?
What I don't take seriously: Any idea that the local lawyer is opening this store because of his passion for home-brewing. Any idea that the opponents are trying to protect children from the evils of wine in the supermarket.
Basically, there is a law that favors liquor stores owned by individuals over those owned by grocery stores. Wegmans says they met the requirements. The opponents disagree. This is about making money by selling liquor, and I don't have any opinion or prediction about who will win. Luckily, I'm not a journalist so I don't have to quote the claptrap about how the liquor store owner is a venture capitalist who has nothing -- I see nothing, nothing! -- to do with Wegmans.
Hat tip to the HoCo Rising blog that linked to Greisman's story.
18 comments:
Thanks!
On the Wegmans topic, I saw a Wegmans truck turning into the store yesterday. They must be getting deliveries of something! Getting close now.
On another Wegmans topic, I saw employees in their Wegmans polo shirts leaving Wegmans at 11:45 to go across the street to Jason's Deli for lunch. Really close!
And I will be SHOCKED if they get approval for a liquor store. The Maryland liquor store alliance is fierce and I think they lost any supporters they might've had when we found out that Mrs Wegmans hubby will own 90%. Kudos for trying though!
In Howard County you can only have one liquor license. So if you want to, say, open 2 liquor stores you get one license in your name the other in your spouse's name. It's commonly done. I'm not saying it is right or wrong, just that it is common practice. In my mind, what Wegmans did is just the same.
So is the first sentence meant meant to state that I'm both a journalist AND a serious drinker?
I'm not sure which one of those descriptions would be a compliment and which would be an insult. =)
So a) I like Wegmans and b) I think MD liqour laws are not the best.
However, here's an interesting statistic. Wegmans has stores in the following states: MA, MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA. The following states allow some sort of alcohol sales inside the store: NJ, NY, VA. PA has crazy weird alcohol laws so I'm going to assume they can't open up liqour stores in the same shopping center there. That leaves MA and MD, which according to Wegmans' website has a total of 6 branches (1 in MA and 5 in MD, including the Columbia branch). In the Sun article a company spokesperson is noted as saying this spouse owned liqour store business takes place at 6 Wegmans branches. By my math this practice takes place 100% of the time Wegmans can't already sell Alcohol in store. It would be one thing if most Wegmans stores couldn't sell liqour in the store and at only 6 locations they have spouse owned liqour stores (out of 81 locations) nearby.
To me, its another thing entirely when you can more or less rule out this practice at all but just about 6 stores (the number the spokesperson said this practice is in use at). I still like Wegmans, but I think this is kind of a slimy practice to use when you can't sell alcohol the normal way.
Re: Julie's comment, we saw a person with a Wegmans polo shirt at a nearby restaurant. They confirmed that the opening is still on for June 17.
I feel Wegmans is coming into the county, feeling they can do whatever they please. They are being a bully, and it is clear the liquor store is "owned" by Wegmans. Is this really not clear to everyone? If they do not want to follow the law, then they should have tried to change it, not illegally and unethically open one IN THE STORE (which is essentially what they are attempting).
Does anyone care that a HUGE business is coming into the county, and will be taking the livelihood of numerous liquor stores away?
I will never enter a Wegmans, unless they apologize and admit what they are attempting is 100% unethical.
Maryland has very restrictive liquor laws and with all the vested interests are very difficult to modify. Because of this, it’s been standard practice of individuals and companies to find creative ways around these regulations. For example, the getting around the one liquor store license per person, by getting the second license in a spouses name. It should not be the role of a local liquor board or state regulations to protect the interest of businesses whether they are local or not. I applaud these efforts, including Wegman’s attempt to work around the restrictive laws to increase competition and availability and hopefully eventually force the hand of the elected officials to put an end to these anti-consumer regulations. I do not applaud the efforts by some local liquor stores to restrict competition and as these have identified themselves have made it a point to never spend money at their businesses again.
There will be plenty of folks who will choose their local liquor store over fighting traffic, a parking garage, and wading through Wegman's crowd to buy a bottle of wine for the night. "Taking the livelihood of numerous liquor stores away"? Come on. Wegman's isn't the real bully in this situation. How about the liquor lobby acting as a bully in the State for -ever?
Unless the store is amazing, I doubt I'll go there on its own. Corridor still wins for me for wine and liquors and I hit up Perfect Pour for beers(even though they are overpriced, imo)
However, if I'm doing grocery and at Wegmans, and I need something quickly I'll go there.
"It should not be the role of a local liquor board or state regulations to protect the interest of businesses whether they are local or not. I applaud these efforts, including Wegman’s attempt to work around the restrictive laws to increase competition and availability and hopefully eventually force the hand of the elected officials to put an end to these anti-consumer regulations. I do not applaud the efforts by some local liquor stores to restrict competition and as these have identified themselves have made it a point to never spend money at their businesses again."
Written by "Mr. Wegman?"
I love how if you don't agree with someone, you are automatically accused of being the named opposition. If you're accusing someone of being the opposition, then stand up and name who you are if you're believe in what you say and what you're accusing.
My favorite Mom and Pop liquor store closed and I haven't found another one I would consider shopping in that's local to me. If Wegman's offers me convenience and good pricing on top of my groceries, I will be more then happy to give them my money. If local Mom and Pop's don't like it, well apparently you're not catching my eye for whatever reason. That's on you, not on Wegman's or whoever they use as a proxy as this seems to be the case here. It means your losing business because you are not catering to my needs as a customer. I want a clean upscale place to buy my liquor in a safe area at a decent price. I'll pay higher prices if the first part of my needs are met. If you don't provide that, then I'm not going in your shop.
I live in Columbia and I demand a higher standard from the shopping and retail I frequent due to the standard of living I have come to expect living in this area. I believe there are many who probably feel the same way. If you're not providing this and Wegman's (or their proxy) meets this need, that's not their fault. Do what you need to do to compete, otherwise I'm not going to stop in to see what it is you can sell me, because I won't be interested. I'll go elsewhere to get my needs met.
"
I live in Columbia and I demand a higher standard from the shopping and retail I frequent due to the standard of living I have come to expect living in this area. I believe there are many who probably feel the same way. If you're not providing this and Wegman's (or their proxy) meets this need, that's not their fault. Do what you need to do to compete, otherwise I'm not going to stop in to see what it is you can sell me, because I won't be interested. I'll go elsewhere to get my needs met."
And damn the laws, and damn the people that have spent their life savings buying a store, only to see a giant corporations come in, and do as they please.
Of course, why would you care about the little liquor store, as long as you get what you have "come to expect living in Columbia."
Why are people so me, me, me, even in 2012?
I do value small businesses, but only those that cater to my needs and wants. I also shop at larger stores when small businesses cannot or will not meet my needs and wants. It's called a free market. I choose to spend my money at places that cater to what I look for. That's my choice with my dollar which I'm entitled. It's not my job to support you based only on your arguement you were there first. Make your business attractive to where I want to spend my money there and you'll get my money, but if you don't meet my criteria, you aren't losing my business anyway, since you never had it.
If Wegman's (or their proxy) gets the liquor license and follow the letter of the law, then you may not like it, but you're going to have competition. You have had at least three years to anticipate Wegman's putting in a liquor store (its no secret that they have stores with liquor stores and most likely would pursue this in some fashion) and do something to make yourself more competitive and build a stronger customer base to solidify your profit margin even with inevitable customer attrition. That's on you to make your business model stronger.
Well put Kelly! I could not agree more. As for Anonymous, apparently you just don't like Big Bad Wegmans (or any other large company, it seems)and you're entitled to shop elswhere. It's called a free market. It isn't the government's job to decide winners and losers in business....EVER. The liquor laws in this state are ridiculous and they should be changed, but that won't happen with the liquor lobby around. Shame on all of them.
The one thing to me that has been overlooked by the opposition to the liquor store, is that Wegmans is a "privately - family owned business". Albeit they are a huge family business, but a private business just the same. I'm sure the other privately owned liquor stores would not be too happy if the liquor board told them they couldn't open their business because others did not think it was a good idea. I just don't see legally why a Wegmans family member can't own the store if they want to. One might not like it, but being rich is not a sufficient reason to disallow a business.
Regardless of why he wants to be part owner, I know the local lawyer truly has a passion for home wine making. I have personally tried many wines from the dozens of varieties he has brewed.
Post a Comment