I got into a social media discussion the other day with a distiller who was bemoaning the fact that many of his limited releases are snapped up at release and sent straight to the secondary market (flipped) in the hopes of making a quick profit from inflated prices. The only way for ‘actual fans’ to get one of his bottles is to pay well over retail at auction, thereby incentivising flipping and perpetuating the vicious cycle. All of this led to debate on “what can be done about flippers.”

Flipping may be a fairly new phenomenon to the drinks industry (made possible by booming demand and the proliferation of low-fee, online auction houses) but it’s something the live entertainment industry (music, sports, etc.) has been dealing with for years: ‘scalpers’ and ‘touts’ bulk buying tickets to gouge fans for way over face value. In the entertainment industry however a range of countermeasures to prevent profiteering have been implemented, and with a good deal of success! So why does the drinks industry seems to have struggled to find a particularly satisfactory solution?

The obvious difference between the two industries is that, for entertainment, the commodity is the event itself, the ticket is really just a coupon you redeem at the door. It’s easy enough to match a name to an ID - something the Edinburgh Military Tattoo started doing nearly a decade ago - and, with the technology we have available, to ensure if someone wants to sell their ticket, it can only be done in a controlled market place - a feature offered for the last concert ticket I bought. Once a bottle is out in the world however, it’s pretty hard to control what’s done with it.

One solution suggested by the aforementioned distiller is that auction houses could implement a 6 month moratorium on new releases to allow the ‘hype’ to dissipate. Without the immediate return on investment those looking to make a quick buck would be deterred and prices would settle back into a steady increase over time rather than the quick peak - often followed by a deep trough - that we see now. If it was workable it would be a good plan but sadly it’s not.

The spirits auction industry is just too competitive for any kind of industry wide agreement and any auction that decided to go it alone with such a policy would just be handing business to it’s competitors. In fact, there was a retailer operated auction that had such a policy. That auction is no longer in business. I can’t say for sure the policy was to blame but it seems unlikely any others are likely to follow their example.

But really flipping is only the latest boogy man of the community. Before flipping came along, we were bemoaning the investors: buying up bottles not for the love of whisky but for the promise of future returns. Before that the collectors were the ire of the drinker, buying bottles to sit on a shelf admired but unopened. Flipping is apparently the logical conclusion of supply failing, so profoundly, to meet demand.

It’s hard to detach ourselves when it’s something we care about: among Daftmill fans (myself included) there is much consternation about the number of bottles auctioned straight off to investors to be traded back and forth till the end of time. On the other hand I’ve yet to meet anyone who bemoans the lack of open Macallan Folios, (a cynic might suggest that’s because they were never made to be opened?) but whether its a Daftmill or Macallan ballot we’re all disappointed when we get the “better luck next time” email.

For some, that disappointment will translate into anger: vented over social media (which I can sympathise with) or at poor retail staff trying their best in a tough situation (which I can’t). I’d tentatively suggest however we would be better served reconnecting with the part of the hobby that brings us joy. Ok, you didn’t get your bottle, but there’s plenty other great ones out there you can get. Better yet, if you have a good whisky bar near by, drop in and see what exciting things they have. You never know, they might just have the one you wanted in the first place!