Replies to post #62543 on BlockQuarry Corp (BLQC)

[skellington93]

Still here Carini. I was the one that passion told they were legally not allowed to ship to New York or Texas addresses. I called last week for an update and spoke with the same guy. They are still not allowed to ship in New York but a hoping that will change soon. I didn't inquire about Texas as I live in New York. You would think the website would mention such a thing. It's not like they're not updating it because they did change the shipment date to May. Alonzo told me on the phone that New York sales via the website are pretty much non-existent... doesn't seem like anyone cares about expediting my desire to get twisted on tequila.

[hedge_fun]

Love Jug pimps, huh? Like market makers......sort

of. Thanks for the info.

[loanranger]

Nice work. I'm still not clear on this...
"What are the functions of Park Street versus Passion Spirits?"
...but as you discovered there are plenty of other questions. One is: How does Passion Spirits get away with this?:
"By working with a network of retailers in several states we are able to offer nationwide delivery for your product(s)."
Based on your homework that seems impossible.

The State controlled alcohol world that you describe makes things complicated enough, but I think there's an element that has to be added to the mix....distributor agreements.
We don't know if CD ships to distributors (vs direct to retailers), but I would be surprised if they didn't.
In most retail businesses the retailer decides what items to stock, but it's not quite so black and white in the liquor business. I expect that it may be questionably legal, but I believe that there are typically arrangements where a retailer is told that he "NEEDS TO" take a product that they don't necessarily want....likely a new product in the introductory stage. Retailers have limited access to distributors and distributors each typically carry specific brands/lines, so they have little choice in these matters (I expect that is also a function of their size or franchise affiliation).
Does the distiller/bottler impose the product on the distributor? Or does the distributor, perhaps having been incentivized by the bottler, require the purchase su esponte? Why does it matter here?
Obviously, or at least from what we've heard, the final distribution to online customers is made by retailers. There are two requirements then...obviously the retailer must carry the product AND be willing to ship it. The latter is a relatively new process for a local retailer, so that waters down the number of available distribution points further. Not all retailers who are willing to ship liquor will carry Besado and vice versa.

So when Park Street says that their retailer doesn't have the stuff yet they really mean that THEIR retailer doesn't have the stuff yet. If ISBG wants to say that they offer Besado nationally (I guess they've already said that, haven't they?) and consider online sales to be a primary profit center, they have to instruct CD to fill the supply line to those retailers first. If supplies are limited that must be done to the neglect of other retailers.

I know Pierce purportedly has an extensive background in the industry but the logistics of this seem well beyond his known abilities (as you said)....I'm pretty sure that he has never successfully introduced ANY product nationally. I have the feeling that his experience may have been as the guy who visited the local liquor store and told the proprietor that he "needs" to carry a given brand....I think they call them sales reps. His more recent experience (other than hijacking shells, I mean), seems to have been in arranging for some clubs to offer "grand opening" nights where the stuff gets passed around for photo opps with cleavage. Lately he likes non-US beaches for his girly pix. In those respects he seems to know what he's doing.

I can't wait to see what the actual increase over the the 4th quarter's $4,680 in Revenue turns out to be in the first quarter when it is filed in two weeks. And whether the retailers that had not sold a nickels worth of the $300K+ (wholesale) in Besado that was shipped to them in the third quarter as of 12/31 managed to sell any of it in the first quarter. And, if so, how they account for it. I still don't know how they shipped them that inventory without first reporting its existence on the balance sheet. And I don't know how that inventory (that was shipped to retailers in Q3) was accounted for on 12/31. The next set of financials might give us a clue about some of these things...but I kind of doubt it.


Logistics! Audits! Park Street?


Maybe we'll know more about these things from the Court on Monday...keep us posted, please.

[loanranger]

Isn't this NY Law on point?

" As of 04/25/2017 10:41AM , the Laws database is current through 2017 Chapters 1-23, 55-59
Alcoholic Beverage Control


§ 116. Deliveries of alcoholic beverages. No alcoholic beverage shall
be transported within this state by any vehicle unless such vehicle is
owned and operated, or hired and operated by a licensee and unless there
shall be attached to or inscribed upon both sides of such vehicle so as
to be visible from a reasonable distance, a sign setting forth the name
and address of such licensee in such form and with such additional
information as the liquor authority may prescribe; provided, however,
(a) that alcoholic beverages may be transported by a retail licensee to
the home of a purchaser not to be resold by the purchaser; (b) that
alcoholic beverages owned by a person may be transported from place to
place not for purposes of sale; (c) that alcoholic beverages may be
delivered from a licensee to a steamship or railroad station or terminal
for purposes of transportation, and may be delivered from a steamship or
railroad station or terminal to a purchaser for purposes of consumption,
or to a licensee by any bona fide trucking agency holding a permit under
this chapter. In lieu of such sign, a licensee may have in the cab of
such vehicle a photostatic copy of its current license issued by the
authority, and such copy duly authenticated by the authority.

http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/lawssrch.cgi?NVLWO:


Your citing talks about whether a State allows "the direct shipment of alcoholic beverages to consumers". Do you think that I/we might be misinterpreting the phrase "direct shipment"? What do you think that it means? Especially in light of the highlighted phrase in the NY law.


-------
This may play into the issue:
Ownership restrictions
A provision unique to New York requires that every license to sell wine or spirits at retail for off-premises consumption be held by a single individual who lives within a few miles of the store and holds no other such licenses in the state. It was intended to prevent any chain liquor stores from doing business in the state, and none have ever done so. However, some proprietors open other stores in the names of their family members while maintaining complete control over the other establishments. Collaboration isn't only limited to families, for example, Premier Group in western New York has three locations each individually owned and operated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_laws_of_New_York

The absence of chains in NY may tie into my earlier suggestion that local liquor store owners may not want to get into the shipping business whereas chains might see it as an opportunity that is worth pursuing. The little guys are resistant to ANYTHING different.