Question concerning wine shipments.
People that are located in connecticut,....can they bid on wine sites,
such as winecommune and have the wines shpped to connecticut? site says
sellers do ship to CT- anyone tried this. thanks! (this would be wines
coming from primarily CA)

KOS wrote:
> Question concerning wine shipments.
> People that are located in connecticut,....can they bid on wine sites,
> such as winecommune and have the wines shpped to connecticut? site says
> sellers do ship to CT- anyone tried this. thanks! (this would be wines
> coming from primarily CA)

Unless the site says it does not ship to your state, never make waves.
Some sellers transfer title to the goods in their state, act as an
agent for you, and ship in your name for you. The exceptions are the
few felony states. The down side is that, if the wine is lost or
damaged, you might not be able to collect. Some sellers are very strict
and spell out exactly what states they ship to. This is a rather gray
area, but in most cases, in non-felony states, the worst that very
rarely can happen is that you do not get the wine.

In message . com>
"cwdjrxyz" > wrote:

>
> KOS wrote:
>> Question concerning wine shipments.
>> People that are located in connecticut,....can they bid on wine sites,
>> such as winecommune and have the wines shpped to connecticut? site says
>> sellers do ship to CT- anyone tried this. thanks! (this would be wines
>> coming from primarily CA)
>
> This is a rather gray
> area, but in most cases, in non-felony states, the worst that very
> rarely can happen is that you do not get the wine.
>
????????? What could be worse than that?

Tim Hartley

How about, you don't get the wine, AND you get slapped with a
$1000/bottle fine? That would definitely be worse.

Timothy Hartley wrote:
> > This is a rather gray
> > area, but in most cases, in non-felony states, the worst that very
> > rarely can happen is that you do not get the wine.
> >
> ????????? What could be worse than that?
>
> Tim Hartley

In message . com>
"Chris Sprague" > wrote:

> How about, you don't get the wine, AND you get slapped with a
> $1000/bottle fine? That would definitely be worse.
>
> Timothy Hartley wrote:
>> > This is a rather gray
>> > area, but in most cases, in non-felony states, the worst that very
>> > rarely can happen is that you do not get the wine.
>> >
>> ????????? What could be worse than that?
>>
>> Tim Hartley
>
And all that in the "land of the free"? for having wine sent to you?

I'm surprised anybody tolerates it but then I suppose we put up with
Excise Duty of GBP 1.26 + Value added Tax of 17.5% on top per bottle
and the rascals still get re-elected.

Tim Hartley

Timothy Hartley wrote:
> In message . com>
> "Chris Sprague" > wrote:
>
>> How about, you don't get the wine, AND you get slapped with a
>> $1000/bottle fine? That would definitely be worse.
>>
>> Timothy Hartley wrote:
>>>> This is a rather gray
>>>> area, but in most cases, in non-felony states, the worst that very
>>>> rarely can happen is that you do not get the wine.
>>>>
>>> ????????? What could be worse than that?
>>>
>>> Tim Hartley
> And all that in the "land of the free"? for having wine sent to you?

No, it's a penalty for the person/organization that sends the wine.
It's all about competition for the distributors, the middlemen in the
infamous "three-tier" system here. It's a tiresome and pathetic story,
so I won't elaborate further.

Mark Lipton