Really Super Fun Wine Quiz of the Day
Do you like a good quiz? I like a good quiz. Who doesn't like a fun quiz? Exactly. Everyone likes a fun quiz. So, sit back and enjoy this really fun wine quiz of the day!!
What Do All These Wines Have in Common?
Chateau Léoville-Barton, St-Julien, France
Louis Roederer Brut Premier, Champagne, France
Yellow Tail Chardonnay, Australia
Monchhof Mosel Slate Riesling Spatlese, Germany
Weinrieder Gruner Veltliner Alte Reben, Austria
Henry of Pelham Cabernet Franc Ice Wine, Canada
Elsa Malbec, Mendoza, Argentina
Hetszolo Furmint Sec, Hungary
Yarden Cabernet Sauvignon Galilee, Israel
Sesta de Sopra, Brunello di Montalcino, Italy
Kumeu River Mates Chardonnay, New Zealand
Chateau Lafite,-Rothschild, Pauillac, France
Luna Beberide Merlot, Spain
Graham Vintage Port, Portugal
Man Vintners Sauvignon Blanc, Paarl, South Africa
Domain de la Romanee Conti, La Tache, Burgundy
ANSWER: Marylanders will be banned from having all these wines shipped to them under the new direct shipping bill that will soon be signed into law by that states Governor.
Now here is your bonus fun wine question of the day:
Why Will Marylanders Be Banned From having these wines shipped to them under the new wine shipping law about to be signed by the governor?
A. They are too good for the good citizens of Maryland?
B. As a group they pose al security danger to Marylanders?
C. Marylanders were clear that they hate these wines and don't want them on their shores?
D. They are all wines only sold by retailers, who are banned from shipping to Marylanders under the new dirct shipping Law
ANSWER: D (Wasn't that fun!!)
That's right, Question Quids! Marylanders will be banned from having any wines of foriegn origin shipped to them under their new wine shipping bill because only RETAILERS sell foriegn made wines and the new Maryland law bans retailers (in-state and out-of-state) from shipping to Marylanders.
EXTRA FUN WINE FACT: The Maryland lawmakers couldn't even bring themselves to pass a law allowing Maryland retailers to ship OUT OF STATE where legal?
Isn't this fun??!! Wait, there's more.
DOUBLE FUN WINE FACT: Marylanders will be banned from having any wine shipped to them from Wine-of-the-Month Clubs and Auction houses. This means that Marylanders won't get to have wine club gifts given to them and it means that Marylanders will be banned from having 99% of all rare and collectible wines of both domestic and foreign origin shipped to them because Auction Houses and Wine of the Month clubs are retailers.
Ha ha ha ha…Hmmm. Boy, Do I love a good wine quiz.
We have our fair share of crazy licensing laws in the UK. It seems it a global, or at least English-speaking world, phenomenon.
Crazy cool post Tom. Makes me want to go down to Annapolis and ask for some??
I suppose none of those shown in the photos were Marylanders? If so, the pics had to have been taken BEFORE they learned of their fate under the new wine law. Now they will be wearing sad faces.
There will be many long faces “Old Line” state when they learn (after the fact) that although it is legal for them to drink wine, they are prohibited from buying a great deal of the good stuff.
The thing is, the new MD law brings MD in line with most of the other states, who also don’t allow their citizens to buy from out-of-state retailers either. It would have been nice if MD could have bucked the trend, but it would also be great if other states did, too.
I liked the House version (HB234) much more than the Senate version.
A couple of questions if I may…I want to make sure I understand the language in the Senate version correctly.
When they require a Common Carrier permit, are we looking at the MA model of permitting every vehicle? FedEx Ground, being independent contractors will have to each obtain a permit in order to deliver wine it seems.
On the version found on the MD Leg. website they have struck out the words “or the persons agent” when talking about who can ship. Does this make it illegal for a third party fulfillment house to ship an order on behalf of a permitted winery?
Finally, the aggregate limit. 18 cases a year is not bad but 24 would be better. Of course, as written it is 18 cases to any delivery address, NOT consumer. As I read it, if your adult roomie orders 18 cases before you do and has it shipped to the house you are out of luck when it comes to ordering wine for yourself and having it shipped to the same address. Do you see that the same way?
You have already covered the non-retail issue very well so no sense in beating a dead horse, though I’ve got my club ready.
Would the MD House need to reconcile HB234 to match SB248? I haven’t been able to find anything to indicate that they did and passed the revised version.
Thanks for keeping us all informed.
No I don’t believe the MD has the same common carrier problems that MA did.
The 18 cases per address is limiting for the reasons you cite. It was written specifically to be limited in this way.
I believe there may still be some formal reconciliation being done still, but the bill as you lay it out is a done deal and will be signed by the Governor.