Paul A Jellis wrote:At first I loved the idea of a 'VIP Club' or a 'Subscribers Club' and thought that I would gladly pay double for a ticket like that, but isn't that a sort of snobbery that the whisky 'image' can do without.
That could also lead to arguments between, exhibitors, the 'have nots' and the 'haves'.
It would obviously need a bit of working out, but I don't think it could be viewed as "whisky snobbery".
A club is for any group who have a collective interest and as such are able to do more than as just individuals. Take sport for example. There are many who turn up for an international rugby match, the majority of whish are not associated to a rugby club. Clubs get a preferential allocation of tickets before the general public but no-one seems to mind. That's the perk of membership. If you want to be part of it, join! I do take your point, but I'm not convinced that this would encourage snobbery. Snobbery to my mind, would be to exclude membership on the basis that an applicant prefers blends to malts, for example!
There are already many whisky clubs around the world (though none in Crieff so far
) and in principle I don't see why a "Whisky Mag. Club" could not be successful. After all we all read the magazine and contribute to the forums - we're partly there already
As regards preferential treatment at whisky festivals, there could be, as there are at many sporting events, members areas where more "contemplative" samples could be made available.
I'm sure the exhibitors would enjoy this as they would be conversing with those who have enough interest in the subject to join a dedicated club and it should be (though I never say never
) a better behaved crowd.
Just a thought
Matt - I think we all appreciate the difficult position the WL Organisers find themselves, but this thread occured because a decision was taken without apparently asking customers what they want.
Perhaps a short consultative exercise which included past attendees at WL (and those who post on these boards) as well as those in the industy, local authorities etc. might have been better PR.
Sure, we may have ended up with the same situation re tokens, but at least folk would have a better understanding of why that option was preferred, the political pressures on such events and other external factors that influence the decision. Albeit we might still disagree, I have no doubt that we would have valued being involved in the process.