Hermit Woods Winery
 

Last year or so my wife and I stopped into Hermit Woods Winery in Meredith and enjoyed a wine tasting. We ended up purchasing two bottles of wine and a port, which was a little pricey but fun. My wife enjoyed the wine and I really enjoyed the port.

Last weekend my wife and I were driving by Hermit Woods' Meredith store, and I asked my wife if she wanted to stop in and buy some wine. Her response was "no, it's too expensive." Keep in mind that she is willing to spend money on wine that she likes.

Today, I read with interest in The Daily Sun that Hermit Woods is now paying a "living wage" of $15 per hour. To pay for this raise, every sale will be charged a 3.5% surcharge. Although a nice gesture, I hope that Hermit Woods does not price themselves out of the market. It seems that they have fallen for the notion that entry level jobs should provide a "living wage."

My advice is to let the marketplace dictate how much an entry level job should pay, and if a person performs well, reward them by increased responsibility and money. Maybe Hermit Woods has already done this analysis, but it seems to me that it's price point is already at the top of the market, and that they should be looking for ways to reduce costs and lower their prices. I hope they are not falling for this false narrative of a "living wage."

It is my observation that the vast majority of people who own "Boutique" style businesses tend to be of the liberal bent and knowing few people outside their circle, believe that everyone believes as they do and therefore everyone will willingly pay a premium for the "living wage". This reveals a lack of economic knowledge for which we may thank the liberal school systems beginning in the public schools and carrying through into college and university.

Wow!!!
 

I will absolutely NOT support a business that provides an additional surcharge to increase employees wages.

If they want to pay their employees a "living wage" or whatever pay rate they feel they need to, it is their choice but do not place a surcharge on your sale price and directly pass it on to your customers, all costs and overhead should be in the sale price.

It is misleading to do so to consumers, again price your product as you see fit but a suchrage........

You're buying a niche product from a small town winery, you expect their prices to be on par with the powerhouses that source their grapes from multiple vineyards and have almost fully automated processes?

You pay more for a reason when visiting places like Hermit (personally I am not a huge fan of their wines), otherwise spend the 7$ and buy a bottle of yellow tail.

The economics of small batch wine making are one reason why their prices are higher than some of the big name brands. Everyone knows the more you make the lower your costs.

Hermit Woods Winery
 

The wine is already priced higher than the big boys due to small batch processing., I get that. Adding an additional premium to pay a "living wage" is ridiculous. If the owners want to increase price so be it, that is there choice, but don't advertise it as helping to pay a living wage, that is not my concern. Will they explain the next price hike as a premium for electricity prices raising?
Try gaining some efficiencies or heaven forbid not taking as much profit on their end out of the business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here's the article from their website detailing their philosophy: http://hermitwoods.com/2016/08/14/he...its-employees/.

Side note: I was reading some reports this morning about something interesting happening in America with regard to "luxury" product pricing. Specifically, the numbers show that the increase in wealth for the "rich" have craft breweries doing very well and, as a result, pricing staying almost stagnant (1-3% inflation) whereas "low-end" breweries are seeing lower purchase numbers as a result of the "weakened middle-class buying power" and, as a result, are seeing inflation numbers of 7+%. The quotes are mine, reflecting paraphrasing of contentious topics.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

I tried to leave a comment regarding their philosophy and the surcharge but the comments section of their website below the article is "closed" :eek:

Probably to avoid a political discourse. What's interesting to me is how they've phrased it--why not just say what you're going to do and why and then increase the pricing accordingly? The sales numbers would indicate consumers' feelings.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

They would have been better off simply raising the price of their wine and keeping their mouth shut about the "surcharge". It's business 101 that as labor or material prices increase so does the price of the product being sold. To call it a surcharge against their customers is simply bad business and just plain stupid.

Dan

Agree!!!
 

I whole heartedly agree. That is exactly what I was saying above.

Hermit Woods
 

Closing the comments option on their website speaks volumes.

Any business that mixes in politics risks alienating half their potential customers.

They are welcome to pay employees whatever they want and price it into the product. Personally I have a problem with any organization that presents a price then adds on fees; just tell me what it costs and I'll decide.

I guess the airlines started this with: "round trip coast to coast for $100"

plus baggage loading fee, unloading fee, drink fee, seat surcharge, landing fee and air conditioning assessment.

"Progressive" = Intolerance
 

Those of the "Progressive" bent tend not to tolerate opposing viewpoints.

Hermit Woods
 

The wine at any price is really not that great! In time they will learn.

I agree, Dan. Raise the price. A 3.5% increase on a $20 bottle of wine raises the price to $20.70; a $40 bottle of wine goes up to $41.40 . It seems to me to be either a "feel good" change; tell the employees that they are getting a raise, and price the wine accordingly. If someone likes their product (s) , they will buy it. Just don't go public with the raises and then tell me that I can still drink their wine, as long as I pay a 3.5% surcharge for that privilege. :(

I live here... I am always Upthesaukee.

Exactly!

Dan

Never have heard of this place , but certainly won't be paying a 'lazy worker premium' for what I'm sure is a substandard product...

Living wage vs. jobs for the young...
 

Personally, I don't like being waited on by some loser in their 40's with 2 kids, who's skill level is minimum wage. Raising the wage not only doesn't make this person a better employee, it's taking jobs away from young people who need the entry level opportunity.

What happened to the "adult" who's making minimum wage? Many think society failed them. Many think they failed themselves.

"Lazy workers," "substandard product" (even though OP said he enjoyed it and was looking to buy more), and "loser[s] in their 40's." Awesome.

From the article: "Some of our employees are in school or just out of school and have college debt to pay off while others have families to support, two of whom are single moms. If they’re going to work hard to help us grow our business, we want to make sure they have the resources to afford to live.”

I think the business owners' goal is more noble than big business triple-dipping by raking customers over the coals, avoiding taxes, and taking government subsidies.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

There is wisdom in this statement.

I had to zip my lip for my entire career as an employee and then as a business owner.

Now that I am retired I am free to offend all comers!;)

Better than everyone
 

I quess you feel that u are better than everyone else because maybe you make more than minimum wage ? You are not & you have no idea why anyone is working in the position they are in but they are working & not collecting free $$$ somehow. Everyone is different & Everyone is EQUAL

Free Market
 

While my wife and I enjoy a bottle of wine through the week with our meals and the occasional wine tasting and "special" bottle of wine is enjoyed, I am not going to pay $20+ a week for a bottle of wine. There are plenty of very good wines at reasonable prices out there. Our favorite is an $8 a bottle Riesling; $416 vs. $1040 a year. I could afford it if I chose to but am very happy with the less expensive wine and have $600+ to spend on something else.

That's me. However, I suspect that many feel the same way.

The winery can price it's products however they please for whatever reason they please. The public will decide, each person by their own standards, whether their wines are worth the prices they charge.

A comparison for another food product might be Ben & Jerry's that is a very good but premium priced ice cream. They also have a strongly stated "socially conscious" philosophy. They have done well in the market. I may not agree with their programs and even got a good chuckle when food analysis showed their products were not quite as "pristine" as they would like but I love their ice cream. However, it is an occasional indulgence because of the price (and sadly the calories). There are other excellent ice creams in a variety of flavors in the market at better prices (but sadly with just as many calories). I ignore B&J's pontificating policies and occasionally enjoy their delicious ice cream. Many people who buy their products have not the slightest idea of their "philosophy" and might care less if they did.

The free market, each individual making a choice to purchase based on their own value judgements, will decide the success of B&J's and Hermit Woods. I can tell you why I make the purchase choices I do and would be interested in why others make their choices and may or may not agree with them but in the end I don't care if others make different choices. As long as I am not forced to buy expensive (or cheap for that matter) ice cream or wine for someone else, who cares.

BTW, it's a whole other matter if the government sets a $15 minimum wage that removes my choice to pay entirely.

Missing the point
 

I believe you are missing the issue. Yes they absolutely have the right to charge what they want as does Ben and Jerrys but the issue here is a specific surcharge for them to pay their employees the 15.00 per hour. Ben and jerrys do not have a surcharge because they want to save a rain forest. They take their profit and do with it as the see fit whether keeping the funds or contributing to social causes.

Equal Opportunity
 

I agree that everyone is different. I disagree that everyone is equal. Some people are smarter, some people work harder, some people were raised under better circumstances. Nothing in life is guaranteed. Everyone should have an equal opportunity to succeed, and I think in America, we come as close to that ideal as possible.

Creating an artificial minimum wage does nothing but damage the economy. My grandparents, parents, uncles, brothers and I have owned small businesses through the years, and if forced to pay a high minimum wage, we would not have been successful. We're not multimillionaires, but successful small business owners who create entry level and working wage jobs for individuals willing to work hard.

Like many posters, I didn't need to know that Hermit Woods was increasing its minimum wage and passing this cost onto the consumers. I would have rather not known that an already pricey product is increasing. However, this is an excellent example of what happens when an artificial increase of the minimum wage occurs -- either the cost of the product goes up or less employees are asked to do more work.

The point is that Hermit Woods was transparent as to why they are raising their prices. If you disagree with the policy and price, don't shop there. B&J does it in the background by building their "social program" costs into the base price. Purchasers of either product are still paying for these programs whether you know about it or not. B&J's customers might want to put their heads in the sand about it and B&J's helps them do that by not breaking out the costs as an add-on charge. If B&J's has bumped their prices 5% to cover the cost of supporting their causes, isn't the effect the same?

For that matter, most banks, insurance companies, and other large businesses support music, plays, and lots of other local activities. Many are truly altruistic but if they don't they are not considered to be "good neighbors". They use a portion of the money I pay them to do this. I don't have a choice about it. What's the difference?

In addition, if I am a stockholder of one of these businesses, the management is taking some of the money that I should have received as returned profit and diverting it to other uses.

In short, businesses of all kinds are taking more money from us than they actually need to provide their products and using the surplus in ways they see fit. I agree that Hermit Woods doing it in such a obvious way can bug some people but the actual practice is typical for business.

Disagree in this instance
 

I disagree in this instance. Again what any company does with its profit is up them and their shareholders to decide. They charge a price and I choose to purchase or not purchase that product. This is a specific surcharge for a specific purpose for a normal cost of doing business, "labor" which is always included in the sale price. This transparency in my eyes is NOT true transparency but a company making a political statement and passing it along directly to the consumer

Bingo! Except I don't think everyone is given an equal opportunity anymore, with all due respect affirmative action and hiring based off of diversity is not equal for the people who don't fit those demographics. In my opinion it should be based off the best applicant regardless of anything but that's a different topic. No more asking for race, sex, or age etc on any applications.

The everyone is equal thought is a problem in today's society. I was taught you want something go work for it, nothings handed to you. And if you don't want it bad enough someone else will surely take it. Sure on a moral level we are all people and equal and all that junk, but when discussing business and pay a surgeon and a icecream scooper are not equal, and should not be compensated as equals.

As far as Hermit making a political statement, look how Chick-filet did after they made their homophobic comments a while back. In some states I could see that kind of transparency used as a marketing scheme.

With stores in New Hampton, Meredith, and Center Harbor, that's probably a lot of competition from the state liquor stores for the Hermit Woods store in Meredith. Believe state liquor pays about $12.25/hr for starting employees. State Liquor has a huge selection of wine at very reasonable prices, too.

Have you been in the new state liquor stores in either New Hampton or Plymouth.....both are very large! The state liquor in Ashland, at exit 24, has closed permanently......probably due to the closeness of the new huge store in Plymouth.

You know, if you do not drink adult beverages, or play any lottery games, there is absolutely nothing for you in a state liquor store, and NH has about 78 stores across the state. Maybe the state could hold mental health counseling clinics, every Monday from 2-3:30, in the back of the state liquor stores, for the rest of us who never, ever, go inside a state liquor store ...... as a secret way to build the business and create new customers.:rolleye2:

Everyone who has no reason to go to a state liquor store ...... please raise your hand .....you know who you are.

For about $3.25, Walmart sells a 1 1/2 litre of white wine called Golden Oak or something, and I have had the same bottle in the back of the frig for about four years now......think I should use it for cleaning the stainless steel kitchen sink......ho-ho-ho-ho! .... is cheaper than stainless sink cleaner ....and tastes much better too!

I commend them for paying the employee's as much as they can and still have a working business model, If they indeed do, but to say there is a surcharge for that is absurd. There obviously pandering, other wise they would charge what they need to charge and keep It to themselves. I guess they've chosen which 50% they are targeting.

They are free to pay whatever they want to their employees but it seems like they were a little self serving to flaunt it on the front page of the Sun knowing that most of us in the service industry could not stay in business under a $15 minimum wage.
Skilled employees make that and more in our industry but entry level and summer jobs for 14 year old kids would cease to exist.
Would have been more impressed if they had eaten the raise instead of passing it on to their customers.

Regardless of one's political views, in my opinion, it was a poor business decision to alienate customers by stating the "surcharge." My politics are probably a little left on some issues than most of the Forum, but I did find this policy statement a little too self-serving.

To me, it is similar to hanging a political poster. It would rarely be a good business decision even though the business has every right to do so.

And if the business is not doing so well, if it goes "belly-up" it is of little help to workers regardless of minimum wage.

This kinda reminds me of the VK thread and not accepting Credit Cards. :laugh:

i agree with you in fact since they do flag it i am less likely to go there

Equal
 

I have to agree with u fully, I know I am off base here but I was trying to make a point that the 40 year old person trying to support 2 kids should NOT be called a loser by anyone Period

NO, everyone is not equal. Get used to it, they're not. In God's eyes maybe, but in the employment field not even CLOSE.

My late father taught me as a youth that all work is honorable. A simple, but important concept to grasp. I'm not coming down on you, but your "concern" about being served by some loser trying to make a living says more about your thought process than these individuals working for a living in whatever stage of life they find themselves in.

I have to say I admire anybody who WORKS for a living no matter what they make. When I keep hearing that people won't work because they can make more sitting on their butt and collecting welfare, it makes me mad. And it is so obvious that the more a company has to pay in wages or any cost of doing business for that matter, the more they are going to have to charge for their product. Who can't understand that???? Bread and hamburg used to be 5 cents a pound in the old days when the average person made 18 dollars a week. It is all relative.

oh brother. Let's paint everyone with the same broad brush.

in the end to me each establishment should pay their employees what they can afford and the value they receive. But i don't see the reason to highlight why they are making that decision. if fuel goes up would they shown a fuel surcharge. i think they wanted to make a political statement which as someone said makes half the customers happy and half will view it has a political statement.

Hey people, what's happening in this thread? Lol...

At the end of the day the customer ends up paying all increased wages, taxes, fees, rainforest savings or whatever, it all gets passed along. If the customer decides not to pay the increase the business either reprices or goes out of business. Capitalism at its finest, nobody gets to escape unless it is a president trying to pick a winner companies and his buddies who enrich themselves before the "winner" goes belly up.

Right! But Isn't fun to discuss? :liplick:

Yes, and it will be interesting to see what happens to the business. Although it may soldier on if it's supported by a trust fund.

My wife and I were in Meredith on Friday evening for dinner and ice cream. We saw the winery and thought about going in. It was 8pm, so it was closed. After reading this, I'm sort of glad. I do not care for wine but I would buy a nice bottle for the wine drinkers in the house. I will not bother going there now after learning about the surcharge. I would rather the price just be the price and not have to partake in some political thing.

And if $15 is good....wouldn't $30 be twice as good? Where is the research that shows $15 is the magic number?

It's "virtue signalling". They get to show everyone how virtuous they are.

Article referenced in this thread's initial post
 

For anyone looking to read the Laconia Daily Sun article referenced in this thread's initial post, you will find it here:
http://www.laconiadailysun.com/newsx...rs-15-per-hour

As the thread went off topic...I will take an opportunity to respond to the "people are not equal" comments with this quote:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

Words matter. I can agree that we are not all the same; but, as a very grateful American citizen I am proud we have a founding document that holds equality to be self-evident.:patriot:

Cheers to good wine wherever it is found. Cheers to people making a decent living.

Equal
 

I agree in the eyes of the Lord, all men (and women) are created equal. And in our great country, all men and women should be treated equally by their government, and have an equal opportunity to succeed (or not). As mentioned by a prior poster, I am not sure whether affirmative action, which frankly can be characterized as reverse discrimination, adheres to this principle. Notwithstanding, my point above, and that of other posters, is that there is no guarantee of equal outcome. Whether it's the BLM movement or the Occupy movement, it seems that people associated with these groups are more concerned about assuring equal outcome, not equal opportunity. I think the quote supports my (our) arguments contained within this thread. Not sure whether FarmLife thought differently.

Have to say it FarmLife, And the hell with the people aren't? :laugh:

No one is saying to Hell with those who do not make a decent living (who gets to decide what is decent by the way?) What is said, thought and felt by many is that people who are not making a decent living look to blame others for their failures. Once out of the clutches of the public school system where a huge amount of blame (if one wishes to blame others) can be placed, it is up to the individual to make the most of the hand they have been dealt. Not everyone has the same level of energy, confidence, brain power, focus, etc. To expect either the government or the private sector to make up for individual deficiencies is a fools errand and never ends but poorly.

I was making a joke folks. After FarmLife extols the virtue of equality he only toasts those that make a decent living. I know it was inadvertent and he wishes good cheer to all, but I thought it was funny.

www.liquorandwineoutlets.com/events

If you hurry, maybe you can make it to this adult beverage tasting that's happening right now on Thursday, August 25th, from 4-6pm with Bully Boy Boston Rum and Bully Boy Old Fashioned at the new New Hampton state liquor store which is close to exit-23.

I am so there ....... I am on my way! And, a tasting like this is most probably free.....correct!

And tomorrow at the New Hampton store, Friday, August 26, from 4-6pm ........it's Nautical Gin ......... sounds very appropriate for boaters!


www.bullyboydistillers.com/boston-rum/


About five years ago, the State of NH closed the Registry of Motor Vehicles office that was in the Belknap Mall in Belmont, so now you must travel to either Tamworth or Concord for the next closest registry office. But, if you need to find a wine or spirits tasting for something to do on a rainy Thursday afternoon, you have state liquor stores all over the place: Plymouth, Center Harbor, Meredith, New Hampton, Gilford .... they are everywhere with 79-total. So, why not open a small RMV office in the back of the huge, new state liquor store in New Hampton what with its central location there .... to better serve the motor vehicle operators here in the lakes region.


Well gee whiz......scrolling down the list..........the Center Harbor state liquor store is having a wine tasting today as well ....... like, who knew!

Is NH a great state, or is NH a great state, or what!

NH Liquor Store
 

NH is a great state! Too bad me and Mr. Gin had a falling out many years ago!:laugh: