September 23 2008
In the blink of an eye, quick as a hiccup, Wine 2.0’s newly released social network is up to 790 members.
Back in April I wrote a post about merging Wine 2.0 and the Open Wine Consortium, also with a social network.
That suggestion went over like a a helium balloon in Anarctica.
One commenter on the post had the insight (temerity?) to suggest that OWC was a network and Wine 2.0 was an event. This was, of course, before the Wine Blogger Conference was announced, which is, well, an event.
I don’t know what to make of this, but I do know Wine 2.0 has something interesting going on. Aside from their social network, which is well and good and interesting, the more interesting aspect is their consumer events which are pulling a lot of people in.
1000 + folks at their event in New York last week.
To put that in perspective, consider that hundreds if not thousands of non profits put on wine-oriented events ever year in every city in America. Every single one of them would kill to have a 1000 paying people in attendance.
That is something.
Even if it was 800 paying people and 200+ hangers on, it’s still impressive.
The shift that I came around to that helps me really get behind Wine 2.0 is I see it as an expansion of the now defunct Wine Brats from the 1990’s (good ideas, but no full lift) and I see it as a legitimately more urbane, updated and interesting version of the Wine Tasters Guild.
Net-net, people in the wine business may bemoan the three tier system, but in this regard, wine marketing, a brokering device to create a winery - consumer push / pull mechanism is very much needed.
Since I’m wont to wax hyperbolic, I’ll continue down the path; the vision of growth that I would have for the organization is probably not a big enough vision for the potential that exists for a business like Wine 2.0 to aggregate and engage members from the trade and consumers.
The Open Wine Consortium may be a network, but methinks Wine 2.0 is going to turn into a business.
Posted in, Wine: A Business Doing Pleasure. Permalink | Comments (9) |
Jeff,
Interesting perspective. Again, as I have said in the past there is room for both in the industry and they have very different focuses.
DISCLOSER - I am on the BOD of the OWC.
A few points you should be aware of.
Both Wine 2.0 and the OWC are generating dollars from their events and I am confident that both have means to monetize their networks. That makes both of them businesses.
In my mind one has a clear consumer focus and the other a clear B2B focus. Both are good initiatives and the Wine 20 NYC event was clearly a successful consumer focused event.
Though I will let Joel Vincent, the managing director, speak to network “stickiness.” I think you are remiss in not mentioning that the OWC has over 1800 members (and 95% are in the trade in some capacity - winery, blogger, winery service company, etc). You also fail to mention that of the 790 members over 50% are also on the OWC. That indicates that the success of the OWC’s foray into the social network scene allowed Wine 2.0’s ability to solicit and rapidly build its network from an established membership. This is made easier since both platforms run on the same social network framework - Ning.com. I would imagine the same will be true of vinoshipper’s social network, etc as each of them feed off the each others membership base.
I just want to make sure you were objective in your statements and fair. Wine 2.0’s initiative and network are a success but that by no means diminishes the effect and efforts of the equally successful OWC.
Best,
Paul Mabray
Chief Strategy Officer - Inertia
Hey Jeff,
Great post. Wine 2.0 is an interesting beast. It is taking the interesting step of mixing offline and online networking. Kind of like Meetup.com, but to a greater degree.
An interesting, more techy, story is the use of Ning’s software by a number of wine related social networks. The social networking space is becoming fragmented as different URLs are now using the turn-key solution to build lively social networks. An analysis of the proliferation Ning-built wine social networks might make for a good future post.
Cheers!
Wow, Paul beat me to the point on Ning. I should have typed faster!
I’m not sure I agree with your take. Given that the EVENT Wine 2.0 pre-existed the OWC, and that the OWC contains many members that are Wine 2.0 savvy, if not companies, isn’t the OWC the parent of the Wine 2.0 network?
The OWC was conceived as a network; Wine 2.0 was not. The WBC is an entirely different event than the Wine 2.0 event. Unless Wine 2.0 expands beyond being a big tasting and actually incorporates some discussion and breakout sessions, it will just be a big networking event. The WBC event has a lot more content and will be more education with a wine soaked theme.
That said, I think there is room for more than 2 networks / events / groups; given the proliferation of other NING enabled wine networks (I belong to at least 5 myself) why are we enabling an us vs. them mentality?
Why can’t the two networks co-exist and BOTH succeed?
Why does everything need to be a competition?
I think that both can be successful. I think that Paul’s point of AUDIENCE is an apt one.
I’m reposting a comment, as my last comment was deleted (thanks, technology!)
Jeff-
We’re all happy for the success of the 2.0 event…indeed, anything that brings more people (whether they be a consumer or a professional) into the fold is welcome. That benefits all of us, from the blogger to the winery owner.
But a few points need to be made:
- As everyone has pointed out, 2.0 and the OWC are both social but they have distinctly different purposes: consumer-driven versus professional-driven. Furthermore, the OWC’s events are bound to be smaller, albeit more intimate and focused, due to the difference in audience (bigger / more isn’t inherently better in the case of the OWC).
- The OWC’s membership is increasing and it’s increasing at an exponential rate despite the limited pool of potential users. As Paul pointed out, the number of UNIQUE users on the OWC is what is most impressive; the actual market share of the OWC is growing at a faster pace than any other remotely similar site. Because of its visibility, and because of cross-membership, OWC’s users are benefiting 2.0 immensely.
- Your comment of the 2.0 site expanding into a “business” highlights another interesting point. Just as both sites have different users, the end goal of both sites and the way they’ll get there are drastically different as well. That said, one isn’t better than the other….
...All of this aside, both sites can co-exist and we can all mutually benefit from each other. To be a bit crude…why the proverbial pissing contest? There is no need. Highlighting the success of the 2.0 gathering without being disparaging would have been a bit more appropriate
Cheers,
-Kimberly
Thanks for all of the comments ...
Pardon the Interruption (and yes, this is a direct reference to PTI on ESPN for those familiar with the show) ...
I heard “pissing contest” and “why does everything have to be a competition” and “disparaging”
Well, I could have written a 900 word reasoned analysis of both and remained nuetral, but nobody would have read the whole thing and nobody would have commented.
It’s not competition, it’s writing something interesting that you may or may not agree with.
In fact, I’m not disparaging anybody. I’m a member of the OWC, I’m going to the WBC and I’m a blog advisor for Wine 2.0. Is there room for both, yes, of course there is, but it makes for more interesting blog reading is somebody is from a red state and somebody is from a blue state.
I just happen to think that Wine 2.0 has something interesting going on.
What’s more interesting to me is everybody says there is room for more than one, yet everytime I write about the two, spirited comments pop up, which, to me, is the point. There’s something competitive here that I can’t quite put my finger on.
Thanks for reading all,
Jeff-
You’re starting to sound like a real Op-Ed writer! (I kid).
That people (such as those who have posted here) write spirited comments about the subject is probably a good thing: we are passionate about our involvement in either, or both, sites. And since we all devote quite a bit of time to furthering the wine industry, we’re going to be opinionated! =)
It’s a competitive world out there, but it pushes us to improve ourselves and what we are involved in (which is a good thing).
We like your blog, otherwise we wouldn’t read it, but perhaps the tone in this one was apt to stir up the dust
And thanks for blogging…
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License
Design by The Blog Studio
Print
Very interesting take, my man!
I just published a post today on my Wine 2.0 NYC experience… and I’m inclined to agree with your prediction…
cheers!