Fermentation: The Daily Wine Blog

The Future of Online Wine Sales

"He said: "I think the market has just tipped. All of a sudden, rather than being driven by 20-year-olds who were the early adopters [of the net], I'm starting to get emails from people saying 'as a pensioner ... The silver surfers have arrived."

This comes from a news story put out by Off License News. Just how significant is this finding that older drinkers are coming to the on-line wine sales channel?

I think it must be significant. Despite the talk about young folks being the one's helping to drive wine's sales accent, it is somewhat older folks that do the real buying of wine. There appearance in any significant number in the on-line world would in fact represent a notable turning point in the on-line wine sales world.

Now get this quote, from the same article:

"Vinitrac research from Wine Intelligence in March 2007 found that 16% of regular wine drinkers in the UK had bought wine online in the previous six months. Internet shopping was marginally more popular among those aged over 55, the survey found, with those under 34 the least likely to buy wine online."

These kind of findings remind me that we are still very much in a transitional phase when it comes to the world of on-line sales and wine. While on-line purchasing has overtaken some industries such as travel and books, this same kind of transition WILL come to the world of wine and completely transform how this beverage is sold. And for those companies that are making full court presses to be at the center of this transformation and who have the funds to keep going and breaking even during the transition, AND who have the ability to either develop or implement "ease-of-use" technology to the sector will find themselves sitting pretty in the years to come.

It also suggests that as this transformation to on-line sales continues, the political pressure to make these virtual transactions easier will become more intense. This is bad new for those who still want to argue that restricting consumer choice in wine is a needed trade off in preventing all those teens from purchasing Paso Robles Syrah and the Austrian Rieslings they are known to crave.

It's Child's Play

I sometimes run by my kids issues I am dealing with at work. I probably shouldn't mention this as clients of Wark Communications are supposed to think that what we do here is a bit more than child's play.

Anyway, this morning over "Eggs in Frame" we were discussing how wineries sell wine. I explained the state-mandated three-tier distribution system to the kids (which, oddly, they seemed to comprehend easily). One of them piped up and said, "I think the middle guys (that's the wholesalers) should have to sell all wines!"

...Duh!  I've thought about this before but when you suggest it to folk in the wine industry they look at you like they've just had a stroke and can't quite comprehend what you are saying. But the fact is, the kid is absolutely correct!

Any wine distribution system must satisfy three demands that are placed upon it:

1. The distribution system must allow access to the wines available in the United States. If it cannot or does not meet this primary goal, then the system is broken and inefficient.

2. It must provide a means for the state to regulate the distribution of alcohol. This means ways by which states can assure its rules and regulations are being followed.

3. It must provide a means by which the state can collect taxes on the sale of alcohol.

Clearly, where ever the state mandated three-tier system is in place, you have a broken system because the first, and primary, goal is unmet. In every state where there is a mandate that wine sales go through a distributor, only a fraction of the wines available in the U.S. are actually distributed by the wholesalers. Hence, broken.

There is a simple way to fix this problem if the states insist on continuing to subsidize the wholesaler tier through a state-mandated three-tier system that demands distributors get a cut of all wine sales.

STATES SHOULD MANDATE BY LAW THAT DISTRIBUTORS REPRESENT ANY WINERY OR IMPORTER THAT WANTS TO SELL WINE IN THAT STATE.

No picking and choosing. No denying wineries and importers distributor representation. No claims that there is no market for the wine when brands are denied representation. If states want to continue to subsidize the existence of wholesalers and to guarantee them profits, then wholesalers should also be forced to represent any brand that wants it, just as all brands are forced to use a wholesaler.

Now there is no guarantee that the wholesaler would actually sell the wines to retailers and restaurants in the state, let alone sample the products, just because they were forced to represent these brands. But that's OK. By guaranteeing all brands access to the state, the brands themselves can do the real heavy lifting and market their wines themselves, using the wholesalers as mere paper shufflers and logistics companies. This way the state and its political representatives are still able to give wholesalers something (a guaranteed profit) in exchange for their campaign contributions, yet also provide something of a functioning distribution system that serves the producers as well as the retailers and restaurants and, ultimately, the consumer.

This is not a perfect system. But it does remove most of the unethical qualities of the current state mandated distribution systems that provide wholesalers with subsidized profits through law, while not actually guaranteeing a rational or fair system of distribution.

Now, this proposal would not allow consumers to necessarily access the tens of thousands of wines currently available in the United States. In order to make the state-mandated three tier system truly rational, a true tax collecting vehicle, truly consumer-friendly and economically efficient, you'd need to provide an exception that allows consumers to purchase and have shipped to them wines from any retailer or winery in the nation.

I've got the kids working on this problem, too.

Totalitarianism and Gigantism in Napa Valley?

James Conaway is wrong about Napa Valley:

While at the California Preservation Foundation Conference in Napa Valley, Conaway said about Napa Valley (Quoting from the Napa Valley Register):

"Conaway said the undoing of the Napa Valley may be the sprawl of boutique wineries by rich newcomers who would sacrifice our natural and architectural heritage in the name of “showing off.”

First, would it be different if the sprawl of boutique wineries were being built by middle class, old-timers? Second, the implication in the idea that our "architectural heritage" in Napa is being sacrificed, suggests there is a style of architecture for wineries that is "better". Really? Better? How? This strikes me as a form of Nimbyism/Elitism/Good-Old-Daysism.

"He cited the architecture of Dominus Estate — a winery covered with stone-filled gabion enclosures — as an example of “totalitarian” design, an “unapproachable” building that serves the “vineyard elite” that now rule the Napa Valley."

Wow..."Totalitarian"?  It "serves the Napa Valley elite"? How is Dominus "totalitarian"? I need to remember this rhetorical tool. Think up all the words that have ugly connotations and use them when I want to criticize someone, regardless of whether or not these words have any relationship to the topic at hand. Maybe something like this: "In a Nazi-like yelp filled with fascist-implications, the author let loose with a sneaky blitzkrieg of commie-inspired accusations!"

"In the same vein, Conaway disparaged the Frank Gehry-design for what will be Hall Winery in St. Helena, a clear case of a building dictated by “fashion, not function.”

Since when is function the only thing to be considered when constructing a building? One suspects that the Palace at Versaille could have been far more functional were it built as a simple rectangle with only straight lines.

"Tourists play into this trend, Conaway said. “They’re attracted by the spectacular.” Be wary of catering to tourists, he said. “Tourism can devour the thing it loves.”"

Indeed, tourism has just killed the wine industry. I mean, imagine a winery actually including direct contact with the customer as part of their marketing plan. What are they thinking?? That's just crazy!!

"Conaway, who is an editor at large for Preservation magazine, said George Yount, the valley’s first white settler, would hardly recognize the place today. The Napa of his day was marked by abundant wildlife, clear-running streams and dense forests on the western hills, Conaway said. If conference attendees were to venture into the hills today, they would find forest “scrapped raw” by vineyard development, he said."

I have to assume this quote is taken out of context or at least the context of this quote just isn't included in the article but that it exists somewhere. George Yount? The implication is that Napa Valley would be better off the way George Yount found it in the middle to late 19th century with its Grizzly Bears running around in mass numbers and not a human being to be found outside of a band of Native Americans. I wish I knew what Conaway was trying to get at here.

"Perversely, the very success of the Napa Valley wine industry — wine grapes are “one of the most valuable legal crops in the country” — has created the conditions that threaten it, he said. The valley is attracting the mega-wealthy who want a piece of the action, he said. Vineyards have been planted on questionable terrain. The homes of the rich are infected by “gigantism.”"

What's the threat? Someone please show me the threat that are vineyards? And someone else has to point me to a time when wealthy folks DID NOT build larger homes for themselves?  "Infected"??? "Infected by gigantism"?  And finally, which vineyards have been planted on "questionable terrain"?

I wish I was at this talk, damn it! The message delivered by these quotes just can't be real. Can they? If these are the real thoughts of Mr. Conaway, then they must lead to his concluding of one of two things: It's just too darn bad what's happened to Napa Valley and we should mourn the loss of pristine wilderness or we should create laws that regulate how wealthy one can be to own a winery or vineyard as well as the style of architecture that is allowed on private property.

Rejoice Ever More

Depending on your spiritual and moral disposition, there may not be anything too wrong with beating a dead horse. This post might reveal my spiritual and moral disposition.

I wonder if the critical establishment surrounding wine is too unforgiving. I wonder if the predilection among the reviewing class is that it tends to oversubscribe to the notion that a wine can be too wrong, rather that right enough for those who will put up with its character.

Oddly I was once again brought back to this issue of reviews, quality, preference and standards in wine upon viewing the last episode of HBO's brilliant "John Adams". The last episode, entitled "Peacefield" is a brave and beautiful meditation on legacy, and that all too human combination of joy and sorrow that appears to be a symptom of the end of life.

I've been very pessimistic lately of the probability that any set of quality standards can be rationally conceived when it comes to wine. And even after taking the counsel of a number of the "Wise Men" of the wine reviewing trade, taking to them my doubts, and having been reassured by them that some measure of standards can be construed if only we have an appreciation of man's unchanging physiology, I find I remain pessimistic on this issue.

In the last episode we see the former President Adams in the last years of his life at his family home. Death and irrelevancy surround him as his dear wife and best adviser Abigail dies, his daughter dies of breast cancer, his revolutionary compatriots slowly wither and die and his own significance in political matters seems to amount to very little other than his symbolic value as one of the remaining founders. And yet, Adams is able to overcome all this and is able to insist to his youngest son, "Rejoice Everymore!" as he takes in the beauty of nature on an early evening stroll.

I wonder if there is a brand of wine connoisseurship and wine writing that places the focus on rejoicing rather than reviewing, even in the face of the competition, the business, the tackiness and the need to be bigger and better? I wonder if the world of wine can be described by its chroniclers more as an adventure, intellectually and sensually, than as a world of ranks and precedents?

This would take a great deal of forgiveness on the part of those who tell wine's story; forgiveness of imperfection, forgiveness for wines being less than we desire, and writers themselves seeking forgiveness from those who have relied on the writer to offer joy, hope and discovery rather than decimals, points, numbers and flaws.

I'm not suggesting that reviews of wines ought to disappear. But I wonder if they might become something more. I wonder if the best writing might be known as that which rejoices in simply finding something new that isn't quite up to our standards but which is best described as surely up to another's standards.

Implications For All Involved

A variety of academic studies seem to have determined quite convincingly that the non-wine expert and even the non-wine interested don't like the same kind of wines that the "experts" and those who have had wine training tend to like.

The corollary to this is that the ratings of wine experts and wine critics seem may have little value for those who are not trained in wine.

The most recent confirmation of this comes from a Working Paper published at the website of the American Association of Wine Economists entitled, "Do More Expensive Wines Taste Better. Evidence from a Large Sample of Blind Tastings."

The basic findings of this working paper are that the average person prefers less expensive wines, while the experienced wine drinker (called an "expert" in the paper) tend to prefer wines that are more expensive. The study included blind tastings by more than 6000 individuals.

At the end of the working paper, the following questions are posed: "is the difference between the ratings of experts and non-experts due to an acquired taste? Or is it due to an  innate ability, which is correlated with self selection into wine training?"

Both excellent questions.

I think the implications of this and similar studies with similar findings is immense, yet I'm not sure I've even come close to wrapping my mind around their meaning. Last week I played with the notion that there can be no such thing as objective quality in wine and that any criteria for quality set down by experts or non experts alike is merely an assertion of preference and not anything that can be called objective, if not mere tradition that is capable of, and has, changed over time.

But there is something else to be considered here. Is it possible that a large percentage of those that eventually find themselves to be either experts on wine of taken by wine in general are also much more likely to be a part of that 25% of the population that are called "supertasters"? This has to be considered. Recently Dan Berger, in an article at Appellation America, took a much closer look at the "genetics" behind wine preference. I sense that what Dan might be on to and what the researchers behind this newest study are confirming, might just need to meet up in the middle.

Something else to consider given these findings is the real world role of the wine critic. Given these studies, is it over the top to suggest that articles in daily newspapers and general readership magazines that review wines would be better off not reviewing wines at all, but rather providing more general interest or business-related wine stories?

Finally, this. Among those of us who are interested in wine, we rarely, very rarely, drink a wine knowing little about its provenance, including the producer, the appellation and the price. And whether we say so or not, I believe we place a strong correlation on price and quality. This leads me to conclude that if we see very similar styles of wines being produced at the higher price categories, we may be in danger of cementing in place that style of wine as the style that is equated with "quality". The implications of this possibility are important to consider.

I Have Been Shamed!!

It appears that shame has fallen upon me.

In response to this press release, issued two days ago on behalf of Specialty Wine Retailers Association and in conjunction with the 75th anniversary of Repeal of Prohibition, I received the following scolding:

"Your press release is an absolute travesty; I wonder how the members of your organization would feel if people outside your industry considered all of the retailers the same.  I'm sure your stereotyping and fear-mongering seems more than justified in your eyes, but as a Sales Manager for a reputable wine wholesaler I take offense at being lumped in with everyone else.  What people like you don't understand is that not all consumers in the US are comfortable supporting causes or organizations that only see things in black or white; that paint everything with the same brush.   You are no better than people running around saying "All politicians are corrupt scumbags" or "All professional athletes are rich, spoiled steroid junkies."  Shame on you."

I would have sympathy for the pain this gentleman feels if he were actually willing to come out publicly, as a wholesaler, and break with the two decade old line the distributors have held: that direct shipping is bad for the public and will only lead to children dying from consuming Pinot Noir.

I'd have sympathy for this gentleman's plight if he issued a statement saying, as a wholesaler I disagree with my industry's cynical and self serving positions that serve only to line their pockets and screw consumers. I've been looking for just such a wholesaler for a very long time.

In fact, my response to this gentleman wholesalers was as follows:

"Tell me Sir, are you the wholesaler I've been looking for? Are you the one that will break from the party line. Because if you are, I'm willing to send out a press release nationwide, retract any sweeping statements I've made about wholesalers and demonstrate my mistake by noting that you, a Sales Manager at respected distributorship, are willing to support retailer to consumer shipping.

In fact, I suspect that next year there will be a bill in your state's legislature that would create a permit for out of state retailers to ship to consumers. Would you be the wholesaler willing to testify in favor of it. Can you get the owner of your distributorship to put his firm on record as supporting retailer to consumer shipping?

You see, until I can find a wholesaler willing to actually prove me wrong, a wholesaler willing to stand up for consumers and support their ability to purchase wines that wholesalers will not bring into the state, then I think I'm on firm ground in painting with a very broad brush."

I've not yet received a response to my offer. However, the offer stands for ANY wholesaler: Come out against the cynical positions your state and national associations have taken for two decades and Specialty Wine Retailers Association will issue a press release withdrawing any sweeping statements it has made about the cynicism of wholesalers and their willingness to dismiss and disregard the consumers for the sake of their own bottom line.

I await the flood of wholesalers taking me up on my offer.

I'm A Twit!!

Am I a Twit?

God knows I've had this shingle hung around my neck by a few dismissive folks over the years.

But I've never willingly adopted the moniker. Until Now.

TOM'S NEW TWITTER FEED.

Yes, I joined twitter. I'm not quite committed to the TwitterRevolution as I'm not sure how it will increase my productivity as a blogger or quality as a blogger or the readership of my blog. Nor am I sure how it will increase the quality of the work I do for my Wark Communications clients. Both these considerations will determine if I remain a Twit.

It seems to me that one's enthusiastic adoption of Twitter into their daily lives amounts to taking the real plunge into social networking. Blogs are one thing. Scanning social networks (Open Wine Consortium) is another. But relenting to receiving tiny messages at random times from any number of of folks you choose to follow really seems like a leap to me.

I'm trying to figure out what place the following twitter message has in my daily life: "It's colder today. Sun trying to get through."

At this point, I think there might be potential to use Twitter as a way to point Fermentation readers who use twitter toward intriguing news and information that may not warrant a post at Fermentation. In addition, it might be a way to guerrilla-ize my communication work on behalf of Wark Communication clients. For example. I might send out this kind of twitter: "Mayo Winery Launches New Reserve Room Food/Wine Menu: http://www.mayofamilywinery.com/mayofamily/page/reserve_room.jsp (shortening the URL, of course)

If I take this route I'll find out somewhat quickly what type of client info is acceptable to my "followers"—that does sound nice: FOLLOWERS...Like I have some sort of torch-wielding army at my disposal.

In any case, there is an experiment underway here.

I'd love to hear from others who live in and around the on-line wine world just how useful or intrusive they've found Twitter to be.

The Internet & Giving Wine a Fighting Chance

A new website has opened its doors that reminds me just how extraordinarily empowering the Internet is.

Prior to the Internet's development it would have been impossible for a brick and mortar version of Israeli Wine Direct to survive anywhere in the United States. The focus and selection of wines at this new on-line retailer is so specific and exclusive it quite literally would have been passed by and perhaps glanced at no matter where in America it opened its doors.

On the Internet, however, it has more than a fighting chance.

Israeli Wine Direct works in a very similar way as WineMonger, Truly Fine Wine and Kermit Lynch (why Kermit Lynch is not selling on-line I do not understand). Richard Shaffer walks Israeli vineyards and wineries looking for small, undiscovered, high quality wines made in that country but which are not currently available in the U.S. The latter qualification is not hard meet since very little Israeli wine is sold in the U.S. Yet it turns out that Israeli vintners are churning out  delicious wines. Shaffer imports them, sells them at Israeli Wine Direct, but also distributes the wines in the United States.

While the current number of wines at offer at IWD won't come close to matching the number of wines offered at your local brick and mortar store, they do deliver more Israeli wines than probably any brick and mortar store anywhere has ever offered at any one time. And while the names of the vintners won't be familiar, the types of wines produced in Israel and sold at IWD will be familiar: Caberent, Pimativo, Merlot, Shiraz, Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay, Riesling.

Israeli Wine Direct is the kind of on-line wine store that should attract at least a glance, if not an order, from all those wine lovers that fancy themselves wine explorers and who revel in the diversity of what different places and people can do with the grape.

A Little Luck is Always in Order

So it happened again.

I won another poker tournament.

This time I was not up against a final player who  appeared more interested in his vodka than the game. Rather, I was up against a player who had recently made it to the final two tables of the World Series of Poker.

This was the second hold'em tournament I've won in the last six I've entered, including a 7th place finish also. Upon winning a good friend suggested I needed to do this more often, that I was a damn good poker player. I am, however, inclined to find explanation for this success, for now, in another fact that is all too easy to forget about: luck.

It's just like the winemaker. How much luck is really involved in making a good bottle of wine? Enough to pay deference to the Gods I think. I'm thinking here of the weather. I recently heard a story about the Tennessee winemakers who not only lost a crop due to a deep freeze, but many of them lost their vineyards due to the freak cold snap. And in California at this very moment we are at the point where an untimely frost could devastate those vineyards that are now budding out just about everywhere. And this doesn't even get us to the issue of rain in the fall. I submit that in order to make a good bottle of wine, one has to agree to put themselves in fate's hands.

I got lucky when I was dealt two aces and two other players were dealt two kings and two queens. It was a big bet and a raise before it got to me, allowing an all in bet by me that led to two calls. I was lucky. The other two players played well, but were unlucky.

I suppose the issue is perspective. I've always looked curiously at those who say, "I don't believe in luck". As though any rationalization for such a statement could ever justify its absurdity. The grapegrower is a firm believer in luck. They hope for it. The better grapegrowers are sensible enough to pray for it even if they are atheists.

For those of us who really want to see lots of very good wine on the market, but aren't involved in growing the grapes we too should hope and pray for luck where the weather and grapegrowing is concerned. Right now across Sonoma and Napa vines are taking on that tinge of green as small buds open and spread patterns of green across the vineyards. It's a marvelous sight. Like all spring occurrences it's a symbol of hope. New beginning. But hope implies potential. What we are looking for this time of year is the opportunity for the grapegrowers to apply their skills and talents. But they'll need a just a little luck for the next month to assure they get to that point.

I needed a little luck to win number 2. Skill and talent played a role but it would not have mattered had I not been lucky.

Wine Clubs and the Economy

The success of the wine industry is dependent on the state of disposable income. In other words, wine is not a staple in American life, but rather a luxury. Granted, their are a variety of ways one can luxuriate with wine be it through a bottle of "Two Buck Chuck", a nifty 15 Australian Chardonnay or with a $60 Napa Cabernet. But no matter what, it would be a mistake to disregard the fact that wine purchases are not like cereal or energy purchases.

I've often looked for ways to evaluate and measure the state of the American economy and the health of the wine industry. One very simple way of doing this is to look at sales trends? Are wine sales in general selling more? Are higher priced wines flying off the shelf?  Are consumers trading down to lesser priced wines? These figures can tell you quite a bit.

However, yesterday it hit me that there is another type of measurement that can tell us not only the state of the wine industry but of consumer confidence: Wine Club Cancellations.

Anyone who runs a wine club follows cancellations in club memberships very closely. At the very least the level of monthly, quarterly or bi-annual cancellations in a club's memberships tells one the satisfaction level of its members.

Tracking membership cancellations is tricky and dependent on how the club works. For example, every club sees more cancellations right before or directly after a shipment of wines is made. This is for the obvious reason that the person's membership is not top of mind between shipments. It only arrives there when the shipment is imminent or has just arrived. It's only then that the financial consequences or satisfaction level of membership is evaluated.

Still, a certain number of cancellations will occur between shipments also. The good club manager keeps a close eye on cancellation trends and knows what to expect at any given time.

So how about this: My informal survey of a few wineries shows that cancellations of wine club memberships has increased over the past two or three months to a rate not ever seen by some and to a point for others that correlates to times in the past that were clearly recessionary.

This informal survey makes sense. We appear to be moving through an economic moment that is somewhat perilous and consumers confidence in the future of our economy is not great. I'm not an economist, just an observer. But neither am I blind.

The Consumer Confidence Index hasn't been as low as it is now since March of 2003. This measurement of consumers' confidence levels in the American economy has fallen for six out of the last seven months, an ominous movement that correlates to the late 2002/early 2003 period when the run up to and launching of the war in Iraq hit folks like a brick. If you negate the 2003 plunge in the CCI a related to confidence effected by a war rather than an economy then the last time the CCI was at this level was 15 years ago.

Wouldn't it be interesting for someone to work up a Wine Club Cancellation Index. I have no doubt that were it being done for the past 15 years we'd see that at this moment that Index will be in a severe downward trend.

Of course when economic times such as this are with us we learn where the creativity, business acumen and solidity really exists in the wine industry. This is the moment when agile companies and business people put their ingenuity to work. Perhaps those that rely on wine clubs will institute a new type of club that allows the wine lover to still indulge in their periodic box of vinious surprises without breaking their bank. Perhaps some retailers will will find cost effective ways to reach out to previously unappreciated consumer sectors.

Whatever must be done, I think we can say that we are moving through an economic moment that will challenge many in the wine industry.

This Wine is Gay!

I've been thinking about what it means to be Gay.

It's not that the wives of my male friends have to start worrying about my charms. No, instead I've been thinking about the notion of marketing wine to the gay niche. It came about when the folks at the "Food & Wine For the Gay Palate" blog asked if they could post an old entry of mine about the subject of a gay-facing wine website. At this blog there is a truly fascinating post about a wine called "Pansy" that is produced for and marketed to the Gay community.

Now, marketing wine to the Gay community isn't brain surgery. You do it in the same way you'd market wine specifically to the Hispanic community or the Baseball loving community or the community of middle aged snake charmers: you simply speak to them directly in a voice, with an attitude and with language that they'll recognize. In large part it's about paying attention to them and their specific world view.

But what I'm really interested in and what I found fascinating about "Pansy" is the idea of producing a wine that is made for the "gay palate". According to Erica Crawford, Pansy's Co-founder:

"We didn't want to make a winemaker's wine. The first one we made was 4 grams RS (residual sugar); I'd like it bone-dry but it's important to make wine for your consumers, not for yourself."

I get the idea that a wine aimed specifically at the Gay community might naturally be a rose or pink wine. After all, trading on stereotypes that are adopted and even not adopted by groups is a standard method of speaking to a group in voice they will recognize as their own. The association of the color pink with the Gay community is an old and recognizable one. But here, according to Ms. Crawford, the direct implication is that the proper way to make a wine that will appeal to the gay community is to make the wine pretty damn sweet.

I can't figure this out. But I'm trying. A 4% Residual Sugar Rose borders on being slightly alcoholic soda pop. You really need to chill that thing down to make it drinkable. Personally, I'd be pouring it over ice and sipping it while floating on a lounger in the pool on a warm day. It's the kind of wine you give to someone who doesn't drink wine because, "wine's just too sour!". Consider that the vast majority of "White Zinfandel" on the market comes in at about 1% to 3% residual sugar. This one is 4%. A half of percent residual sugar is very noticeable.

Does one's palate become particularly attuned to sweetness once it is determined they are gay?

Or is this just another case of "speaking" to the Gay community in a liquid language that they would recognize?

If this is a case of speaking a liquid language recognizable by Gays then we are witnessing a really intricate form of marketing. It would be a case of recognizing that the sensation of sweetness on the palate is not just a physiological experience whereby sweetness is detected by "G protein" receptors found on tastebuds. It would also be a recognition that "sweetness" experienced on the palate can act as a language that gays can "read" and comprehend as specifically applying to them.

This raises a number of questions. Do gays acquire a taste for sweetness far beyond that of straights by virtue of consuming larger amounts of sweet foods? I don't think so.

Is there a genetic connection between the "gay gene" and a gene for appreciating sweetness on the palate. Who knows? At the least we know this hasn't been demonstrated and I'd be inclined to doubt it.

Instead I think it's a matter of again falling back on stereotypes that work as a form of communication that can be used in marketing. The stereotype of gay men being feminine, "light in the loafers", and drastically unmasculine seems to mesh well with the concept and associations that come with "sweetness". And this begs the question, could a wine made for the gay community be successful were it a big, brawny, tanic, dry Petite Sirah?

I don't know the answer to this question, but I suspect that one could just as easily make and successfully market such a wine to the gay community just by falling back on standard marketing techniques that have the marketer paying real attention to the community it is selling to and speaking in a language that is theirs and that they would recognize.

Still, I'm lead to wonder if their are styles (sweet, dry, big, alcoholic, fruity, earthy) of wines that one would produce specifically for another demographic or community. What kind of wine, for example, would one produce for Golfers or Fans of "Oprah" or Liberals or Rockhounds or Trekkies?

The analysis of the social and intellectual meaning of Sweet, Bitter, Tannic, Dry, Alcoholic, Fruity, Earthy and other wine styles is one that probably deserves some significant investigation. Yet I'm convinced that using any meanings associated with these characteristics of wine to sell more wine to a particular niche group will not work without a explicit pitch to the group through other, more direct means—such as speaking directly to that group and saying, "this wine is for you" just as the folks at Kim Crawford Wines have done with "Pansy".

And what of the name of this wine—"Pansy". Clearly it is a case of the now common practice of groups re-appropriating and embracing a disparaging term in order to diminish its usefulness as a slur—a tool I'm very much in favor of using in a world where language is too often used slap folks around with. Any marketer would have to be extraordinarily careful in using such a tool. Yet in this case it appears to not have caused any problems.

So, this has all set me on a mission: if a style of wine can be used to market that wine to the gay community, I want to try to figure out what style of wine needs to be produced to market specifically to the bland, vanilla, over-bite-while-dancing, wine-country-living, over worked, straight male niche.

Wilma Hits The World of Blogs

I just now became aware of a TERRIFIC new wine blog from a long time wine industry insider that has all the markings of being a great regular read.

Many of you will know Kim Stare Wallace. Kim is VP of one of Sonoma County's most loved and most venerable wineries: Dry Creek Vineyards. In her newish blog, Wilma's Wine World, she legitimately and properly refers to herself as an "insider". As Kim writes in her "About" section:

"I literally grew up in the wine industry and have spent the last 23 years of my professional life working for our family winery, Dry Creek Vineyard I’ve held just about every job imaginable--from the office to the cellar, but figured out long ago that I was a lot better at the marketing side of the business than the winemaking. (Thank goodness for our wines too!) Currently I serve as Vice President working side by side with my husband running the daily operations of our 35 year old business."

What's really interesting is the insight Kim offers on just this issue (being an insider) in one of her blog posts where she takes note of the fact that more and more she does not know all the players in even her local industry. This speaks not only to the new blood that has entered the Sonoma Wine Industry of late but also of its vibrancy...not Kim's lack of insider status.

What you are going to get at Wilma's Wine World is some really fun reading the comes with glimpses into the life of a person at the dead center middle of running a very respected and very visible winery. The most current post is a perfect example wherein Kim explains the dynamics of the regular "family meetings" that occur and that are not all smiles and simplicity. It's great stuff.

The challenge for any winery owner that takes up blogging is keeping up with the necessary task of regularly writing. It's not like Kim has nothing else do do and can sit around in skivies and write blog posts all day. She's got to get that Fume Blanc into the market, make sure the right corks have arrived and make sure her distributors are doing their duty.

Here's to hoping that Kim can give us enough of her time.

Everything Served To Arouse

Winebid.com remains one of the surviving early dotcom wine ventures. It survived for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it presents a business model that is so perfectly suited to the Internet.

Their most recent achievement is pretty cool. They just finished having Apex Wine Cellar install a 100,000 bottle Malaysian Mahogany racking system in their temperature controlled warehouse in Napa. 100,000 bottles.

As you can see from the photos, that's a pretty cool thing.

What's interesting about Winebid.com is that it operates differently than the traditional wine auction house insofar as it sells a tremendous number of individual bottles rather than many lots of multiple bottles or full cases of a single wine. This is what necessitates it having so many single bottle openings in its new racking system.

The warehouse they work out of in Napa looks a great deal different than when I was with the company. For a long time the wines sat in cases along the floor with tags around their necks. Then we got large shelves in the warehouse that came with a pretty simple categorization system. And even though I was inside the offices in the marketing department, I loved heading out to the warehouse...just to stroll among the bottles.

It was a little like walking through a sex shop. Everything in it served to arouse...if you were a wine lover. Over there was the mag of 1961 Margaux, in that corner was the 20 year vertical of Mondavi Reserve, the 3 liter of d'Yquem was over on that side of the warehouse, in the middle there was the vertical of Stony Hill Chard. It got me off.

I'm still pretty proud to say I worked with Winebid.com at the time of its first auction and helped open it's first CA warehouse. It's great to see them do well. According to their CEO Jerry Zech, "This custom wine racking system was the final step in completing an inventory and shipping system to handle the thousands of bottles of wine we auction every week.  Our new bar coding system and wine inventory database are all integrated into the final process of shipping and fulfillment."

That's good news too. Winebid now has upwards of 50,000 registered bidders. I fully recall the excitement when the number of bidders hit 5,000. back in the late 90s. It's nice to be able to point to a pure Internet wine play and not say, "what were they thinking!!".

Who To Trust?

Can you trust a wine retailer's recommendation? They are, after all, in the business of selling wine and one presumes that a wine they have on their shelves can't be ignored, let alone dissed by them.

This is the question at the heart of a very interesting story in the LA Times by Jerry Hirsch that focuses on Wilfred Wong, Beverage & More's Online Cellarmaster and the person who reviews wines exclusively for BevMo and who's reviews and ratings show up on shelf talkers at BevMo.

I've worked with Mr. Wong. I know him. I've judged with him at competitions. Let me say up front that this man has a killer palate. It's perceptive, educated, experienced and nuanced.

Nevertheless, the question remains, can a retailer review of a wine it is carrying be trusted? And this is the underlying issue inside the LA Times article. It should be noted that this is not the first time Wilfred and his job as BevMo's wine rater in chief has been covered in the media. Last year the SF Chronicle did a story focusing on Wilfred that touched on the issue

The answer to the question is Yes, a retailer's rating can be trusted.

If one is going to discount the objectivity of Wilfred's notes and ratings, then one is obliged to discount any and all ratings and reviews any retailer, anywhere in the world provides for a wine they carry in their store. If this is the perspective one is going to take, then the skeptic would at least ask the the retailer's rating be written and determined by someone who is not focused on wine buying at the store.

That's exactly the situation with Wilfred Wong. He does not report to BevMo's buyers.

This had to be a touchy PR situation for the folks at BevMo and I think they acquitted themselves well. Calling into question the objectivity of a rating system, be it a retailers or publishers, is just about the worst thing that can happen. Every publisher of wine scores knows this. This is also why I've always viewed those who claim the Wine Spectator skews its scores toward advertisers as simply not looking at the big picture. Do the mental exercise. Imagine the Wine Spectator or Wine & Spirits being caught red handed manipulating scores to give bigger numbers to advertisers. How would you react?...OK....Now, how would others react...OK....Now, what happens when a wine publication's reviews no longer have any credibility? Is there anything a publisher could do that would be dumber than skew scores for advertisers?

If one chose not to trust BevMo's Wilfred Wong-rated wines, I'd want to know specifically why? I want to know upon what basis they believed them compromised. Without such a detailed explanation then I'd prefer to stick with what I know: BevMo made a very smart moving hiring one of the best palates in California.

Very Quaffable Innovations

John Gavin, best known as the author of Quaffability Blog and popular web designer to the wineries is on a roll with two new and innovative websites that wine lovers probably should be aware of.

WEB TASTING ROOM

It's a video blog. It's a source of excellent deals. It's a message direct from the winemaker. What John has done here is create not just a web site the provides access to good deals on wines, but gives you much deeper insight than normal into who is behind the wine. One deal is offered at a time (right now it's an SB and Red blend from famed winemaker Mia Klein) that most often includes a fantastic deal on shipping. The current offered delivers two very rare wines with SHIPPING INCLUDED. In addition you not only get detailed info about the wine but a video interview with the winemaker. Pretty cool!

FREEWINESHIPPING.COM

While I like the WebTastingRoom concept, this particular website is the one I think will lead a number of folks to sign up for their mailing list and RSS Feed. John is regularly posting links to wineries and retailers who have a deal going that offers free shipping. How cool is that??? "Free Shipping" is the number one promotion that consumers want from wine sellers. Not 10% off. Not 20% off on a case. It's "free shipping" or its equivalent that is desired.  Gavin is searching the web and posting his finds, be they from wineries or retailers. If my wife finds out about this I'll need to raise my rates to Wark Communications clients.

Cheers to more very cool wine innovations on the web!!

The State of The Wine Industry...Dan-Style

I missed the Unified Symposium this year, and I'm worse off for it. It's an important event.

However, I did read the news coming out of the Symposium about the state of my beloved California wine industry. All good news. All GREAT News! For example:

"Industry experts assessed the industry at the 2008 Unified Wine & Grape Symposium in Sacramento Jan. 30 with a dizzying array of charts, tables and graphs. The data show a healthy and thriving market for U.S. wines and the potential to capture an even greater market share"...wrote the folks over at Captial Press where agriculture reporting is the focus. In fact, this was the news reported out of the symposium just about everywhere.

Assessing all the various trend data and indicators to get an idea of the health of any industry is not an easy thing to do. Most of us are content to read the news and rely on our own observations. It's always nice to have the perspective of someone who knows the industry intimately, but doesn't have an interest in any particular part of the business.

Enter Dan Berger.

I know people who dismiss Dan's because they are opposed to his belief that too many wines made today are down right unpleasant because of their enormity that comes with a desire to grab scores and the customers who buy scores. Dismissing Dan Berger's opinion, however, is akin to dismissing the reporting of Bob Woodward because you were a Nixon fan.

Dan recently wrote an article for Appellation America that literally scrapes the smile off the Unified Symposium's Happy Face. In this article Dan points to a number of trends that give one pause:

31 percent of all wine sold in the United States last year was imported wine. This, in case you aren’t aware of it, is an all-time record. In 1986-87, imports reached nearly 1 bottle in 4, and if the current trend continues, it’ll soon be 1 bottle in 3."

...

"With Gallo, Constellation, Diageo, and Fosters now controlling a larger share of all wine production and sales than ever before, the consumers’ options have shrunk. The majors now call the shots in ways they didn’t until just recently."

...

"Fredrickson, publisher of the respected Gomberg Fredrickson Report, showed graphs and tables proving how healthy the U.S. wine economy was in 2006, with shipments up 2 percent from 2006 to 2007. All well and good, but his own data showed that sales of imports rose 9 percent last year."

...

"Except for rising sales of Pinot Noir and Sauvignon Blanc, increases in sales of Riesling and rosé over the last few years, and a bit of enthusiasm for Pinot Gris/Grigio, little else is very encouraging."

This is a really important story that Dan Berger has written and it is recommended to anyone in the wine industry or anyone interested in the wine industry that craves perspective.

It's Time We Joined Together—The Open Wine Consortium

It is most often the case that single individuals are the cause of change or the inspiration for change in (and the evolution of) the wine industry. This is not unique to the wine business.

However, it must also be noted that associations, organizations and, yes, CONSORTIUMS can and have pushed issues forward, and caused significant change in this industry. The California Wine Institute, Family Winemakers of California, Wine America, AWARE (for those of you who remember this group), Specialty Wine Retailers Association, Coalition for Free Trade and Free the Grapes all represent groups that bring together like-thinking people to pursue change and have been successful in their efforts.

There is a new organization that is in its infancy, but which I believe possesses the potential to also bring significant change to the wine industry.

THE OPEN WINE CONSORTIUM is bringing together folks who embrace the change that technology in particular has wrought within the wine business and that it will continue to bring. As with all significant changes, these tech-driven changes in the wine industry has caused something of a fragmentation among those who both embrace the change and those who have at best only dabbled with the possibilities that new technologies can bring to sales, communications, publishing, and marketing in the wine business.

The OPEN WINE CONSORTIUM aspires to be the group that funnels disparate interests and technologies and people into a more cohesive and activist agent that can consolidate the changes and technologies into tools we all can use and understand to make winemaking, wine consuming and the wine business more efficient and vital.

IF YOU ARE IN OR ALONGSIDE THE WINE BUSINESS, IF YOU USE NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO COMMUNICATE, SELL, MARKET OR PRODUCE WINE, IF YOU HAVE NOTICED THAT THE WINE INDUSTRY AND THE CONSUMERS IT SERVES ARE DABBLING IN SIGNIFICANT, TECHNOLOGY-DRIVEN TOOLS....

    ...THEN YOU SHOULD JOIN THE OPEN WINE CONSORTIUM.

Traditionally, organizations have embraced bureaucracy. The Open Wine Consortium will also, insofar as there will have to be directors, boards, committees and working groups to drive its initiatives. But understand too that just as the technology that drove this new Consortium into existence is in fact propelled by a 21st century notion of openness, so too will the Open Wine Consortium take on its chosen challenges with a philosophy of openness that is supported by the new technologies it hopes to harness for all to use and help further change the wine industry.

If this organization is successful, what we'll find are the traditional, more established elements of the wine industry—its associations, symposiums, businesses, conferences and people—adopting and approaching new technologies and new ways of thinking that will lead to more intimate ties between producer and consumers, quicker integration of open standards for data configuration, quicker embrace of the newly minted and tech driven wine companies and a wine industry more willing to embrace the changes that the broader culture has already dove into face first.

JOIN THE OPEN WINE CONSORTIUM

The Monolith

The ongoing, steady march toward consolidation within the distribution/wholesale tier of the wine industry continues.

News comes today that Southern Wine & Spirits has purchased Distinctive Wine & Spirits of Illinois from its parent company, Charmer Sunbelt.

There are folks that raise concerns that about consolidation within the producer/winery side of the industry every time we hear about a larger wine company buying another winery. But the pace and impact of winery consolidation doesn't hold a candle to the impact of consolidation inside the wholesale/distribution tier. It's the impact of this middle tier consolidation that should have folks very concerned.

We are moving toward a situation where no more that 2 or 3 distribution companies control large markets and in some cases distribution in entire states. This means that only 2 or three companies control which wines are made available in these markets. It also means that if any one of the dwindling number of distributors choose to forget to take a retailers order, that retailer can quickly find themselves without product. It's a disturbing situation because it places the kind of enormous power and control in just a few wholesalers' hands that that once existed in producers hands before the onset of Prohibition and that led to truly unsavory marketing schemes.

A very powerful, state supporter monolith is being created across the country.

What I found very interesting about this acquisition was in Illinois was the characterizations of the distribution business. Consider this quote from Charmer CEO Charles Merinoff, the seller:

“Over the past few years we have invested       considerable time working to increase our market share in Illinois. Despite       these efforts, and although we are extremely proud of the services this       team has delivered to our Suppliers and Customers who do business in       Illinois, the volume of business does not justify our continued presence."

So Charmers couldn't make a go of it, eh? Take a look at the brands inside Charmer's Distinctive Wine & Spirits portfolio. According to their website, they distributed over 220 brands. Many of them very impressive, very high profile, very high quality wines. Their selection of American Pinots, Bordeaux, Burgundy and CA cabs is good. But they can't make a go of it?

I feel for those good producers who chose to go with Distinctive Wine & Spirits as their distributor in Illinois, but now find themselves with Southern Wine & Spirits. It's well know that attempting to get the attention of the sales force of a mega distributor like Southern is like a mouse trying to get the attention of 18-Wheeler rushing headlong in its direction. Someone is going to get flattened.

I find it highly unlikely that back in 1934 when the states devised their mandatory 3 tier system that they also imagined a very small collection of wholesalers controlling the destiny of the wine market in entire states. Nor did they imagine the existence of over 5000 wine producers arising in America. The bottle neck that is the 2nd tier of the three tier system is becoming narrower and narrower.

At what point does the issue of control over a market of this magnitude become an issue for legislators and regulators. That point is reached when it becomes clear that these developments non only impact producers' access to a market, but begin to severely impact the consumer.Are we not there?

As wholesalers are want to point out on every occasion possible, the state is granted the right to control the distribution and sale of alcohol inside their borders. It strikes me that if a state is going to create for wholesalers the kind of all powerful and favorable conditions for doing business and even allow them to consolidate that power in a way that makes them the arbiters of what products consumers are allowed to access, then there ought to be considerable thought given to to placing requirements on the wholesale tier.

More than anything else, it's probably time to allow wineries to self distribute their product to retailers and restaurants, bypassing the wholesalers altogether.

1997 Whatever....

"most Americans were satisfied with the system as it is except for a small, very vocal segment who say they can’t get their bottle of 1997 whatever.”

Count me in as part of that small, vocal segment of folks who really do love the "1997 Whatever". What a great wine that was, huh! I'd loved it's fruity component of So What. And who can forget that wine's firm and crisp Too Bad. And the wine was legendary for it's long, smoky Nevermind.

The wine that all vocal wine drinkers will be looking for today, the 1997 Whatever, is the creation of Craig Wolf of the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers Association. Mr. Wolf made note of this very hard to fine legend of a wine in a New York Times article by Eric Asimov. In the article Mr. Wolf pull off a pretty neat trick as he responds to the movement to open up direct shipping laws: He very capably denigrates both consumers and wine producers in once sentence. That's not easy to do...you have to work at it.

The implication of his "small, very vocal segment" is that these wine lovers, the ones that purchase LOTS and LOTS of wine from retailers, restaurants and wineries, really don't matter to him and the wholesalers he represents. And I can understand that. It's awful difficult to really pay attention to this big spending, influential, but small, group of wine lovers when your main concerns is making sure 15 year-old Lisa Schoolgirl isn't ordering 1997 Whatever on her laptop while hiding under her bed covers at night (a trick that is always followed by her faking sickness the next day so she can stay home from school and convince the delivery person that, yes, she really is 21 years old even though she lost her drivers license. Craig Wolf is worried about this group not getting wine, as well as worrying that the small, vocal segment of adults don't get their 1997 Whatever. He's a busy guy.

But Mr. Wolf also finds a way to denigrate the producer. "Eh...it's just 1997 Whatever". I suspect the owners of Chateau Whatever work pretty hard to make and sell their elusive bottling that Craig has now made famous. In fact, I'll bet the VP of Marketing at Chateau Whatever spends a GREAT DEAL of time begging his few distributors across the country to PLEASE sell the wine they said you would!! Who knows, maybe the folks at Chateau Whatever decided to drop their wholesalers and start selling their wine direct to retailers and to consumers. After all, why give away margin to a distributor who is so willing to denigrate your wine and wines of other small producers right there in the NEW YORK TIMES!!!!

If you ever wanted a pure explanation of how the wholesaler community views fine wine lovers and producers of fine wines in America, all you need to do is re-read Craig Wolf's statement today in the New York Times. Make no mistake. He knew he was talking to the NEW YORK TIMES. He knew he was talking to a reporter who's article would be read by millions including the vast majority of the winemaking community and the fine wine drinkers in the United States. He chose his words carefully. So let me remind everyone what he carefully chose to say about wine drinkers and fine wine producers:

"most Americans were satisfied with the system as it is except for a small, very vocal segment who say they can’t get their bottle of 1997 whatever."
Craig Wolf, Wine & Spirits Wholesalers Association

The Next Wine Movie (trailer included)

One of the two forthcoming films about the 1976 Paris Tasting, Bottle Shock, has made its debut at the Sundance Film festival. Below is the official trailer for the film. There are initial reviews of the film out too. Not many of them are terrific

FROM VARIETY: "A peculiar demand placed on the cast, from Farina in Paris to Pine, Rodriguez, Taylor and Pullman in Napa (and Rickman in both locales), is credibly reacting when tasting vintages, sending the visual clue that a great wine is at hand. Rickman plays the snob to human scale and never to exaggeration, while Miller lets Pine and Pullman go overboard with unevenly calibrated perfs. Taylor and Rodriguez, despite one ridiculous love scene, pull off big-screen charm. Production is slick on a budget (though using Napa spots as a location substitute for France is an obvious flub), and plenty of visuals serve as little more than commercials for California wine country."

FROM CINEMABLEND: " Is there room in the world for yet another movie about wine?  If the movie is Bottle Shock… then nope. Director Randol Miller has assembled an amazing and talented cast, but he uses them on a disjointed script which never seems to find its focus."

FROM FILM.COM: "With the runaway success of Sideways you just know the general public is ripe for a good wine movie. Even better, the concept here (at first blush) is even better than Sideways and the filmmakers have gotten Alan Rickman involved too. So how did things go so terribly wrong? Well, they violated rule No. 1 of storytelling: they forgot what story they were trying to tell."

FROM PHILLY.COM: "Director and co-screenwriter Randall Miller insisted in a phone interview that Bottle Shock is "as close to the truth as possible."

 

In that case, the screenplay from June that I read must have undergone major surgery before shooting started in August. Even so, big chunks of truth apparently have been jettisoned for wider cinematic appeal, and an invented love triangle has been added."

I for one plan to withhold judgment until I see "BottleShock". What I do know is that one more film about wine is nothing but good for the wine industry in general. 

Deconstructed Wine Reviews

So,  a certain percentage of those little advertisements we see on shelves of retailer outlets that we call "Shelf Talkers" are speaking with a forked tongue, according to the Washington Post.

This is not the first time this issue has come up. I recall a similar news story making the rounds a couple years ago.

In this case, the Washington post looked at 100 different shelf talkers and found that:

"Accuracy varied from shop to shop, but overall, 6 percent of the signs either advertised a score that was higher than the one the wine actually had received or invented a score for an unrated wine.Nineteen percent referred to a different vintage from that of the wine for sale. A vintage mismatch could be chalked up to sloppiness rather than deliberate misrepresentation, but it can be just as misleading. In our checks, the vintage available was usually unrated or had received a lower score, though there were occasions when the actual wine displayed had received a higher rating."

Before anyone extend this little bit of nastiness into a general discussion of the problem with the 100 point rating system it should be noted that just as much fraud could occur were there no such rating system.

That said, a 25% inaccuracy rate on in-store shelf talkers really has to be called a failure by any measure.

I've designed and had printed shelf talkers...more than I care to own up to. But I've never once put a score on them that the wine did not earn. That said, I have built shelf talkers that make use of the dreaded ELLIPSE (...)

Let me show you how that's done:

"Appealing...yellow apple, tropical fruit...Drink Now"

This is an "ellipsed" version of this review:

"85 Points—Simple yet appealing with yellow apple, tropical fruit and a touch of fruit cocktail. Drink now. Tasted twice with consistent notes"

Is this accurate? Yes. But barely. And this is not even the worst example of the use of an ellipse on a shelf talker or an advertisement. I'm proud to say I've not ever been convinced to go over the line.

However, this would be over the line...way over the line:

"The vineyard is a good one...Flavors of Blackberries and Cherries"

Unfortunately it could come from this review:

"82 Points—A troubling wine. The vineyard is a good one, but this Cab is hot and overly ripe, with stewed flavors of blackberries and cherries. There's a heaviness that doesn't work, especially at this price"

This is not a specific example of something I've seen before, but I have seen stuff just as bad.

The point of course is that an old review on a new wine might be bad, but it might not be the worst kind offense.

Provoking The Future of Wine Journalism

Of late (say the last 3 to 5 years) I noted something of slight detour in wine journalism. Rather than a dedication among wine journalists toward praising and congratulating wines as a rule, there is a slight move toward the secular and cynical when it comes to wine. But it's ever so slight and that's because among those who read most of the wine writings, there is not that much call for peering behind the color and taste of the wine.

Nevertheless, has anyone noticed the willingness among serious wine writers to question and closely consider what goes on in the world of wine and in the glass? We've always had those who place wine in a social and political context...at least one or two of them who write for a small audience. But today it seems more are willing to look at wine this way.

I'm not talking about reporting on scandal and society's underbelly, which often leaves me feeling a tad soiled upon reading this kind of story. I'm thinking about critiques of governing wine styles, open questioning of the critic's role in wine, the various business stories that count up the beans and the close investigations (usually in book form) of the "wine culture".

You don't write stories about  how a product is understood by people, critics and business unless unless that product has come to matter. Where that threshold is for how much a product or industry must matter to the public at large lies, I'm not sure. However, I do know we've crossed it when it comes to wine.

The Internet, with its blogs and chat rooms, will tend to cross that threshold more willingly than the traditional wine media if only because its members have less at stake and more concern to jump up and down shouting, "look at me!". In the last two weeks a variety of wine business stories broke out of the Internet and hit the traditional media. And in the recent past we've seen stories on how the character of wines have changed, why they should change back and what the international and globalist implications of wine might be.

I think the trend among the traditional wine media and the non-wine media is to continue to look for stories that have broader implications than just how a wine might be sumptuous or great to pair with lasagna, though this kind of writing will always rule the day.

I wonder if wineries have noticed this trend? And I wonder if their marketing and PR shops have noticed it too. If they haven't then there is the risk of acting as though no one is watching or as if very little matters to the public and media beyond what their wines taste like. That would be a mistake. But here's where the action and reaction comes in. We most certainly will see wine companies get into some tepid water now and again in the media. That will lead to wine companies being a bit more careful in how they act and speak. This will lead to the media peering in more closely. This will lead to even more searching journalism. This will lead to even more careful explanations by wineries of their company line.

This...in turn...offers opportunities to the winery that wants to gain attention by speaking honestly, forthrightly and provocatively...because it seems to me that wine writers, traditional and not-so-traditional are more frequently looking for "provocative."

Who's Surprised??

If I had a dollar for every time I heard a person say "If you don't charge more for the wine they won't take it seriously" I'd have enough money to fund a research project on why people believe the more expensive it is the better is.

Of course no one does give me a dollar every time I hear such a thing so it's a damn good thing we have the folks over at the California Institute of Technology to do this research for us.

For some of you reading this the following will fall into the category of "duh, tell me something new": Research shows people get more pleasure from a wine when they know it costs more.

The research was carried out by Antonio Rangel and colleagues at California Institute of Technology. Basically they had subjects taste different wines and all the people new was the prices of the wines. However, in some cases less expensive wine was labeled as much more expensive than it really is and vice versa.

"They [researchers] asked 20 people to sample wine while undergoing functional MRIs of their brain activity. The subjects were told they were tasting five different Cabernet Sauvignons sold at different prices.

However, there were actually only three wines sampled, two being offered twice, marked with different prices.

A $90 wine was provided marked with its real price and again marked $10, while another was presented at its real price of $5 and also marked $45."

Folks liked the wines they were told were more expensive.

"Our results suggest that the brain might compute experienced pleasantness in a much more sophisticated manner that involves integrating the actual sensory properties of the substance being consumed with the expectations about how good it should be."

Ya think?

OK...so to those of us who know wine and the wine industry well this isn't much of a shocker, but it's nice to have scientific confirmation of what we already know. But how about this part of the research:

"On the other hand, when tasters didn't know any price comparisons, they rated the $5 wine as better than any of the others sampled."

Why would this be the case? Americans like sweet, smooth liquid and most certainly like their wine that way. That's why inexpensive wine, the kind most often bought, is smooth and sweet.

But here's my favorite part of the article that reported on this research:

"Next step: pain.

Rangel wants to see if people perceive pain differently, depending on their expectations. He hopes to administer mild electric shocks to subjects and measure their reaction when told a shock was going to be stronger or weaker."

Any Volunteers?

Subliminal Wine Reviews

There is a wildly subversive and subliminal quality to this story.

The Office of Champagne, USA has issued a press release exalting the fact that "Belgian Customs       authorities seized and destroyed a shipment of over 3,200 bottles of André       sparkling wine. The shipment was seized at the port of Anvers, Bel