Excited!! I can’t contain my enthusiasm for the new, ultra modern wine kisoks being tested in Pennsylvania. Move over Jancis Robinson – the Pennslyvania Liquor Control Board is now not only the unreputed wine expert in the state (Pennslyvania’s retailers are already very restricted to what brands they can carry), but they have also transformed the pleasure of learning, understanding and purchasing a bottle of wine into a robotic episode akin to taking money out at your local ATM (although you don’t have to breathe on the machine or teller at the bank).

What a great way to educate the public on wine – how grapes are grown and harvested, how wine is produced, the concept of “terrior”, the history, culture, and dedication of those that produce wine – all by keeping the bottles hidden behind glass doors and providing various snippets to the potential buyer – snippets no doubt written by the distributor that is trying to push one brand over the other.

According to a recent article in the Post Gazette, the kiosks have 4 coolers with … an astounding 53 different wines (let’s see with about 7,000 wineries in the US alone with say an average (being very conservative) 3 wines each, that means the great citizens of PA are being offered about .0025% of what is available in the US, not to mention the thousands of wines produced around the world). How was this selection made? I highly doubt it was selected based on quality and diversity.

In a time when only large producers can hope to secure distribution and only 36 states allow direct shipment, here comes Darth Vader – another attempt to save money while ensuring that access to small producers is kept at bay. Vinography said it well in  “How to AVOID selling wine in Pennslyvania”.  This is an excellent way to hinder sales – just what the wine industry needs after the recent recession.

Now, I am not totally opposed to any automation. In a trip to Madrid I visited a wine shop where you could purchase a card and then use that card to get tastes of various wines of the region. The bottles were displayed along with a full explanation of where produced, which varietals, methods, and tasting notes. There were also employees in the store to provide additional information about the wines and producers.

I understand convenience and certainly agree with keeping alcohol out of the hands of those too young to drink or those that abuse it, but in my opinion this going in the wrong direction. Education and knowledge is key to the enjoyment of wine, and this contraption satisfies neither.

Hmmm….I highly doubt Pennslyvania will be on my priority list of places to visit – at least not unless I bring my own bottle.

I have been to many wine tastings over the years and the ones that I appreciate the most are those where the speaker displays a passion for the wines he/she represents. So it goes without saying that at a tasting sponsored by Yankee Spirits and hosted by Ole Imports USA earlier this week, I found the wine and the speaker very much to my taste. Patrick Mata, Co-Founder, President  provided some much appreciated enthusiasm, wine knowledge and plenty of anecdotes to keep everyone’s attention during the tasting.

Speaking to a packed crowd of about 100 attendees, Patrick provided a feel for the wines and culture of Spain starting in the North with a wine from Bilboa (2009 Berroia from Chacoli de Bizkaia), then tasting South and East to Rioja (2009 Cortijo Blanco, 2007 Bodegas Rugvino Big Band, 2007 Cortijo Calma), then farther South and West to Toro (2007 Cal Blanca)and then a bit to the East to Ribera del Duero (2008 Barca de Piedra). He completed the tour of the country with two more flights. First, comparing a blend of Garnacha, Mazuel0 (Carignane), Cabernet, and Syrah from the Priorat (2008 La Cartuja) with a Tempranillo from the Ribera del Duero (2006 JC Vizcarra). The last flight positioned a very inexpensive wine from Valencia (2007 Bodegas Enguera) that saw no oak, with a  premium priced wine from Toro (2005 Bodegas Matarredonda Libranza) that spent several months in new French oak.
 
During this wine tour he related several interesting anecdotes to keep the crowd engaged while they tasted different wine varietals and styles. (I appreciated seeing a picture of a castle that I took pictures of while in Ribera del Duero a couple of years ago on my way to a visit to Abadia Retuerta).

One of these anecdotes poked some fun at the aristocracy of Rioja, relating how some local farmers have somewhat turned the table on the well established “chateaus” by offering well made and reasonably priced wines that sometime outmatch the established labels in the region. The example given was two offerings from El Cortijo (Cortijo Blanco and Cortijo Calma). The rub is that El Cortijo in Spanish translates as “the shack”, poking fun at the more established and well funded wineries of the region.

Another anecdote described the origins of the French name for Monastrell, a varietal that originated in Spain, but that is also now well establish in Southern France (very prominent in Bandol in particular). The story goes that in the 16th century wine was shipped from a small town around Valencia called Murviedro. When the wine arrived they were unable to read the name of the varietal, but they could read the name of the town, thus naming the varietal “Mourvedre”.

I was curious to know if this was true. So I did some snooping and low and behold.. some interesting history. Murviedro was the name of the town in the 16th century, but this particular town has a quite a bit of historical importance.

This was actually an ancient city in Eastern Spain by the name of Sagunto (Saguntum in Latin), and the first casualty of the Second Punic Wars falling to the armies of Hannibal in 219, who at the time had set his sights on Rome (that’s why I am fascinated by wine – always something new to learn!).

My favorites for the evening included the 2009 Berroia (90% Hondaribbi Zuri, 6% Folle Blanche, 4% Riesling), the 2008 Cartuja (50% Garnacha, 30% Carinena, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon, 10% Syrah), and the 2006 J C Vizcarra (100% Tempranillo), although I felt all the wines presented were of good quality and worth tasting.

So if you are looking for “unique, terroir-driven wines of extraordinary value” check out Ole Imports. Don’t forget to download their catalog, which is full of information about Spain, wine making, and details about the winemakers and wines represented. If you happen to be in Massachusetts, you can find many of these wines at Yankee Spirits in Attleboro, Swansea, or Sturbridge.

Salud!

This bill was recently introduced in Congress to safeguard the status quo regarding the three-tiered system of alcohol distribution and ensure it remains without challenge even in those cases where the Supreme Court has ruled related state laws are discriminatory.

There are several sites providing a good amount of detail  including Tom Wark’s Fermentation, WineIndustryInsight, Decanter and WineHarlots, to name a few.

As a wine lover I find this attempt by the Wholesale lobby incredibly disturbing at the least . At a time when this country is simply fed up with special interest group legislation, this lobby wants to have their cake eat it too so no one is able to legally challenge them in the future.

To me this is a clear case of self interest and greed; this group wants to make sure that no one can challenge their monopoly. They are getting the support of several State Attorney Generals with the argument that the current justified litigation is too costly – states should not have to put up with it (boy, imagine if the health insurance industry came up with a similar bill and argument: “we should not be bothered with what we consider to be frivolous lawsuits if we unjustly deny coverage to sick people.. it costs too much and takes too much time”!)

Why do I suggest this is absurd?

First, no one is trying to do away with the three-tiered distribution system. From a logistical viewpoint, there are many large wineries that need the current system just to get their product to market. So even after 70 years there is still a place for the system itself.

Secondly, the current challenges in the courts are not based on anyone challenging the state’s right to regulate alcohol, they are challenging the state’s rights to implement laws that clearly discriminate between in and out of state wineries and retailers. Yes… they are reeling against anyone that might challenge them from implementing self interest laws that are clearly in conflict with laws regulating interstate commerce.

So what are the salient arguments?

My interpretation:

“The three-tiered distribution system has served us well since the repeal of Prohibition in 1933. If this system is circumvented it will lead to underage drinking, more alcoholism, loss of taxes and loss of jobs. Further, the cost of defending current laws is becoming expensive and the States should not be burdened with such lawsuits.”

Let’s take these one at a time:
1. The three-tiered system has served the industry well in terms of an orderly transition for a decimated industry at the end of Prohibition. With that said, so has regulations regarding telephone service, television, radio, and many other technologies and processes. However, most all of these have gone through their own transitions based on changing needs and demand. Imagine what things would be like if everyone still only had only land lines to work with, or needed to use cash for all transations. The bottom line is that needs change and most industries and businesses change with it. Actually, the three-tiered system has changed. It now includes a much smaller number (albeit much larger size) of distributors, many who control vast amounts of the industry – from the vineyards, to the wineries to distribution. So there is now a lot on the line for these mega distribution companies (hence… lot of money being spent at the State level to keep these laws in tact).
2. I would like someone to point out to me how the current system has fully curbed underage drinking or alcoholism. This lauded system still has many cracks in it. I would also like someone to prove that direct shipment would drastically increase either of these. If that were the case, every state in which direct shipment is available would have drastically higher rates of underage drinking and alcoholism, which is not the case. (I am not saying there are no alcohol issues as that would be naive. What I am saying is that allowing direct shipment does not translate into either of these assuming well identified safeguards are implemented.)
3. Direct shipment states collect taxes and fees from wineries that wish to ship into their state. Tax collection is not an issue.
4. The next one is loss of jobs. I look at this issue much the same as under age drinking. There is no basis for there being a loss of jobs. The three-tiered distribution system will still have plenty to sell. The issue here is simply allowing those that want access to wines that are not currently offered to be accessible. These are not the high volume wines currently in mass distribution, but rather, small volume winereies that often can’t get representation in the current system. This saves jobs not the way around.
5.Lastly, let’s look at the absurd argument that States should not be bothered with lawsuits to refute laws that clearly discriminate between in state and out of state wineries. Again, this is akin to saying after the most recent catastrophe in West Virginia that mining companies should not be held accountable for safety because the cost of litigation is too expensive. If its wrong its wrong.

My advice to States:  Don’t draft discriminatory laws and you won’t have to deal with related lawsuits!
In my opinion, this is clearly a bill that should not see the light of day. It serves one purpose only – to safe guard a monopoly initially implemented 70 years ago. Time we updated our laws to reflect the demands, capabilities and promise of the 21st Century.

If you feel the same way I do, I encourage everyone to write to their representatives to reject this well crafted, special interest bill that is an affront to all wine lovers. Here’s a link to help you make your voice heard (courtesy of Free the Grapes)

As Tom suggests: Kill bill – HR 5034.

“A hint of black cherry with cedar and loam.” “Orange peel and slight touch of citrus”. “Lucious jammy blackcurrant, chocolate, and tea.” Heard something similar before? You may be thinking someone had a little too much before they started tasting!  But no, in reality wine can contain traces of chemicals that in fact suggest various kinds of fruit, nuts, spices, minerals, and many other elements.

I’m not going to dispute that they are many nuances in a glass of wine (if you have the opportunity check out Le Nez du Vin, which contains small bottles of chemicals that represent the smells you will often find in a glass of red or white wine). With a lot of practice one can start to identify many of these elements.

But … that’s not the subject of this blog: what I wanted to talk about is that no matter how hard people try to explain various tastes in wine and no matter what the pundits (reviewers) say or experience, you may or may not experience the same smells or tastes.

In a recent blog – Tasting Tuesday – Wine Lingo, Heather Fleming did a good job in sizing the issue , by using a car industry metaphor, and then providing some good advice regarding how to taste wine.

This is one of many attempts to try to help those new to wine to increase their appreciation and enjoyment. I have seen countless attempts by many bloggers as well as  wine organizations such as the Wine & Spirits Education Trust or  UC Davis. All of these are valid.

However, one of the issues that no one can avoid is that all of this is subjective: humans don’t all have the same sensitivities to taste and smell. Tartness and sweetness are not perceived at the same level by everyone.

So, while I agree that practice makes perfect –  and the more you taste the better you get at it – if you are simply trying to find new wines to try based on tasting notes, then I would suggest the following:

• Read tasting notes from a multitude of reviewers such as the Wine Advocate, Wine Enthusiast,  Wine Spectator, or Gary Vaynurchuk….to name a few.
• Try these wines and determine which you like and don’t like ( too dry, too sweet, too earthy, too jammy, whatever)
• Make note of the reviewer that most often describes a wine that is to your taste as well as reviewers that do not.
• Then, when you see a wine praised by someone that often appreciates wine in line with your tastes, it is likely you will like that wine as well. On the other hand, if you see a review by one of the tasters that usually dislikes wines you like, and he/she has nothing but praise for that wine, it may be one to avoid (at least for you).

So, nothing scientific -but it works most of the time!

Please bear with me … this has nothing to do with wine today …but I just can’t stop thinking of what kind of foolishness would result in something so stupid from a government body that talks about stopping waste … and then sends out something that is a complete waste. Here goes…..

Having just returned from a business trip, I needed to go through my mail. Now .. what do you think I found?

A letter addressed to “Resident at” and my address. So what was in the letter?

(contents)

“Dear Resident:

About a week from now, you will receive a 2010 Census form in the mail. When you receive your form, please fill it out and mail it in promptly.

Your response is important. Results from the 2010 Census will be used to help each community get its fair share of government funds for highways, schools, health facilities, and many other programs you and your neighbors need. Without a complete, accurate census, your community may not receive its fair share.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Sincerely,

Robert M. Groves

Director, U.S. Census Bureau”

Then in six languages “Go to 2010census.gov for help completing your 2010 census form when it arrives.”

OK … that’s great. I have no problem with the Census or filling out the form.

What I have an issue with is the stupidity of spending approximately $125 million (say 250 million letters at .02 for the paper, .o5 for the envelope and .43 for postage – conservative estimate) to send me a letter to tell me I am going to receive something in the mail (keep in mind that there are countless ads on the television right now as well as website doing the same thing at likely several additional millions of dollars). Why couldn’t this message have been sent with the Census itself?

Help me understand Census Bureau … what is the purpose of the letter? What did you think spending an additional $125,000,000 to send this out would accomplish?

Wouldn’t it be better to save $125,000,000 and instead distribute that to various states to provide a “fair share for highways, schools, health facilities, and many other programs”?

Certainly only a small amount, but at least a good start.

What did the letter accomplish? Absolutely nothing … no value whatsoever. What did it cost? Minimum $125,000,000 not counting labor.

For a country that is struggling to find ways to provide healthcare to its citizens, it sure seems like a dumb thing to do.

Sorry for the interruption .. back to wine next blog.

There are many great wine blogs on the net. One of my favorites is Dr. Vino. Tyler Coleman not only holds a Ph.D., he is also the author of several books, and very importantly, his blog often delves in some rather contraversial subjects. Case in point, his recent blog entitled “Wine Shops in states with supermarket sales – three views”, in which he has initiated a rather, some times stormy “conversation” between various intersted parties regarding allowing sales of wine in grocery stores in the State of New York.

This is a fairly heated issue at the moment. Here’s a view on the subject from the retailers perspective from the Queens Chronicle – Liquor Store Owners Face Grocery Clash.

This actually is a second attempt to allow wine sales in grocery stores after a first attempt failed about a year ago.

What’s at issue?

There are actually five competing perspectives on the matter:
1. The State of New York wants to increase revenues
2. Grocery stores want to sell wine to  increase sales
3. New York State wineries would like to see more shelves dedicated to selling their wines
4. Consumers would like to be able to shop in one place for their food and wine
5. Current liquor stores want to keep the status quo, and/or are concerned over what this might do to their business.

All the markings of a great debate! As of 2/12 at 12:28 there were about 71 responses. Now this does not reflect 71 individuals. Rather, it represents a much smaller number of people who are either dead set for or dead set against the enactment of this law. (The count is up to 77 as of 2/20)

As I peruse the responses, it is clear that there are passionate arguments for and against enactment. The current store owners do have reasonable concerns particularly where current law includes many restrictions on their business. Namely, dozens of laws enacted before and after Prohibition that likely make little sense in 2010. On the other side are those that are passionate about changing things for the better (their perception) and are arguing strongly in favor of moving away from the laws set as a result of the lifting of Prohibition in 1933 to more reflect the realities of 2010.

Debate is good. No one is completely right or wrong, even if some of the arguments are either protectionist, in error, or simply self serving.

Tempus fugit. Some laws are timeless, but many need review and change over time. For instance, there is a law in Massachusetts that does not allow financial support to parochial schools. Now, I do believe in a separation of church and state. However, the reason for this law goes back to the 1900s when a group (Know Nothing Party) were determined to do whatever needed to stymie those emigrating from Ireland. There is debate now that the law is getting in the way of providing children a better education.

So laws do need to be reviewed, and lively debate is needed to ensure the best results are achieved. Business also must evolve. It wasn’t that long ago that General Motors fought for years against regulations that required safety glass in cars, only to find the Japanese and others investing in engineering instead of lawyers. Times change and require laws and businesses to adapt.

I simply can’t help believe that if each of the concerned parties took a position that said “let’s make things better for the citizens of New York”, a compromise could be identified that:
- Helped increase revenues for the State of NY
- Allowed consumers to do one stop shopping
- Allowed grocery stores to sell wine
- Increased the shelf space dedicated to wines produced in the State of NY (3rd largest wine producing state)
- Changed or did away with laws that restrict current liquor store owners from evolving their business to exist profitably in spite of wines sales in grocery stores (where in 35 other states grocery stores and liquor seem to be able to co-exist)

The only thing I can hope for  is that after pondering the stupidity and inability of our current legislative bodies in Washington to work together for the betterment of the American people, that the interested parties in the State of New York will reflect on what is before them, see this as an opportunity – not a win or lose situation – and act responsibly for the sake of all concerned.

OK .. with that said, don’t forget to bookmark Dr. Vino. Kimchi anyone?

Many people have special interests that over time turn into a passion. Sometimes a passion remains pent up and is not acted upon for whatever reason, while other times it is vigorously pursued. Here at ViralVines the passion is wine.. in case you couldn’t tell

I have followed that passion in many ways  over the years – through tastings, reading about wine, making wine, visiting wine regions, having communication with fellow wine enthusiasts, working in the industry, taking the latest quiz on the Wine Hub (let Luiz know I sent you:-), and yes, blogging about wine here on Viralvines too!

So after completing my Intermediate Certification with the Wine Education Trust (WSET) last Spring, I thought it would be beneficial to move on to the Level 3 Advanced Certification. The WSET is a wine education organization located in London with worldwide recognition, and often the starting point for gaining knowledge and pursuing education in the wine industry. Courses can be taken in London or they are offered around the world by local educators with usually a minimum  Level 4 Diploma, which is viewed universally as the stepping-stone to the Master of Wine qualification (with only 279 members worldwide). 

The Advanced Certification level includes a tasting test as well as multiple choice and short answer and/or essay questions, and it covers all the major wine producing regions in the world as well as a focus on the production of various spirits.

So for most Mondays since September I have been driving to the train, heading into Backbay, and learning more about wine at the Boston Center for  Adult Education.

What did I learn? Well, I’m not the best taster and …..need to keep working at it!  

But at least now I can systematically approach each wine and make a better judgement. What else? Lots of facts and figures .. some that frankly are good to know but will likely be forgotten, but many others that will help in both the evaluation as well as the enjoyment of wine.

For example, with properties in Bordeaux the Chateau name is largely a trademark. The owner can increase the size of the property by purchasing vineyard plots anywhere within the same appellation and sell it all under the same name. On the other hand, in Burgundy the name is attached to a plot of land and registered in that town where the size seldom varies. Bordeaux has 60 names under Appellation contrôlée (AC ) while Burgundy has ten times that many even though it has less than half as much land. So why is that of any importance?

The devil is in the details! While in Bordeaux the same team and winemaker will be responsible for all of the wines from that Chateau (even if multiple labels), in Burgundy the vineyard is seldom a monopole (owned and worked by one person or group), it normally has multiple owners and each owner can and often does make wine in his / her own style. So while in Bordeaux you will find consistency under one or multiple labels from the same chateau, in Burgundy you may find great variance from a bottle that comes from the same piece of land with the same classification, but different producer.

There were some other facts that I learned such as the residual grams of sugar in a brute bottle of champagne or in a bottle of Tokaji Azsu 3 Puttonyos, the temperature at which most sherries are fermented, and why Chile is such an ideal place to grow grapes and make wine. There is also much discussion on the aromas and taste of grapes grown in different regions around the world. Chardonnay for example can taste vastly different based on whether it is  grown in cooler or hotter climates, whether or not  it undergoes malolactic fermentation, as well as  the vessel and length in which it is matured.

What made this all come together was a passoniate and knowledgeable instructor by the name of Adam Chase who leads  GrapeExperience in the Boston and San Francisco areas. Grape Experience is a company that offers educational studies to individuals as well as education services to businesses.  While Adam covered all the material in the book, he also often provided anecdotes to help understand some of the nuances surrounding the growth and adoption of wine in various countries.

For instance, certain cities such as Valparaiso in Chile, and Cape Town in South Africa grew and prospered simply because they became logical supply points – places to rest and resupply – as ships headed from west to east or east to west. Another example was the fall of the Spanish Empire and the migration of Spanish, Italian, French and German settlers into countries such as Argentina, Australia, the USA and Chile,  that brought their love of wine and skills with them.

All in all it took a considerable amount of time and effort, but for someone with a passion for wine, it was well worth the time and money. I can now approach my enjoyment of wine with a higher appreciation of what makes a great wine great… or sometimes, not so great.

Don’t know what my next step will be … but I did receive the latest edition of the  Wine Atlas by Oz Clark for Christmas. So I guess its time to start reading…. of course with the appropriate glass of wine to coincide with each chapter!

UPDATE: Just received word (March 2010) passed the WSET Advanced Exam with Distinction!

As a frugal consumer I am always on the look out for the best value available for my dollar – whether the purchase is a car, an electronic gadget, or more importantly – a quality bottle of wine! I don’t know about you, but I like to experiment and expand my knowledge whenever possible. I am always looking for that next bottle that really stands out. Not the one that says “OK” but the one that says “wow”!  Of course, by the same token, I want it to say “wow” without breaking the bank:-)

Now I suspect that for the most part 2009 will not be remembered with fond memories especially if you were one of the people or one of the wineries, wine distributors or retailers adversely affected by the economic downturn. So finding that quality bottle of wine at a reasonable price point is more relevant than ever.

With that said, I will look back with fond memories regarding some great deals I was able to make during 2009 primarily due to a glut of inventory in the distribution channel. In some cases, wines that normally sell in the $25 range were available for purchase for around $10, while other bargains a result of wine sold and re-branded with a new label.

So did I find a lot of wines with that “wow” factor? After all .. we are speaking about wines that normally sell for over $25 a bottle. To be fair, not all the time. Price in wine does not determine quality or value of and by itself. Good wine simply means it has no defects. Great wine on the other hand means that not only was it free of defects, but in addition it had balance, aromatics and taste that for you as an individual is very attractive. Said another way … wine is somewhat subjective – what is “wow” to one may not be to another. With that said, in several cases the new find was more than memorable – it was great!

But here’s the conundrum: While I take a lot of joy in finding those bargains from a consumer point of view, I am concerned about what the loss of profitability is doing to the wine industry players – to the growers, to the producers, and to general distribution as well.

Unless the costs are decreasing with the price, someone is losing money. Now I am not concerned about the global conglomerates or the huge regional distributors who have to give up a margin point or two. I am concerned primarily with the small family growers who may lose contracts or renew at very low price points or the quality winery that was already working on a shoestring, who may be driven out of business.

I know that in life and business it is survival of the fittest. Natural selection is normal – businesses come and they go. However, I have had the pleasure of meeting or interacting with many small produces who genuinely take tremendous pride in their work and their product. It would clearly be a shame to lose that enthusiasm, not to mention the quality wines that are produced.

So will I strive to pay more per bottle? Not likely.  As with the majority of consumers, 2009 emphasized a need to pull in the reigns – search for the best buys and conserve capital. But I am hoping that those most adversely affected will be able to weather the storm. There are already too many players whose main focus is solely or mainly profit, so my concern is with the outfit – be it large or small – that focuses on quality and takes great pride in the product they produce.

Good luck … and let me know how I can help.

There’s no doubt that wine scores do sell wines. Just ask those wineries that have received praise from Robert Parker, the WineSpectator and other well known score keepers. I have seen this first hand working in retail where more and more customers walk through the door with a typed list in hand – one that reflects the latest “Top 100″ scored wines.

Of course, no one retailer will likely have all of these wines, particularly those that were in short supply to begin with.

However, I have also witnessed a similar, but seamingly illogical trend when it comes to buying wines based on their  labels. You know. Those labels that catch ones eye based on color, or design, or whimsical words. You walk done the aisles where there are countless options, bottle shapes, and possibilities, and then it catches your eye – the word “Bitch” in glowing pink! I can’t tell you how many women in particular grab this label to take to a friend.

Haven’t seen that one? How about “Vivacious Vicky“, “Menage a Trois”, “Fat Bastard”, “Smoking Loon” – the list goes on and on.  Now I am not suggesting that an outlandish label likely means the wine inside is poorly made or undrinkable, but by the same token it doesn’t speak to the quality or drinkability either.

The label and the capsule really have no function when it comes to the quality of the wine inside. The bottle obviously holds the wine and the cork protects it from oxidation. The label is there often as a legal requirement to inform the purchaser of what the wine is, when and where it was made, perhaps the style or a suggested pairing, and the capsule is there simply as decoration (although at one time it was used to hide the fact that when champagne or sparkling wine was disgorged it naturally lost some of the wine – the capsule hide that fact from the buyer:-).

So why would one buy one wine over the other based on label alone? Well … why does a buyer choose any product  over the other? Brand, reputation, price, recommendation amongst others all come into play. The label is just one more marketing ploy to get the attention of a particular buyer… some times it works, and some times it doesn’t.

I have bought certain wines that had crazy labels and some of these have turned out to be interesting wines. However, in general I am a bit leery of crazy labels as they suggest to me that the winemaker is having difficulty differentiating his/her wine based on its own merits and needs to turn to slick packaging to do the job.

So as with the scoring on wines … caveat emptor. Neither scores nor crazy labels mean you will enjoy the wine.  For this you will need to explore on your own and decide what you like.

With so many wines stuck in distributi0n looking for buyers many are at discount, so now maybe a good time to experiment.

Have a wonderful and safe Holiday!  Enjoy the wine but don’t drink and drive.

Yesterday I read a very interesting report (December 2009) from the Marine Institute (Alcohol Industry Watchdog) entitled: “The Myth of the Family Winery: Global Corporations behind California Wine”. Even as a passionate wine enthusiast I would have to agree or at least acknowledge that many of the  statements in the report are accurate.

• As an example, a very high percentage of production of wine from California is controlled by a small number of global organizations (won’t list them here… you can easily identify them in the report).
• I must also acknowledge that these same organizations do in fact fund lobbyists across the nation (and I assume abroad as well) to try and keep the status quo from changing. This of course is also done by powerful organizations across all types of business as a way to support continued growth and profitability – not perhaps humane, fair or reasonable, but still legal.
• Again I have to agree that these large corporations are not only wine focused, but are usually also well invested in beer and spirits.

So where do I differ with the report?

As with any facts, the key is in understanding the background and the numbers to the degree that one has an accurate picture by which to evaluate. In this case, the facts are presented from one point of view; that is, from that of an “Alcohol Industry Watchdog”.

So my humble perspective:

• Yes… alcohol in general is controlled by a few very large corporations. This is true today and it was true at the turn of the century in America, one reason why wine was included within Prohibition. In both instances the main focus is and was on profitability. However, wine is produced also by hundreds of dedicated grape growers and winemakers who have a passion for their craft and who are firm believer’s as am I that wine is and should be a part of your everyday life – not as a beverage with which to binge, but as an integral part of a healthy diet.  Yes… there are huge conglomerates in the wine industry, but there are dozens and dozens of family run wineries that are under constant financial pressure due to the economy and the difficulty of getting their product to the consumer under the current 3-tiered system.  These are very hard working individuals and families who are not wealthy, take great pride in their work, and also provide employment, pay taxes, and produce a quality product.
• Yes … these very large corporations do fund lobbyists .. but not fully as the report suggests. While these large corporations own the majority of production, they are also distributors of the product.  High volume production in any industry requires tiered distribution to support the large volumes that must flow from producer to consumer. Small producers are often shut out of distribution since there isn’t sufficient volume to interest the large volume distributors. So yes there is large scale funding and lobbyists, but not to support direct shipments or alter 3-tiered distribution. One of the issues before Prohibition was the fact that the producters (yes.. again very large scale corporations) controlled the flow of alcohol, often putting pressure at the retail level to the point of exclusivity as a way to stymie the competition. The system put in place after Prohibition (3-tiered system) was engineered to avoid this from happening again. However, over the last 70 years since the repeal in 1933 the situation has changed whereby distribution is now the controller not the producer. I will leave it up to the reader to determine which is better.

In reality, the United States has been debating the role of wine since the mid 19th Century when Nicolas Longworth worked to make wine a part of daily life (keep in mind drinking water at the time was very hazardous to your health with the alternative mostly distilled liquour) and Samual Carey, a strong advocate of temperance, insisted wine was no different than any other alcohol.

As with many aspects of life, the “truth” for the majority of people likely lies in between.

QUICK UPDATE:  According to Linda Reiff, executive director of Napa Valley Vintners, “The strength of the family business is evident in Napa Valley — 95 percent of our appellation’s wineries are family owned. And, yes, 70 percent produce less than 10,000 cases annually and 60 percent less than 5,000 cases annually.”

For more on Napa Valley, its wineries, and the last 10 years, read “Wine Tales of the Decade”.wine