Brad Ballinger

I'm going to be at an annual pilgrimage of wine geeks in Toledo at the end of February. Bandol is one of the themes. So I'll report on some after that time. Like you, I like Tempier (who also makes a Bandol Rose and Bandol Blanc by the way -- both very good). I really prefer the red wine with hearty aromatic dishes.

Another U.S. importer with a large Austrian book is Vin Divino out of Chicago. Their book also includes reds and stickies from Austria. The restaurants here with large lists tend to have room for wines from Austria, and more of these wines are beginning to appear. We are also starting to see a wider range in pricing. For many of the Austiran wines first introduced into the U.S. market, the price was 2-3 times that of German whites. I realize they are not the same style, but for the average consumer it was difficult to bifurcate the two. I have a few Austrian wines in my cellar, but I've had to buy them out of state. I've had some interesting reds from Umathum -- very food friendly IMO.

This must be a state by state thing. I've been to many places across the country when unfinished wine can be taken home -- in the trunk of the car, of course.

I also love tawny port, but here in the U.S., we're not really a wine-drinking culture, let alone a port-appreciating culture. Probably an overall lack of education among other things. How many commercial tastings do you see where any port is being poured? I have a friend, though, who drinks the stuff like it's water. For age, I prefer 20-year old tawny. Older than that and it seems too over the top for me.

Well, I did mention herbs.

No notes, really on these wines, but our "gourmet group" got together on Friday the 13th and pulled some corks... 2002 d'Arenberg The Hermit Crab Marsanne/Viognier. Citrus, flowers, herbs. Nice balance. Could have too many green elements for some. 2002 Bergstrom Pinot Gris. A bit heavy-feeling, low acid, smoky, oaky. 2002 St. Innocent Pinot Gris, Vitae Springs Vineyard. Nice complexity. Good spice and fruit mix. Didn't have the oak influence of the Bergstrom, and I think this particular St. Innocent gris is tank fermented. 1995 Cosentino Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve. Fully mature. Just starting to show some age. 1995 Guigal Cote Rotie Brune et Blonde. Still evolving. Meaty, leathery, fruity olives, peppery. Good structure. 1998 La Spinetta Oro. A moscato passito that is one the most perfumed wines I've ever had. This is my sixth go around with this wine. It's a terrific combination of flowers and citrus.

2000 J.L. Chave “Mon Coeur,” Cotes-du-Rhone. This wine was appropriately opened on Valentine’s Day. This was my first experience with the Mon Coeur CdR. And it’s an experience I enjoyed more than Offerus. At the same time, though, one can’t expect the wine to be in the same league as Chave’s Hermitage. This particular wine is for drinking now with a variety of food. It’s full of spice, mushrooms, and berries. It also shows pepper and olive. Moderate acidity. Soft tannins. The wine shows more character and dimension than many other Cotes-du-Rhone wines, but still has the crowd-pleasing capability and versatility that usually are part of why people buy the wine in the first place. The wine was decanted for some chunky sediment immediately before drinking the first class and the integrity remained consistent over a three hour period following.

If you're into game, from Minnesota I offer you... Deer River Elk River Moose Lake Buffalo And of course... Trout Lake Bluefish Lake Fish Lake But also... Cherry

In Minnesota - New France Wine Company

One more -- avoid dairy. My doctor once told me it keeps one congested and keeps the fluids thicker.

Bravo! Bravo, I say! I hope you continue to remain successful with your business strategy. And I hope there are many others that will, too. We used to have a retailer here that was great for getting interesting wines for the geek crowd. In recent years they've shifted to primarily volume -- particularly with their sales. They've lost my business, but there are plenty of other places around yet.

I like that the article shows light at the end of the tunnel in that these niche distributors are starting to fill in the gap resulting from distributor consolidation. Here in the Twin Cities, we have about 20 distributors (still). I'm sure consolidation is coming. I've already seen it hit where I buy most of my Italian wine. Certain producers are no longer being carried by the distributors that provide this retailer with their wine. It's good for me that I can get what's being closed out for pennies on the dollar, but then that will be it for those wines unless I look to out of state sources (provided the wines are still being brought into the US). The mega-distributors, though, are not catering to us. By us, I mean the less than 5% of the wine-drinking public that are geeks about this stuff. They (and some retailers as well) have moved to a heavily volume-based business model. Right now, it's working for them. There are plenty of wine buyers who are happy with McWine; who don't care to learn about the crus of Burgundy; who don't want to try and decipher the wine labels of Germany, Austria, and Italy; who still buy wine to drink it that day or within the week. And there's loads of money to be made there. Fortunately, for the geeks of the world, we are seeing more and more legislation open up borders for direct purchases from wineries, and for purchases from retailers in other states. And many are finding some deals through the auction houses, which are doing a booming business. As long as there is a market for them, the artisanal wines will find their way to consumers. It may require more work on both ends, and it could mean we do our part -- 1) let retailers know the types of wines we want more of (and hope they can do something about it); 2) continue to buy wines we want to see remain available from whatever source; 3) don't feed the monster.

If you wish to have Port with chocolate, I can second Jason's recommendation for Ruby over Tawny (which I prefer with nuts). There are some "proprietary" ports from reputable producers that are ruby ports, but might not include the word "ruby" on the label. Examples are Fonseca's Bin 27, Warre's Warrior, Graham's Six Grapes. If you want to step it up a bit, and still stay under $25, you may wish to consider a Late Bottled Vintage Port (these will be labeled as such). Other wines that people like to pair with chocolate are Banyuls and Maury, both from the extreme south of France near the sea and the border with Spain. You can find some "standard" ones in your price range. Many think these wines have chocolate flavors in the wine itself. Hence, their reason to pair it with chocolate.

Something high in grenache/garnacha.

It was violent AGREEment (with some of my fat-finger typos). But whatever. Jgould -- I think you were the one who really escalated this and started taking issue with contrary points to your own (go back and re-read your "It's funny" post -- "DUH" should be your first clue). It's too late to take the "I'm above it all" approach now. No one is disagreeing with you. Rather, just trying to provide different thinking. There is not a one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to restaurant wine pricing (warning, another one of my "obvious" observations). Finally, you ridicule me for pointing out the obvious. If it's all so obvious, why has your head not yet made a dent in the wall?

I think there's a little name calling of the kettle by the pot in terms of short-sightedness. Either that, or there is violent agreemYeent here. I can't tell anymore. The point of Craig's post was to name names of placing whose wine pricing seems "painfully priced," and to include some support for the conclusion. The topic has grown into wine pricing in restaurants, the discussion of which has kept this thread on page one of the forum list. Yes, "just deal with it," is an acceptable position. Deal with it by paying it or going elsewhere. Not all restaurants target all types of customers. A restaurant could serve wine in a tumbler on a bare table. In fact, many do. But other retaurants have other business models. So what? If they can make a profit, good for them. Regarding markups. They are part of being a retail customer. The retailer needs to make a profit to stay in business. The markups are (in theory) what the customer pays for the value added by the retailer. And restaurants are going to mark up wine as they mark up any product they serve to cover their costs in adding value to the customer -- DEAL WITH IT, or stay home. And some give the customers greater value than others. But it's the customer who ultimately decides, and right now restaurants with high-priced wine lists are creating enough value for enough customers. It's all about what the market will bear on either a micro or macro level. It's a rule of business.

Jason did -- "My recommendation is that you drink the DP 1990 on its own to toast the new house and find something else to drink with dinner that matches better with food." Although he followed this up with Prosecco or a $10 Argyle recommendation. He later wrote "My case in point" with respect to your Terry Theise list. I made the link on my own, which may or may not have been wholly accurate, but Jason took the bait so... Jason, Yes, some see oak. Interestingly, one of the big oak users (abusers?) -- Vilmart -- still manages to make wines with plenty of character, and that are good food partners. I'm not saying that there are NM wines that are poor food partners. There are plenty. My nit was just about generalizing to a classification of wine is all. As I wrote, I prefer the RM wines, and right now that's all I have for Champagne in my cellar (so I'm in your corner). But I've had the 1990 Dom, and I think it would go well with several appetizers and entrees. But I agree with you on one point -- not caviar.

Point made, Mark. Diners often forget that they are not just paying for food and something to drink with it. They are paying for the experience -- the setting including decoration, ambience, plateware, flatware, stemware; the kitchen staff time to source, prepare, cook, and present the food; the serving of the food from making recommendations, to timing the delivery of items to the table, and all the little details; the wine staff (in restaurants that have them) to purchase, inventory, select, match, and serve the wine; the overhead; the insurance; etc., etc., etc. This is why we deicde not to have dinner at home on occasion. If you just want the food, order takeout and pull the cork on your own bottle of wine. But savvy diners know what constitutes value to them and when they are being fleeced. I think where people struggle with wine list pricing or other pricing is when they don't perceive any comparative value that warrants the markup. At Citronelle, I know I'm going to have a wonderful experience, and I expect to have to pay for it. But for other places who have the same markups but don't deliver on the service and the experience, then the markups become more of an issue. These are the places I'd like to see called on the carpet in this thread -- not the Citronelles of the world. For example, there's an Italian restaurantin Minneapolis called Arezzo. It's in a tony neighborhood, and perhaps they are hoping to attract a certain clientele. The food is average -- uninspired pasta dishes, saltimboca (with cheese, which is just plain wrong), you get the idea. Some geek came up with the wine list. It's a smallish list, and 75% of the wines are over $50/bottle, 50% over $75, and 25% over 100. At least that was the case on my one and only visit over a year ago. The ambience is nothing special. The service even less so. The wines are nice enough wines, but they are in a different class than the cuisine. Shame on them.

All right. Time to jump in. Yes, there are markups with wine. As with beer. As with spirits. As with food. It's just the markups are more "visible" if you will to one who buys wine frequently. Where's the outrage for a bottle of beer that cost the same if not more than the wholesale price of the six-pack. And don't even get me started on the price of one shot (x24) of scotch in that bottle of single malt. And wine will continue to be marked up at what the market will bear. In recent years, however, with some economic downturn and restaurants hungering for business, we have seen wine lists with wines in a greater price range, with plenty under $30 or even $20 dollars. These are still marked up, mind you. But these wines also are great food wines, not some souped-up CA Syrah that tries to overpower you and is impossible to match with food. Restaurants moving in this direction are making a smart choice. And there are half-price nights as well. I'm aware of some restaurants -- similar to Starfish -- where there is a standard dollar markup (instead of percentage) regardless of wholesale cost. And I've seen them as small as $10 over retail. Restaurants are not the only culprits. We've seen the industry push the envelope with the market to see just how much can be charged. We've also seen a dollar declining against the euro. High prices are everywhere, not just in restaurant markups. Yet, of course, there are restaurants that gouge patrons when it comes to wine. The answer is simple -- don't order wine from them. Or do it by the glass. Or pay a corkage fee and bring your own (where allowed and where legal). But, also, support and patronize the places that are doing it right.

Minneapolis - Walleye (I won't go the lutefisk route) St. Louis - Deep-fried ravioli New Orleans - Gumbo/Jambalaya And a comment on Cincinnati chili. The stuff is served on noodles in a 3-, 4-, or 5-way. The history is that it is actually Greek pasta sauce, and not chili at all.

yes

I've been to Valence (the one you are thinking of), but it has been over ten years ago. I can underscore the recommendation of sausages. Also lemons, oranges, and lavender-infused items (honey, sauces, sorbet). OF course, also roast chicken and other fowl. Regarding wine, if you are buying recent vintages you will find Cotes-du-Rhone and Crozes-Hermitage to be more accessible when young.

Okay, I have to nit about something. I love RM Champagnes, too. I would assume that you like them because they are more interesting and have a greater variety of character than many of the NM (Negotiant Manipulant) wines. But that doesn't de facto make them better food wines than the 1990 Dom that started this whole discussion (or better food wines than Bollinger, Krug, etc.).

Ditto. Now. A couple of reasons. 1992 didn't/doesn't really have the staying power of other Champagne vintages. Not many houses declared a vintage in 1992 (but Moet & Chandon seems to declare more Dom vintages than other houses).

I thought the basic was Gruyere/Emmenthaler. I like the thought of Chablis or a mineral-laden Alsatian wine.