JohnL

I think the site is quite clever. They actually provide legitimate wine terminology then provide "their "cheeky" irreverant version or translation. One could actually learn something here. It is clear they are having some fun. The wine they are selling is probably a basic "crowd pleasing" style. Their direct competition is probably Yellow tail and Red Bicyclette although I wouldn't be suprised if one entity owned all three! The fact is there are many levels of wine drinkers and potential wine drinkers. Some people will respond positively to their message and try the wine-- if it is good they will buy a second time and some of these folks may move on to other wines when they tire of the Virgin stuff. Its all in the same vein as Nouveau Beaujolais--marketing and product. (by the way I actually enjoy the Beaujolais--nice and grapey!)

Assume this is the "Russian River" bottling. (Williams/Selyem make quite a few different pinots--grapes sourced from different vinyard etc) I happen to like their wines quite a bit. I wouldn't disagree with any of the recommendations you have received here. The WS pinot is balanced and has some complexity. there's oak but it is not overwhelming in these wines --they also get pretty ripe fruit. I have had a few W and S 2002's (not the Russian River) and they were very nice. With these wines I like simple dishes like basic roast chicken or seared tuna , (simple duck preparations work also--say some ducklegs seared then roasted in the oven with just salt and pepper)

I have long hated the use of Horseradish in Bloody Mary's. The flavor is ok (although too many Bloodies taste like liquified Seafood cocktail sauce with alcohol). But the suspended shredded horseradish root is off putting to say the least. (I also don't like the use of lime juice--lemon is preferable--but this is a gripe better suited to the Beverage board).

I don't think that taking the consumer to the next level of expertise is really Virgin Vines' responsibility any more than it is Sutter Home's or Ernest & Julio Gallo's. That's really up to the consumer him/herself, armed with appropriate tools (a reputable wine guide, a knowledgeable salesperson, a trusted friend who knows wine...). I have yet to run across a winery that follows the old General Motors brand-hierarchy system (a basic "starter" nameplate, then several other brands that are differentiated on a status ladder, a la Chevrolet/Oldsmobile/Pontiac/Buick/Cadillac)--though the various Mondavi permutations (Woodbridge/CK Mondavi/Robert Mondavi/Robert Mondavi Private Reserve...are all of these still under the same corporate umbrella?) come close--and I suspect that if a winery were to try this, it might confuse some of their customers. BTW: Someone upthread mentioned Virgin Wines as an "alternative product" to Virgin Vines. It is no such thing. Virgin Wines is a British online wine retailer that offers a wide selection and direct-to-your-door delivery. As far as the education part is concerned, though, I do like their system for "browsers," in which wines are grouped according to taste profiles. Had something like that existed over here, I might not have had the reaction I had to the jargon of wine taste when I first encountered it. ← Sandy I believe I confused Virgin Vines and Virgin Wines. Who knew there was a Virgin Wines!? Well obviously you did and I thank you for pointing me to the Virgin Wines web site. I have long thought (argued) that this is how wine needs to be sold: by flavor profile. That is a simple easy to understand description of what one will expect to taste. You are correct in noting that Virgin Vines is not about a strategy to get people to try a "starter wine" and move up to more "sophisticated wines. Sort of like training wheels. This is part of the problem. It seems that a lot of wine lovers can not seem to accept the fact that for many people there is no "next step" and the additional fact that this is perfectly fine in the greater scheme of things. It is similar to the audio nut who can not fathom how 99% of the world's population listens to music on "low fi" systems. As for Daniel's concerns--I believe he is on to something regarding standards. The main problem is that a kind of "winespeak" has developed. I would argue that this began with the intent to be precise in describing wine and has evolved into an almost impenetrable jargon that amounts to one geek communicating with other geeks none of whom can actually translate the stuff back into a basic language ; thus creating an insular world only they can inhabit. The result is not only exclusion of the greater world at large but the attempt at precision has led to imprecision. There are many people who are well informed about wine who will tell you there is no objectivity--that wine can not be evaluated objectively (worse should not) and that there are only subjective "impressions." thus we have vague terms like "masculine" or "femine" or "finesse"--these terms are tossed about with no context and have long lost any real meaning (if indeed they ever had any real meaning). The fact is, a well trained taster can determine many basic attributes of a wine and should be able to clearly communicate these. Granted there is an acceptable level of "jargon" involved and a "lay" person can certainly with a little effort be able to "comprehend it ,but should not be expected to should they not be so inclined. This is where another level of communications comes in. Retailers should be able to communicate the attributes of what they sell to their customers. This is an area where we often have retail shops that provide one or two options to a consumer. One--you are on your own and we have little or no information about the wines other than they are arranged by place of origin. So if you don't "know" Bordeaux we suggest you stay out of that section. Here one will be lucky if the store has pasted a score and tasting note from another source on the shelves. Two--a sales "consultant" who has a solid wine education will attempt to guide you, the "unwashed"-- through the world of wine that is far to complex for you to understand. I believe this is all changing. The Virgin Wines site is a good example-- as are retailers like "oddbins" etc how refreshing a departure from the "upscale" wine retailers in London who don't even display any bottles--you can't even browse--you have to deal with one of those "wine consultants). Also--there are in store tastings and plenty of opportunities for people to learn a bit (or a lot) about wines. At a higher level there are wine writers and critics who are attempting to make sense of wine and better communicate with a wider audience. there are also publications some dedicated to wine others more general in nature that realize there is a potentially large audience of people who enjoy or would like to enjoy wine at many levels. The growth of wine production in more and more countries has opened things up --the importance of what is in the glass is now more critical than where the grapes came from. (Terroir is important but for too long it has been misused and abused--it has become a smokescreen for wine snobs who use it to separate themselves from the rest of the universe and by the wine trade to sell inferior wines). The great thing about wine is it can be enjoyed at so many levels and ,best, it can be enjoyed with others. Enjoying wine--at whatever level--should involve fun. That enjoyment should be inclusive not exclusive. ps VirginVines wine will hopefully be a well made wine and if a lot of folks try it and like it that is a good thing. It would also be nice to see more retail salespersons be able to open a dialog with the people buying VirginVines wine and engage them--"If you like this wine -I have a few other wines you might like...." or "what is it you enjoy about this wine? ...I have some others you might enjoy as well..."

that is exactly what Virgin is doing with Virgin Wines and Virgin Vines. the most elegant communication is the one that is the simplest most effective way to communicate an idea so that the idea is understood hence the rant against flowery blah blahs that are meaningless. think of miles in sideways ← They (Virgin Wine) are no "dummies." The truth is, good, basic everyday wines are improving in quality and there are more of them from more places available today. It is also true that many people (winemakers and drinkers) are begrudging the changes that are impacting the wine world. Globalization, New World, Old World, new style, old style, terroir, modernization etc are now highly charged code words. Too often these things are simply misunderstood and all too often they are used by those who want to advance an agenda. Most people have little of no interest in all this and just want a nice wine to enjoy--they really don't care where it comes from. For others who are looking for more in a glass of wine there are plenty of options. There is room for the "romance" of wine. Unfortunately, there are still plenty of "snobs" who will proclaim things like: "only Burgundy produces the true expression of pinot noir grapes" or "one must be in the know to truely appreciate wine." The New World is moving beyond a Eurocentric view of wine and, interestingly, so is Europe! In the end we wine drinkers (here and abroad) at all levels of appreciation will reap the rewards!

"Could pressure? I understand there are precedents. Some of them close to home. [1] I have to mention here for anyone patient and interested that "don't even tell you what grapes are involved" is partly a US prejudice and not only that, it is historically a recent one. I believe that until Schoonmaker and Lichine "sold" the idea of the formerly casual "varietal" naming (as they called it) starting in the 1930s, even US wineries often didn't tell you what grapes were involved. Also, even in the US, if you studied fine wines in depth, any time until the last decade or two, you likely still heard about the rest of the world. In that event, you learned also that in some wine regions the grape varieties are key information; in many others they are implicit and the location is the focus, and the soul; in yet others varieties are blended. This can be hard to explain to people convinced of a rigid notion that grape variety is the key. We had a thread some time ago in another and very old wine forum, where one (stubborn and evidently fairly young and self-described Californian) contributor, while acknowledging that he was not very experienced with wine, still insisted that the grape content was the main thing he needed to know. (He was not interested in experienced opinion that differed with this -- as an example, for the varietal-blend Rhône wines where, it could be reasonably argued, grape varieties were truly not what he needed to know and could even be distracting.) Here we can see perhaps, once again, that wine is a human subject. -- Max [1] "Although a wide variety of phylloxera-resistant hybrid rootstock had been in use prior to Prohibition, [uC Davis] began its own research. Winemaking had been re-invented, why not re-invent viticulture as well? . . . Rootstock crosses ... were tested. Because none of these academics had any personal or cultural memory of the [European phylloxera] disaster of the 1870s, some of the hybrids included non-resistant Vitis vinifera crossed with resistant American stock. One such was AxR [Aramon x Rupestris], a cross already found by Europeans to be inadequately resistant. In early field tests, . . . yields were higher. The University seemed to have found its very own all-purpose rootstock, one not in use in Europe, where cultural memory of the devastation of the 1870s was still present, and where there had been no break in the empirical tradition. . . . By the nineties, seventy percent of vineyards in Napa and Sonoma were grafted on AxR rootstock The stage was set for disaster. . . . The first recognized outbreaks appeared in the early 1980s . . .the University, with some reservations, continued to recommend AxR right up until 1988. It appears clear that over the next ten years or so, the majority of vineyards in Napa and Sonoma will have to be replanted. . . . [Ridge's own plantings remained on a traditional, phylloxera-resistant, Saint George rootstock.] We were not on the "cutting edge" as defined by the University. We deliberately looked to the techniques of pre-Prohibition California, techniques virtually identical to those used for centuries to make the finest European wines. We were not impressed with the simple, clean, fruity wines produced by "modern techniques." Why, we reasoned, would the academics know anything more about fine-grape-growing than they did about fine winemaking?" -- Paul Draper, "Ridge Report," January 1993. ← Max: Place is important too. However, I would argue that what this is about, is information. That is, the more a consumer has at hand the better. Wine is very complicated in that we are talking about myriad grape varietals as well as myriad places of origin. Then we are also talking about myriad producers or makers-- toss in vintage information. This is an incredible amount of information for even "experts" to absorb. WSET has a sixteen (or so) week course for a thousand bucks and after mastering that class one has only scratched the surface. There are just too many "places" that make wine. So while "place" is important, it just doesn't get one where one wants to go. The Americans basically simplified things. faced with the fact that, at the time, "Napa, Rutherford" let's say, on a label meant little or nothing to consumers, it was decided to try placing the varietal on the label. At least consumers would be able to recognize the general flavor profile of the Cabernet Sauvignon grape. In fact, this has been adopted by most of the rest of the new world. The Europeans (most) are faced with the problem that while place is important it is at a distinct disadvantage in a marketing sense. Relying on a consumer recognition that just having Bordeaux on a label is not enough today. In fact, the great flaw in the "place" argument is that all it ensures is the wine makers followed the laws as they apply to that particular "place." (try briefly summarizing those laws). These laws in the real marketplace guarantee little except confusion. What is happening today is that Europeans are wrestling with these problems and eventually will have to adapt the New World focus on varietal. At the same time the New World is discovering that "place" can be important. Soon, I believe, we will see Chardonnay on a white Burgundy label just as we are seeing "Sonoma Russian River" on Chardonnay labels. In fact, the French Chateau system or Negocient system is, de facto, "branding." That is Jadot or Mouton are brands much as "Yellowtail" In a marketing sense, these "brands" have somewhat superceded place of origin in the marketplace. Then there is the "sense" that the Europeans the "old world" are more "sophisticated" than the New World. This, I would posit, is nonsense. The "average" French person is drinking vin d table wines produced, in all liklihood, by a large cooperative. These wines are no more "sophisticated" than say, a "Yellowtail." or a simple Gallo Chardonnay. In fact, I would argue the Yellowtail or the Gallo is a better quality wine in most cases. It not insignificant that the EU has designated millions of gallons of French and Spanish table wine as of 'inferior" quality and ordered the "destruction" of this wine. It is not "what's in the bottle" so much as it is "what's in the glass." For casual drinkers to wine geeks. At least it should be. The varietal composition of every wine should be stated clearly on every label. (along with where the grapes came from and who made the wine, how much alcohol, etc). Also there is the "sweetness" thing! The Germans were actually more in line with the Americans (yes they came long before we did) in communicating with consumers by emphasizing varietal and ripeness of the grapes and resultant sweetness of the wine. However, a simpler means of stating this would have helped. In the end, most consumers are interested in the general flavor profile of a wine over everything else. Not just Americans but everyone the world over. They (we) want to know "what is this wine goinna taste like?" or "what can I expect?" They don't have the time or inclination to attend formal classes or to consult a guide they are not interested in exploring "food/wine" pairing rules or guidelines beyond --"hey I am having a steak tonite and would love a nice full bodied red." It is amazing to me how the wine world (let's not forget the retailers) can't seem to "get this" and come up with a better way to communicate.

Interesting point: Their website, www.virginvines.com, says on the home page, "WARNING: If you're looking for recipes or food pairings, hate to break it to you, but you're in the wrong place." As they plan to sell 300,000 cases a year, there must be a vast market of wine drinking idiots who actually like to be treated honestly as wine drinking idiots. ← I wonder: What qualitatively is the difference between the "Yellowtails" and "Virgin" wines of the world and most basic Vin Pays D'oc or Cotes du Rhones? Is it any wonder that people throw up their hands when confronted by many wine labels that don't even tell you what grapes are involved in the wine in the bottle? Do most people really care about the info on wine labels anyway? or are they more interested in the flavor profile? Do people who live in winemaking areas of the world worry about "food and wine pairing" or do they just drink the "local" stuff ? Could it be that the Brown Foremans of the world are trying to provide "local stuff" for people who don't live in wine making areas? What happens to the "local stuff" when the "locals" are able to buy wine from other parts of their country or from other countries? Just some rumination that may or may not be apropos all this.

Qute an eclectic group of wines for one tasting! I have tasted most of these wines and pretty much agree with your brief assessments. --91 Bonnie's (Silver Oak) This wine has always had some herbal notes. I believe the vinyard is near a creek or stream. In some years the fruit flavors win out in others there is a distinct weediness to the wine. I don't think this is a result of unripe fruit--the common culprit--rather it seems to be inherrent in the vinyard itself. I believe this wine is no longer produced. It has never been a favorite of mine. --88 Suduiraut I agree with you this has always seemed a bit one dinmensional especially compared to others from the vintage. --86 Mondavi. I think holding Cal Cabs beyond ten ot twelve years is pushing it. Not suprised to see this "drying out" or "tired." --2000 DuBoeuf Moulin. I have always liked this. It seems to be a recent "geek discovery" that yes, some Beaujolais does age well. --Chave hermitage Blanc I am not sure what you mean by "green." --Beaux Freres You are dead on re the Upper Terraces. I wonder when you think this will be drinking at its best. as for the Belles Seurs -- this has never really excited me the wine seems to lack charm and up front fruit compared to many other oregonian Pinot from the same vintages. I wonder if they are vinifying this cuvee too much like the beaux freres? Maximin. Unfortunately, problem corks arew not discriminating as to bottle size! I have has corked halfs often enough. Too bad--this one (Maximin) coulda been a contender!

Well said Rich. Media is all about communication. Back in the seventies Carl Sagan was not anywhere near the pre eminent astronomer of his day, Many "serious" astronomers joked about him and mocked him-- but he was the one who was on the Tonight Show and other media and he is the one who sold millions of astronomy books. Why? He was able to communicate obtuse theories and principles in an entertaining and easy to understand manner. In the end he was good for astronomy. The fact is most people are happy with Ms Ray--they like her and respond to her--they will not go on to appreciate food at a higher level and find those shows on PBS. some people will be introduced to cooking by her and will move on. In the end she is good for cooking and food appreciation. As to exactly why she is so succesful? Hard to say. No one has quite been able to figure out why Ed Sullivan was as succesful as he was or many others. I can say that Ms Ray has a girl next door quality and is attractive but in a non threatening way. She has those ellusive qualities that make for a TV star. Is she everyone's cup of tea? No--but she obviously has a very broad appeal. If we are looking at the advancement of culinary awareness and the arts then she is as important in her own way as Thomas Keller is in his.

Her talents are as a communicator. They are estimable and there is little debate over her effectiveness. She has a passion for food and cooking and communicates this well. I believe that the endless criticism of her is focused upon what she is NOT rather than an appreciation/recognition of what she IS. Most everyone would agree she is not Charlie Trotter or Thomas Keller in the serious foodie credential area. Nor does she possses the dry wit and literary skills of Anthony Bourdain. One certainly can't fault her for claiming to be either. What she does do is turn on a lot of people to cooking and food who might otherwise not be. (they may move on to appreciate more "serious" levels or they may not.) She is at the entrance --drawing people into a very large and growing funnel of culinary appreciation. I agree with Mr Ruhlman--the article was well done.

Another thought-- If the food in question has an ethnic background then look to the wines produced and/or drunk in the place from which the recipe/food originates. for eg I have learned a lot by looking at cookbooks from various places around the world and then looking at what wines are produced/drunk in those same parts of the world. It is hard to argue with local who have a history of hundreds of years of experience in cooking and winemaking.

I am starting to get offerings for the 2004 vintage from wineries in California and The Pacific Northwest. Not that I would ever question a winery's assessments in their offering letters but--given that we have some very trustworthy people out here with "intimate" knowledge of the 2004 vintage in California, Oregon and Washington State--I would love to get some inside info on how the 2004 vintage went and ,seems to be developing, as these wines are now in bottle or will be over the next several months. many thanks for any help (as a great marketer once said: "an informed consumer is our best customer.")

here are the "rules" by which I live: 1--any wine brought to a party, dinner party, whatever is a GIFT. once I hand the bottle to my hosts it is THEIR WINE they may do whatever they want with it. I have given the wine out of gratitude for their hospitality. There are instances where I offer to provide wine for drinking for the evening and this is discussed when the invitation is proffered. 2--when I am the host I serve wine appropriate to the occasion--that is I serve a good quality wine no matter what-something I feel my guests will enjoy. Something that I will enjoy. I ALWAYS DRINK WHAT I SERVE MY GUESTS. I never question the level of wine appreciation of my guests--if one of them wants to drop some ice cubes into the wine that is fine with me-no matter what the provenance of the wine is. Once I serve wine to my guests it is theirs to enjoy as they wish. The goal is always to have happy guests--how they achieve that happiness is of no consequence to me. And the level of enjoyment is up to them--not me. A wine snob (or "fascists) is someone who sets him/her self up as an arbitor of taste and exercises a level of control over others. In fact, serving guests an inferior wine while sneakily serving "the good stuff" to ones self (and any guests "deemed to be worthy") is as fascist (and communist) as it gets. That is the peasants or workers get the wine they are deemed worthy of, while the "government commissars or dictator" get the best wine. (ironically the very wine the peasants have produced).

Interesting re: the 1992 Leonetti. If I recall, the 1992 was a good wine on release, though this was not one of the better vintages for Leonetti cabs. Given the flavor profile Figgin's goes for: lush, rich, dense, oaky fruit forward wines., I wonder if this is an example of that sweet fruit and big oak attenuating with age? or Is this wine (as most of the other leonetti releases) just bettewr drunk young.? I always like to see notes on these "older" wines.

Maybe we have "discovered" what happened to those collectors wines that "disappeared."

I haven't been to the Palm in years (I used to eat regularly at Palm Too across the Avenue). I remember a pretty good level of consistancy in the quality of the meat. I too noticed the Gallagher's omission and wondered the same thing--those sides hangin in the window sure look dry aged to me!

Good stuff. It has taken awhile, but, the dust is clearing and there is now some rational perspective on the topics of the film. Jancis has perhaps delivered some of the sanest commentary on the film yet. The film was basically agitprop-- not a well reasoned presentation of what is going on in the wine world. As such, I believe it did a disservice to all parties. Parker and Roland are not the devil's desciples and Mr Montille and his ilk are not facing extinction. There is plenty of room for many different styles of wine in the world.

As I see it, this is not about consumer behavior influencing the trade, rather it is the other way round. Few people feel so intensely about this subject so as to affect any real change. Fact is, Nike will get a thousand per cent mark up for its shoes and Mouton will will retail for $400 a bottle--it is supply and demand. However, It also seems that the number of people who will respond to diversity in a wine list is increasing. Witness the explosion in interest re; cooking shows the Food Network as well as more and more wine tastings--in store and off premise. It is up to restaurants and the trade to "see" this and capitalize upon it. As the global wine market changes the demand will be for high quality wines at every price point. We are seeing more wines from more different places at all prices in the market place. Looking at Italy, the wine makers have (and are continuing) to clean up their wine making --so we are seeing better quality chiantis, and pinot grigios (low to med priced) Barbarescos and Barolos (med to high) but we are also seeing wines from other varietals. Nero, Primitivo etc etc etc. Most of these are low to moderately priced wines. as the wine press and the media and restaurants and retailers "discover" these wines more and more consumers will become comfortable ordering them from a list (or buying at retail). Will this create less mark up. Not neccesarily. at best it will offer more choice in low end and moderately priced wines and more competition for the traditional mainstays of retailer shelves and restaurant lists. But as more and more people "discover" wines--restaurants will see more opportunity for profit at all price levels. It will always remain a fact of life--that lower end wines will be marked up more than higher end wines and restaurants will "tailor" wine lists to their clientel. That moderately priced Italian restaurant will offer primitivo and nero d' avola and better quality chianti's at prices its customers can bear. And these types of restaurants will --if they are smart--be able to gain benefit of higher returns on their wine business--by cultivating the market. When there is profit to be had in lower price points--the marketers will go there.

I would think that of prime concern (aside from shipping capabilities) would be freshness (Champagne needs to be fresh and well stored) thus the reliability of the source is critical. Price should be of less concern given the importance of the task at hand. I do not know what city you are posting from. I would think that rather than just using a web site, you would be better served by dealing directly with a retailer. At least by phone. Here in New York City, there are several retailers who would be good resources--they all have websites but I would recommend calling and talking to someone. Sherry Lehmann:www.sherry-lehmann.com 212-838-7500 Morrell and Company:www.morrellwine.com 212-688-9370 Zachy's:www.zachys.com 914-874-8000 the first two are in Manhattan the second in Scarsdale. I am familiar with most wine shops in the NY area and I believe these three are best suited for the taks at hand. keep in mind--we have some arcane shipping laws when it comes to alcohol--things are getting better--these establishments are very adept at shipping--I have dealt with them often enough to vouch for their capabilities as well as their service. hope this helps! good luck

when most talk of obscene prices, the reference is restaurants!!! quite frankly, it is true our 3 tier system is biased toward increasing prices; however, the point is, AFTER the wine leaves the retailer. therefore the 3 tier system is NOT in effect at this stage; ex. an $8 beaujolais village retail already has the 3 tier built-in, so your explanation falls short when many many restaurants charge $32!!?? & your comment about finding some restaurants that are reasonable - there are ~10,000 restaurants in nyc, so how many are u referring to? there is an epidemic spurred on by those who makes excuses, by those who don't mind 4x mark-ups, & by those who support the greedy restauranteurs. poor vintages do NOT have any effect. 99.9% of the population couldn't tell a 1982 bordeaux from a 1984, or a 2000 from an 2002. ONLY HUMAN INTERVENTION WILL IMPACT PRICING!. SUPPLY, DEMAND - unfortunately & sadly, only works in theory or in the classroom. in the wine world, this is not appropo as witnessed by huge supply NOT affecting prices, regardless of quality. & yes, i totally agree with your "tongue-in-cheek?" recommendation - there should be a "wine appreciation" course one should be required to take AND pass ← I think we are guilty of two things here: 1--over generalizing 2--basing opinion upon conventional wisdom I do not share your pessimistic view of restaurant wine pricing. Yes, many restaurants mark up wine way too much. (There is probably a thread out here on that topic alone). I would add that many do not and this list is growing. First--are we talking about basic low end wines on a list or mid priced or high end? restaurants often mark up lower priced wines at greater multiples and higher end wines at lower multiples. Thus the "bargains" on many wine lists are found at the mid-to higher end wines. A good restaurant will attempt to "balance" their wine list based upon who their customers are and to be profitable. Second--There are many factors that go into the price of a wine on a restaurant list from what the restaurant paid for the wine, to time the wine spends in the cellar, to the cost of service (glassware, breakage, personnel) etc etc etc. The good restaurant will also adjust pricing to encourage wine sales. Many times certain wines are marked down based on inventory--older wines, wines that were bought in too large quantities etc. I just think it is unfair to take a $32 Beaujolais and declare--"Guilty of gouging." In fact a good cru Beaujolais at that price is a good deal on a list--IMOP. On that same list one may find an Haut brion from a good vintage at $200 which may in fact, be a "better bargain" than the Beaujolais. The point is, most restaurants selling $20 Beaujolais would be guilty of bad management--potentially fatal for them for them more than gouging. As to wine prices in general, here too, it is difficult to generalize. Are we talking about Bordeaux? Burgundy? Australian Shiraz? California wines? Bad vintages are indeed a factor--especially in Bordeaux. Anything that leads to too much wine on retailers shelves and too little demand from consumers at any level will lead to either the retailer going out of business or lower prices. In fact, as noted out here (see the "Teargas/Burgundy thread) the "glut" at the lower end of the wine quality ladder is, in fact, due to a drop in demand!--the French are drinking much less wine. Conversely, at the high end, top Burgundy and Bordeaux are fetching high prices because there are more and more people who want these wines--the Japanese etc. It is true that more people are drinking (and buying) better wines these days. The lower end of the spectrum sees brutal competition for French wines (and the US and Italy) from Australia who have mastered the art of making a better quality low priced wines and marketing them to the world. Right now, there are more options for wine drinkers at every level of interest and every price point than ever before. and more places to buy! It has only been recently that auctions of wine were open to the general public and there is the internet--these have created greater competition at retail and thus better prices and choice for consumers. Finally, as for the "Lafitte test", this smacks of "wine snobbery." There is some insidious conventional wisdom that a group of nouveau rich Wall Street tycoons is buying up all the "really good stuff" and guzzling it with $100 hamburgers made of kobe beef or even more insidious, those Japanese millionaires who are drinking Romanee Conti mixed with soda water and lemon. I have heard both of these canards--and worse-- often enough. That is the "unwashed" the amateurs, people who don't "appreciate" wine like "we" do. "We" who are worthy! Yes, there are probably some people somewhere in the world who are chilling red wine or even drinking Lafitte with soda, and yes, somewhere there are some louts just buying pricey wines for pure status. So what!? The same snobbery can be used against anyone over any product. From fois gras to fine automobiles, to big screen tv sets. Does one have to "appreciate" something to buy and own it. What exactly defines "appreciation"? and worse--who determines who passes the test? In fact, not all that long ago, it was a small group of rich upper class Brits who were controlling the prices of first class Bordeaux--to be placed in cellars to which most people had little or no access, for long term aging to be opened and drunk at affairs to which few were invited. Those days are over! Today anyone in Brittain (or anywhere else in the world) can buy any wine and enjoy it as they please. The point is, people wnjoy wine to different degrees. Case in point, my father in law is always joking that I waste money buying 'expensive" wines (to him anything over $10 a bottle is expensive), yet everytime I open an "expensive" bottle for dinner, he declares: :"hey this is really good!" Does he know what the wine is? No does he care? No. Would he buy it for himself? No. Yet he "appreciates" it in his own way. Should I only serve him some cheap plonk and save the "good stuff" for myself--that way there will be more for me--and I really "appreciate" it. Or do I share my wine with people generously, and allow them to enjoy it (or not enjoy it) in their own way? I love fine cars and I have long ago stopped begrudging everyone I see driving a Ferrari as "someone who is just rich and probably doesn't really appreciate like I would--if I could afford it!" --Just as I have stopped glancing over at the next table ordering the Harlan cabernet--to see if they are true connoisseurs or a bunch of unknowledgeable yahoos who can't possibly "enjoy" the wine.

I think the price of wine (at least here in the US) is not a result of "obscene" markups. Rather, the three tiered system we have adds some layers of markup. I doubt there is any "gouging" on the part of retailers--there is not a lot of money in retail. As for restaurants, some do mark wine up stiffly, I am finding quite a few places thaty are quite reasonable though--this has to be looked at on a case by case basis. The demand for the "upper tier" of wine is not necc the result of those rich folks who "want to impress." True there are some who fall into this category but for the most part--people buying these wines (first growth Bordeaux, Burgundy, Cal cult wines etc) do, in reality, appreciate these wines. Some of these people are wealthy and many are not. (They just spend a large portion of what disposable income they have on their passion for wine). I have always been a bit "bothered" by the "conventional wisdom" that attributes sales of fine wines to people who are wealthy and have no appreciation for these wines. This amounts to a bit of "sour grapes." Is there a wine appreciation test one must pass to determine their worthiness to purchase a bottle of Lafitte? I think your complaint about prices does have some merit, there are restaurants that mark things up too highly and some wines are quite costly. I do not think this is epidemic in nature. Already, we are seeing a moderation in prices of those wines that are vulnerable to competition and we are seeing other wines that are in great demand garner higher and higher prices. Several poor vintages will impact pricing far more substantially than any human intervention. I believe that in most cases, the cost of the wine in question is most easily attributable to supply and demand.

You might want to take a look at a recent thread: "Police Teargas Burgundian Winemakers" in this forum. There are some links to great information on the current state of affairs. The glut of French wine is at the lower levels of the classification system. There is an ocean of Vin s de Pays and Vins de Table. There are many reasons. The French themselves are drinking less wine (strict drunk driving laws have been recently enacted) and there is increased competition from other wine making countries. These "lower level" wines also have difficulty competing with similarly priced wines from the New World--the EU has told France that they must reduce the quantity of these wines and increase the quality so as to better compete in the world market. Most of these wines are not even sold here in the US. Higher ranked French wines-classified growth Bordeaux and Burgundy for eg., has been performing much better in the world market. Prices for higher quality wines are affected by supply and demand. Currently there is still plenty of demand for these wines from not just the US but the rest of the wine buying world. markups via the three tiered system of seeling wine in this country don't help things here. Competition from wines produced in Spain, South America and Australia and New Zealand has an impact on wine prices as well. (I suspect that many large producers of California Cabernet and Chardonnay are now changing their marketing strategies--It is not for nothing that suddenly there is an emergence of Syrah as a key player in California.) In the end--we should see a grater variety of wines here in the US--both foreign and domestic produced. The quality of the lower end wines will rise and the prices of high demand wines --be it first growth Bordeaux or Cal cult wines will continue to rise.

Brad- You have touched on an important fact. In Europe, wine production is regional and regional wines are drunk regionally. Until recently that is. As markets open up to wine from all over the world and there is less "protection" for local wines. All wines will have to compete for wine drinkers on more or less equal footing. This is a major (maybe the prime) reason for all the anti-globalization of wine feeling (Mondovino, etc) it is all about turf (or terroir!). We in America have more choices than probably anywhere else in the world when it comes to wine. (this is changing). For eg those inexpensive Italian white wines are now turning up on lists as alternatives to similarly priced domestic chardonnays. The response from California for eg has been an increasing number of white Rhone varietal blends and other interesting wines. For the Italians, they are competing both at home and abroad--not long ago, many of these wines were drunk close to home with no competition. In the end, growers and negociants restaurants, and most important consumers win out. Craig, you are correct IMOP. However, what mary's original post indicated, was that sales are often about things other than passion for the product. In an ideal world, we would have salespersons who loved the products they sold and buyers who bought them because they loved them as well. This is not all that prevalent, unfortunately. I have found that great salesmanship is a natural gift in and of itself. Often a great salesperson will be more succesful than the passionate advocate. Their focus is on closing a sale and they will find a way to get it done. (if need be they will be "passionate advocates.") The passionate advocate has nothing but their passion --and think about it, everywine maker is passionate--so why is one more succesful selling than another. You are right about attention to the product. A small winery may be better off with a small (or no) distributor. Someone who "believes" in the wine. Unfortunately, this also cuts both ways as a large distributor can take his/her clout and get your wine sold. In the end though, isn't the real goal to get your wine into the hands of the consumer--people who will drink and enjoy your product from a restaurant list or at retail? It really should be about how to get there. As a consumer--I would think that, if you can get to retailers directly and better if you can get to me --even better--without the middlemen--there are IMOP too many layers between the wine maker and me!

A good friend of mine was a wine nut--he got laid off from an advertising job. He decided to change careers! What he did was approach a small Chinese restaurant he thought served good food but had little or no wine list to speak of. He approached the owners and told them he would work for free if they allowed him to take over their wine service. He made up a list--ordered the wines--and became the "sommelier"--the deal was he would increase their profits via wine sales and trhen if he delivered they would pay him. My friend was off and running and now owns a very fine eclectic wine shop in New jersey. The point is he had to change perceptions of both the restaurant owners and the customers creating demand on two levels. This is very difficult and can be costly (remember he worked for free for a while). An almost impossible task even at this small scale level. So the motivation was profits but there was a lot of work involved. Now, it would have been easier had more and more customers come in asking for wine with dinner and looking for more choices. The demand woould have been there. The more people are aware of food and dining out and cooking and eating etc. wine can only win in the long run. This is why the Food Network is good as are all the other cooking/food related shows on TV as well as other media. As awareness grows,demand grows, the restaurateurs, the wine wholesalers, the wine makers who are prepared and have good selling practicews in place will win as well. The problem is, wine is lagging behind food in this revolution. Another story: A restaurant on Nantucket my wife and I love (soon to open in NY City as well) is Sfoglia. They serve rustic italian food and they also sell a lot of wine. What their wine list consists of is a limited/manageable number of Italian regional wines at prices that range from $20-$70 a bottle with most in the $30 area. The glasses are simple juice glasses--thick and thus not very breakable. Totally unpretentious in keeping with the menu and the decor. You almost cannot NOT order a bottle with dinner. I think we may start to see more restaurants like this which will help the demand for less expensive wines with character--I believe that the reason we are seeing more better quality Italian wines (especially whites) is there is a growing demand for less expensive wines and the Italian winemakers have cleaned up their act and are making better wines. In the end it is incredibly expensive and time consuming for a winery or a wholesaler to impact the restaurant business--yes there are success storied here. But it is easier and less expensive to individual wine makers and wholesalers for the market to change and to be on the leading edge of that change.

In a low-markup, cut-throat market, I agree with you. When your margins are razor-thin, you need volume. However, when I go somewhere like a dedicated wine shop, or an upscale restaurant, I go there for a higher level of knowledge, service, and care in all aspects of my restaurant experience. Here's my question of you, JohnL. The simplistic situation is that you markup all of your wines the same percentage. Salesperson 1 sells 5x the units of salesperson 2, but the wines salesperson 1 sells are 1/5 the price. So, they make you the same money. Salesperson 1 gets perfunctory business thank-you cards to your business. Salesperson 2 gets heartfelt thanks from the people he/she sells to. You have to lay one of the two off. Who do you lay off? ← I assume the "units" are different wines. I can not answer until you tell me how many of each type of wine I must sell over time. I know where you are going here--and I believe I agree with the point you are trying to make. However, My salesforce in their technique, demeanor and their approach will be determined, in large part, by what my customers demand/and or respond to. So this is not really about high end salespeople vs low end. If I am really good, there will be a certain amount of anticipation in knowing my customers and thus, correctly predicting their needs. There are a number of idiosynchratic sellers who take a "my way or the highway" approach to selling their products but these folks are only in business because their products are in such demand that the buyers desire for the product is strong enough. There are myriad cases where when these folks products fell out of demand they changed their selling approach radically! My whole point is that the customer is king and the selling practices will always be "attuned" to satisfying them. If diners demand interesting wines at fair prices then restaurants will demand them and wholesalers will supply them and winemakers will make them. The marketplace drives the market! (I am being somewhat simplistic here and there are a lot of exceptions to the rule).