How do you like your wine lists organized...

[Graphix]

My dad and i are having a disagreement about how the list at our restaurant should be organized. So how do you guys like them arranged?

[Florida Jim]

My dad and i are having a disagreement about how the list at our restaurant should be organized. So how do you guys like them arranged?

←

I like them by region.

However, I doubt I am the target demographic for dining out.

Best, Jim

[jsmeeker]

I'm not a huge wine guy, but I do like wine. As I learned more about wines, I decided to try to learn a bit more about wines from one place. I picked France as that place. So, I learned about regions there. And I started to learn I like wines from a specific region in France. (reds from the Rhone region, to be specific).

So, now, I sorta like to see a wine list that breaks the list down my regions so I can easily see "Rhone" . I also know other wines I like, so seeing those regions or countries makes it easier to see if they have anything from those places.

However, I think there is merit to different arrangements, especially listing the wines in order of increasing "weight" (or whatever you like to call wines that are more "full flavored" than others).

Of course, with a knowledgeable staff, I think the arrangement doesn't matter. If you can give them an idea of what you like, then they can help you select one.

[Synergy]

I think it depends on your market and how extensive your list is.

Many people are more comfortable with a regional list, but progessive lists are becoming increasingly popular.

I think for a very extensive list, a regional one is easier to navigate, but for a smaller list with some depth, a progressive one can make more sense.

[slkinsey]

I think it very much depends on the style and price point of the restaurant, and the depth of the wine list. What are the restaurant and wine list going to be like?

[GordonCooks]

Bubbles first, whites listed by varietal character (light to heavy) and price (low to high) and the same for reds. Dessert wines & ports at the end. This would be a good format for your basic 50-75 label list. Anything grander in scale - bubbles, whites, then reds but by region and producer. Wines by the glass on a separate list. Just my .02

[Graphix]

any opinions on a list sorted by varietal? for instance having chardonnay as a heading then within that have your american chards together french chards together. Or does this lead to problems with people now knowing where to find certain french or italian reds because they dont know what the the grape is in the wine? For instance how do you find Formentini Tajut if you dont know the grape is merlot?

EDIT: kinsey this is an upscale restaurant with about 400 different wines. Average price per bottle sold last year was $110

Edited June 6, 2008 by Graphix (log)

[Synergy]

With over 400 wines, I would definitely go by region. I think it makes it easier for customers to navigate.

[KatieLoeb]

Bubbles => Whites => Reds

Within each wine type:

by Country

then Region

then Varietal

then Body (lightest to heaviest)

It's not possible to do body AND price at the same time. Those two things don't necessarily follow in order.

Edited June 7, 2008 by KatieLoeb (log)

[Graphix]

katie, have any links to wine lists (in pdf form) set up like that? I would like to see how the headings and such are formatted.

thanks

B

[KatieLoeb]

Sorry - I should have been more clear. Those are MY personal preferences on the priorities in arranging a list. That's what I thought the question was. It's actually not possible to do all those things at once. Price and body not following in any predictable order was just the best example of that.

The Proprietor's Reserve List at Ristorante Panorama here in Philadelphia is an example of a well organized list, in my opinion. The varietals are only listed for the New World wines because Old World wines are more identified by "style" and there is a very capable sommelier on the floor at all times to explain the proportions in the blend, talk about the vinification techniques, etc. For a place that doesn't have an on-the-floor sommelier, I think it would be more important to be more specific with those sorts of details so the guests could have more information before choosing their wines. Obviously, training the wait staff very well makes sense if there isn't an actual sommelier, in addition to having the wine list be more self-explanatory.

I hope that makes more sense.

[Brad Ballinger]

Another data point, but not much different from what's been stated already.

I prefer to see a list that separates bubbles, whites, reds, and dessert/fortified. Within those categories, it doesn't matte that much to me how the wines are categorized as long as each contains the following information: vintage year (with the exception of N/V bubbly or certain ruby and tawny ports), region, and varietal. I would generally only prefer to see the varietal listed if it is actually listed on the bottle's label -- as is the case with most New World wines and some Italian wines. But I don't have any heartburn if a list tells the patron that Sancerre is Sauvignon Blanc or that Cornas is Syraah or that Barolo is Nebbiolo.

I definitely do not like lists that categorize wine by character or style (i.e., light, fruity whites, full-bodied reds, etc.). When I see German Riesling wines listed in the spicy white wine category, it just makes me cringe.

With 400+ wines, definitely separate by country/region within each broad category of bubbles, whites, and reds.

[Really Nice!]

For me it's pretty much what Brad and Katie said. My preference is old world/new world, country, and then varietal. Any place offering wines based on adjectives is a guarantee that I'll be buying the least expensive entree with a glass of water. Cringe is an understatement. Heebie-jeebies is more like it.