Virgin Vines says it's hip to be dumb

[Rebel Rose]

A report on KIROTV, from BusinessWeek.com:

Wine-Talk May Often Be Too Complicated And Overripe, But A New Ad Campaign From Brown-Forman And Virgin Atlantic Errs At The Opposite Extreme

The label's pitch goes like this: "Dare to enjoy this wine without dashes of pretentiousness or hints of snootiness. Virgin Vines believes wine should be all about having fun and loving the taste...not waxing poetically about meaningless wine-speak and food pairings."

Interesting point:

SELLING IGNORANCE. All this marketing muscle for mediocre wine worries me. Increasing consumption of wine that's well-marketed but not very well-crafted could pressure wine regions to concentrate more on vineyard yield instead of quality. It took discerning French winemaker Alexandra Marnier Lapostolle, who heads Chilean winery Casa Lapostolle and is part of the family that owns Grand Marnier, for example, to convince Chilean vineyards to plant more vineyards on the mountain slopes to get better quality -- albeit fewer -- grapes.

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.

[Vinfidel]

its just marketing, like the 'for dummies' series of books. the people that buy and read them are not really dummies, of course. maybe you are being a bit harsh with the for idiots comments or just making a joke

the next big challenge for the industry it is to demystify the wine experience so that it can become a daily part of the lives of people like in old world france and italy

a drink like coca cola or milk in the USA

the successes of yellow tail and the little penguin and two buck chuck proves that there is a huge market for it. richard branson is the king of all marketing, and he will be getting people to think of wine like beer, something casual and daily not only for special events

once this phase has been completed then people can drink up the ladder to higher end wines and worry about pairings

it is not a priority at this time in the wine market to get people worried about what is the right wine and the wrong wine to pair with their pizza or spaghettti or takeout thai food every night

[Brad Ballinger]

Well, who is really surprised that wine is more about marketing than what's in the bottle? I know, there are a number of exceptions, but it's true for many wines. Consider all these aspects of marketing: label design, bottle color, bottle shape, price (people still think there is a correlation between price and quality), placement, closure, there's probably more.

The wines being marketed in this case are products of Virgin Atlantic - the record company, music retailer, airline company, and now beverage company I guess. There are two wines -- Chardonnay and Shiraz. The bottles are frosted and have some frilly painted design and the Virgin branded logo. Personally, I think the logo being featured so prominently would hurt sales, but I'm probably wrong. I'm sure the juice in the bottle is simple, one-dimensional, easy to drink, and equally easy to forget. But it's worked for Yellow Tail, which sells 5 million cases per year.

[Ted Task]

This "Old wine guy" saw the Virgin package just this past week and have this as

my comment, without tasting.

ANYTHING that will get the American public to pick up a bottle of wine is OK by me.

It has been my (almost 50 year) experience that consumers need an inexpensive

entry point. Many (not all) will gravitate to more expensive (presumably better)

product eventually. An INexpensive drinker will ask "what makes -that- more

expensive?", maybe I should try it one time.Look at the success of Two Buck Chuck.

From my own experience (teaching a lot of classes to consumers)"Better" product

shows better/tastes better with all of the attendent psychosocial satisfaction.

NOW, having said all of this, I also KNOW that today's winemaking/vineyard

caring advances ARE making better wine available to all of us at considerably less

dollars than at any time in the past.

TED TASK swe

[docsconz]

I agree with Vinfidel. If this gets people drinking wine rather than beer because people feel less intimidated so much the better for the wine industry. As people get used to drinking more wine, many will get bored with the plonk and seek out different products. Many will just stick with this kind of product, but I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing. Demand for interesting high end wines will not disappear because of this. I think it will only increase.

[Daniel Rogov]

Let it be known that I'm all for high quality, medium and low priced wines. And I am certainly all for having wine become an everyday part of life. But I am not in favor of ignorance and certainly not in favor of boasting of one's ignorance.

The appreciation of any subject - be it mathematics, art, music, literature, or wine depends on language and language is not innate - it is developed and that development comes with experience. I am not speaking of wine snobbery. I am speaking of the ability to communicate our thoughts and sensations in words to ourselves and others in order to best appreciate what we are doing, seeing, hearing or otherwise sensing.

The simple truth is that those who want to discuss wine at more than the most superficial level, need at least a basic comprehension of that language. As is well known, without language, accurate descriptions, the ability to make comparisons and intelligent discussion are virtually impossible.

The language of wine need be neither snobbish nor particularly frightening. Based primarily on words already in our vocabulary, all one needs do is learn to apply those words specifically to wine.

Sorry, but "I know what I like" just doesn't cut it for intelligent people in the 21st century.

Edited October 24, 2005 by Daniel Rogov (log)

[jsolomon]

What about MD 20/20, the original one-dimensional, forgettable wine?

Is that a different un-hip dumbness? Or are the two correlated?

[docsconz]

Let it be known that I'm all for high quality, medium and low priced wines. And I am certainly all for having wine become an everyday part of life.  But I am not in favor of ignorance and certainly not in favor of boasting of one's ignorance.

The appreciation of any subject - be it mathematics, art, music, literature, or wine depends on language and language is not innate - it is developed and that development comes with experience.  I am not speaking of wine snobbery.  I am speaking of the ability to communicate our thoughts and sensations in words to ourselves and others in order to best appreciate what we are doing, seeing, hearing or otherwise sensing.

The simple truth is that those who want to discuss wine at more than the most superficial level, need at least a basic comprehension of that language.  As is well known, without language, accurate descriptions, the ability to make comparisons and intelligent discussion are virtually impossible.

The language of wine need be neither snobbish nor particularly frightening.  Based primarily on words already in our vocabulary, all one needs do is learn to apply those words specifically to wine.

Sorry, but "I know what I like" just doesn't cut it  for intelligent people in the 21st century.

←

Daniel, I don't disagree with you, but the fact is that many people who might enjoy wine are intimidated by it and stay away from it as a result. Most children walk before they can talk. People need to be introduced to wine before they can get into it. Those who do and have curiosity will seek out communication about it. Those that start with an innate curiosity will also be less likely to opt for this product as a starter and will look for education.

[Rebel Rose]

Doc, I certainly agree with you and with Vinfidel that the wine industry could go farther toward making wine more approachable. But please. Calling food pairings stuffy and unnecessary? Well okay, maybe they are. But they can be fun, too.

Can you imagine what Virgin would do for beer? "Mircrobrews -- for Microbrains."

[Vinfidel]

mary if you go to the web site you will see that they use a joke to introduce the notion of body and bouquet and other wine terms to consumers

it is not serious about itself, it is making a joke about wine snobs

to appreciate a food pairing is beyond the scope of the market for the VV product

Virgin has another product - Virgin Wines - that is targetd to slightly more advanced consumers.

in this product they have more about the wines and food pairings including free wine courses to learn more

if you take yourself outside of the shoes of a wine expert you will see how the concept of wine pairings can seem to be fussy and contrived to a person that is used to drinking pepsi or miller lite with his meals

once he tastes the wines he learns, then he asks questions, and move on up the ladder

[Bill Miller]

We are trying to expand our circle of wine drinking friends (small town-few wine lovers). We do "open that bottle nite" every year and suggest that our guests buy a bottle of "good" wine. Result--they are afraid to spend too little. One couple brought a nice Stags Leap Cab. After the wine was shared he said he learned something--he always thought Kendall Jackson was as "good as it got"--now knows otherwise. Another guest remarked that he wanted his wine to taste like that. Progress. Regards Bill

[Vinfidel]

a great anecdote bill, i have the same experience with my parents who hate to spend more than $7 per bottle of wine

a lot of people here seem to think it is important to 'know wine' as in where it came from how it was made who made it was it a good vintage. this can come from learning like reading a book or this web site or similar web sites. but the best way to get this learning is to taste. the more you taste the more you 'know.' learning by reading is only theoretical. the more you taste the more you know the more you learn the more you understand

tasting is still king

[Daniel Rogov]

... the more you taste the more you know the more you learn the more you understand. ... tasting is still king

We are in full agreement on this. But such understanding is going to be limited without the vocabulary to describe one's experiences. As understanding comes, sooner or later so will the question ... "why did I enjoy or not enjoy this wine"?

And without the words, there will be no explanation.

Since the time of the ancient Greeks it has been accepted that the statement "I know but I cannot explain it" has been invalid. If you cannot explain something (and that takes words/vocabulary) you do not truly understand it.

As to why understanding is important - and staying with wine and not the ancient Greeks in this case - sure, I'd rather have people drinking Blue Nun or Two Buck Chuck with their meals than Diet Sprite (I find wine more civilized and civilizing than soft drinks), but I'd hope their acquired understanding and learning will take them on to wines perhaps a bit more complex, a bit more interesting.......

But of course, I am willing to admit that all of this may simply be no more than the problem of a person who happens to like words and at least some semblance to the intelectual life as much as he does wine.

[Bill Miller]

... the more you taste the more you know the more you learn the more you understand. ... tasting is still king

We are in full agreement on this. But such understanding is going to be limited without the vocabulary to describe one's experiences. As understanding comes, sooner or later so will the question ... "why did I enjoy or not enjoy this wine"?

And without the words, there will be no explanation.

Since the time of the ancient Greeks it has been accepted that the statement "I know but I cannot explain it" has been invalid. If you cannot explain something (and that takes words/vocabulary) you do not truly understand it.

As to why understanding is important - and staying with wine and not the ancient Greeks in this case - sure, I'd rather have people drinking Blue Nun or Two Buck Chuck with their meals than Diet Sprite (I find wine more civilized and civilizing than soft drinks), but I'd hope their acquired understanding and learning will take them on to wines perhaps a bit more complex, a bit more interesting.......

But of course, I am willing to admit that all of this may simply be no more than the problem of a person who happens to like words and at least some semblance to the intelectual life as much as he does wine.

←

That is in wine appreciation the noble 2nd step. They begin to identify what makes them like it and then the miracle---they want to describe it!!! Fun to watch the progress. Regards, Bill Edited October 24, 2005 by Bill Miller (log)

[JohnL]

A report on KIROTV, from BusinessWeek.com:

Wine-Talk May Often Be Too Complicated And Overripe, But A New Ad Campaign From Brown-Forman And Virgin Atlantic Errs At The Opposite Extreme

The label's pitch goes like this: "Dare to enjoy this wine without dashes of pretentiousness or hints of snootiness. Virgin Vines believes wine should be all about having fun and loving the taste...not waxing poetically about meaningless wine-speak and food pairings."

Interesting point:

SELLING IGNORANCE. All this marketing muscle for mediocre wine worries me. Increasing consumption of wine that's well-marketed but not very well-crafted could pressure wine regions to concentrate more on vineyard yield instead of quality. It took discerning French winemaker Alexandra Marnier Lapostolle, who heads Chilean winery Casa Lapostolle and is part of the family that owns Grand Marnier, for example, to convince Chilean vineyards to plant more vineyards on the mountain slopes to get better quality -- albeit fewer -- grapes.

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.

[jsolomon]

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.

←

Ideally, the label should have helpful information. To help promote this, I attempt to only buy wines that have helpful information on the label.

What does that end up meaning? Well, my fiance thinks I'm a wine snob because we end up having normal-looking bottles with generic-looking one- or two-color labels. The French imports generally have an apellacion controllez and an area (yeah, I can spell English, but I'm lost at French). American have a varietal or a varietal breakdown. Port, is well, port.

The way I look at it is getting to know wine is like becoming a chemist. There is no instant-gratification way of doing it. You have to get out there and spend both time and money.

Many of the people that this VV stuff is marketed to are the people who are interested in instant gratification wine, and I think it will lower the general discourse on wine, especially where it comes to labeling.

The way I feel about it is if people don't want to take the time to learn my language (wine's) then they ought not feel left out of the conversation. On the other hand, if they're working toward becoming functional in it, I'll give them a hand.

[MaxH]

... Increasing consumption of wine that's well-marketed but not very well-crafted could pressure wine regions to concentrate more on vineyard yield instead of quality.

"Could pressure? I understand there are precedents. Some of them close to home. [1]

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?

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.

[JohnL]

... Increasing consumption of wine that's well-marketed but not very well-crafted could pressure wine regions to concentrate more on vineyard yield instead of quality.

"Could pressure? I understand there are precedents. Some of them close to home. [1]

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?

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.

Edited October 25, 2005 by JohnL (log)

[Vinfidel]

"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."

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

[Busboy]

Let it be known that I'm all for high quality, medium and low priced wines. And I am certainly all for having wine become an everyday part of life.  But I am not in favor of ignorance and certainly not in favor of boasting of one's ignorance.

The appreciation of any subject - be it mathematics, art, music, literature, or wine depends on language and language is not innate - it is developed and that development comes with experience.  I am not speaking of wine snobbery.  I am speaking of the ability to communicate our thoughts and sensations in words to ourselves and others in order to best appreciate what we are doing, seeing, hearing or otherwise sensing.

The simple truth is that those who want to discuss wine at more than the most superficial level, need at least a basic comprehension of that language.  As is well known, without language, accurate descriptions, the ability to make comparisons and intelligent discussion are virtually impossible.

←

What about those who just want to drink it?

[JohnL]

"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."

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!

[Mark Sommelier]

Doc, I certainly agree with you and with Vinfidel that the wine industry could go farther toward making wine more approachable.  But please.  Calling food pairings stuffy and unnecessary?  Well okay, maybe they are.  But they can be fun, too.

Can you imagine what Virgin would do for beer?  "Mircrobrews -- for Microbrains."     

←

Thunderbird and Cheetos. What could be a better pairing than that?

[Busboy]

Doc, I certainly agree with you and with Vinfidel that the wine industry could go farther toward making wine more approachable.  But please.  Calling food pairings stuffy and unnecessary?  Well okay, maybe they are.  But they can be fun, too.

Can you imagine what Virgin would do for beer?   "Mircrobrews -- for Microbrains."      

←

Thunderbird and Cheetos. What could be a better pairing than that?

←

I prefer Mad Dog with Cheetos -- and other vegetables. Thunderbird goes better with deep-fried meats IMHO.

[MarketStEl]

mary if you go to the web site you will see that they use a joke to introduce the notion of body and bouquet and other wine terms to consumers

it is not serious about itself, it is making a joke about wine snobs

to appreciate a food pairing is beyond the scope of the market for the VV product

Virgin has another product - Virgin Wines - that is targetd to slightly more advanced consumers.

in this product they have more about the wines and food pairings including free wine courses to learn more

if you take yourself outside of the shoes of a wine expert you will see how the concept of wine pairings can seem to be fussy and contrived to a person that is used to drinking pepsi or miller lite with his meals

once he tastes the wines he learns, then he asks questions, and move on up the ladder

←

What Vinfidel said.

VV is also an attempt to crack the "party" market, where beer and spirits dominate. That much became clear to me after exploring the VV site fully. The registration form by which you join their "V3IP" e-mail list promises that you will be kept up to date on "club happenings" in your area. I suspect that most of us posting here aren't into the club scene; I can assure you that most of those who are, when they drink, aren't drinking wine.

As further evidence that the wine industry is now setting its sights on the party crowd, have any of you seen Sutter Home's "Little Pink Box" yet?

(Full product view in my ImageGullet gallery "The Little Pink Box.")

This little bit of retro-'60s cool is currently on sale at Pennsylvania Wine & Spirits Shoppes (="State Stores") for $8.99, a real bargain considering the boxed bag holds the equivalent of four 750 ml bottles of Sutter Home White Zinfandel. ("About what it's worth," I'm sure some of you are now muttering.) Given that white zin is already a popular wine among non-serious wine drinkers, it only makes sense to me that they'd promote it to the same people who go into trendy bars and clubs and ask for flavored "martinis" made with vodka. The box even has a recipe for a "little pink cocktail" on it!

The people who buy this (aside from me) probably have a few years to go before they're ready to do the serious-oenphile bit. But at least they will have had exposure to wine in a fun setting beforehand.

Edited to add: Oh, I don't think it's "stuffy" to pair wines with complementary foods any more than it is to try to serve vegetables that complement a meat or poultry dish or season foods with certain spices to add a particular flavor or aroma. I think that what does come across as "stuffy" to some people is those elaborate descriptions of a wine's taste in which all kinds of different fruits, spices and other flavors are invoked. This may be based on a simple but understandable bit of logic that roughly runs as follows: "The stuff's made from grapes, for Chrissakes. What's all this talk about pears, peaches, black currants, pomegranates and so on?"

I sort of felt that way myself before buying an inexpensive Spanish white wine a few years ago that had a distinct citrusy flavor. That wine--Las Brisas--is now a favorite of mine.

Edited October 25, 2005 by MarketStEl (log)

[Daniel Rogov]

What about those who just want to drink it?

Charles, Hello.....

Both Van Gogh and Andy Warhol did portraits of women and those can be found in many museums of modern art. Wouldn't it help the person looking at those portraits if they knew just a wee little bit about the lives of those artists? Or, in a restaurant, knowing just a tad of knowledge about the differences in flavor and texture between a T-Bone and an entrecote steak?

I hate to sound pompous but ignorance is not bliss. It is simply ignorance and in the end that robs us of the ability to gain full enjoyment from either a painting, a steak or a glass of wine.