In Vino, Populism

The L.A. Times today has a meandering but interesting look at the Gallo winery's successful attempts at producing Galloized French (and Itailan) wine for American and even French consumers. The article references the fascinating wine documentary/polemic Mondovino, which I saw in France (it'll come to the U.S. in spring), and touches on a bit of what I found most interesting about that film: The sight of elite Americans treating their wine-biz success as a victory for democratic tastes against the snobby French.

"Too many Americans have been humiliated when they were ordering a bottle of French wine in a restaurant," continues [Gallo marketing chief Gerry] Glasgow. The difficult-to-pronounce names, the confusing labels -- both remind Americans of their preconceived notion that the French are condescending and arrogant, he says. In late 2002, Gallo was trying to understand American attitudes toward all things French; the political climate between the two countries sank to new lows with France's opposition to America's invasion of Iraq. The project went forward when Gallo market-tested an image of French village life in the rural south, particularly Provence. Suddenly the scores shot up: These French people were OK, nothing like the awful Parisians.

You'll hear the same chip-on-the-shoulder populism from the moneybags Mondavi family and influential Wine Spectator Advocate critic Robert Parker, even while they fetishize Sideways-style wine rituals and contribute to the notion that $50 for a dinner bottle is sane. Meanwhile, back in the Land of Snob two weeks ago, I enjoyed several visits to unpretentious local growers, who (like any French supermarket) were happy to sell us delicious hooch for 6 Euros a pop. Of course, I didn't ask about ag subsidies....

Comments

Gary Gunnels | January 19, 2005, 4:31pm | #

That's really fucking hilarious. :) Thanks for making my day Matt.

Parker is probably one of the biggest snobs in the wine industry.

Mr. Smith | January 19, 2005, 4:35pm | #

Perhaps we should punish the French snobs by making them drink boones farm.

Gary Gunnels | January 19, 2005, 4:38pm | #

"Too many Americans have been humiliated when they were ordering a bottle of French wine in a restaurant"

Maybe if they took the short amount of time it takes to learn the terms "pinot noir" or "cabernet franc" or "gewürztraminer" (the latter is admittedly a German term) then they wouldn't have that problem.

Gary Gunnels | January 19, 2005, 4:40pm | #

Mr. Smith,

Trust me, France has its own versions of Boones Farm; meaning "kool aid" wine. :)

Mr. Smith | January 19, 2005, 4:43pm | #

Trust me, France has its own versions of Boones Farm; meaning "kool aid" wine. :)

Agreed, I'm sure they do.

I personally have not ran into anything over there that is not at least OK.

Fred | January 19, 2005, 4:45pm | #

Perhaps we should punish the French snobs by making them drink boones farm.

Of course, Italy allways has Bolla. -:}

Evan Williams | January 19, 2005, 4:47pm | #

a) Bob Parker's publication is the Wine Advocate.

b) If you have a gripe with paying $50 for a bottle of wine for dinner, then take that up with the restaurantuer, who is, doubtless, marking it up 100%.

c) I've had bottles of wine that I paid big money for, and felt like I got ripped off. inversely, I've had cheap bottles that I would have paid $50, at the very least, to have the pleasure to put my nose and lips upon.

d) Being both a free-marketeer and in the wine industry, I find it odd that someone from Reason would bitch and moan about people who "contribute to the notion that $50 for a dinner bottle is sane". I have a certain disdain for Parker (mainly, his affinity for syrupy aussie shirazes and his snubbing of anything that's not opulent and slutty), but, please...market prices are market prices, set by demand. Econ 101, anybody? As long as people will pay $50 for a dinner bottle, then the people will pay it. As of now, we're seeing a consumer backlash against arrogant producers trying to pawn off their lackluster Napa cabs as world classics, and who have no notion of a price ceiling.

Sadly, when you go deeper than my level (retail), you see that, many times, the tail wags the dog when it comes to pricing. Most consumers won't take a wine too seriously if it costs $12, so producers set the price artificially high in order to garner respect. I suspect that the wine industry is not alone in this trend, but given the highly subjective nature of what constitutes "good" wine, we are especially susceptible to it.

The best thing any wine fan can do for themself is set up blind tastings, and judge the wine for what's in the bottle, independent of what the label looks like, or what expectations you might have regarding this particular Gevrey vs a Sonoma zinfandel. But to make a blanket statement that $50 for a dinner bottle isn't sane, well, that's just silly.

As for this anti-french thing, we saw a dip in french sales after the war scuffle. It never made sense to any of us, given how none of these producers had anything to do with France's foreign policy, but still, expect not rationality from the average nationalistic drone. Good luck to Gallo, though...however, I do have a bit of a sour taste in my mouth already regarding "market-testing" a wine venture via photographs of a region.

Matt Welch | January 19, 2005, 4:55pm | #

Evan -- And here I thought you'd invented Blogger! Thanks for the correction, and the insight. From where do you work, if I may ask?

Ken Shultz | January 19, 2005, 4:58pm | #

I suspect that the American vintners here are projecting their inferiority complex on the rest of the American people. I don't think Americans are intimidated by pronunciation--picking the right wine or asking for help, perhaps.

It seems to me, by the way, that French wine producers haven't denigrated California wines any more than California's wine producers have denigrated wines from Australia, Chile and New York--any more or any less I suppose I should say.

Gallo isn't all bad either--it can be great in a pasta sauce, say, if maybe you don't have time to get one of those two-dollar, three-gallon jugs of mountain burgundy they sell at Costco.

Gary Gunnels | January 19, 2005, 5:01pm | #

Fred,

Ouch!!!!

Evan Williams,

So have sales of French wine rebounded? I know a big issue for French winemakers is the growing weakness of their domestic market; therefor they appear to be becoming more focused on international sales.

Ted B. | January 19, 2005, 5:03pm | #

Heh heh, those same "clueless" Americans could probably rattle-off all sorts of arcane baseball statistics; or NASCAR-rankings, crew-chiefs and race-results for 10-years. It just depends on what important to the individual.

"Miss, I'll have the red wine."
"OK. Chablis, Burgundy or Rose'?"
---an actual conversation.

Tim Cavanaugh | January 19, 2005, 5:15pm | #

Hey all your fancypants talk about economics hasn't answered the main question: What do the vintners buy, half so precious as the thing they sell?

One man has revolutionized the wine economy, and his name is Trader Joe.

Jason Ligon | January 19, 2005, 5:20pm | #

I find wine annoying to a certain extent. Here is this food that the vast majority of Americans don't drink enough of to form informed opinions. It, unlike, say, beer, has a defined role in etiquette. It is this intimidating thing that classy people are supposed to know all about. People who entertain are expected to know wine. People who host business partners are expected to know wine. That is a lot of Americans who would not otherwise give a flip about the stuff who feel like they have to do it right.

Reading books and sampling wines doesn't help. There are professionals that tie certain characteristics of wine to quality and therefore directly to a given wine's role in etiquette. Alas, the uninitiated can't even detect those qualities in the first place - many suspect descriptions of hints of this or that are fabrications.

The price you pay is the guarantee that at some level you don't look like a goober in front of your boss. Resentment of the French is an sympathetic reaction with the resentment of having to go through all that hooplah for a stinkin' beverage.

Not that I PERSONALLY feel this way, mind you. I'm all cultured an' shit, and nothing makes me happier than drinking $50 wine.

Tim Cavanaugh | January 19, 2005, 5:24pm | #

It's all bullshit. I brought a bottle of California wine to a party the other day, and because I remained silent about the price, the revelers were marveling at how much better it was than the "two-buck chuck" the hosts were serving. In fact, it wasn't even two-buck chuck: I got it for $1.99 at Bargain Bank.

Gary Gunnels | January 19, 2005, 5:29pm | #

Tim,

There are differences in wine quality (aside from opening a bottle of vinegar), but their importance is a matter of individual taste and can't be reduced to some overarching paradigm.

Ken Shultz | January 19, 2005, 5:43pm | #

"The price you pay is the guarantee that at some level you don't look like a goober in front of your boss."

There's little relation between price and quality in the wine shop. For a time, I worked in a gourmet Italian food store/restaurant(don't call it a deli)/ wine merchant. The two best selling wines were always the best that we had that happened to be marked low at the time, and the highest priced wine in the store.

That's right--when we couldn't sell something--we'd triple the price, and it would fly off the shelves immediately thereafter.

That's the difference between normal goods and...you know, Econ 101 stuff. It's not just that price and quality aren't directly related here--it's often--I'm tempted to say most often--an inverse relationship.

Small vintners who can pay very close attention to their wines and grapes, etc. can still sell at very low rates. Even on the lowest priced, imported bottles we sold, the mark up was almost always over two hundred percent.

gaius marius | January 19, 2005, 5:58pm | #

In fact, it wasn't even two-buck chuck: I got it for $1.99 at Bargain Bank.

mr cavanaugh, this says less about what constitutes good wine than it does about the kind of people that go to the same parties you do. :)

Jason Ligon | January 19, 2005, 5:59pm | #

Ken,

As the guy who is trying not to look like a goober, but who does not trust my own ignorant taste in wine, I rely on prices to discriminate for me.

The store, knowing that I am going to pay more for wine because of my incentives, does as you suggest and moves bad wine by increasing prices.

The lynchpin that holds this whole f-ed up system together is that my boss must not be able to tell the difference, either. If I had the slightest idea that I had not impressed my boss with my $50 bottle, I would be very upset that prices don't tell me anything, and the wine merchant's incentive to raise prices would disappear.

I am operating on the assumption that there is a standard of good wine out there that other people grasp while I do not. If my boss is tapped into that standard, I need to be able to produce it. If he is not, it doesn't matter, but there is no adverse social consequence for meeting the standard. I should logically, up to the price point of my professional embarrassment, try to meet the standard.

Note that the actual quality of the wine may mean absolutely nothing here - it depends on what the standard is. Like with diamonds, we may be in a place where the retailer tells us the acceptable amount to spend so that you have a clear conscience (i.e. the standard IS the price, so high price and low quality still is a win for me).

Stevo Darkly | January 19, 2005, 6:11pm | #

I don't know anything about wines, except:

1) The last time I had a merlot, it gave me a whacking great headache.

2) I like the Australian shirazes that someone disparaged in an earlier post. (I might never have been exposed to them, but I have an Aussie relative.)

3) If you ever get involved in some kind of special all-hands-pitch-in emergency rush project at work, which involves spray-mounting special labels to bottles of wine that are being sent as holiday gifts to clients, the combination of the bottle of wine that you are sampling while you work plus all the spray adhesive and solvent in the air will cause you to keep saying mildly inappropriate things to your hot (and married) female co-worker who looks like a cross between Rene Russo and Mitzi Kapture, and is fortunately very sweet-natured and has a nice sense of humor, so she won't hold it against you, but still.

If I order a bottle of wine at an uppity bar or restaurant, I think my best bet is to rely on the expert advice of the waiter or steward, e.g., "What will get the lady drunk the quickest?" while slipping him a couple of twenties.

Tom Wark | January 19, 2005, 6:21pm | #

With regard to price..it's pretty simple...If the wine is priced at $100, and all of that wine sells, clearly that wine is worth $100.

How do you get a wine to sell at $100 or $50. You convince the trade and consumers through your winery's reputation, that of your winemaker, through the wine ratings and reviews you recieve for the wine, through the packaging and through the story of the wine that it's worth this much money.

I once did the PR launch for a wine that at the time of its release was the most expensive wine ever released in America: $70. We had 300 of this Chardonnay. It sold out in 3 months. Fact is, it was underpriced because we were ourselves intimidated by the price we were looking at and undervalued the story of the wine and all the other elements that went into its pedigree.

I won't deny there is a lot of snobbishness in the wine industry and particularly among consumers who use wine to inflate their own self worth. However, don't mistake those who have wine as a hobby or passion and the way they talk about it and the opinions they spew as snobbishness. When you really get into any hobby or passion you need to use a vocabulary that reflects the depth of knowledge and passion you have for the subject. Simply saying "I like this" or "I don't like this" doesn't get it for the hard core wine lovers. They want to talk about why they love it or don't love it. The mistake they make is thinking the casual wine drinker has the same level of interest as they do.

Cheers,
Tom
http://www.fermentations.blogspot.com

Hag-Ridden Boozehound | January 19, 2005, 6:38pm | #

I like a sip of the juice of the fermentd grape from time to time, uh huh.

I usually just buy the cheap stuff, being ignerant of the quality issue, and I find that usually I'm happy with the small amount I imbibe.

I also know (sniff, belch) that there really are folks who know a lot about wine and who are getting an entirely different galaxy of experience out of drinking it.

I've been trained extensively in wine knowledge as a former server in an upscale restaurant, but I don't remember none of it except that I like wine now.

hiccup.

Ken Shultz | January 19, 2005, 6:45pm | #

Jason Ligon,

I know amore than the average guy on the street about wine, and when I don't recognize something on the list that I want, I ask the waiter to have the manager recommend something--all the time. I don't know your boss, but it's unreasonable to expect you to have an encyclopedic knowledege. The manager should know his list and what will work well with what you order.

On another topic, I told my associate the other day what you said about the the flagpole. He was impressed with the flagpole.

Jesse Walker | January 19, 2005, 6:46pm | #

I usually like the red stuff.

Don't care for the white stuff.

I think the words "two-buck chuck" sound cool.

And if I have enough money to spend on a $50 bottle of wine, I'll order something cheaper and spend the dough I just saved on some lamb.

serafina | January 19, 2005, 7:00pm | #

Where I grew up, the standard wines served at holiday meals and other special occasions (and only then) were Cold Duck and Mogen David. Martini and Rossi Asti Spumante was considered extremely sophisticated because of the tv ads.

I drink a fair amount of wine now, and wouldn't blink at spending $50 on a decent bottle in a restaurant. Wine isn't that difficult--it's just that there are seemingly so many choices I can't imagine why anyone would feel humiliated ordering a bottle of wine in a restaurant. All you have to do is ask the waiter to suggest something in a certain price range. No worries about the pronunciation even.

I'm tickled by the idea of Gallo test-marketing imagery of Provence to sell their wine, rather than the wine itself.

Ken Shultz | January 19, 2005, 7:10pm | #

"Wine isn't that difficult--it's just that there are seemingly so many choices I can't imagine why anyone would feel humiliated ordering a bottle of wine in a restaurant."

Men tend to think of themselves in terms of their achievements and failures. The kinds of achievements they tend to take credit and responsibility for might surprise you. When a guy takes you out to a restaurant, and you like it--that's an achievement. When he orders a bottle of wine, and you like it--that's an achievement.

If, on the other hand, he takes you to a restaurant, and you don't like the food or the service--that's a failure. If he orders a bottle and you don't like it--that's a failure too. If he defers the selection to someone else, well, maybe that someone else should give you a ride home too.

...It's a subliminal thing, but it's real. Some women complain about the food and the service all night and wonder why the guy never calls them back. The guy, meanwhile, goes on with his life thinking that she hated him.

P.S. Sorry 'bout the thread spillover, but spillover happens.

serafina | January 19, 2005, 7:26pm | #

Heh. Someone so insecure that he can't acknowledge his own limits of expertise over something so minor probably deserves what misery he pulls down on himself. If it matters that much to him, a clever boy would check out the wine list ahead of time and save the handwringing.

Actually, I don't think women and men are all that different in regards to thinking of themselves in terms of achievements and failures. We groove on picking a good restaurant just as much as a guy does. But we're more likely to see the guy's complaining about the food and service as his failure rather than our failure to make a good choice. Unless the restaurant truly sucks

Douglas Fletcher | January 19, 2005, 7:34pm | #

I remember having a very nice bottle of wine in Cannes. The bottle had a pop top instead of a cork and had a local phone number on the label. Gives me the impression ze wine biz is probably more about marketing than it is about anything substantial.

NoStar | January 19, 2005, 7:53pm | #

What's the word?
Thunderbird
How's it sold?
Good and cold
What's the jive?
Bird's alive
What's the price?
Thirty twice

Gallo has come a long way. They even removed the Gallo name from the Thunderbird label. But, that was one hell of a jingle.

thoreau | January 19, 2005, 7:56pm | #

I know nothing about wine, and I never drink, but I happened to watch the first episode of the short-lived reality show My Big Fat Obnoxious Boss. (Only because the star is a guy that I know, and yes, I agree, it sucked.)

In a nutshell, it's about a guy posing as a billionaire and contestants competing for a job with him. At the first meeting, the contestants are served champagne from a convenience store and hors d'ouerves (or however the hell you spell it) made from ingredients from the convenience store (cheap bologna, cheese whiz, etc.). The contestants are told that the champagne is from some really fancy brand, and that the snacks were prepared by a chef from a fancy restaurant.

The contestants all raved about how "you could tell, that champagne was first class! That's how billionaires live and dine!"

There may very well be a difference between cheap champagne and the expensive stuff that an experienced taste-tester could discern, but the psychological difference is at least as important if the person is inexperienced.

Ken Shultz | January 19, 2005, 7:58pm | #

Serafina,

It's not a question of whether women enjoy success and dislike failure just like men--it's a queston of magnitude.

I've long suspected that women tend to judge themselves socially. They think of themselves as a girl-friend, mother, daughter, wife, etc. That's not to say that men don't think of themselves socially too, but it's a question of magnitude.

When guys think of themselves as husbands or fathers, etc. they tend to judge themselves in terms of their achievements. Generally speaking, judging a woman in terms of her performance as a mother or wife is considered abusive.

Ken Shultz | January 19, 2005, 8:04pm | #

thoreau,

I don't think many people would disagree. There's less difference in quality between highly and moderately priced sparkling wines than there is in any other type, I think.

E. Steven | January 19, 2005, 8:21pm | #

If Gallo wants to really push the Anti-Euro thing maybe it can hire Vincent Gallo, to be its spokesman. One can only imagine the wine ads he'd direct.

Super Prole | January 19, 2005, 8:23pm | #

That Trader Joe's two buck chuck is nasty but the kangaroo wine is eminently drinkable ($5.00 a bottle and my wife says it's selling like gangbusters).

If the Frogs would send a decent $5.00 bottle of wine over here, I'd buy it.

But yeah, you can pay $50.00 for a bottle of wine if you want to, it's a goddam free country.

Ken Shultz | January 19, 2005, 8:40pm | #

Super Prole,

In the late 80's, I don't know if this is still true, there was a bottle of imported Italian wine called "Dago Red". I didn't know that was a disparaging term until someone pointed it out--but the wine was inexpensive and very popular. There might be a market for a wine from France called "Frog"--I can see the frog on the label now.

Is "Frog" a bad word, or is it more like "Yank" for Americans?

P.S. When a Europeans call an American a "Yank", should he be offended?

D Anghelone | January 19, 2005, 10:12pm | #

Just took a swig of Early Times. Imported from Kentucky.

J | January 19, 2005, 10:42pm | #

NoStar,

Ever hear the song "Talking Thunderbird Blues" by Townes Van Zandt?

-----

Among the strangest things I ever heard
was when a friend of mine said "Man, let's get some thunderbird"
I said "What's that?" he just started to grin
slobbered on his shirt, his eyes got dim
he said "You got fifty-nine cents?"

I said "Yeah, I got a dollar, but don't be a smart-aleck
I ain't gonna spend it on no indian relic"
and he said "Thunderbird's not an old indian trinket,
it's a wine, man, you take it home and drink it."
I said "It sure don't sound like wine to me"
and he said he'd bet me the change from my dollar

We hustled on down to the nearest U-Tote-Um
the guy wanted my ID, I whipped her out and showed him
he got a green bottle from the freezing vault
my friend started doing backward somersaults
through the cottage cheese

Took it back to his house, started drinkin'
pretty soon I set in to thinkin'
"Man, this thunderbird tastes yummy, yummy, yummy
and I know it's doing good things to my tum, tum, tummy"
it's how you reason when your on that crap

Got a few more bottles, chugged them down
I pulled myself up off the ground
decided I go see my dearest sweet wife
who met me at the door with a carving knife
said "Get them damn grape peel from between your teeth."

I could see we're gonna have a little misunderstanding
I said "Dear, I better get in touch with you later"
She said "Forget it, man, you're never touchin' me again!"

Now I've seen the light and heard the word
and I'm staying away from that ol' dirty thunderbird
a message come from heaven radiant, and fine,
all I drink now is communion wine
six days a week

-----

That guy kicked ass.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | January 19, 2005, 11:38pm | #

There are differences in wine quality (aside from opening a bottle of vinegar), but their importance is a matter of individual taste and can't be reduced to some overarching paradigm.

I know nothing about wine and hope that I never will. Can't stand the stuff. Admittedly, I am a beer and bourbon snob.

Anyways, back to the crappy wine. My wife is one of those that knows multitudes about wine. She can talk about a freaking bottle of wine with someone (not me) for 30 minutes. UGH. In all of this that she knows, her three favorite wines, cost, in order: $14.99, $5.99, and $39.

When personal preference crosses with individual senses, crosses near-infinite choice, price is no longer a gauge of quality.

The Real Bill | January 20, 2005, 6:28am | #

I worked as a waitron in an upscale Sonoma County restaurant for four years. I learned more about food and wine than I really wanted to. By the end of that experience, I was so sick of the wealthy idiots raving about the food and wine that I'd whisper to myself, "It's just booze and grub. It's just booze and grub," just to keep myself sane. Don't get me wrong. It was very fine booze and grub, but it was just that.

Rich people can be so fucking stupid. I imagine the biggest idiots were born to it.

I don't think many people would disagree. There's less difference in quality between highly and moderately priced sparkling wines than there is in any other type, I think.

Very, very wrong, but, of course, it's just a matter of personal taste. Try a vintage bottle of Dom or Kristal. Then try a bottle of standard or even expensive California sparkling stuff. There is absolutely no comparison. Yes, it's just booze, but there is something in the soil of the Champagne region of France that gives the bubbly an amazingly nutty nose and flavor that's just amazing.

Gary Gunnels | January 20, 2005, 8:52am | #

Super Prole,

Its not hard to find $5,00 bottles of French wine. And there are boatloads of $6.99-$8.99 French wines.

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 9:13am | #

Matt Welch:

The Wine Warehouse in Charlottesville, VA.

Gary Gunnels:

"So have sales of French wine rebounded? I know a big issue for French winemakers is the growing weakness of their domestic market; therefor they appear to be becoming more focused on international sales."

Yeah, they have rebounded. But, like I said, they didn't drop that much to begin with. However, I can't say this objectively. Our shop usually brings in folks who know enough to know that they're not going to influence Chirac's foreign policy by eschewing a perfectly wonderful bottle of Rhone grenache. I'd suspect that the grocery-store crowd would see much more of that kind of attitude, though, I did have to hold my tongue those few times when someone asked for help, then explicitely refused anything French.

Tim Cavanaugh:

"Hey all your fancypants talk about economics hasn't answered the main question: What do the vintners buy, half so precious as the thing they sell?

One man has revolutionized the wine economy, and his name is Trader Joe.

Charles Shaw is your basic grocery-store dreg, with a tad more acidity on the back end. This gives the average consumer a feeling that the wine is not ordinary table wine, and thus, good. But far be it from me to tell people what the should like. Lots of people buy "Goats Do Roam" and "Fat Bastard" just because of the funny label, and to each his own. Our shop focuses on what is inside the bottle; twobuckchuck is nothing special, it's just very cheap.

"It's all bullshit. I brought a bottle of California wine to a party the other day, and because I remained silent about the price, the revelers were marveling at how much better it was than the "two-buck chuck" the hosts were serving. In fact, it wasn't even two-buck chuck: I got it for $1.99 at Bargain Bank."

What's "all bullshit", Tim? The fact that your guests couldn't distinguish between one bargain basement wine and another? Yes, price and "expectation" factor too much into wine. This stems from the fact that wine quality is subjective and very unstable. SO, short of blind tastings, people revert to other methods, like the label, or the price. In all truthfulness, it's possible that your bargain basement wine was marginally better than the charles shaw. Our wine shop tasting group got together a few nights ago for a blind tasting. I broke out a non-vintage $10 blend from Paso Robles, and got comments (these are professionals, mind you) that it just had to be high-end Zin, such as Ridge. I'm telling you, if you want to cut through what you consider "bullshit", then blind taste.

Ken Shultz:

"That's the difference between normal goods and...you know, Econ 101 stuff. It's not just that price and quality aren't directly related here--it's often--I'm tempted to say most often--an inverse relationship."

Which I touched upon above, noting that producers often inflate their prices so that the wine will be taken seriously.

"That's right--when we couldn't sell something--we'd triple the price, and it would fly off the shelves immediately thereafter."

This has never been our experience. Typically, if things are priced out of their range, they won't buy it. Of course, we don't bring crap into our store, but, the key is knowing the wines, and getting your customer base to trust you to bring them great stuff. I have plenty of customers that walk in -repeatedly- and say "put together a case of 6 whites and 6 reds. I trust you." But this sort of relationship hinges on your staff and its knowledge, as well as the un-snobbishness of your clientele.

Jason:

"I am operating on the assumption that there is a standard of good wine out there that other people grasp while I do not."

This assumption is the first thing that needs to go. Surely, those with trained palates and experience with a vast variety of wines might be more experienced than you, but what wine boils down to, past all the hooplah, past all the bottle art and the pricing and the snobbishness, is, does it bring you pleasure? Everything else is just...superfluous.

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 9:28am | #

Tom,

"I won't deny there is a lot of snobbishness in the wine industry and particularly among consumers who use wine to inflate their own self worth. However, don't mistake those who have wine as a hobby or passion and the way they talk about it and the opinions they spew as snobbishness. When you really get into any hobby or passion you need to use a vocabulary that reflects the depth of knowledge and passion you have for the subject. Simply saying "I like this" or "I don't like this" doesn't get it for the hard core wine lovers. They want to talk about why they love it or don't love it. The mistake they make is thinking the casual wine drinker has the same level of interest as they do."

This is a very important point, especially at the retail level. It's quite easy for our tasting group, all wine collectors and enthusiasts and professionals, to get into what some might consider silly details. Just the other night, we were all flabbergasted by a blind tasting of a '00 Chablis. I had pegged it as an Alsacian Riesling or P. Blanc. It had the fat, glyceral nose of an Alsacian. We were all floored when it turned out to be a Chablis.

But none of this matters to our average customer. And the truly good wine retailer should be able to guage a customer's level of expertise via a few brief questions, and thus, be able to explain things in the appropriate terms, as well as pick out the right wine for their palate. It is infinitely important to avoid alienating customers (by, for example, remarking to a wine novice that this certain producer gets only 10 hectoliters per hectare, giving the wine a more concentrated profile, or that that wine is grown in limestone & schist soils).

Ironchef | January 20, 2005, 9:55am | #

LOL Nostar! I heard that years ago but never since, and never had a clue knew it's origins.

What's the reason?
Grapes is in season.

Isaac Bartram | January 20, 2005, 10:01am | #

The bottle had a pop top instead of a cork ...

I heard that there is a move to screw tops (formerly reserved for cheap stuff) because of the cost of cork. I wonder if maybe the synthetic corks aren't working out.

When a Europeans call an American a "Yank", should he be offended?

At my high school in Tasmania we had an American teacher who we nicknamed "Hank the Yank"*. At the beginning of each year he told each of his classes that he was not a "Yank" since he was from Tennessee. Otherwise he was pretty good-natured about it.

A friend of mine, born and raised in Florida, said that in England in WWII he and other southerners were bothered by being called Yanks.

In most of the world Yank or Yankee is a good-natured nickname in the Southern US it is an insult.

D Anghelone | January 20, 2005, 10:13am | #

...$5,00...

Cheap trick.

Scupper.

Russ D | January 20, 2005, 10:27am | #

Evan,

Great posts! But I have one question: how can a wine seller "pick out the right wine for their palate" for a customer they don't know?

I used to drink a lot of beers, and what I noticed when giving new ones to friends (beers they almost always hated) is that it isn't an issue of "palate" so much as it's an issue of expectation. For someone who only drinks Bud, they expect a Bud-type taste. For someone who rarely drinks beer, they don't have that expectation and may be more open to a different taste. I mean, I'm happy with a bottle of Bass or a can of Blatz, but what I have a taste for at any moment in time I can't predict. I usually go by the tagline from the old Pabst Light commercials: "The one to have when you're having more than one!"

drf | January 20, 2005, 10:39am | #

Evan:

have you ever run into the peay brothers? nice guys.


Goiter:

please don't say you think belgian beers are "the best"...

what bourbons do you recommend?

:)

drf

Call me snake | January 20, 2005, 10:48am | #

Pardon the cigar post but cigar market dynamics are closely analogous to the wine market.

I know fuck-all about wines, except knowing what I like. But after throwing away a lot of money on overpriced cigars in the last 8 years, I can relate to the vino fans here. Cigar prices are only now starting to return to rationality after the boom of the mid-late 90's.

When Fidel dies premium Cubans will flood the US market, and the good Dominican and Honduran products will have to adjust their price points...woo-hoo!!!!

Thomas Paine's Goiter | January 20, 2005, 11:25am | #

Great posts! But I have one question: how can a wine seller "pick out the right wine for their palate" for a customer they don't know?

They can't. It's bullshit. They can prattle on and on about how certain wines match to certain foods, and how certain flavors are supposed to present themselves in the glass. But they'll have no idea if the individual likes it or not.

Listening to someone about wine (however expert they may be) is asinine. Just close your eyes and point at the racks.

Gary Gunnels | January 20, 2005, 11:29am | #

TPG,

Tell the proprietor what you are having for dinner and what you like in a wine.

D Anghelone | January 20, 2005, 11:34am | #

I used to drink a lot of beers, and what I noticed when giving new ones to friends (beers they almost always hated) is that it isn't an issue of "palate" so much as it's an issue of expectation.

Two taps labeled for the premium beer and two taps labeled for the cheap. Three taps are for the cheap. By the third beer everyone is on the cheap with none the wiser.

Twba | January 20, 2005, 11:40am | #

Two taps labeled for the premium beer and two taps labeled for the cheap. Three taps are for the cheap. By the third beer everyone is on the cheap with none the wiser.

Even after three pints of Guinness you can't slip a Natty Light past me.

Stevo Darkly | January 20, 2005, 11:46am | #

Just close your eyes and point at the racks.

Eyes open or closed, chicks hate when you do that.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | January 20, 2005, 11:48am | #

Goiter:

please don't say you think belgian beers are "the best"...

Funny, but I can't stand Belgians. In a group of beer snobs, I am the black sheep. I'm the only guy wretching over the smell of a fruity-assed Belgian beer. Everyone else raves over them. Blech.

what bourbons do you recommend?

:)

drf

Wow, well, this is totally dependant on your tastes, but I'll try to describe how some of them match up with me and see what hits ya.

Basil Hayden's: Made by Jim Beam and my personal favorite. It's spicier than your average drink, and has a bit of a peppery taste to it. Slight oak taste as well. It has a spicy aftertaste that pops up in the middle of the palate but disappears quickly. My ideal Manhattan base. Should be around $30.

Woodford Reserve is very smooth. Not harsh tasting, and doesn't really assault any part of the palate. Very pleasing taste, with hits of grain. Almost zero aftertaste. Probably around $30 Ideal on the rocks or neat and a nice choice for the non bourbon drinker because it's so smooth.

Blanton's is also smooth, not as much as Woodford though. It has more of a smoky flavor with a bit of vanilla in it. Gaining popularity amongst the "hip" crowd.

Those are my three choices on the lower-priced end of the spectrum.

There are also some higher-end selections all in the $70 - $90 range that are excellent, but not three times as excellent ;). Jefferson Reserve's 15 year old has some spice in the taste, it has a fruity flavor with an obvious smoked wood bite in it - $65; Black Maple Hill's 21 year old is a strong man's man drink, much more oak flavor than most bourbons and it's got an overwhelming dark fruit flavor as well. It can be overpowering to some - $90; AH Hirsch's 16 year old is one of the more sweet drinks I've tasted. A heavy sense of caramel is in the smell, taste and aftertaste, and it will linger on the palate for a long time because of the sweetness - $75.

Like I said, these are my opinions, you may find something completely different when you taste them. The safe, sure bet is Woodford Reserve - I've tested it on many people, all gave it good reviews. It's very smooth and not intrusive at all.

NoStar | January 20, 2005, 11:51am | #

"j", thanks for the Talking T-Bird Blues, although I'm sure you made kwais blow a gasket over having to read another stupid ass song.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | January 20, 2005, 11:51am | #

TPG,

Tell the proprietor what you are having for dinner and what you like in a wine.

Yup, and he'll still have no idea, just a wild guess.

Ken Shultz | January 20, 2005, 12:10pm | #

"Very, very wrong, but, of course, it's just a matter of personal taste. Try a vintage bottle of Dom or Kristal. Then try a bottle of standard or even expensive California sparkling stuff. There is absolutely no comparison. Yes, it's just booze, but there is something in the soil of the Champagne region of France that gives the bubbly an amazingly nutty nose and flavor that's just amazing."

Wrong perhaps, but not very, very wrong.

I should have qualified my statement. Most people aren't going to notice the qualitative difference between the high priced wines you mention and relatively, moderately priced champagne--of the same class and from the same region. Don't you agree?

Name another type of wine in which price exaggerates the perception of quality to the same extent.

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 12:14pm | #

TPG:

"Great posts! But I have one question: how can a wine seller "pick out the right wine for their palate" for a customer they don't know?"

They can't. It's bullshit. They can prattle on and on about how certain wines match to certain foods, and how certain flavors are supposed to present themselves in the glass. But they'll have no idea if the individual likes it or not.

Listening to someone about wine (however expert they may be) is asinine. Just close your eyes and point at the racks.

[...]

Tell the proprietor what you are having for dinner and what you like in a wine.

Yup, and he'll still have no idea, just a wild guess.


What's assinine is some blanket statement that those in the wine profession have "no idea". A wild guess? Try a colston bassett stilton cheese with a Brooklyn Brewery Monster Barleywine beer. Then we'll see if I have "no idea".

Look, a great deal of the wine industry may be subjective, and a great deal may be bullshit. But there are folks out there that know wine...at the least, they know the wine that they're selling. And with a few well-placed questions from the outset, I can sometimes guage what a customer might like. No, I cannot guarantee it. They might hate it. I had a woman come in the other day looking for dry sauvignon blanc, so I gave her a fantastic Cottat Sancerre. She brought it back, claiming it tasted like it had too much sulfites in it. Of course, you can't *taste* sulfites, but, the moral is, even with great wines, not everyone will be happy. The mark of a great proprieter is being able to do well most of the time.

It's funny that we supposedly have "no clue", though. Our shop has a plethora of loyal customers who, as I said before, come into the shop repeatedly and place their trust in our hands, 100%. They do this because, in the past, we have gained their trust by picking out wonderful wines for them. Now, maybe we have no clue and they have no clue and the producers have no clue, and we're all just feeling around blindly in the dark, but...somehow I doubt it. Those people have many choices in this town when it comes to wine/beer retailers. For them to repeatedly come to us and say "we trust you, because you've always done so well in the past", well, somehow, I doubt that that's just blind luck on our part.

But I understand---there are people who think the entire wine business is all pomp and no substance, and they refuse to actually accept that, while they may not be able to pick one wine out of 500, others can, and do, for a living.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | January 20, 2005, 12:21pm | #

Uh oh, it looks like we've hit a nerve with a wine snob:

What's assinine is some blanket statement that those in the wine profession have "no idea". A wild guess? Try a colston bassett stilton cheese with a Brooklyn Brewery Monster Barleywine beer. Then we'll see if I have "no idea".

I can't stand barleywine, it gives beer a bad name. Want to make another wild guess?


Look, a great deal of the wine industry may be subjective, and a great deal may be bullshit. But there are folks out there that know wine...at the least, they know the wine that they're selling. And with a few well-placed questions from the outset, I can sometimes guage what a customer might like. No, I cannot guarantee it. They might hate it.

Thus, the industry is bullshit.

Cross personal taste with individual senses and someone like yourself can't tell another person what they'll like. You can guess. Or, I'm sorry, "gauge". Which is winespeak for guess.

No other group of snobs, whether it be vodka, beer, whiskey or cigar, act and react as arrogant as the wine snobs.

Even after admitting in your post that you're throwing darts, you still think there is something to your guesses.

Amazing.

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 12:22pm | #

Name another type of wine in which price exaggerates the perception of quality to the same extent.

Two words: Na. Pa.

We're doing a blind champagne tasting in February. And among professionals, I'm very curious to see whether we can all pick out the Krug Grande Cuvee over top of the regular old Veuve Clicquot.

Honestly, Champagne is one of the worst in this respect, inflated prices, marketing campaigns (clicquot on Sex & the City?!), etc., coupled with a very vague and subjective differentiation between them, mean that it's a wierd market, even moreso than still wine. The reason, I believe, stems from the fact that the bubbles can mask a champagne's flaws much easier than oak can mask a still wine's flaws. I'd wager good money that I could tell a $100 burgundy from a $10 burgundy much easier than I could distinguish between $100 and $10 champagnes. They're tricky beasts, but I must say, when you've had a truly great champagne, you know it. Like classic Burgundy, it's magic.

Tony | January 20, 2005, 12:25pm | #

Uh oh, now that we're onto bourbon and beer, I can't stay quiet.

In whiskey, as in most other things, Trader Joe's rules. The Woodford Reserve mentioned above is my favorite bourbon, and I've seen it at TJ's for $20. I may never buy a bottle of Maker's Mark again, and I kinda like Maker's.

As for the wine snobbery, that's one more reason to just drink beer. I've never met a beer snob who was an asshole about it. I'm sure they're out there, but even the brewers I've talked to don't take it too seriously.

Mmmm, beer...

Beer Snob | January 20, 2005, 12:30pm | #

Budweiser tastes like good beer that's already passed through a kidney.

joe | January 20, 2005, 12:34pm | #

Since TPG doesn't know anything about wine, no one else is allowed to, either.

It makes him feel bad.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | January 20, 2005, 12:38pm | #

In whiskey, as in most other things, Trader Joe's rules. The Woodford Reserve mentioned above is my favorite bourbon, and I've seen it at TJ's for $20. I may never buy a bottle of Maker's Mark again, and I kinda like Maker's.

$20! DAMN YOU PENNSYLVANIA AND YOUR STUPID STATE-OWNED LIQUOR MONOPOLY!

$20 for Woodford? Holy Shit. I think I'd become a sloppy drunk.

As for the wine snobbery, that's one more reason to just drink beer. I've never met a beer snob who was an asshole about it. I'm sure they're out there, but even the brewers I've talked to don't take it too seriously.

Bingo. Wine "experts" really think themselves to be quite special.

serafina | January 20, 2005, 12:41pm | #

Evan, did you feel like a failure when you didn't get that woman'ts taste in sauvignon blanc right?

Picking out wine, to me, is a bit like picking out music. There are things I know I like, things I definitely don't, and things that are delightful in the right context and hellish in the wrong. Also, as with music, becoming familiar with a particular wine or a particular variety of wine helps me appreciate it more.

serafina | January 20, 2005, 12:43pm | #

Kevin, I think you and I don't hang out with the same women. But I'll admit there are certain circles of women that utterly mystify me.

Gary Gunnels | January 20, 2005, 12:45pm | #

TPG,

My local proprietor has picked out numerous wines for my dinner table and I've never been disappointed.

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 12:54pm | #

Uh oh, it looks like we've hit a nerve with a wine snob:

Hit a nerve? Nah, you can dismiss wine knowledge all you want, the real proof is in our customer base. I just find it a bit odd that someone who is typically pretty level-headed would so quickly and unequivocally dismiss an entire profession off-hand.

I can't stand barleywine, it gives beer a bad name. Want to make another wild guess?

It's not a wild guess, it's a food and beer pairing that I and many others have marvelled over. I can't guarantee that you'd like it, but before I tried to sell it to you, I would ask you if you like barleywine. You just told me you didn't. So, then, I'd ask you what qualities you do like, what wines or beers you have enjoyed in the past, what your price range is, etc.

Thus, the industry is bullshit.

By this standard, anything that does not provide a 100% guarantee that you will be 100% satisfied all the time, would also be considered "bullshit". Wow, looks like almost everything we humans do that is not 100% objective is "bullshit". Again, the proof is in the words and actions of our customers, the foot traffic, and the profits, baby.

"Cross personal taste with individual senses and someone like yourself can't tell another person what they'll like. You can guess. Or, I'm sorry, "gauge". Which is winespeak for guess."

We have a finite product line to offer you. You have a finite pleasure threshold. But yes, wine is highly subjective. But trying to move from complete subjective chaos towards a more context-based educated decision, is our goal. You are making "improved" the enemy of "perfect" here. You are claiming that, since I cannot guarantee that you will love every wine, that I am just "guessing". Again, this is silly.

"No other group of snobs, whether it be vodka, beer, whiskey or cigar, act and react as arrogant as the wine snobs."

So you're basing this a generalized stereotypes. Tell me, is this (a quote from me, above) something a wine snob might say: "but what wine boils down to, past all the hooplah, past all the bottle art and the pricing and the snobbishness, is, does it bring you pleasure? Everything else is just...superfluous."

Just because we believe that, since we have actually tasted everything we're offering to our customers, we are able to offer thema more educated selection, that does not make us snobs. Yes, there are wine snobs, but simply asserting that we are experienced wine professionals, and that our job is not "bullshit", does not necessarily make us so.

Even after admitting in your post that you're throwing darts, you still think there is something to your guesses.

I never said I was simply throwing darts. I simply asserted that I know the wines better than the average customer, because I have tasted a great deal of them, and thus, I am in a better position to offer them help with their selection than, say, someone who had never tasted a single one of our wines.

Again, by your logic, any profession that is not entirely based in objective, logical, concrete information, is "just throwing darts".

But I seek not validation from someone like you, TPG. I know that there are some people who just hate anyone who claims to know anything about wine, and thus, labels them a "snob". This is unfortunate. Again, let the market speak for itself. If the folks at our shop were just "throwing darts", I doubt we'd be as successful as we are.

So, what's the best place to look for a good evaluation of our practice:

A) The sales figures and the thousands of pleased repeat customers who place their trust in us and tell us how much they appreciate our knowledgable sales staff, or

B) Some dude who claims that since we cannot guarantee satisfaction all the time, we're just wine snobs throwing darts.


There are thousands of professions wherein the goal is to improve the likelihood of success, via education, experience, knowledge, etc. Perfection is rarely a goal, it's the improvement of the chances of success that is the business. You are basically calling all of these people "dart-throwers".

Ken Shultz | January 20, 2005, 12:55pm | #

"Evan, did you feel like a failure when you didn't get that woman'ts taste in sauvignon blanc right?"

Serafina, would you feel motherly if he did?

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 1:01pm | #

Evan, did you feel like a failure when you didn't get that woman'ts taste in sauvignon blanc right?


A failure? I felt bad that she didn't like that particular wine which I had recommended, but, again, you can't please everyone all the time. Now, if 10 or 15 people all brought it back, I would rethink my decision to carry it. But the reality is, while she hated it, I let 3 or 4 customers taste the same bottle she had just returned (after she left) and they all loved it to death...and one bought a bottle on the spot. None of them could understand why the woman disliked it.

serafina | January 20, 2005, 1:19pm | #

Sorry, Ken. I called you Kevin earlier.

I only feel motherly when one of my sales does exceedingly well and I'm so gosh-darn proud of its success.

Matt Welch | January 20, 2005, 1:24pm | #

I love this thread. And I'll testify that there *is* such a thing as beer snobbery (or general fancy-pantsness), which one can find without looking too hard in micro-brew capitals like Portland, Oregon.

D Anghelone | January 20, 2005, 1:31pm | #

Even after three pints of Guinness you can't slip a Natty Light past me.

You're a stout one.

D Anghelone | January 20, 2005, 1:36pm | #

And I'll testify that there *is* such a thing as beer snobbery...

Beer should go to a good head but not the drinker's. It's all horse piss.

Jason Ligon | January 20, 2005, 1:45pm | #

Ken Shultz:

"On another topic, I told my associate the other day what you said about the the flagpole. He was impressed with the flagpole."

I'm flattered, but I don't recall what you are referring to here. Maybe it was someone else?

Ken Shultz | January 20, 2005, 1:56pm | #

Jason,

It was a long time ago, but it stuck...

Weren't you the one that told me the story about a libertarian fallin' off a skyscraper? He manages to grab a flagpole, and he's dangling from it. The flagpole's owner sticks his head out of a window and says, "That's my property--let go of my flagpole!" The libertarian says, "No way!" The flagpole's owner replies with a grin, "I thought you told me you didn't want to live in a world where people assumed ownership of other people's property?"

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 2:15pm | #

What a silly quip! If only our various political beliefs could be reduced to such little snippets. Of course, there are many things wrong with it. First, rarely, if ever, are we forced to apply principled, day-to-day facets of those beliefs to black-and-white/life-and-death decisions. When's the last time you had to make the choice between paying taxes or someone dying instantaneously? Moreover, if it weren't for the original act of the man erecting the flagpole, then the libertarian jumper would have died anyway.

Injecting nearly-impossible life-and-death anecdotes into broad principles, like property rights, is amatuerish "get you in a corner" kind of nonsense. "If you had to choose between a communist-style revocation of property rights, and instant DEATH!, what would be your choice! Hurry up!" Life-and-death situations, anecdotal or not, change your immediate perspective. They narrow your scope. And they are generally unapplicable to our day-to-day lives.

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 2:17pm | #

I know...can't I take a joke? Ha, yes I can, it was amusing, just like the onion's blurb about the libertarian who didn't complain when the public fire department put out his house fire.

Eddie Izzard | January 20, 2005, 2:43pm | #

"Cake, or death?" "Umm... cake, please."

Jason Ligon | January 20, 2005, 3:44pm | #

Evan and Ken,

That is classically a question raised in Liberty Magazine's How Libertarian Are You quizzes that show up from time to time. I can't take credit for it.

It is a good thought experiment, and a series of questions along similar lines can really help clarify for you if you are an idealist libertarian or a tainted consequentialist like me. They make me laugh, too.

Jason Ligon | January 20, 2005, 3:48pm | #

Along similar lines, but without life and death, how many will refuse their Social Security checks given the nature of the system?

If it turned out that midnight basketball programs reduced more property crime than prosecuting thieves, which do you spend money on?

Evan Williams | January 20, 2005, 4:03pm | #

OK, I'll bite...

"Along similar lines, but without life and death, how many will refuse their Social Security checks given the nature of the system?"

The "nature of the system" is that I spend my life getting robbed. While I disagree with said robbery, I'm certainly not going to refuse some of that stolen wealth being returned to me. Nor would my refusal help abate future theft in any realistic terms.

If a thief robbed me on the street, then, years later, I saw him again, and he offered to repay some of the money he stole, should I refuse it? Would my refusal in any way affect his decision to perform future theft? Of course not.

"If it turned out that midnight basketball programs reduced more property crime than prosecuting thieves, which do you spend money on?"

Prosecuting thieves. Liberty isn't a zero-sum game, nor is true Justice. You can't throw principles out the window in liu of pragmatic economic figures. But, more importantly, in a constitutional republic, the powers of government are enumerated; you can't just rewrite the rules because of a results-based prediction. Or, more simply, the ends do not justify the means.

Super Prole | January 20, 2005, 4:05pm | #

TPG,

Which wine goes for $5.99? The kangaroo wine (Yellow Tail, no snickering) is getting boring.

SP

Ken Shultz | January 20, 2005, 4:17pm | #

"If a thief robbed me on the street, then, years later, I saw him again, and he offered to repay some of the money he stole, should I refuse it? Would my refusal in any way affect his decision to perform future theft? Of course not."

I think this situation is further complicated by the fact that the thief is, in this instance, paying you back with stolen money.

TWC | January 20, 2005, 5:57pm | #

Absolutely fascinating stuff.

Charley Wagner founded Caymus and those of you who appreciate good red wine know that when Caymus is available it's generally pretty dam good. In off years, they don't send it to market, opting instead to sell it off to second labels. For example, at one time (not any more) Liberty School was Caymus that wasn't good enough for the Caymus label. But I digress.

Mr. Wagner offered the following insight:

"If a wine doesn't appeal to your palate, it's not your wine."

That's it in a nutshell. Parts is Parts.

As Ever,

The Wine Commonsewer (and now you know what TWC stands for)

TWC | January 20, 2005, 6:00pm | #

Damn, I wish I hadn't come late to this.

I read most of the comments and hope I'm not duplicating anything here. The reason for the proposed switch from cork to screw top is spoilage. Simply put, cork leaks and some people in the business estimate that as much as 10% of all corked wine is damaged to some degree by the air that seeps in over time. That problem goes away with screw tops, which are being resisted by most of us winos.

TWC | January 20, 2005, 6:06pm | #

Two Buck Chuck, which is Three Buck Chuck in many states, happens to be a cheap wine that is drinkable. It's better than many wines in the under $10.00 range. I'm not stocking up but it's okay.

A very wealthy friend of mine served it at a Christmas party at his mansion. Nobody even payed any attention. Maybe because it was being served by hired help.

Interesting to me that he would hire caterers to serve two buck chuck.

Now the food he served, mama mia, whole different ball game altogether.

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

TWC | January 20, 2005, 6:19pm | #

Wine is tricky and fun. It is better than Prozac for what ails you, but it has a ton more calories.

Speaking of Gallo, the first time they tried to get into the premium market was back in the good years of the 1980's. They were advised to drop the Gallo name in favor of something not associated with the jug wine image that Gallo still has. The brothers refused on account of their pride in their name and the Gallo line. As a result the effort flopped.

At one point I was able to pick up these Gallo vintage cabernets for two and three dollars because liquor stores couldn't sell the stuff. It was Gallo for gosh sakes. But, you know what? It was very good wine.

Ken Shultz | January 20, 2005, 6:52pm | #

Yeah, I think if there ever was a libertarian film festival, there should be a wine tasting too.

...and maybe a smoker.

TWC | January 20, 2005, 8:14pm | #

I'm also surprised at how much interest the subject of Yuppie Pot has generated here.

Super Prole | January 20, 2005, 8:52pm | #

TWC,

I still say two buck chuck is nasty.

Yuppie Pot? I ought to give you a good stomping.

"Wine, it's not just for yuppie scum and pretentious snobs anymore."

SP

TWC | January 20, 2005, 10:23pm | #

Super Prole, please note I said it was drinkable but I wasn't stocking up any time soon. -VBG

And even if you classify it as 'nasty' (I have only had the merlot) there are many wines in the under 10 buck range that are way worse. I mean WAY worse.

I just popped a 4.99 bottle of Yellow Tail shirz/cab and, dude, it's really not very good. The plain YT shiraz is better. Not sure how it compares with two buck chuck but it is three bucks more. Course, once you get through the first glass it's more tolerable.

Yuppie Pot? Who do you think it is that's driving the demand that has pushed wine prices through the ceiling? I rest my case. :-)

Good God Almighty, those got dam baby booming yuppies have driven the price of wine to the stratosphere. Good wine that used to be affordable is sometimes pushing 20.00 bucks per these days. I'm stuck drinking Mondavi plain cab (not that really bad stuff, the next one up) instead of something better on week nights.

Pretentious Snobs? They don't call me the Wine Commonsewer for nothin'........

Evan Williams | January 21, 2005, 8:32am | #

TWC says,

"The reason for the proposed switch from cork to screw top is spoilage. Simply put, cork leaks and some people in the business estimate that as much as 10% of all corked wine is damaged to some degree by the air that seeps in over time. That problem goes away with screw tops, which are being resisted by most of us winos."

Actually, the main reason for said "spoilage" is not typically leakage of corks, it has to do with stuff on the cork itself. When a wine is "corked" (figures hover around 10% of all wine, mostly reds), it has been infected by the cork-based 2,4,6 trichloroanisole - TCA. This is a result of the bleaching process used to sterilize corks. While the degrees of corkage vary greatly, and even trained noses/palates might not spot them, you can typically tell a really corked bottle by it's uncommonly funky "saddle-leather" aromas.

Evan Williams | January 21, 2005, 8:36am | #

TWC says, "Two Buck Chuck, which is Three Buck Chuck in many states, happens to be a cheap wine that is drinkable. It's better than many wines in the under $10.00 range. I'm not stocking up but it's okay."

As I noted above, the only noticable diff between shaw and your typical $7 grocery store sludge is a bit more acidity on the back end, which cuts through that typically cardboard-y finish that those nasty reds have. Other than that, it's, um, $3.

Evan Williams | January 21, 2005, 8:44am | #

"Good wine that used to be affordable is sometimes pushing 20.00 bucks per these days. I'm stuck drinking Mondavi plain cab (not that really bad stuff, the next one up) instead of something better on week nights."

SHEEEEEEEit, you're not lookin' in the right places then. Sure, if you wanna get some half-decent Napa drink, you're inevitably gonna have to pay inflated prices to feed their inflated egos. Check out some $10 deals from Espana. We have tons of really fantastic stuff in the $7-$15 range.

"those of you who appreciate good red wine know that when Caymus is available it's generally pretty dam good."

I appreciate good red wine, my friend, and, no offense, but Caymus is overrated and overpriced. I was at the winery for a private tasting a couple months ago for the latest releases, and I can't tell you how utterly disappointing it was. And $145 for that reserve cab is highway robbery. Even the base cab is upwards of $50, when it's worth around half that.

I had a 2002 Tortochot Gevrey Chambertin a few weeks back. THAT is great red wine. I had a Quilceda Creek '00 cab this past tuesday, THAT is great red wine. Caymus is, well, good-but overrated-red wine.

Seppo | January 21, 2005, 9:40am | #

Wine is a lot more difficult than beer for most people to appreciate. Generally, there are fewer variables in beer, and fresher is better. Each brewer's output tends to be pretty consistent from batch to batch.

Wine bewilders people because of the vast array of varietals, vineyards, blends, brokered grapes, and the inherent variability of the same "name" or label from year to year... not to mention the changes that occur as wines age in the bottle.

Who the heck can keep track of all the variations, and translate it into something meaningful to Joe or Jane Public who just want something they like, today, for a particular meal.

At best, a highly experienced wine afficiando such as Evan can only practice an art, at different levels of proficiency. Joe or Jane Public would like a science, or an easy decision matrix, but that is never possible.

So wine consumers are either comfortable risk-takers, or they think the whole scene is a crock.

It's just wonderful that we have the ability to explore and enjoy a wide array of beers and wines, and some have the patience and resources that let them explore and find what they like.

Guys like Evan are really helpful in that process.

Evan Williams | January 21, 2005, 10:35am | #

Nicely put, Seppo. This is why our shop has been around for years, while we see bottle shop after bottle shop fold. Their problem is, they do nothing to foster a relationship of trust with their clientele. They put bottles on a shelf and tell you they're good, but the difference between a mediocre bottle shop and a premier retailer is the knowledge, experience and trusting relationship that you bring to the table for the customers to reap.

With the inevitable variation between one person's palate and another's, there is no way to objectively qualify all wines. People search for a higher level of expertise, put into some objective terms. This is why Robert Parker is so revered (and so damned rich). His rating scale and his developed taste allow everyday people, who obviously don't have the time to taste every bottle in Australia, to get a little more insight into what may be a better deal.

MQ | January 29, 2005, 9:56pm | #

Came late to this, a shame.

I threw a dinner party where I blind tasted a good $35-$40 left bank Bordeaux against 2BC cabernet for a crowd of friends who were accusing me of being a wine snob. A lot of them were fond of comments about all-that-crap-is-the-same, sort of like some posted above. Tasted blind, *every single person* preferred the Bordeaux. I was pouring a good amount of the 2BC down the drain at the end of the night. But the bastards drank all my 99 Lynch Bages, so I guess they do get the last laugh...perhaps it was all a diabolically clever plot.