June 21, 2010

Is Sutter Home Winery’s ‘Build A Better Burger’ Contest Illegal?

Posted by John Cesano under Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[22] Comments 

Shortly after pulling off a guest chef job for Parducci Wine Cellars, and having fielded offers from two other wineries to consider future culinary collaborations, I turned my attention to Sutter Home Winery’s 2010 Build a Better Burger Contest.

With dreams of my own big fat prize check, I went to Sutter home winery’s website.

I had a mental leap of creativity that would ensure that my submission would be unique, and I thought it a genuine stand out recipe idea, for good or ill; I was either go to turn heads or stomachs.

Visiting Sutter Home’s Build a Better Burger, I was thrilled to find that the prize had been increased to $100,000 for 2010, the contest’s 20th Anniversary. My elation turned to confusion, then unhappiness, as I read of an exclusion that would effect me.

The Rules

2. The Contest is open to U.S. residents, aged twenty-one (21) years or older, except for the following:
(a)  Residents of California, Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories or possessions…

I pored over Sutter Home’s burger contest site, and found some information regarding the exclusion of Californians, and other relevant information.

Sutter Home’s Burger Contest History Page

Shortly after the 1998 cook-off, Sutter Home Public Relations Director Stan Hock made the bleak announcement that “this was our last Build a Better Burger® contest. We are not discontinuing the promotion because of any dissatisfaction on our part but because the State of California has changed its regulations on contests. It is no longer legal for us to sponsor any contest in which the prize exceeds one dollar And that’s no prize, because for a buck you can only get one of those other burgers, not the one-in-a-million variety but just another one of the eight or twenty billion or so.”

As it turned out, the legal experts at Sutter Home determined that the new California law only made California residents ineligible to participate in the contest, joining the state of Utah where the contest is also illegal, so BBB was able to continue after all.

With Californians now ineligible to participate in BBB, [in 1999] an effort was made to generate more entries to make up for losing the state that had generated 50 to 60 percent of the contest submissions. A winning recipe was chosen each day from Memorial Day through Labor Day and awarded $100. Sutter Home wine bottles on grocery store shelves sported bottleneck brochures containing burger recipes, mail-in grocery and wine rebate offers, and instantly-redeemable coupons for mustard and cheeses.

In an effort to make it possible [in 2002] for Californians to once again participate in the contest, the American Culinary Federation presented the competition, with Sutter Home and National Cattlemen’s Beef Association as sponsors. Finalists were chosen in two divisions: Best Beef Burger (Grand Prize) and Best Alternative Burger.

[In 2008] Jeffrey Starr, Sutter Home’s Culinary Director and Executive Chef, announced the winners and Bob Torkelson, Sutter Home’s President, presented them with giant checks and arty trophies.

Anthony Torres, Principal and Senior Vice President Administration of Trinchero Family Estates, welcomed the [2009] invited guests gathered under the big tent. Wendy Nyberg, TFE Senior Director of Marketing, announced the news that BBB would be doubling the Grand Prize money for 2010, making the contest the highest paying annual cooking contest in America!…Roger Trinchero, Vice Chairman and CEO of Trinchero Family Estates, joined his nephew Anthony Torres in welcoming all of the finalists back to the stage. James McNair announced the winners, who were presented with checks.

I contacted Sutter Home to ask about the exclusion of millions of Americans, roughly 12 percent of the US population, through Facebook, and the unsatisfying response came quickly.

“Hey John – Unfortunately, Californians are excluded from both Wine & Burger University and the Build a Better Burger competition due to California alcohol laws.”

I also e-mailed Sutter Home and asked for a more detailed response for a possible future article (you are reading it now). Again, the response was timely, and although more detailed, it was no more satisfying.

Dear John,

Thank you for taking the time to write to us regarding the Build a Better Burger Contest. We are as frustrated as you that we cannot offer the Build A Better Burger Contest or other sweepstakes promotions to California residents. However under California law and regulations, a California wine producer is prohibited from giving a California consumer anything of value over $1.

Under California Business and Professions Code Section 25600, no licensee, i.e. alcoholic beverage manufacturer, wholesaler or retailer, shall give any premium, gift, or free goods in connection with the sale or distribution of any alcoholic beverage, except as provided by rules that shall be adopted by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverages Control (ABC). The ABC adopted regulation 106(j) which states that a supplier is prohibited from the giving of any premium, gift or goods of any sort, whether by way of sweepstakes, drawings, prizes, cross-merchandising promotions with a nonalcoholic beverage product or products or any other method if the value of the premium, gift or goods given to an individual exceeds $3.00 with respect to beer, $1.00 with respect to wine or $5.00 with respect to distilled spirits.

Until California residents convince the state legislature to change the law, we unfortunately have to prohibit California residents from entering our contest and sweepstakes. Maybe you can rally California consumers to work toward changing the law. We would love to open up the Build A Better Burger Contest to California consumers!

Graciela DeHaro

Trinchero Family Estates

Sutter Home Winery

While I think Graciela DeHaro was somewhat graceless in her communication to me – Trinchero Family Estates might have sought a solution in the California legislature anytime in the last 10 years rather than suggest the impetus for change is mine – I was inspired to see what I could do.

I initially contacted Mike Korson who heads up the Santa Rosa District Office of the California ABC, responsible for matters in Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Napa and Sonoma Counties.

Mike Korson directed me to contact Alma Yamada, District Administrator at the ABC HQ for the Trade Enforcement Unit.

I called and left a message for Ms. Yamada.

Chris Albrecht, Deputy Division Chief at HQ and member of the CA ABC’s Executive Management Team, overseer of the Trade Enforcement Unit, called me back.

My initial reading of 25600 and 106(j) did not lead me to conclude that the prohibition for Californians exists, the prize earning event was unrelated to the sale, distribution, or promotion of wine and 25600/106 did not obtain, but I am neither a lawyer nor certain that I was reading the most recent versions of the code and regulation. I found it odd that the California legislature could conceivably pass rules that punish only Californians, at least as it applies Sutter Home’s burger contest.

Sutter Home Winery/Trinchero Family Estates, a multimillion dollar wine industry leader, certainly makes political contributions to ensure access for situations like this. It boggles my mind that a smart and successful business would ignore the opportunity to correct an unnecessary inequity, but seems to take Californians for granted.

Albrecht did not understand how Sutter Home could possibly think they could hold the event in California, regardless of where the competitors hail from; he believes that the contest is a gross violation of 25600 and 106, and the case law that come from tests of 25600 and 106, preclude not only Californians from the contest but anyone from any place as the contest increases Sutter Home’s brand awareness, is held in California, and a gift/prize is being awarded here in California. Albrecht said excluding Californians from participating in the contest was had no bearing on whether 25600 and 106 were being followed or violated.

I find it funny that the ABC had no idea that Sutter Home ran such a contest, Food Network’s broadcast of the event is pretty showy; ironically, it took a suggestion from Sutter Home that I become involved to bring it to the attention of the ABC. While there are many wineries that run similar, smaller profile, contests – and do allow Californians, I did not mention them to the ABC. I only mentioned the Sutter Home event because Sutter Home sent me out on my own to do their work for them.

In view of the Albrecht’s statement that the burger contest is not legal, I asked Albrecht about options, and it was determined that Sutter Home could hold the contest out of state, in Las Vegas (where outdoor grilling in the Summer sun is close to Hell) as an example, and that a contest out of state could include competitors from California.

Laws are amended over time, and case law further clarifies what a law means. Albrecht explained that the giant checks, the enormous cash prizes, awarded at the California winery location, with television and other media coverage, generate enormous benefit and promotion. The recent June 11, 2010 Food Network rebroadcast of the 2005 Burger Contest featured hundreds of Sutter Home logo sightings, and the many if not most of the burger recipes chosen included Sutter Home wine as an ingredient; pretending that there exists no promotional effort or benefit on Sutter Home’s part stretches credulity. The winery owners and officers are tied to the giant prize checks by the winery’s own contest website.

Giant Sutter Home logo branded prize awards made at California winery site – as seen on TV

I shared my initial initial findings in an e-mail to Graciela DeHaro, asking for a response. In a very short time, Ron Larson, Sutter Home’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel called me directly.

Larson had never heard of Albrecht, but said that he had determined the appropriateness of the contest rules and operation with the “ABC’s head of enforcement Matt.”

While I assume Larson referred to Matthew Botting, General Counsel for the CA Dept. of ABC; in a follow up, Albrecht wrote that he was, “not aware of any specific conversation between Sutter Home’s counsel and General Counsel Matt Botting or any other Department employee, but I can assure you that during our conversation, I provided accurate and consistent information on the subject.”

I do not know whether the contest is legal, but I would encourage Sutter Home and Trinchero Family Estates to work to make it so for Californians – the CA ABC does not operate in a vacuum; Sutter Home can and should use whatever political influence a multi million dollar California business leader, with decades of past political contributions to pave the way, enjoys to create an environment where California wineries can hold contests, with prizes over $1, that generate promotional benefit and feature branding and press coverage, without fear of bending and breaking the law.

It is obvious that Sutter Home must see the effect of 25600/106 differently than Albrecht, and I will cut and paste any comments left by Sutter Home or the CA ABC in response to this post into the body of this post where it will be more visible.

Contest or not, I tried out my revolutionary burger idea and can report that the cutting edge ingredient and preparation that inspired me to go to Sutter Home’s website in the first place was a complete and total disaster. I have subsequently come up with a delicious new twist, a burger recipe unique to me, and look forward to the day Sutter home is able to include Californians again.

 

April 24, 2010

Trinchero Napa Valley, Featured Winery Review

Posted by John Cesano under Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[4] Comments 

I visited Trinchero Napa Valley in St. Helena this week and tasted several wines poured by Michael Stopka, who was about as good as a winery representative gets – friendly, knowledgeable, and happy.

The Trinchero Napa Valley Tasting Room

For those of you unfamiliar with the Trinchero name, you have probably seen, tasted, or bought one or more of the wines made by the Trinchero family. Most famously, as I wrote in January, the Trinchero family owns Sutter Home and Bob Trinchero is generally credited with being the first to make White Zinfandel as you know it.

I also wrote about another Trinchero wine that I had with Christmas dinner, and pointed to as what wine can and should be, delicious, readily available, and affordable; the 2008 Menage a Trois from Folie a Deux winery.

From Bandit in the 1 Liter Tetra Pak to Australia’s Angove wines, from the ubiquitous Sutter Home White Zinfandel to Montevina and Terra d’Oro in the Sierra foothills, the Trinchero family are as important a name in California wine as any.

Wine Spectator honored Bob Trinchero for “having introduced more Americans to wine on the table than anyone else in history.”

The wines of Trinchero Napa Valley are the pinnacle of the family’s offerings. These are premium wines of limited production, hand crafted from single Napa Valley vineyards.

Built on the site of what had been Folie a Deux, Trinchero Napa Valley is surrounded by Mario’s Vineyard, named for the winery founding family patriarch, Mario Trinchero.

Mario’s Vineyard, St. Helena

Coincidentally, the winemaker is another Mario, Mario Monticelli. Monticelli’s father Marcello was the winemaker for the largest winery in the world, and at the age of 14, a young Mario was making wine in his father’s garage. Monticelli grew up in vineyards, learned about wine from vine to glass from his family, attended the University of California at Davis (the nation’s premier school for Enology and Viticulture), worked at the Antinori wine estates in Italy, and then at Quixote Winery before coming to Trinchero Napa Valley.

These are the wines Stopka poured for me:

2009 Trinchero Napa Valley Sauvignon Blanc, Mary’s Vineyard, Calistoga $24 - This is the only white wine made at Trinchero Napa Valley. 100% Stainless Steel held, not shy, varietally correct. Stone fruit, lemon, grass/hay, and I hate to say this because people freak out, but cat pee. This is a normal and appropriate aroma for the varietal, if I didn’t mention it, you wouldn’t notice it; oddly it is not off putting, and this is a great tasting, refreshing Sauvignon Blanc. Absolutely delicious, the best I have tasted in a long time. 13.5% alc., 1,480 cases.

2007 Trinchero Napa Valley Merlot, Chicken Ranch Vineyard, Rutherford $35 – Biodynamically farmed. Really round, nice cedar cigar oak tannin, great smooth round fruit, dark cherry berry and herb. 14.2% alc., 1,420 cases.

2007 Trinchero Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, Chicken Ranch Vineyard, Rutherford $35 - Biodynamically farmed. Dark purple perfume, cocoa, cherry, cassis, really nice structure. Rutherford dust. 14.2% alc., 3,330 cases.

2007 Trinchero Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, Mario’s Vineyard, St. Helena $50 – Lush, delicious. great floral perfume. Purest blackberry note ever. Elegant. 15.3% alc., 950 cases.

2007 Trinchero Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, Clouds Nest Vineyard, Mt. Veeder $50 - Expressive. Inky, rich, smooth. Cherry, earth, herb. Super fine  chewy tannin. 14.2% alc., 760 cases.

2007 Trinchero Napa Valley Meritage, Napa Valley $50 – 79 % Cabernet Sauvignon, 13% Merlot, 7% Petit Verdot, and 1% Cabernet Franc. Blackberry, blueberry, cherry, rose perfume, tobacco, cedar. The complete flavor palette for your palate. . Really gorgeous balance. 14% alc., 1,770 cases.

The winery is Bordeaux focused, and the combination of great grapes, great vintages, and great winemaker allowed me to enjoy one perfect wine after another. Tying the wines together was the winemaker’s choice to let the grapes be the star; showing finesse and grace, with fine tannins, perfect balance, all were smooth, round, and easy to enjoy, while positively full of flavor; but complex and layered, displaying subtlety rather that the explosive fruit bomb all too common elsewhere. Terrifically integrated. These are grown up wines.

The grounds of Trinchero Napa Valley

In addition to daily tastings from 10am – 5pm at $15 and $20, the tasting room offers special seminars by appointment.

On Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday, guests can experience “A Taste of Terroir,” a horizontal tasting and evaluation of four Trinchero Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignons; Atlas Peak, Mt. Veeder, Rutherford, and St. Helena. $40 per person.

On Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday, guest can take part in “The Sensory Challenge,” featuring a test of your nose as you try to correctly identify aromas present in wines using the Le Nez du Vin aroma kits. Also included is a sit down tasting of currently released wines. $35 per person.

Both appointment seminars include a tour of the brand new state of the art winery and last about 90 minutes.

The state-of-the-art Trinchero Napa Valley Winery, tour by special appointment

Trinchero Napa Valley is located at 3070 N. St. Helena Highway in St. Helena, CA. The wine club is called the Legacy Club, and members receive a 20% discount on wine and merchandise purchases from the winery, and the phone number for information or to make a seminar experience appointment is (707) 963-1160.

 

December 30, 2009

My last entry started a real conversation; I love it.

Posted by John Cesano under Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[2] Comments 

My last blog entry, about how the wine industry could do a better job of marketing their product and how wine writers could try to reach beyond the small circle of people they write for and try to reach a larger audience through a serious decrease in snobbery, seems to have struck a chord.

I have seen links to my article receive tweets and retweets, diggs, and email forwardings. My blog numbers have exploded. I have gone from nowhere to the #4 top blog on Wine Blog Network Rankings.

Most importantly, I started a conversation; a real one with differing viewpoints. I am thrilled and amazed at the number of people that have found their way here to my blog, I am so incredibly grateful that some of you felt moved enough to share your thoughts here, on facebook, and by email.

This blog entry is about you, my readers, and what you have had to say in response to my last entry. Here is our conversation so far, please feel free to keep it going.

Shannon L., blog author’s friend, Dec 27 2009 8:46 PM

Walmart and Costco also sell Menage a Trois. Costco being the cheapest at $6.99 a bottle.

_____

Kelly Doyle Mitchell, owner of juicyplants.com, Dec 27 2009, 8:52 PM

Great read! Loved what he had to say about marketing and the (over)pricing in restaurants!

_____

John Cesano, blog author, Dec 27 2009, 8:59 PM

Again, better with food than by iteslf, but an absolutely GREAT food wine, and only $1.17 per glass from Costco. Wow. Beer prices for this wine’s superior food pairing qualities. That’s what the wine industry should be telling folks.

_____

Rob McLean, article inspiration, Dec 27 2009, 9:39 PM

Ok, so I am starting to see some of the light. My parents drank wine but mostly the famous box wines you’d find while at the grocery chain.
I being of the industrial worker type always enjoyed beer and shots as opposed to wine. I must admit a little wine does go a long way, at least to my head.
Appreciate the nod from this writer and friend, I will keep reading and eventually perhaps even change my beer drinking tunes. Admittedly Mr.Cesano already has me looking at the wine in my grocery outlet with more interest. Just haven’t committed as of yet.
Keep it up John, you are the future when it comes to a friendly voice in the wine writing community. I am sure of that.

Always
RK McLean

_____

Nancy Cameron Iannios, Oregon’s best tasting room and wine club manager, Dec 28 2009, 10:38 AM

Wonderful John! This is my favorite blog yet. I truly believe this would be a worthy submission for national publication with one of the big wine magazines…you should give it a try! I’m definitely going to pass it along to all of my So. Oregon wine associates. It is something that needs to be addressed! I cannot tell you how many guests have stepped right up to the tasting bar with an immediate disclaimer: “please don’t laugh at me if I don’t taste the wine correctly…I’ve never done ‘this’ before.”
First and foremost, wine should be fun and the stigmas associated with wine do need to loosen up. You don’t have to comment on the nose. It’s not necessary to recognize the nuances. You needn’t concern yourself with whether or not you are holding the glass correctly. Wine is meant to be enjoyed. You either like it or you don’t and you definitely do not have to agree with what you read or with what you hear. Reviews aren’t the final authorative word; they are merely one person’s perception and opinion. Each person’s taste buds allow for the final personal review.
The absolute beauty of wine is that it’s subjective. Each person’s experience is as unique as their own fingerprints. Tasting notes are more of an exercise in creative writing than they are a carved in stone description. I’ve seen many a concerned guest struggle to pick up on a flavor that is suggested in tasting notes. A gracious host/hostess can immediately address such concerns and save the whole experience.
I totally agree that you needn’t depend upon the price tag on a bottle of wine in order to enjoy an enhanced food experience. My daughter Rachel turned me onto Bogle Merlot about a year ago. You can purchase it at almost every supermarket for about $7.99. It has allowed me to have a dinner by candlelight experience in between paychecks on more than one occasion!

_____

John Cesano, blog author, Dec 28 2009, 3:57 PM

Robert Parker Jr. just gave a Napa wine you’ve never heard of (Dana Estates’ 2007 Lotus Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon), that you’ll never see (only 250 cases made), that you wouldn’t buy ($275 for a bottle of last year’s release), a perfect 100 point s rating. seriously, who really cares? Way to go wine industry, just keep shoveling that news that no real person cares about.

_____

Shannon L., blog authors friend, Dec 28 2009, 4:49 PM

I love what Nancy has to say. I believe she should submit it so some publication!
I admit, I buy my wine purely by if I like the picture or the title of the vineyard on the label!
I either like it, or I don’t. That simple.

_____

Shannon E., Wine Goddess, Dec 28 2009, 6:53 PM

[Parker] has to sell his newsletter and books. Look at his audience. Those dudes (readers) need to think they have something up on everyone else. Don’t sweat it just use it in your comedy routine (who is Dana? Is she THAT hot?)

_____

John Cesano, blog author, Dec 28 2009, 7:06 PM

Today, I checked in with the twitterati of winedom, and the big news was that Robert Parker, THE wine critic, had deigned to grant a 100 point score to a Napa Cabernet you have never heard of (Dana Estates’ 2007 Lotus Vineyard Cab), will never see a bottle of in person (only 250 cases produced), and can’t afford ($275/bottle for last year’s release, this year’s will likely be more). Really, who cares, besides a bunch of wine geek, Frasier Crane wanna-be, Napa cult Cab, fan boys? This news will not effect one single person I know.

Let me say it again clearly to wine writers and the wine industry: give real people news that they can use. Tell real people about wines that are readily available, do not cost an arm and a leg, and pair well with the food people eat at dinner time. Give people a reason to try your product, instead of writing for each other about things real people will never care about.

Just sayin’.

_____

Josh, author of drinknectar.com, Dec 29 2009, 8:58 AM

This was a very good and well written piece. The wine industry is behind the curve when it comes to 1) vision and 2) marketing and 3) distribution (don’t get me started here)

I love to debunk the wine snobbery of it all. There are a few good wine writers trying to do the same. Both John and Nancy are spot on in their comments too.

Josh @nectarwine (twitter)

_____

Tamara, author do sipwithme.blogspot.com, Dec 29 2009, 9:03 AM

Good article and I hear what you’re saying, but I personally find it more interesting to taste (and read about) quality over quantity. Not just wine either, same goes for beer. I can drink a tall boy for next to nothing or I can indulge in a deliciously handcrafted local ale. I’d pay 5 times the amount for the microbrew… and I’d be more likely to read a review about it too. Same for food for that matter. Do you want to read about a Big Mac you can get for under $5 or do you want to read about and taste the juicy gourmet kobe beef hamburger loaded with toppings you could never imagine on a burger (like a quails egg!)? News that you can use is good, but it has to be more than just about value. Just sayin’. icon_wink.gif

_____

John Cesano, blog author, Dec 29 2009, 10:41 AM

Tamara, your points are valid…as far as they go. When I visited friend in Oregon a couple of months ago, I did not drink a single Budweiser, but I did enjoy a handcrafted IPA or two at Wild River Brewing in Grants Pass. When I listed my 10 Perfect Foods, Kobe beef made the list. I have waxed poetic over wines that most folks, outside of the circle of wine geeks (and yes I consider myself one), will never taste as well.

With nearly every wine writer writing about wines that regular folks will never taste, it just perpetuates the wine industry’s failures to effectively market their wines to a wider audience. If you venture from Oregon to Napa, I’ll look forward to reading your review of the 2007 Dana Estates Lotus Vineyard Cabernet. Your prose is solid, and, as I am a self-professed wine geek, it would be interesting to read your review of a wine no one I know will never taste.

Handcrafted beers, and even Kobe beef, are available to the average consumer. Many of the wines I read reviews of are not.

You seem to be likening the wines I would recommend regular folks try with their meals, over the beer or iced tea they currently drink, to a 24 ounce can of Budweiser. It is just that attitude, dare I say snobbery, that puts so many people off ordering wine.

I love quality. I acknowledge that many more $20 wines will appeal to my palate than $10 wines, and there is a great likelihood that I will enjoy a $40 wine more than a $20 wine; but I’m not writing for myself, or for a circle of other wine writers. I have chosen to write for my friends, most of whom are just just regular folks, most of whom too rarely drink wine. I will write try to find “value” wines that taste good, or pair well with food, review and recommend them. I’ve taken on the job the industry doesn’t do, trying to get regular folks to drink wine now and again.

I think I’m on the right track, this was my most read blog entry by far.

Thanks for the comment. I love your blog and I’m adding it to my blog roll.

John

_____

John Vitale, editor & publisher of Washington Tasting Room Magazine, Dec 29 2009 1:48 PM

I read your post “So, you don’t get wine writers or the wine industry?” with a big grin on my face.

Cheers, keep up the good work on your blog!

John Vitale

_____

Scott Casey, Man of Mystery, Dec 29, 2009 9:59 PM

Love your Blog John. I agree with you 1000% wine beats all drinks when it comes to food.

_____

Nancy Cameron Iannios, Oregon’s best tasting room and wine club manager, Dec 29 2009, 10:10 PM

I’m definitely not trying to get into any debates, but I’m 100% behind John on this entire subject. I’m not convinced that a high priced bottle of wine is a guarantee of “quality”. I personally prefer red wines that have been fermented in New French Oak rather than American Oak. The cost of New French Oak is much more expensive than American Oak so wine producers have to cover their costs by pricing their wines accordingly. New French Oak aging is my personal preference but it’s not an indication of whether or not the wine is of higher “quality”. From my experience there are lots of marketing ploys involved in determining price points. For the most part, these price points have absolutely nothing to do with the actual quality of the wine and have more to do with a marketing manager’s opinion about what is going to make their product move at the best percentage of profit. Some people automatically see value in something with a higher price tag on it, but wine is no different than any other product…it’s about supply and demand and impressions left through marketing efforts. Most “impressions” in the wine industry are created with a sense of snobbery that appeals to a specific market. I think the point that John is trying to make is about industry “impressions” that leave the ordinary person feeling that wine is unapproachable. The “ordinary” person accounts for a much higher percentage of the buying population. So, purely from a numbers standpoint, the wine industry could probably sell more product to a wider audience if they were to take the snob appeal out of their product.

_____

John Cesano, blog author, Dec 29 2009, 11:37 PM

Nancy, I always welcome your comments. You have a viewpoint I respect, and as the best Oregon tasting room and wine club manager I know, your opinions enrich this blog.

To be fair, I am thrilled with Tamara’s comment as well. I would love people to look at my entries as the beginning of a conversation. I welcome comments, and mine is not the only valid viewpoint. It is entirely possible, perhaps probable, that I will be completely wrong in something I write. Tamara’s thoughts were so well presented that I added her to my blogroll immediately.

As Tamara’s blog is about visiting every Oregon tasting room in a year, it is more than likely that the two of you, Nancy and Tamara, have met.

I tried to taste wines at Fetzer’s tasting room in Hopland today, only to find it was closed about 3 years ago. Instead, I tasted some delicious wines from Topel Winery of Mendocino County at their tasting room in Healdsburg. While I’ll be putting up a new entry tomorrow recapping my visit to Topel’s tasting room, I can say that getting out to taste inexpensive wines looking for some jewels will be hampered if large wine groups are closing their brand’s tasting rooms.

_____

Denise Slattery, triovintners.com, Dec 30 2009 8:00 AM

Hi – This is a great summation of what’s screwed up in this industry. I like what I have read here. Thanks very much. Couple of things to add: I make wine and have a small winery which is holding on financially but a bit stressed at this time (who isn’t?) I would say the hardest job I have (besides cleaning barrels and tanks!) is marketing my wine. It’s not just about pouring samples in a tasting room. It’s really a 360 degree process that requires me to have everything buttoned up in terms of marketing and communications. Fortunately I really enjoy this part and like the challenge, but I am stunned at how stupidly the industry has organized itself, especially with regard to the point scale / medal winning / incomprehensible review system that we are all (consumers and trade alike) forced to contend with. I loathe kowtowing to the point-people and therefore do not send wine to WS or WA for review. But I second guess myself on this decision with each new release….”What if we actually got a high score on a wine from WS? That’s good for business. Right?”

Most of the wineries in this county (and there are something like 6,000 +) are small, family-run operations that are thriving because they are focused on small lot productions and a hand-crafted product. Making only 250 cases of a particular wine for me is mostly a matter of economics, not about creating an aura of exclusivity. Is the wine better because there’s less of it? Not necessarily. Does it cost more to make because there is less of it? Of course. But I think the point should not be lost on consumers that when it’s gone, it’s gone. So, pay attention and try it because it’s going to provide an experience for you. Not because so-and-so gave it 100 points. Right?

Finally, the craziest obstacle to promoting more everyday wine consumption is the insane restrictions that states apply to the sale of wine. As long as these hold-over restrictions from prohibition continue, and the three-tier system is protected, wineries are prevented from direct to consumer trade in many states. I can deal with the TTB compliance issues (which are also tedious and arcane but primarily there to capture tax revenue) but I loathe the three-tier system and believe this is a restriction of free trade. I think it’s down right anti- American!

To each and every one of you, thank you for writing this blog entry. Your opinions and viewpoints, uniquely yours, benefit us all when shared, and enrich my blog tremendously. Keep reading, keep commenting, keep sipping. Consider signing up as a subscriber of the blog too, Thanks! -John

 

December 27, 2009

So, you don’t get wine writers or the wine industry? I know why.

Posted by John Cesano under Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[13] Comments 

I have a friend named Rob who isn’t really a wine guy. Rob isn’t alone, many people aren’t into wine.

The wine industry has allowed a perception that wine is more special than beer to permeate society. Working guys drink beer. Fancy pant elites drink wine.

I don’t know of any other industry that would purposely allow barriers to purchase to exist like this.

With wine, we’re not talking about unattainably expensive status symbol luxury items like Rolex watches, but there are many people who would more willingly buy a Rolex watch than a bottle of wine. With the Rolex, you know what you bought, an expensive, investment grade, time piece.

People just don’t know about wine, and not knowing are afraid to order it.

By allowing wine to be perceived as complex, a beverage for learned experts, the industry has fostered a fear in consumers. “I’m not James Bond, I don’t know a good vintage, or even a wine type; I’ll just have a beer, or a shot of tequila, or a Mojito, or a coke, or iced tea…anything but wine. I don’t want to look stupid in front of my friends or the waiter or the shop keeper.”

At the same time that Bacardi was marketing their rum through aggressive Mojito promotion, and selling more rum than ever, the wine industry was allowing fear to continue to be a wall most people won’t climb to try their product.

I could scream.

I read the blogs of many wine writers, pick up the wine magazines, keep up on marketing trends. 100 point wine ratings, 5 star ratings, indecipherable wine speak, Frasier Crane-esque reverence paid to a handful of producers of wines not available to the general public or too expensive to justify buying. Open a door or window and let’s get some air in here; most of what you’ll read about wine is from writers who have bought into the failed marketing of the industry – of absolutely no interest to anyone outside of the community of wine cognoscenti. Yawn.

Wine is so much better with most meals than beer, or iced tea, or coke, or just about any other beverage, but the industry is not getting that message across; it also hurts that restaurant wines cost triple what they would in a store and wine service is generally poor.

The next time you are in a nice restaurant, you will see many if not most people drinking beer or iced tea instead of wine. I can assure you that given a wine recommendation that would suit their meal better, and offered a glass of that wine at a reasonable price, most everyone would be drinking and enjoying both their wine and their meal more. I blame the wine industry for poor marketing.

Rather than be one of thousands of other wine writers bleating about the same unattainable cult wines, effectively bragging to my fellow wine writers about the wines I am drinking, I want to write about wine for the guy that would rather have wine with his meal but doesn’t want to feel like an ass.

Although wine knowledge is never ending, wine is simple. Let me say that again; Wine Is Simple.

Take the wine I drank my Christmas meal with, a 2008 Menage a Trois from Folie a Deux winery in Napa County’s St. Helena; while the wine goes for $12 a bottle, I just found the same wine on sale at Lucky’s supermarket for $8.99, so price needn’t be an obstacle to having good wine with food.

I appreciate that there are a wealth of wines in supermarkets that run from $8 – $20 per bottle, and some are good and some aren’t. I’ll try to taste a number of them and give you my recommendations.

Menage a Trois is a playful way of saying that the wine is a blend of three grape varietals, Cabernet Sauvignon, the king of reds, big, structured, dense, with black berry and currant notes, Merlot, Cab’s softer sister red, rounder, fleshier, with cherry notes, and Zinfandel, a brash, in your face red, with raspberry notes.

You have heard, “red wine with meat.” With three red wines in one bottle, this wine is a great wine for pairing with a host of meat dishes from hamburgers and hotdogs to pork shoulder and flank steak. Pasta in an Italian red sauce, Caesar salad; heck, I could drink this wine with just about anything and be happy.

Wine shouldn’t be about inviolable rules, but I will share a few “wouldn’t be a bad idea”s with you along the way.

The “wouldn’t be a bad idea” for today is not overfilling your wine glass just because you have the room to do so. My wine glasses are large, either 16 or 20 ounces, and I pour no more than 4 ounces in my glass. I get to swirl the wine, let it breathe, let the bowl of the wine glass collect wonderful scents, bury my nose in the glass, and inhale all the aroma and bouquet the wine has to give. A sniff and a sip, can change a bite of already good food into something almost transcendent. Doesn’t always, but, oh is it nice when it does!

I can get about six glasses of wine from a bottle at 4 ounces per glass. That means my $8.99 sale bottle of 2008 Menage a Trois is costing me about a buck and a half per glass.

The wine industry should be telling you that you can get a great wine to pair with food at home for about a buck and a half a glass.

That’s a lot more valuable information to most consumers than knowing about another garage winery whose entire release is sold out but just got a 10 page write up in a major wine publication after scoring a perfect 100 points in a possibly not blind tasting.

I’ll be visiting Fetzer and Bonterra in Mendocino County, doing some wine tasting close to home this week, hopefully I will be able to make some more recommendations. I also want to taste some of Topel Winery’s wines, they are also from nearby, but their tasting room is in Healdsburg, so tasting for me will have to wait a bit. I also should be seeing some wine accessory samples arrive this week that a distributer said they would send; I’ll try those out and let you know what I think. I’m also going to try cooking polenta a different way, and I’m going to make another batch of involtini this week. Lots of things to write about, I hope you’ll keep checking in.

_____

If you do have the time, and are near Healdsburg, CA stop into the Topel Winery tasting room and taste some wines before year’s end. They have a 2007 Sauvignon Blanc, Grace at $130/case ($1.80/glass) , 2004 Hidden Vineyard Cabernet at $190/case ($2.64/glass), and 2005 Cuvee Donnis Syrah at $150/case ($2.08/glass). These prices are discounted 43 – 51% per case, promo codes are “Grace”, “Hidden”, and “Donnis”, and the sale only runs through the end of December.

_____

Edited to add: A friend, and reader of my blog, Shannon let me know that the 2008 Menage a Trois was $6.99 at Costco. Seriously, at $1.16 a glass, this wine costs less per ounce than the bottled water I bought at the Fairplex in Pomona, CA at the beginning of this month. Buy it, pair it with meat. Thank me later.

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,607 other followers