NoBullGrape

NYT and vintages

The NYT's Frank Prial wrote a good article outlining the impact of the new vintage rules (that we opposed earlier!) that just kicked in.  He made great points about the fact that the AVAs of the US will remain at 95% while the more general descriptors (e.g. California, Sonoma County) would be allowed to drop to 85%. 

Here's the relevant excerpt:

Two weeks ago, the government increased the legal amount to 15 percent, about four ounces in a standard 750-milliliter wine bottle. A wine's vintage is determined by the year the grapes in it were harvested.

The rule applies only to wines with state and county appellations. It does not affect the more prestigious American Viticultural Areas (A.V.A.'s) like Dry Creek Valley or the Santa Rita Hills in California, Willamette Valley in Oregon or the North Fork of Long Island in New York.

Thus, a Gallo wine with a Sonoma County or California appellation would be covered by the new rules but a Rodney Strong wine from the Alexander Valley A.V.A. would not, even though the Alexander Valley is within Sonoma County. Wineries using an A.V.A. appellation are still governed by the 5 percent rule although most of them, committed exclusively to making fine wines, use 100 percent of the current vintage except in emergencies.

However, he totally dropped the ball on his descriptions of European appellation rules. 

The [Wine Institute] noted that American wines adhering to the 95 percent rule could be at a disadvantage when competing with foreign wines. Australia, New Zealand and countries in the European Union already have an 85 percent standard, while Chile and South Africa can blend in 25 percent of another vintage if they choose.

While he is correct that there is a general 85% requirement in Europe, every AOC that I've ever heard of requires 100% of the grapes in a bottle marked with a vintage to come from that year.  In fact, his particular mention of Champagne -- with its 100% rule on vintages -- and its grand history of clearly marked non-vintages undermined a pretty informative article. 

Probably the most famous wine region in the world, Champagne, has always blended several vintages to achieve a house style, be it Krug, Bollinger or Moët & Chandon. But a Champagne producer can declare a vintage if he believes he has had a particularly excellent harvest, and in recent years there has been a marked increase in the number of vintage Champagnes. There is a question as to whether the trend reflects an exceptional number of fine harvests or a not so subtle attempt by the producers to get in on the public's fascination with vintages.

Missed opportunity!

Highways through Bordeaux

You've got to love the web page created by winemakers opposed to a plan to run a highway through one of Bordeaux's most famous appellations.  In French and English.

TTB doesn't listen to consumers....

You will remember the small brouhaha about the Wine Institute's request to weaken US vintage dating rules a few months ago.  Well, Tuesday brought word that TTB fulfilled the Wine Institute's wishes and US wines with a vintage date can now have 15% of their contents come from another vintage.  Cyril Penn writes about it in today's San Francisco Chronicle.  Of course finding the new ruling on the TTB website has, so far, proven impossible.  Maybe one of our erstwhile readers can help direct us:-)

In short, I believe consumers lost on this one as we should be pushing for clearer labeling, not more misleading labels. 

In addition, this is an example of the way in which the US government comment system is laughable.  The vast majority of the 98 comments received by the government about this potential rule change were opposed to the change... yet they did it anyway.

Too bad.  A missed opportunity to show US wine laws are more consumer friendly than other countries and to send a clear signal that truth-in-labeling is the way forward for the industry and the country.

Larmandier-Bernier

Been out of touch... Lots of travel... Lots of work.

Noticed that Larmandier-Bernier, a great terroir focused Champagne, has switched US importers/distributors from Terry Theise to Dressner.  Don´t have any insight on that part of the business, but a great excuse to check out another example of great location based wines.

Argentina Everywhere!

Seems like Dr. Vino and Vineography visited Argentina in the last week and enjoyed themselves a great deal.  As we found, this country and its wines really are exciting.

Dr. Vino:
Mendoza's terroir
Alta Vista Torrontes
Argentine wine photos
Parilla
Mendoza, high desert

Vineography:
Reviews of Argintinean wine, Part I
Bodegas (multiple)
What's Wrong with America
Reviews of Argintinean wine, Part II
He also provides a breath taking view of his meal at Cabana Las Lilas.  Please note we found many other restaurants in Buenos Aires that were superior to this one.  However, as far as tourist traps go, this is not a bad restaurant.

At some point there became a pretty clear line between wine journalists who flew and traveled on the dime of the region they were covering and those who paid their own way (Wine Spectator, NYT, etc.) to maintain objectivity.  I don't think bloggers are at this point yet, but very interesting that Dr. Vino was traveling with Wines of Argentina.

Increasing cost of Argentine wines

We talked about the cost of Paul Hobbs' Los Cobos wine from Argentina the other day.  Catie at Through the Grape Vine did as well. Now Mr. Asimov at the New York Times has chimed in with an extended column on Malbecs -- both from Argentina and France.  When we traveled to Argentina with Limitless Argentina we drank lots of this good stuff and came out with a much higher impression of the wines than Asimov did.  That said, I completely agree that the wines being produced are good at the 10, 20 even 30 dollar range, yet do not warrant the kind of $135 prices that (in this case a French produced) Malbecs are trying to get.  In fact, one of its greatest attributes is its high quality for low cost ratio.

Here is an excerpt from Eric Asimov's column that, I think, summarizes his opinion well.

These are wines that can be very pleasing with a good steak — not surprising, given Argentina's veneration of red meat. But they are supporting players, not wines that would take naturally to a starring role on the dinner table. Even Ms. Fabricant's memory of a particularly thrilling moment involving a Cahors in France had more to do with potatoes roasted over a fire with black truffles and butter than with the wine itself.

"I really do think these wines are by and large reliable," Ms. Hargrave said, summing it up well. "They're very agreeable — you don't have to think about them."

For his part, Mr. Le Dû felt price would be an important factor in assessing most of these wines. He said they ought to be relatively inexpensive.

I really like the Tikal that Asimov praises as well as the Altos Las Hormigas Reserve that Asimov doesn't really recommend (though is a favorite of the Spectator).
At the end of the day, Malbec is great.  When it comes from Argentina it is different from when it originates in France.  It may not be yet worth the high price tag that some are putting on it right now.

Hobbs: High cost of Malbec

When discussing Corie Brown's article on Argentina, the high cost of Paul Hobbs' highly rated wines came up.  The subject is broached again in the San Francisco Chronicle by the always tuned in Linda Murphy.

She says:

 

$150 Argentine Malbec?  
- Linda Murphy
  Thursday, February 2, 2006
 

 

Paul Hobbs of Sebastopol produces a $150 Malbec from the Mendoza region of Argentina. That's right, $150.

Is his 2003 Vina Cobos Cobos Marchiori Vineyard Mendoza Malbec worth the price?

Let's just say it earned four stars on our four-star rating system, that it's an amazingly deep and powerful mouthful of exotic blackberry, blueberry and plum fruit, with spice and toast notes, a meaty texture and velvety tannins . . . and that it sells out.

After that, the wine's value is in the palate of the beholder.

Hobbs, who also makes fine single-vineyard wines from Sonoma County and Napa Valley grapes under his Paul Hobbs Winery label, is a partner with the husband-and-wife Mendoza winemaking team of Andrea Marchiori and Luis Barraud in Vina Cobos. If their $150 Cobos is too rich for you, try the 2003 Vina Cobos Bramare ($85) or the 2004 Vina Cobos El Felino ($25) Mendoza Malbecs (see "The Chronicle's Wine Selections" this page). Both are winners.

High praise, high price.

I guess one has to ask, with labor costs so low and land prices in Mendoza so inexpensive (on a worldwide scale) how can this wine be so expensive? 

Is this an attempt -- as many have done in many other parts of the world -- to put their wine on the map by pricing it so high?  Or is this where the Argentina malbec market should be?

Unlike many other regions where this debate is ongoing, Mendoza -- with its Hobbs and one or two of Catenas offerings -- has few who seek to peg the price so far ahead of others and almost makes one ask... how can one great wine (e.g. Alto Los Hormigas Reserve or Achaval-Ferrer's wines) cost so much less than another great wine from the region?

Terroir: A definition

Lots of people throw around the term terroir.  Tom at Fermentation has pointed out a very accessible definition in Rachel Forrest's piece in the Portsmouth Herald. 

Terrior: This is a big one to throw around at parties nowadays. The French term literally means "soil" and it refers to the way the place in which the grapes are grown affect the flavor and aroma of the wine. You know how some places in your garden are better for growing radishes and some aren’t? Same diff. Sun, soil, shade, rain - all that stuff goes into the wine as the terrior .

While I agree that some of the more complex definitions add details, I like the radish analogy and thought I would share it.

Further proof of power of quality, high-end wine

Further proof of the growth of higher-end wines, particularly those driving imports into the US (as discussed yesterday in this post) can be found in a recent post at the very good blog over at Avenue Vine.

US wine market: Big and soon to be the biggest

In a statement similar to those of my child (he is all about what is big, bigger and biggest), Jon Fredrikson proclaims that the US wine market is in very good shape and predicts it will be the biggest wine market in the world soon.  Speaking at the Unified Grape and Wine Symposium yesterday, Fredrikson said "From the perspective of 3½ decades in the wine industry, I can assure you right now that things have never been better in this market and the future looks outstanding." 
Here are some key points from his speech (as reported here):

• Americans purchased an estimated 300 million cases of wine last year, worth more than $25 billion (both records). 
• Census numbers show drinking age adults in the United States is growing as well, from 164 million in 2000 to an estimated 184 million in 2010.
• If per capita consumption continues to go up 3% every year, the US will be the largest wine consumer in the world by 2010.
• Wine drinkers bought an estimated 187 million cases of California wine last year, 6.5 million more than 2004 and a 4 percent increase.  At the same time they bought 8.4 million more cases of imported wine than in 2004, soaring to 81.5 million cases, an 11 percent increase. 
• sales as Baby Boomers and 20-somethings bought more - and more expensive - wine.

Thoughts on this:
I am particularly struck by the fact that this report shows such broad based expansion.   Fredrikson is saying is that the US wine market is not just growing in volume, but also in price (a weak, but useful indicator of quality).  The price increases are being fueled by a. Baby Boomers and, most interestingly, by 20-somethings who are paying more for bottles than previous generations.  This is most pleasing as it shows that the growth is not just targeted on those who are greying, but also on those who will be drinking wine for the next 60, 70 or 80 years. 

Would think that this kind of data would keep investment in the US and those who import to the US up and support more pushes to improve the quality of the wines produced for consumption in the US.

Also very interested in the faster growth rate among non-US wines.  Past years this kind of stat would be attributed to Australian wine, yet the growth over past years seems to indicate an even broader growth in who is successfully importing wine.  Doubt you will see brilliant numbers from France as they announce annual industry wide results over the next few months, but quality players in France, Italy, Portugal and Spain clearly are improving their ability to pierce the US market.  These import numbers may also be boosted by other countries such as South Africa, New Zealand and Argentina whose wines seem (anecdotally) to be getting more shelf space each year.

Please note: some of this comes from personal notes, but the majority of the info here comes from a very comprehensive article in today's Press Democrat titled "US Forecast to become world's #1 wine market."

Two messages from Australia

Interesting that these two articles appeared on the same day. 
1. The Sacramento Bee reports that a major US wine executive calls for mandatory assesments on grapes to go towards improving US wines and wine science as the Australians are spending much more than the US on these kinds of projects.
2.  An Australian news service reports that Australian grape growers are complaining about a grape glut making it impossible for grape growers to make any money.

A long excerpt from the Sac Bee piece provides a pretty good overview of what the exec is seeking and how well this has worked for the Australian wine industry:

The nation's largest wine industry trade show opened Tuesday in Sacramento with a leading executive saying a widening research and development gap between the U.S. and Australian wine industries will not be closed without mandatory assessments on growers.

"We have numerous funding organizations, but the contribution is voluntary," said Nick Dokoozlian, vice president for viticulture at Modesto-based E&J Gallo Winery. "We need to make that funding process more vigorous."

"I don't see how we get to the level of R&D that's necessary in this country without a mandatory levy on wine-grape production," he told industry representatives from the United States, Europe, South America and Australia.

Dokoozlian's remarks came during an opening session of the Unified Wine and Grape Symposium, where speakers stressed the increasing sophistication of Australian winemaking and its competitive threat to California wines. They represent 90 percent of U.S. production.

Australian wine officials said Tuesday their industry spending on research and development is triple that of the U.S. wine industry - despite being only one-third its size.

"The biggest impact of an active research program is surely the delivery of a new and improved culture of quality," said Robin Day, owner of Australia's Domain Day wines. Day, the chairman of the country's Wine Research Institute, added, "Improved awareness of scientific detail reduces the chances of preventably poor wine being made."

Australian grape growers pay a mandatory fee - roughly $8 per ton, Day estimated Tuesday - that is collected and matched by the government. Assessment proceeds are split nearly equally between the research needs of grape growers and of winemakers.

Australians have witnessed phenomenal growth in their young wine industry over the past decade and have been steadily cutting into the U.S. market as California wines have seen market share decline from 75 percent to 66 percent. Italy and France have also seen declines in their U.S. market shares.

Australia, noted for its popular Shiraz wines, exported 419,000 cases of wine to the United States in 1990 and 19.4 million cases in 2004, said David Hayman, senior vice president of the the world's largest wine company, Constellation Brands Inc. of Fairport, N.Y.

At the same time, an Australian web site associated with an Australian news source reports:

Grape growers in three states are demanding the Federal Government hold an urgent summit to solve a looming crisis in the industry.

The latest Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) report shows there were record exports of Australian wine last year.

But the success hides disturbing trends.

Supply has outstripped demand - there are more than one billion litres of unsold wine in storage.

Grape prices are tumbling and growers representative Chris Byrne wants the Federal Government to hold a national summit.

"Unquestionably the industry is in crisis at the moment," he said.

"Growers are no longer able to grow grapes and survive."

Something tells me that the reality is somewhere in between and that US growers are unlikely to pay a blanket assesment in the name of "wine research."  However, it does show the impact -- good and bad -- that massive support for a wine industry can have in a wide open country like Australia.

Napa and the Supremes

After being forced to fight a far too long battle by the makers of "Two Buck Chuck," the Napa Valley Vintners have finally secured protection of the name Napa Valley for wines only from Napa.  As Dr. Vino describes here wine with a brand name "Napa Ridge" can no longer be sold if it does not contain at least 75% grapes from Napa.  This is a huge victory for all who believe that location matters and that consumers should be told exactly where their wines come from.  Luckily for us, there are many great winemakers that fall into this category.  More importantly, it is a big set back for those who seek to use loopholes to hide the true source of the grapes that are used for their wine.  While there are only a few of these characters... they are very, very big.

Non-EU products to gain EU GI protection

We always talk about the failure of the US and other countries to protect the names of distinct locations.  At the very least they do so in a manner that -- when it comes to wine -- is weaker than the protections that the EU provides.  However, there has long been a problem with EU regulations.  They are not available to non-EU countries.  Places like Napa, Santa Barbara, Willamette Valley and the Finger Lakes could not be assured that their names were protected in the EU.  This is because the EU regulations required non-EU countries to also protect EU products (e.g. Chianti, Chablis, Champagne and a number of non-C places).  As the US and others did no such thing, their products did not qualify for EU protection.  Now the EU is being forced (due to a WTO ruling forced on them by Australia and the US) to open the protection they already offer to 720 of their own products to outsiders as well. 
I am surprised that the EU had to be forced to open their system.  One would think that it would be in their best interest to export the system as much as possible.  Yet, whatever the reason, I hope that the opening of the GI system (expected to be approved later this year) provides opportunities for US wine growing regions to gain protection in the EU.  At the very least, it would assure that no Sonoma's from Austria would pop up.  In the best case scenario, there would be increased pressure on the US government to better protect its own regions (and not force the growers of Napa Valley to go to court to protect their name against wine labeled "Napa Ridge" when it is from some other place).  In either case, the consumer who wants to know where their wine comes from wins.

Fewer Bordeaux AOCs?

Interesting news from Bordeaux.  As many know, the AOC system has been under attack for causing consumer confusion -- particularly in the key UK and US markets.  This has been one of the reasons sited for the downturn in the general French wine industry.  In response a number of the appellations in Bordeaux -- where there have been reports of a 25% downturn in previous years -- are banding together to simplify the AOC system while still allowing distinct village names to appear on the bottle. 

Decanter reports:

Bordeaux 5 Côtes new single appellation 

The five Bordeaux Côtes are looking to create a new, simpler AOC in a bid to make their wines easier for the consumer to understand.

In a decision which would streamline Bordeaux's 57 appellations, the new AOC, comprising Côtes de Bourg, Côtes de Blaye, Côtes de Castillon, Côtes de Franc and Premiere Côtes de Bordeaux will be called Côtes de Bordeaux.

It would allow for consistent labeling displaying both the new title, and the more precise origin, such as 'Castillon: Côtes de Bordeaux Controlée'.

Christophe Chateau, director of the Cinq Côtes Association, told decanter.com, 'Our aim is to simplify things for the consumer. These regions have a lot in common – all are Right Bank, largely Merlot-based, and largely approachable, fruit-driven wines. With better consumer recognition, they have great potential on the export market.'

He added that the regions represent 16% of Bordeaux production, and 85% are currrently sold to the French market.

'They are not helped by their fragmented image. A unified AOC would be very interesting to négotiants and brand owners.'

Four of the five regions have agreed to the plan. Only Côtes de Bourg is resisting, where a spokesman told the local paper, 'There's no guarantee that the new AOC will be successful, and we want to keep the choice over our identity. If it works, then we will be happy to join.'

The dossier is with INAO (the National Institute of Appellations), and a final decision will not be reached until later this year, but Chateau hopes that the new AOC will be created in time for the 2006 harvest. He suggested that If Côtes de Bourg does not join, the others would continue without it.

Starting the new year with Corie Brown

Happy New Year!
After a longer than expected hiatus, we are back. The end of the vacation from the blog (and things like work) is prompted by: a. real life schedule and b. Corie Brown's article on Mendoza and Paul Hobbs in this Sunday's LA Times.  As life is not so interesting, this post will focus on Ms. Brown's article titled "Putting Place in a Glass."

In particular, want to focus on how much impact one person (or even a few people) can have on defining "place" in the wine world.  Mendoza is a perfect example because, as the LA Times story states,

Politically isolated and economically crippled by its tumultuous history of erratic despots, Argentina and its wine industry were frozen in their last hopeful decade, the 1930s. As for the wines, they were pure plonk—oxidized elixirs made in decrepit wineries and sold by the jug for a few pesos. Argentines drank them by the barrel, unaware that wine could taste different, much less better.

Then came Paul Hobbs.  I'm always wary of such stories as all wine growing seems to be a community based activity, yet the LA Times says that Hobbs had a big influence on the changes that took place in what is now one of the most interesting wine growing regions in the world. 

Hobbs, so the story goes, taught them about pruning, oak barrels, oxygenation, etc.  He even sent some of them to California to learn about US winemaking practices. 

In the end, he makes some of Argentina's best wines.  Personally think they are too heavy in alcohol, but that is not relevant as his Los Cobos continues to impress critics year-after-year despite its extraordinarily high price -- $150.   

Yet did he really "Put place in the glass" as the LA Times claims?
By capturing the essence of a particular place, I am convinced that Hobbs clearly makes wines that could only come from Mendoza. 

However, is he the standard bearer for all of Mendoza? I'm not sure for the following reasons:

1. He is not really an industry leader -- I would expect this list of names to include Catena, Archaval-Ferrer, Susana Balbo, and the leaders of Altos Los Hormigas, Terrazas, Salentein, Ruca Malen and even Luigi Bosca. 
2. He makes a tiny amount of wine.
3. His best wines are Cabernet Sauvignon, not the Malbec that distinguishes Argentine wine.  In fact, Hobbs is quoted as saying ""You have to make a great Cabernet to be taken seriously."

So why is featured in the LA Times?
Why not a Catena or some of the smaller Argentine winemakers who are well known yet better epitomize the struggle of making wine in Argentina?  Because Hobbs has made it in the States and is a bit of a hometown story for the Times (Sonoma isn't Orange County, but you get the idea).

Yet, despite its flaws, this story is a great window into the perspective of one winemaker in a new land as well as the massive changes that Argentina's wine region have undergone in the last 10 years... making it one of the great places to watch. 

Vacation

As you may have noticed, we are away from the computer.  Should be back just after the Christmas holiday.  To all, Merry Christmas and see you closer to the new year!

Countries that export have little negotiating leverage

On rereading my last post, I was struck at the disparity of wine trade around the world.  Australia exports $3 billion in wine to the EU.  The EU exported $2.3 billion to the US in 2004.  The US shipped only $736 million to the EU (its largest non-North American export market).  Can these numbers be right?

When one looks at the trade agreements (EU-Australia and US-EU) it is pretty clear that the country that exports the most gives up the most at the negotiating table as their politicians can't afford any strategies that could hinder trade in any way as it would hurt their own businesses and farmers most.  Australia gives into EU demands, yet the EU gives into US demands as neither Australia nor the EU want anything to interrupt their very lucrative wine export businesses.

US vs Australia: Opposing industry views on gaining access to EU market

As we have discussed before, the EU has signed (or is signing) wine agreements with both Australia and the US.  Yet the differences in the agreements tell a lot about the different industry perspectives in these two "New World" countries.

When Australia signs an agreement that ends the use of terms such as "Champagne" on the label they say (quoted from ABC Rural):

Steven Strachan, from the Winemakers Federation of Australia, says the agreement should lead to more Australian exports to Europe.

"We get certain outcomes in their marketplace which make our ability to sell wine into Europe a whole lot better and from our industry's perspective of course it is a very strong positive thing," he said.

"We already sell $3 billion of exports we've got aspirations to do more of course and deals like this make it easier."

While the US industry ends the use of these names in the future while allowing the Korbel's and André's of the world to continue this practice saying:

(paraphrase) We must protect the rights of those who have used these names for many years and this agreement allows us to do this while still expanding access to the all important EU market. 

Sounds like the Australian ($3 billion in exports to the EU) industry is more interested in actually getting their wines into the market while the US industry wants to protect these names even though no European consumer would purchase anything that was labeled "California Port."  Don't think this is the primary reason for only $489 million in US wine is sold in the EU, but it can't be a factor that will help break down that barrier. 

Best sentence about the 1976 Paris tasting

With the release of a book on the "Judgment of Paris"  (you know the tasting where the California wines shocked the world and the French judges by outshining many of the most famous houses in France in a blind tasting) there has been a lot of discussion about this momentous occasion. And it was momentous as it gave American  wine real standing in the world and heralded the changes in the wine world that would take place in the 30 years that followed the famous event. 

However, many use this moment to speak for all French wines and all US wines.  That is where it gets a little dangerous and why I like the following sentence from Eric Asimov's column in the NYT today about a little French and US wine blind tasting he participated in this year.

As much fun as the tasting was, framing it as a competition makes it easy to lose sight of the fact that most of these wines - regardless of how they finished - were superb and thoroughly absorbing.

Nice to hear and be reminded that there are a lot of good wines out there to be tried and enjoying each and every one for its unique nature makes life all that more fun.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Couldn't have said it anywhere near as well

Guest columnist Richard Olsen-Harbich of Long Island's North Fork winery Raphael has a great piece on the importance of location -- everywhere around the world -- at the always interesting Lenndevours.

As he says:

Remember a merlot grape -- the same merlot grape -- grown in upstate New York or Sonoma or Bordeaux will not taste the same even if we used exactly the same processing techniques. It's the terroir stupid!
In our arrogance, we sometimes forget how little influence we have over the natural world. I want to know what goes into my wine if that’s not too much trouble. (And please don’t bother to tell me its organic -- that’s a topic for another post.) But when I’m enjoying wine from another region, I want to imagine what that part of the world smells like, tastes like and what the people drink. Maybe its because I can’t afford to travel there myself so enjoying the wine is the next best thing to being there.

As you think about going to pick up your turkey, take a read here.