Vol. 2 No. 29 Ignore my comments on alcohol removed wine!

Friends, I have to put this out, truly the last edition for 2016. The FRE wine I mentioned in the last missive is horrible. I spent the time since writing about it to research it and finally tried it last night! It is going back to the store!

Here is how alcohol removed wine is made: first, it starts out just like regular wine but then they use a tower cone, developed by the Aussie’s to remove the alcohol. The tower is about 20 feet high and the wine enters at the top and percolates down. As it moves it has a centrifuge effect so that the alcohol is extracted. This I thought was brilliant. Wouldn’t you think that if it started as 12% alcohol, they would merely have 88% as an end product. No, and here is where the Trinchero’s come in. Ever hear of White Zinfandel, an oxymoron as zin is a red grape with red juice? But Sutter Home found a way to pull the skins immediately and end up with a blush wine…most certainly not white (Beringer produced one called Eye of the Swan).

However, not satisfied with 88% of the wine, rather than add more alcohol removed wine they simply add grape juice instead…yes, unfermented grape juice. The result is neither fish nor fowl but something that tasted awful (foul?) to me. I tried a Red Blend, Merlot, and the Brut I mentioned. Frankly, they are not even worth the $5.50, so all are going back. It was sweet and velvety from the sugar (unfermented) in the finished (?) product, and definitely not potable wine. Well, I am finished at least with it. Mea culpa for recommending this plonk…not even alcoholic plonk at that! At least with plonk you can at least still get a buzz on which dulls the brain to the awful taste.

The question is: why, after going through the entire fermentation process plus adding an expensive step didn’t they simply add more of the alcohol removed wine? My hunch is it would have at least been palatable. One can hope.

Have a happy new year but don’t lose control of your brain…unless at least you are in your own home and not going to ruin someone else’s new year…and perhaps your own.

Best,

TB

 

Vol.2 No. 28 – are today’s wine prices sustainable?

Building on the theme of ‘good wine forcing out bad, globally’, there is far too much wine out there to allow prices on premium wines ($30+) to be sustainable (not to be confused with organic, sustainable, biodynamic).

Why? Consider that last year for the first time the biggest growing segment shifted from the $10 and under bracket (dominated by Two Buck Chuck), to the $10-20 range. As before, there was little to know growth in each level above $20!

therein lies the rub: more and more wines, aided and abetted by 90+ ratings are trying to price their, often unknown label with ‘comparable’ wines, of the same varietal and region, even though those wines have spent years establishing themselves. I have never seen so many new labels from so many regions that get a high rating (remember TB is opposed to paying attention to ratings since they may not be the same as you look for in a wine).

As a result, more and more labels are being seen on the internet, most notably at www.wtso.com, where you get great value, especially if you buy the number of bottles required (usually 3-4 depending on price), and no sales tax outside of New Jersey. They will even store your purchases for you in their temperature controlled warehouse for up to a year! But, while the savings are very good they are distorted by the ‘comparable value’ shown. Often these are not wineries at all but buyers of ‘sourced’ fruit, albeit often from name vineyards. But that also tells you something: why would someone who owns say the Bien Nacido vineyard sell it elsewhere IF they could sell all they produce?

Since 2008, high priced wines (except Bordeaux shipped to China, Burgundy’s and a few others), have seen declines in wine club membership…and don’t fool yourself, those are seeing it too….yes, even the $300 wines and higher…names you would recognize.

So, what is the solution, without cutting price and having a wine merchant, mainly a big box store, sell it for much less? Once that happens and the word gets out they cannot increase their prices…their future is cooked.

Enter China, and despite risks of copyright protection, at least no one in the U.S. knows what they are selling for, and the lack of transparency means that they will still be thought to be cult wines. Oops!

I will not tell the names of some of these cult wines but you would recognize many of them. Remember, a winery is about cashflow and storage costs eat heavily into that. TB’s advice: think hard before you get on the list of a highend cult wine. Also, keep looking in that $20-30 range for the best values. As TB has said before, once you get above $50, most people would not be able to perceive the quality.

Well, safely above my goal of averaging two issues a month (average), this will be the last issue for 2016. Best wishes for the New Year!

P.S. my wife stumbled upon  a non-alcoholic wine label, FRE. Correction, “alcohol-removed wine”. Hmmm, I found out the label is owned by Trinchero Family, behind Gallo, the second largest family owned wine business in the world. Contrasting to all the other ‘stuff’ out there, FRE, makes a Brut, and several others, including still wines. We bought it so we could celebrate the New Year with our grandson’s. Price: $5.50. Think of this: now you can have wine with dinner with friends who don’t drink alcoh9l for religious or other reasons. Will give you feedback, and hope you will do the same!

Vol. 2 No. 27…Screw it! No more, put a cork in it!…and why!

TB is a hopeless romantic…the bottle of wine, a candlelit dinner, presenting the bottle, extracting the cork, hearing that little ‘pop’ as it comes out of the bottle…you get the picture.

My first experiences with screw caps on wine (sic) were Thunderbird, Ripple, Boone’s Farm, Red Mountain, all with those damnable accompanying hangovers…the morning after the night before. But then TB grew up! No more screw caps…not now, not ever!

Fast forward 50 (FIFTY) years and look what we have: wine in a box! Wine in can’s! …but screw cap’s? No freakin’ way!

Remember these are no ordinary screw caps. They are technologically engineered (aka new and improved), and mandated by the problem of cork taint which impacts as many as one in ten bottles. Some say they have never had a ‘corked’ bottle, others who are super-sensitive have had several…in any event the wine smells ‘skunky’. Once you smell it, you won’t forget it.

Also, recall that most wine is drunk within 30 days of purchase, but what happens if you are a collector or merely like to age your wines…not fun to spend $100 or more on a bottle of wine and have it smell funny (TB is told that on very old bottles there is ‘bottle stink’ – an ugly phrase – but that unless it is tainted fades with the recommended decanting).

What to do about it? Re-cork it and return it to your retailer for a refund or replacement – chances are the second bottle won’t have it but it could. Again, if you have stored it for years you won’t have this option because it could be due to improper storage or other factors.

Now imagine you as a winemaker. You have done everything right; you try to get the wine to the apogee of what you want it to taste like and then you bottle it, and with expensive corks. While producers try to make the corks as consistent as possible.

Stelvin produces two caps.I was told about them by Graham Painter, the Founder and CEO of NZ Wine Navigator which is an importer (exporter to the U.S.). He said that they allow for an oxygen exchange, something I had not heard before, thus allowing the caps to breathe.

I went to the best source I know, Randall Grahm of Bonny Doon Vineyards. Not only is Grahm one of the luminaries of California wine and the first volume producer to use screw caps, eventually to all of his wines, both white and red!

Grahm explained to me that the producer of the caps/capsules is Stelvin. They, in turn, produce two capsules: Saranex, which is more ‘oxygen exclusionary’ and suitable for wines to be consumed relatively soon, and Saratin, which is slightly less exclusionary than a standard cork but about the same as a premium cork, and thus requires slightly less Sulfur Dioxide (which some drinkers cannot tolerate, as with herbicides or insecticides). He adds that in the barrel, oxygen exchange is approximately 1ppm per month!

Back to the winemaker: he/she decides the optimal time to bottle the wine. Changes due to oxidation are not desirable, except over long periods of time. For this reason, vintage Ports are bottled young, after just 6 months to 1 year in barrel, and that is why they shouldn’t be consumed for twenty years or more, hence the English custom of buying a ‘pipe’ when a child is born assuring that they will have some of it for the rest of their lives – how big is a pipe? It is a barrel of 550 litres!!! FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY LITRES. We Americans should be so lucky.

So, will Stelvins replace corks? Given the fact that it takes years for a cork tree to regrow its bark, and the increased demand for corks, especially premium ones, winemakers are turning to synthetics and plastics. TB’s bet is it’s the screw cap that wins out. I have opened too many bottles where the cork has deteriorated and some that were obviously ‘corked’. A skilled sommelier can open one without it appearing to be a screw cap. Time will tell…but to me, it is what is inside that counts, right?

TB ©2016

Vol. 2 No. 26 – are 90+ ratings worth the price?

There is a popular website, Wine Till Sold Out (wtso.com), mentioned in post 24. I have used it and recommend it but with a caveat: every wine they offer has at least a 90 point rating. They are offered at deep discounts to the ‘retail price’. I am not challenging them on it being accurate, I am saying that when a wine gets a 90+ rating (and if you can’t get at least one from the dozens of raters out there – some with self-serving interests – you shouldn’t be in the business!), the winery ‘creates’ a suggested retail price that ‘they’ cannot sell below which is why you shouldn’t buy wine when visiting a winery unless it is hard to get. If you really like the wine then join their wine club. One reason I do like buying direct is that the haircut is huge due to our three-level marketing system which serves no one well, least of all the producer and the consumer.

A couple of years ago, a friend with a highly respected, but small winery, noted that when the high ratings, especially by Robert Parker, come out, the price of the wine is no longer surging. It may be at the winery which is trying to capitalize on the rating but not like before. Furthermore, just because it is priced at $50-100 doesn’t mean it will be bought there. That is a function of so many wines receiving ratings of 90 or above.

Just in the past year or so the fastest growing segment of the wine market in the U.S. finally moved up from the under $10 range, to the $10-20 range, which is good, although that isn’t hurting Two Buck Chuck much. In post 25, my Ten Commandments of Wine, I suggested moving up a notch and seeing if you can notice an appreciable difference. I also suggested that very few except true enophiles can find differences above the $30-40 range, and fewer still above $50.

This bring me back to WTSO: the savings are incredible – from the winery-set price – but most of the wines I see there I have never heard of before, meaning many are buyers of fruit, make the wine, using time-tested formulas for 90 point ratings (again, let me emphasize my dislike of the 100 point system, and preference for the UC Davis 20 point system). Most of those ratings are achieved by following Robert Parker’s taste buds.

Don’t misunderstand, prior to Parker, there was no quantification (except in tastings at fairs, etc. or the famous Judgment of Paris tasting which brought California wines to the fore. What he did was to set a standard of quality. Originally, many wines received ratings of 86-90, fewer 90-95, and only a handful above that with only a couple of 100 point ratings. Now, a winemaker who can’t expect a 90 rating wouldn’t think of submitting her wines for close scrutiny, because as one store owner quipped, “I can’t sell any wines with an 89 point rating, but I can sell all the wines with a 90 point rating, but I can’t get them.”

So, as TB has been fond of saying: globally, good wine is chasing out bad (TBC excepted). But it has now reached absurdity since most couldn’t discern the difference between an 87 point wine and a 90 pointer.

Think of a ’90’ as being the initiation fee at a club. Those achieving it either ‘jack up’ the price immediately, or in the case of a well-known brand like Lafite-Rothschild, the demand from the Chinese does it for them. Bordeaux producers making large volumes of wine set their price and sell all of it (albeit no longer in the U.S. and U.K., the former principal purchasers), but the ability for other producers to do that has dissipated due to the huge number of competitors. Remember too, that a rating is on the ‘type’ of wine or the varietal, which you may or may not like. A good friend, cannot stand and recognizes any Pinot Noir and won’t/can’t drink it. I know, we have tried repeatedly to fool him and it almost makes him sick…must be some chemical inherent in the wine (?).

So now you have millions of gallons of wine in warehouses (expensive), in the producers cellars (taking up valuable space), and on retailers shelves. What’s a winemaker to do? Enter WTSO, which from what I can determine is one of the few that is approved of by the producers (based on limited questions).

Imagine you are a producer with a big inventory overhang. You could offer them to a distributor at a low price (provided the wine is not being offered publicly, such as an older vintage), for a pallet (roughly 50 cases or 600 bottles), and get immediate cashflow – the mothers milk of a winery. WTSO, unlike Trader Joe’s or other retailers, will offer it on their site, but they are generally up for an hour or less before being ‘sold out’.

The offering looks like this:

93 Pt. La Mannella Brunello di Montalcino 2011
93 rating and 65% off!

Free Shipping on 3 or more
Comparable Price*: $85.00
Yesterday’s Best Web Price (With Shipping): $N/A
Our Price:

$29.99

Buy Now
wine bottle Description
Appellation Brunello di Montalcino
Unit Size 750 ml
Varietal/Grapes Sangiovese
Vintage 2011
Country Italy
Region Tuscany
Alcohol Content 14.50

Here are the key points:

1.Comparable Price – nebulous because most have no ‘comparable’. Do they mean what it would cost in a wine shop? Winery (they used to say ‘retail price’ which was the one set by the winery per law).

2.Yesterday’s Best Web Price – lately they are like this one with a strikeout through the price, so it is useless.

3. Their price and discount to the ‘comparable price’. Also the number of bottles you need to purchase to get free shipping – a very good deal! the number of bottles required for this is inversely proportional to the price (i.e. $100= 1 bottle; $20 = 3 bottles, etc.)

4. The point rating can come from any number of critics, WTSO members (?), Wine Spectator, Wine Advocate, etc., so you have to know which ones are reliable and which have their own interests at heart.

Before you think this is a scam consider, that it is an offering price, you have all the information you need (and some you don’t) to make an informed decision. That is all that business ethics require. I have purchased wine from them and found contacting customer service easy and responsive. I purchased some wine that was delivered in extremely hot weather. When I checked the bottle temp it was 90 degrees! They replaced it for me at no cost and held it until I felt it was safe to deliver and pointed out that they will hold the wine for you for up to a year (they ship quickly so if you are going to be away for a few days have them hold it, since a signature is required).

The point is that they try to serve their clients needs (both buyers and sellers), and judging from the volume of transactions, do both well. You, the buyer get the wine at a reasonable price, while the producer helps cashflow without damaging the value of future offerings.

But if they have a dozen or more offerings each and every day, what does this tell you about the retail price? It is too high…that’s Econ 101!

That translates to value for you, but note that ‘cult wines’ don’t face this problem: they have member lists, usually full and not taking names, small production, perhaps 250 cases, and if you want that, and can afford it, go for it. Personally, I would rather see the winery get 100% of the retail price, rather than distributors (some of whom are less than reputable and some downright lazy). The problem with wine club membership is this: shipping adds greatly to the cost, but in many areas like Minnesota, where TB lives, you ae not going to be able to get many of the best wines without joining.

As the popular phrase goes, “it’s complicated”.

Hope you found this useful and remember to support wineries you like, local wine shops that provide information and tastings, and keep trying new wines and ‘inching’ up your prices, that goes for restaurants where the biggest markup is on the cheapest wines.

Best,

Trader Bill ©traderbillonwine.com 2016

 

 

 

Vol. 2 No. 25…TB’s 10 Commandments of Wine

I was talking with a wine shop owner and the term ’10 Commandments’ came out, causing TB to think about it. Here is the result:

  1. Thou shall not buy inferior wine because it’s cheap; only if that is what you prefer
  2. Thou shall not buy wine off the ‘wine wall’ in supermarkets, or big box stores; support your local wine merchants
  3. Thou shall not keep buying wine in the same price bracket (i.e. $5-10), without trying to move up ($10-20), until you find little difference in taste. For most people, once  you get above $30, the differences become more subtle
  4. Thou shall not serve red wines too warm or white wines too cold, thus bringing out the flavors
  5. Thou shall ignore those numerical ratings unless you have found a wine critic whose tastes are similar to your; do not adapt your taste to the critic
  6. Thou shall not buy cheap wine then go to a restaurant and pay $30 for a bottle of cheap wine; when possible bring your own bottle and pay the corkage fee
  7. Thou shall not bring a wine off the shelf of any restaurant, and check to see their corkage policy before bringing any wine
  8. Thou shall not bring a bottle of wine to a dinner and expect your wine to be served; it is at the option of the host who may have planned out wines paired with the meal.
  9. Thou shall not turn up your nose at a bottle of wine given you as a gift, or served by a host at their home; accept it as it was intended – like it or not!
  10. Thou shall not be a ‘wine hog’ at a restaurant dinner to get more than your share of the bottle; and if asked to pick the wine either survey the guests on price, or pick up the tab for it yourself

Just ten? There must be more…and there are. Submit your own. Recall the film History of the World – Part II? Moses descending from the mount, with two tablets, each containing ten commandments? He drops one as he is speaking, saying: “I give you the twenty (drops one), ten commandments.”

So this list is in no way complete, but if it makes you stop and think, it has served its purpose.

Enjoy (wine)!

TB

Traderbillonwine.com Copyright©2016

 

Vol. 2. No.24…TB’s new, improved rating system for wines!

In 1972, TB graduated from college and taken a job at Western Bancorp (later First Interstate Bancorp and now part of Well Fargo), in the Investment Department where he and his boss and mentor, F. Alden Damon, managed the bond portfolios of the 11 smaller banks. Those were largely comprised of municipal bonds, so he learned to distrust Moody’s and S&P bond ratings as they were higher for similar credits on the East Coast than west of the Mississippi.

Deciding to go back to school to work on a Master’s, at night, he had a finance class that required a term paper. He submitted one on “A New System for Rating Municipal Bonds”. The prof questioned him on it and said if you pursue it don’t expect a good grade, because Moody’s and S&P already do that. Really? Frustrated but determined to continue with the project he worked on it, drawing on some research of a predecessor at WBC. Focusing on New York City, TB showed how that rating should have been much lower than the ‘A’ it carried, for many reasons including demographics, amount of debt service, and several other factors. Figuring he would probably get a ‘B’ or even a ‘C+’, he didn’t put his heart into it. In other words an adequate job but not a stellar one, thanks Dr. Dunn!

When the papers were graded, mine had an ‘A1/A+’ on it…huh??? Furthermore, he told the class it was the best he had received and even read it to the class. What caused his change of mind? NYC’s problems were finally coming out and it was on its way towards the biggest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history! What had the rating agencies done? Lowered it to ‘Baa/BBB)’. In other words, using ‘my’ rating system would have predicted dire if not drastic possibilities, while the agencies glossed over it.

What is the point? Well, besides prof’s needing to encourage new thought, it is that all ratings are not created equal. Nothing is more true than subjective tasting of wine.

Consider the Judgment of Paris tasting the showed the quality of California wines was on a par with French wines. Quel horror! Even then on the second pass when they reversed the order there was some differentiation but generally close, except for the French judge who called it a travesty. They were using a system similar to the UC Davis 20-point system mentioned in the previous post. Imagine if they had been using the Parker (or similar) 100-point system, where 50 is the base and after all elements, 25 points are subjective – that’s 1/4 of the total and 50% of the scoring area! Gimme a break!

Parker defends his system but adds (as mentioned in that post):

“Scores, however, do not reveal the important facts about a wine. The written commentary that accompanies the ratings is a better source of information regarding the wine’s style and personality, its relative quality vis-à-vis its peers, and its value and aging potential than any score could ever indicate.”  Robert M. Parker

Got that? They are meaningless comparing one rating with another on the same time, even under the same variables but when they are at different times independently, they are absolutely worthless!

Now drag that across, not the current three bond rating agencies, but perhaps two or three dozen wine critics with varying palettes and desired flavors (not to mention potential conflicts of interest by who they may represent – TB is shocked at this! Shocked!)

As mentioned in the prior blog, we have rating escalation (where no one tries to get you to buy a wine with a rating less than 90! So we have a lot of 91-93 ratings, fewer but still many 94-95 ratings and fewer still with 95-98 and 99-100 ratings. But even Parker has increased the number of 98-100 ratings since 1982 when he rated just two bordeaux wines that high. Here is a link to  a list of his 100-point scoring wines…you decide:  http://www.wine-searcher.com/robertparker.lml

So TB got to thinking. IF there is compression, we need a bigger scale. Here is TB’s proposal of a 1,000 point rating system!!! Consider that there would them be 100 categories of wines – 100 times the number in the current system. Imagine telling your friend that you own a 1,000 point wine and his is only a 980. What plonk that must be!

Here is a comparison to all three scales:

20-point       100-point                                         1,000 point

Appearance                            0-2                    0-5                                                     0-50

Color                                        0-2                     <             included in Appearance        >

Aroma/Bouquet                    0-2                    0-15                                                    0-150

Volatile Acidity                     0-2                     n/a

Total Acidity                          0-2                     n/a

Sweetness (sugar)               0-1                      n/a

Flavor (!)                                 0-1                    0-20                                                 0-200

Astringency                           0-1                      n/a

General Quality*                  0-2                    0-10                                                    0-100

*Only subjective category in UCDavis system; In 100-point it also included potential for further evolution and improvement – aging.

TB’s system has the advantage of making broader distinctions between a 94-95 point wine…TEN whole points…wow! Hopefully, you see this charade for what it is, because IF that became the norm, it would be even more impressive to say “my wine is a 950, yours is just a 940…peon!” But here is the incredible thing: even more price escalation! Because those ten points might now mean $50 more cost to the consumer! Yet it still might not impress if your guests tastes weren’t aligned with the raters.

UC Davis

17-20  Wines of outstanding character having no defects

13-16   Standard wines with neither outstanding character or defect

9-12     Wines of commercial acceptability with noticeable defects

5-8       Wines below commercial acceptability

Since Robert Parker’s was the first, here is his rating meanings:

  • 96-100 — Extraordinary; a classic wine of its variety
  • 90-95 — Outstanding; exceptional complexity and character
  • 80-89 — Barely above average to very good; wine with various degrees of flavor
  • 70-79 — Average; little distinction beyond being soundly made
  • 60-69 — Below average; drinkable, but containing noticeable deficiencies
  • 50-59 — Poor; unacceptable, not recommended

Here is a link that show the minor differences in various 100-point systems. if the same person was using any of the systems they should not vary by more than a point or two.  http://www.wine.com/v6/aboutwine/wineratings.aspx?ArticleTypeId=2

Now to throw a monkey-wrench into the works, here is a personal story: in 1976, TB moved to Reno, Nevada on a job transfer. We met lots of people but they only liked beer (guys) and wine coolers (girls). One day, one of them asked if I could teach them about wine. Having brought dozens of bottles with me in the car and wondering how they held up TB said he would do it, with one caveat: they would have to work. How so? They would have to score the wines using the UCDavis system which was the only one at the time. At first they balked, but reluctantly agreed. There were eight wines in the tasting, and it was amazing how close their scores were when they had to evaluate the variables of the wine. As a ringer however, TB inserted a bottle of Gallo Hearty Burgundy at the end. Bingo! That one took best overall.

So what did we learn? That differences in preferences can be overcome by paying attention to everything that comprises a wine…to hell with the critics. This is especially true when a winemaker can take his wine to a lab in Napa, Bordeaux, or other places and be told what they need to do to get a 90 rating from Parker. That is the problem with ‘Parkerization’. Question: do you want to live in a world where all the wine tastes the same? Not TB!

As they were leaving, they asked TB to arrange a trip down to Napa Valley. It was agreed but as they were leaving one friend came up quietly and said that his uncle owned a small vineyard there and we could probably visit it. Oh sure, no problem the then-wine snob, TB said. Only when we got down there did we find out that his uncle was Joe Heitz! His wines were the most coveted in California at the time. We spent a lovely Sunday on their deck drinking Riesling with sausages from the Sonoma Cheese Factory (there was none in Napa at the time!). Then Joe and Alice took us on a tour of the winery culminating with a tasting of their wines, including the 1974 Martha’s Vineyard Cab. TB loved it so much he bought a case at $25 a bottle…most expensive wine I had bought at the time! It was so good, however that whenever we had someone over we had a bottle…until there was just one left. Never drank it and finally sold it at auction for $800, more than recovering my cost of the entire case (also sold a bottle of 1992 Screaming Eagle, it’s first vintage made by Heidi Peterson Barrett, for $1,200 – a Jeroboam sold at the Napa Valley Wine Auction for $500,000, the highest price ever for that auction – along with many 1982 Bordeaux I bought on Parker’s recommendation but didn’t personally care for as did some of my friends who also bought futures. That was the vintage that ‘established’ Parker as the reigning guru, Robert Finnegan, had panned it, and was over-ruled by Parker.

What does TB drink today? Mostly wines in the $20-$40 range except for wines that are bought from the winemakers who have the passion I want. Not big estates, not corporate owned entities. Wines that taste different from year to year and are produced for the pleasure of the owner/winemaker…not some critic.

Another lengthy one but hope you found it interesting…and useful.

TB