NoBullGrape

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.