One old man asked me, another old man, “At your ripe old age, what would you prefer to get—Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s?” The answer was quite easy: Parkinson’s. Better to spill half an ounce of wine than forget where you put the bottle. (Thanks to email—the real source.)
One wine judging season ended in mid-November and the new one kicks off right after New Year’s with the San Francisco Chronicle Wine Competition. Have we learned anything? Has the public benefited? Has it helped wineries sell more wine? In theory, the latter is the real reason to enter competitions. But in reality, my cynical nature says the most important reason is for the sponsors to make money.
Competitions originally started out as fund-raisers for sponsoring nonprofit groups. Today, several are sponsored by private enterprise with the goal of making a profit. It isn’t inexpensive to hold a competition. There are facility rental fees, judges’ transportation and lodging, up-front administrative costs and lots of little things. It’s interesting that most of the real work (putting the event physically together) is done by volunteers—who are paid in wine.
With the exponential increase of competitions, wineries need to evaluate each by asking themselves if the cost will justify the benefits. Obviously, you hope the ensuing publicity will benefit sales, but, one of the biggest problems for the sponsors is to get that publicity. One answer is to be sure you have enough wine writers as judges to help spread the word. Shelf talkers in retail locations will help (you hope) as well as award displays in your tasting room and winery-generated publicity through wine clubs and in other ads and promotions. Still the costs remain high. A typical entry fee is about $70, and four to six bottles of each entered wine must be shipped to the judging location.
In looking at the results of the last few wine competitions, I see some trends developing. First, the truly high-end wineries don’t seem to ever enter. I’m sure their thought is that, if you’re considered a king, don’t take a chance and let some judges say otherwise. Wouldn’t it be embarrassing for a high-end wine to only get a bronze medal against some $20 wines getting golds? In other words, don’t prove what a lot of us already know—that BS will outshine facts in a publicity-driven industry.
Second, I see the emergence of a lot of regions whose wines have quite rapidly improved and the difference in wine quality in other areas of the United States and the world are quickly being recognized. Midwest and East Coast wines are no longer the sweet, over-fruity ones we once associated with Mogan David and such. The Seyval Blancs, Vidals, Chardonnels and Traminettes are very sound, dry wines. The biggest advances are in Missouri and Virginia as well as our northern neighbors of Oregon and especially Washington, where the reds are not just good, but excellent. Other states, as they continue to improve, could slowly cut into California wine sales in those areas.
There are also some new varieties developed that grow very well in those areas such as Brianna and the Chardonnel I mentioned earlier. The New York Finger Lakes area is producing some outstanding dry Rieslings, and British Columbia has some wonderful white wines.
Third, I find it very surprising that a tremendous amount of gold and silver medals are being garnered by the “big boys”—those wineries we turn our nose up to thinking they aren’t good enough for us. Gallo and Bronco Wines, each with a truckload of labels, won a total of 95 medals—including nine golds.
Mendocino, the county trying to be recognized as a premium wine region, was represented only by its own big three (Mendocino Wine, Fetzer, and Weibel) and won 41 medals. (I didn’t include the Anderson Valley wineries, which did an excellent job winning many gold medals. They don’t consider themselves Mendocino County! Maybe they’re smarter than we think.) I’ve repeatedly stated that if Mendocino wants to get recognized, it better get going by entering and winning some major wine competitions. I also think that getting recognized as a premium wine area is the reason Midwest and East Coast wineries enter competitions. Each year, you see more and more of them winning sweepstakes, double golds and golds, which is beginning to show that they really can compete with Goliath (also known as California).
There have been numerous marketing studies and surveys done recently that show shelf talkers with medals on them do help sell wine. Also a long list of awards on websites seems to be very helpful. Displaying medals during public tasting events also seems to help by raising the state of mind before tasting: “Gee, look at all of these medals, the wines must be good.”
Last, I think I need to emphasize that the results of any single competition shouldn’t be taken as God’s truth. Excellent wines can get lost and bad wines can win at any given time. You need to look at several results to really establish excellent wines from mediocre ones. Overall, wine competitions are useful for publicity purposes but will never replace the ultimate judge—you—when deciding a wine is good or bad. I’ve also learned that price is the least reliable judge on whether a wine is good or not. There are a tremendous number of $15 to $20 wines out there that are far better than a lot of $50 wines. Remember that availability and cult status create expensive wines.
I hope that, as many of you travel around the country, you’ll stop and visit the wineries and see the great strides they’ve made. The same could be said about other new world countries’ wines. Believe it or not, watch for Greek wines, which are beginning to show up on wine store shelves now. Thank God they realized that all wines do not need to contain retsina like they used to. Those of you who want to kill your palate (and maybe yourselves) can try some Ouzo—a Greek, grappa-style product.
Homework this month should be to try some Mendocino County wines and see why they are either not entering, or, at minimum, not winning any medals. Remember, you really are the ultimate judge and it’s your money that makes winners and losers in the end.
