Dr. Harry Oldman recently got back into town after spending the past few weeks in Florida to help knock on doors before the March 15 primary. He tells me he had a successful time and drank some fantastic wine, but something has been bothering him. He just had to get this off his chest.
A website devoted to Colorado Wine and beyond.
Showing posts with label Bloggers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bloggers. Show all posts
Monday, March 28, 2016
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Dr. Oldman won't shut up about the Wine Bloggers Conference
Forgive me. I tried to talk him out of it, but he was insistent on chiming in again on the Wine Bloggers Conference.
Oh boy did I miss out by not attending the Wine Bloggers Conference this year. I saw a few bloggers complain about one of the sessions that was dubbed the, "grand-fatherly white male traditional print writer" session. That sounds like the perfect seminar to me, so I investigated a little more. Turns out that there was a second session dedicated to other older white male experts! Hot diggity! I was totally off in my initial assessment. Earlier this week, I watched a Youtube video of another seminar at the Wine Blogger's Conference titled, "How the Pros Taste." Oh, this gem could have been simply titled, "How to be Professional." I expect well-organized workshops at the Frontiers of Computational Physics Conference (which by the way is in Zurich next June if you're interested), but not at a conference devoted to the lowly art of blogging.
Oh boy did I miss out by not attending the Wine Bloggers Conference this year. I saw a few bloggers complain about one of the sessions that was dubbed the, "grand-fatherly white male traditional print writer" session. That sounds like the perfect seminar to me, so I investigated a little more. Turns out that there was a second session dedicated to other older white male experts! Hot diggity! I was totally off in my initial assessment. Earlier this week, I watched a Youtube video of another seminar at the Wine Blogger's Conference titled, "How the Pros Taste." Oh, this gem could have been simply titled, "How to be Professional." I expect well-organized workshops at the Frontiers of Computational Physics Conference (which by the way is in Zurich next June if you're interested), but not at a conference devoted to the lowly art of blogging.
Monday, July 14, 2014
Dr. Harry Oldman on the Wine Bloggers Conference
With the 2014 Wine Bloggers Conference wrapping up over the weekend, I heard from Dr. Harry Oldman, my extern. I was actually looking forward to attending this year, but my wife was in Panama for a conference and I had to stay home with Ben. Having never attended a WBC, I don't have a whole lot to say about the event, but Dr. Oldman was insistent on chiming in. I know I shouldn't give the crotchety old guy the attention he wants, but I suppose everyone is entitled to their opinions.
So, apparently the Wine Bloggers Conference was held this past weekend in Santa Barbara County. I don't consider myself a blogger (more of a human chameleon that can become a master at whatever I choose), so the big event wasn't on my calendar. You know how I found out about the conference? I saw it all over the news. ABC, CNN, FOX and NBC all picked up on the story. It was all Bill O'Reilly and Brian Williams were talking about over the weekend. Even Wine Spectator published a special issue on the conference that arrived this morning.
So, apparently the Wine Bloggers Conference was held this past weekend in Santa Barbara County. I don't consider myself a blogger (more of a human chameleon that can become a master at whatever I choose), so the big event wasn't on my calendar. You know how I found out about the conference? I saw it all over the news. ABC, CNN, FOX and NBC all picked up on the story. It was all Bill O'Reilly and Brian Williams were talking about over the weekend. Even Wine Spectator published a special issue on the conference that arrived this morning.
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Do wine sales matter for writing wine blogs?
Yesterday, Joe Roberts wrote about one of the most commonly cited criticisms of wine blogs. An argument that many critics use to support their claim of wine blogs' insignificance is that blogs do not move consumers to buy wine and are thus useless to wineries trying to sell wine. I have no idea how many people use my blog to make purchase decisions, and frankly I do not care. I do know that I have purchased wines based on recommendations from other blogs, as well as recommendations from traditional wine publications (Wine Spectator, Wine Advocate, et al.). I buy wine for many different reasons.
Friday, February 7, 2014
The Daily Grind...
Writing a wine blog can be a difficult endeavor. I have the utmost respect for those individuals that are able to publish something on a daily basis. A few blogs are the result of a collection of collaborators, but many are lone writers typing away every single day. I'd love to be able to write every day, but I just can't. While my blog sometimes gets in the way of my life, my life gets more in the way of my blog.
I have a job, a wife, a child and a house to take care. The cats and chickens are easy when compared to all of those other things, but they take work too. I'd be willing to bet that most wine writers that are able to publish daily have few of those responsibilities. I'm sure some do, and probably even more! The hardest part, but also best, of my life has to be the 2-yr old that is sitting next to me as I type this. 2-yr olds require near constant attention (if you expect them, and your belongings, to be safe). When I am home, and thus able to write, my attention is usually not directed at my computer. Diverting a few moments here and there to Twitter is much easier than spend a decent chunk of time typing on this keyboard (which coincidentally is missing the comma key because of a curious little boy...) when feeding, entertaining and cleaning up after the little guy are necessary. Before Ben was born I used to write at night before bed. But now, after he has gone to sleep, I usually just want to turn my brain off and watch television. Over the past year, I've been lucky if I've posted something once a week. Now, I'm not trying to get any sympathy. I understand that I could watch less TV or sleep less if I really wanted to publish more blog posts. My lack of ability for posting more often makes what others do even more impressive.
Time isn't the only limiting factor. Coming up with ideas is almost as difficult as finding the time to put those ideas into a form that other people might want to read. Yes, I do respect the writers that are able to write something every single day. I don't care if some of the topics are repetitive, banal or vexatious, daily publishing is still impressive.
I started this blog as more of a journal to catalog my exploration of the wine world. I would write about the wines that I drank, but I a grew tired of just writing tasting notes with no real bigger picture than just promoting a wine. I do receive a small number of sample wines and taste them with every intent of writing about them, but unless I find the wine really interesting and fitting into a bigger topic I am unlikely to just write a tasting note. Now if I were to start receiving more samples, then then topics such as comparing similar wines from different regions might be more reasonable stories. One successful tasting series was Ben's Bubbly. When my son was born, I added a weekly topic that focused on tasting sparkling wines from around the world, as well as documenting Ben's growth. It was a fun series, and one that I am considering bringing back, although with a different style of wine.
I tried to do a regular interview with Colorado winemakers, but that ran its course when I couldn't get any more responses from more winemakers. It is frustrating that so few Colorado vintners keep up with the world of wine writing. That idea morphed into a series of interviews of American vintners over on Decanter.com, but ever since an editorial change a few months ago I have been unable to continue with that (in fact, two additional interviews were submitted but never published). I might also try to bring these interviews back to the blog in the the future if I can find interested winemakers.
One of my favorite new topics is the occasional "guest" posts by Dr. Harry Oldman and Remi Burmí. The posts by these two characters are more creative and humorous than traditional wine blogging. Plus, they provide a different perspective than I would normal provide. I can guarantee that both will continue as guest writers in the future.
Most of my recent posts are simply opinion pieces reacting to some news item or an other wine writer's articles. I know that across the blogosphere too many stories are about blogging and I am just as guilty as the next blogger. Social media, the 100-pt system and the alcohol content of wine seem to be some of the more discussed topics by digital and traditional writers alike. I happen to think that a healthy debate has its place in the wine world. I am not shy, especially when I disagree with someone. However, there is a lot of navel gazing in the world of wine writing, but that can be said about many other fields. Just look at tabloid journalism. All TMZ and the like "report" on is the illegal or absurd activity of a few celebrities. In academics, many peer-reviewed articles are researchers debating research methods and findings. Politics seems the same way these days. There is more name-calling and criticism, over the same few topics, than getting anything actually accomplished for the good of the country.
I'd love to get feedback from my readers as to what you want to read. I'd love to be able to publish on a daily basis, but that is most likely not going to happen. I do, however, want to try to be more active on my blog. Would more reviews be of interest? How about interviews with winemakers or even retailers? Would having posts published on the same day of the week be a good idea? Do you think Dr. Oldman or Ms. Burmí should be retired? Get more coverage? I really want to know how can I make this blog better. Please let me know in the comments!
I have a job, a wife, a child and a house to take care. The cats and chickens are easy when compared to all of those other things, but they take work too. I'd be willing to bet that most wine writers that are able to publish daily have few of those responsibilities. I'm sure some do, and probably even more! The hardest part, but also best, of my life has to be the 2-yr old that is sitting next to me as I type this. 2-yr olds require near constant attention (if you expect them, and your belongings, to be safe). When I am home, and thus able to write, my attention is usually not directed at my computer. Diverting a few moments here and there to Twitter is much easier than spend a decent chunk of time typing on this keyboard (which coincidentally is missing the comma key because of a curious little boy...) when feeding, entertaining and cleaning up after the little guy are necessary. Before Ben was born I used to write at night before bed. But now, after he has gone to sleep, I usually just want to turn my brain off and watch television. Over the past year, I've been lucky if I've posted something once a week. Now, I'm not trying to get any sympathy. I understand that I could watch less TV or sleep less if I really wanted to publish more blog posts. My lack of ability for posting more often makes what others do even more impressive.
Time isn't the only limiting factor. Coming up with ideas is almost as difficult as finding the time to put those ideas into a form that other people might want to read. Yes, I do respect the writers that are able to write something every single day. I don't care if some of the topics are repetitive, banal or vexatious, daily publishing is still impressive.
I started this blog as more of a journal to catalog my exploration of the wine world. I would write about the wines that I drank, but I a grew tired of just writing tasting notes with no real bigger picture than just promoting a wine. I do receive a small number of sample wines and taste them with every intent of writing about them, but unless I find the wine really interesting and fitting into a bigger topic I am unlikely to just write a tasting note. Now if I were to start receiving more samples, then then topics such as comparing similar wines from different regions might be more reasonable stories. One successful tasting series was Ben's Bubbly. When my son was born, I added a weekly topic that focused on tasting sparkling wines from around the world, as well as documenting Ben's growth. It was a fun series, and one that I am considering bringing back, although with a different style of wine.
I tried to do a regular interview with Colorado winemakers, but that ran its course when I couldn't get any more responses from more winemakers. It is frustrating that so few Colorado vintners keep up with the world of wine writing. That idea morphed into a series of interviews of American vintners over on Decanter.com, but ever since an editorial change a few months ago I have been unable to continue with that (in fact, two additional interviews were submitted but never published). I might also try to bring these interviews back to the blog in the the future if I can find interested winemakers.
One of my favorite new topics is the occasional "guest" posts by Dr. Harry Oldman and Remi Burmí. The posts by these two characters are more creative and humorous than traditional wine blogging. Plus, they provide a different perspective than I would normal provide. I can guarantee that both will continue as guest writers in the future.
Most of my recent posts are simply opinion pieces reacting to some news item or an other wine writer's articles. I know that across the blogosphere too many stories are about blogging and I am just as guilty as the next blogger. Social media, the 100-pt system and the alcohol content of wine seem to be some of the more discussed topics by digital and traditional writers alike. I happen to think that a healthy debate has its place in the wine world. I am not shy, especially when I disagree with someone. However, there is a lot of navel gazing in the world of wine writing, but that can be said about many other fields. Just look at tabloid journalism. All TMZ and the like "report" on is the illegal or absurd activity of a few celebrities. In academics, many peer-reviewed articles are researchers debating research methods and findings. Politics seems the same way these days. There is more name-calling and criticism, over the same few topics, than getting anything actually accomplished for the good of the country.
I'd love to get feedback from my readers as to what you want to read. I'd love to be able to publish on a daily basis, but that is most likely not going to happen. I do, however, want to try to be more active on my blog. Would more reviews be of interest? How about interviews with winemakers or even retailers? Would having posts published on the same day of the week be a good idea? Do you think Dr. Oldman or Ms. Burmí should be retired? Get more coverage? I really want to know how can I make this blog better. Please let me know in the comments!
Thursday, January 30, 2014
Dr. Harry Oldman: Damn right all these teetotalers should get out of my vineyard!
I really didn't want to weigh in on the recent Robert Parker rant, and I won't, but my extern, Harry Oldman, insisted that I publish what he has to say. Please, I'm just the messenger, so don't shoot me!
I can't sit idle any more and watch an idol be dragged through the mud. When I read Robert M. Parker, Jr.'s "Article of Merit," I stood up an applauded. I said, "Well, Parker's the best critic in the game! When you try him with a sorry wine like crappy trebbiano, that's the result you gonna get! Don't you ever talk about him! Crappy trebbiano! Don't anyone open their mouth about the best, or Bob's gonna shut it for you real quick! Legion of Boom!" Granted, I was alone in my living room drinking a delicious 2007 Châteauneuf-du-Pape, but it's the thought that counts. My balls are big enough, and sag low enough, that I am not afraid to stand by my man!
I can't sit idle any more and watch an idol be dragged through the mud. When I read Robert M. Parker, Jr.'s "Article of Merit," I stood up an applauded. I said, "Well, Parker's the best critic in the game! When you try him with a sorry wine like crappy trebbiano, that's the result you gonna get! Don't you ever talk about him! Crappy trebbiano! Don't anyone open their mouth about the best, or Bob's gonna shut it for you real quick! Legion of Boom!" Granted, I was alone in my living room drinking a delicious 2007 Châteauneuf-du-Pape, but it's the thought that counts. My balls are big enough, and sag low enough, that I am not afraid to stand by my man!
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Dr. Harry Oldman has a Surprise Holiday Interview...
Dr. Harry Oldman generously unwraps a spectacular interview for us on this Boxing Day.
Kyle, as an old white man with a beard, I felt that it was only appropriate that I give you and your readers a present this year, but I couldn't quite figure out what would be a good gift. Then it dawned on me! I'm friends with a moderately notorious wine critic and we talk fairly often about wine and life in general. He was kind enough to answer the kind of tough questions no one has ever had the balls to ask him. I felt like Katie Couric! He didn't know that I was going to publish the interview, and I don’t want to name names because I don’t have his permission, so I'll just refer to him as SHhh (as in I'll never tell!). You can guess, but I'll never reveal my source!
HARRY: Hey, buddy! Thanks for agreeing to answer some questions. I know how much you hate answering questions, so this really means a lot to me!
SHhh: No problem, anything for you Harry. I actually love to answer questions, almost as much as asking questions! I write for the consumer, first, foremost and always. So when my readers engage with me, I make it a point to always respond. I learn so much from my readers! Blogs and bulletin boards are supposed to be back-and-forths, right? I mean, we live in this new age of participatory journalism. It is not uncommon for me to comment on other blogs, too!
Kyle, as an old white man with a beard, I felt that it was only appropriate that I give you and your readers a present this year, but I couldn't quite figure out what would be a good gift. Then it dawned on me! I'm friends with a moderately notorious wine critic and we talk fairly often about wine and life in general. He was kind enough to answer the kind of tough questions no one has ever had the balls to ask him. I felt like Katie Couric! He didn't know that I was going to publish the interview, and I don’t want to name names because I don’t have his permission, so I'll just refer to him as SHhh (as in I'll never tell!). You can guess, but I'll never reveal my source!
HARRY: Hey, buddy! Thanks for agreeing to answer some questions. I know how much you hate answering questions, so this really means a lot to me!
SHhh: No problem, anything for you Harry. I actually love to answer questions, almost as much as asking questions! I write for the consumer, first, foremost and always. So when my readers engage with me, I make it a point to always respond. I learn so much from my readers! Blogs and bulletin boards are supposed to be back-and-forths, right? I mean, we live in this new age of participatory journalism. It is not uncommon for me to comment on other blogs, too!
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Guest post from my extern
I've turned this post over to my friend and psuedo-mentor, Harry Oldman.
Dr. Oldman has been in the wine business for decades. He used to be a computational physicist at a national laboratory in New Mexico, involved in computational fluid dynamics of wine. But after getting sidetracked on a trip to California by Randall Grahm, he has never been the same.
He shares his thoughts and opinions on wine and wine writing on various online wine boards, but I of course don't listen to what he has to say (you know, with me being a Millennial and all).
Since 1WineDude and The Hosemaster of WineTM have occasionally handed their blogs over to their interns, I figured I’d open my blog to this extern. Plus, this will allow me to put in extra hours on social media and get my beauty rest all at the same time.
So, with out any further ado, here is Dr. Oldman:
Dr. Oldman has been in the wine business for decades. He used to be a computational physicist at a national laboratory in New Mexico, involved in computational fluid dynamics of wine. But after getting sidetracked on a trip to California by Randall Grahm, he has never been the same.
He shares his thoughts and opinions on wine and wine writing on various online wine boards, but I of course don't listen to what he has to say (you know, with me being a Millennial and all).
Since 1WineDude and The Hosemaster of WineTM have occasionally handed their blogs over to their interns, I figured I’d open my blog to this extern. Plus, this will allow me to put in extra hours on social media and get my beauty rest all at the same time.
So, with out any further ado, here is Dr. Oldman:
Monday, October 7, 2013
Regional Wine Week, version 2013...
Yesterday marked the beginning of the 2013 edition of Regional Wine Week. This sixth annual event was started by DrinkLocalWine.com, a non-profit organization dedicated to "wines from lesser known areas — not because we don’t like California,
Oregon or Washington wines, but they get plenty of coverage in the
major wine magazines." Regional Wine Week is a chance for writers, bloggers or just regular consumers to share their thoughts and experiences on regional wine with the world. Accompanying Regional Wine Week this year is a photo contest. You can participate in the contest by sharing a picture, or three, on DLW's Facebook page.
It can be a photo from a visit to one of your favorite local wineries
or a bottle of regional wine you recently enjoyed with a good meal. Just take a picture, describe it in less
than 100 words, and post it to their Facebook wall for all of their friends to see, like, share, and comment on. Include the hash-tag #DrinkLocalWine with each entry so everyone can easily find your post.
I'd also ask you to do two things for Regional Wine Week. First, share a bottle of wine from one of your favorite local wineries with someone that might not be familiar with it, or even familiar with that region. Recommendations from friends can be very powerful. It doesn't take a positive critical review from Wine Advocate or Wine Spectator to make a wine worth drinking. In fact, those reviews might be harder to come by for regional wineries as Wine Spectator recently changed its policy on sample submissions and will no longer accept wines without prior approval from the tasting department. This means wines that aren't widely available across the country (i.e., small, family-owned regional wineries) won't as easily get in front of James Molesworth to be reviewed. This may not seem like a big deal, but it is another impediment for regional wineries to join the mainstream wine industry. If you have a local wine that you think your friends might enjoy, they'd probably take your recommendation over Molesworth's anyway.
My second request is to try a new wine from a local winery or from a region which you may have not yet tasted. There are always new wineries starting up, so finding a new winery might not be as difficult as you think. However, finding the wine might be. Today's no-name winery could be tomorrow's Screaming Eagle. Go to your local wine shop and ask for something local. If they don't carry any, suggest that should and tell them you'll be back to buy some when they do. Or better yet, look up wineries near you. You might be surprised to see a winery just down the street. Go in and visit them in person. Small wineries love to meet their local customers. Also, don't be afraid to try a unusual variety or blend. Many wineries not bordering the Pacific Ocean make different wines than you'd find in traditional wine country. If the wine is good, let them know by buying a few bottles. If the wine isn't so good, let them know as well. Be nice about it, but constructive criticism is the only way some wineries will be pushed to improve their product. Too often people do not let winemakers know when their wine isn't up to par. Also, never feel obligated to buy a bottle of wine that you don't like.
If enough people do these two little things (share a bottle with a friend and try a new wine or winery) it can make a real difference to regional wine as a whole. All 50 states have wineries and half of the country's wineries are located in a place other than California. These wineries just need a little encourage and support to make a name for themselves. And that is what Regional Wine Week is all about.
I'd also ask you to do two things for Regional Wine Week. First, share a bottle of wine from one of your favorite local wineries with someone that might not be familiar with it, or even familiar with that region. Recommendations from friends can be very powerful. It doesn't take a positive critical review from Wine Advocate or Wine Spectator to make a wine worth drinking. In fact, those reviews might be harder to come by for regional wineries as Wine Spectator recently changed its policy on sample submissions and will no longer accept wines without prior approval from the tasting department. This means wines that aren't widely available across the country (i.e., small, family-owned regional wineries) won't as easily get in front of James Molesworth to be reviewed. This may not seem like a big deal, but it is another impediment for regional wineries to join the mainstream wine industry. If you have a local wine that you think your friends might enjoy, they'd probably take your recommendation over Molesworth's anyway.
My second request is to try a new wine from a local winery or from a region which you may have not yet tasted. There are always new wineries starting up, so finding a new winery might not be as difficult as you think. However, finding the wine might be. Today's no-name winery could be tomorrow's Screaming Eagle. Go to your local wine shop and ask for something local. If they don't carry any, suggest that should and tell them you'll be back to buy some when they do. Or better yet, look up wineries near you. You might be surprised to see a winery just down the street. Go in and visit them in person. Small wineries love to meet their local customers. Also, don't be afraid to try a unusual variety or blend. Many wineries not bordering the Pacific Ocean make different wines than you'd find in traditional wine country. If the wine is good, let them know by buying a few bottles. If the wine isn't so good, let them know as well. Be nice about it, but constructive criticism is the only way some wineries will be pushed to improve their product. Too often people do not let winemakers know when their wine isn't up to par. Also, never feel obligated to buy a bottle of wine that you don't like.
If enough people do these two little things (share a bottle with a friend and try a new wine or winery) it can make a real difference to regional wine as a whole. All 50 states have wineries and half of the country's wineries are located in a place other than California. These wineries just need a little encourage and support to make a name for themselves. And that is what Regional Wine Week is all about.
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Maybe Steve Heimoff was right (I might have lost my mind...)
After giving it a week of thought, I'm going to argue something with which, on the surface, I adamantly disagree. Last week, my digital buddy, Steve Heimoff, wrote a blog post titled, "Saying Goodbye to the Golden Age of Wine Writing." His thesis was that with the rise of the "Age of Digital Information" (i.e., wine blogs) wine writers are finding it more and more difficult to earn a living writing about wine. He claims that the world of wine writing is no longer the utopia it was when he got into this profession and made a name for himself (I'd argue he actually has made his name via his blog and not as the California Editor for Wine Enthusiast Magazine). David White penned a great response to Steve's assertions and claimed that things are actually getting better in the world of wine writing. I wholeheartedly agree with David, but I want to take a deeper look into Steve's post.
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Everyone is a critic, and wineries should be listening!
The claim that "Everyone is a critic" is no longer a cliché, but a fact. Anyone can start a blog and write about wine. Anyone can post reviews on TripAdvisor or Yelp. Maybe you don't give these amateur critics an ounce of credibility, but many people do. Lots of people look to others for recommendations on what wine to taste or what winery to visit on their vacation. Wineries need to pay attention to how they are perceived by their customers, real and potential. Real customers are the ones giving those recommendations and potential customers are the ones using those recommendations on blogs, Yelp and TripAdvisor.
Out of curiosity, I decided to browse Yelp and TripAdvisor specifically for tasting room recommendations in the Grand Valley AVA of Colorado. I saw lots of positive and overly glowing reviews of most wineries. However, a few caught my eye and made me want to bang my head into a brick wall. Without naming names, I wanted to share three of these reviews, each about a different winery, with you.
1. This was by far the worst experience I have ever had at a winery. We arrived for a wine tasting about 35 minutes before their tasting room was scheduled to close, and there were still a few people at the bar doing wine tastings. We were immediately greeted by this man who seemed agitated that we were there, who rudely exclaimed that they had already closed their tasting room for the day. Since we had driven an extra half hour to visit their winery we pleaded with him to give us a tasting, at which time he got confrontational and ordered us to leave his establishment...
2. ...We bought a bottle - price is $38 - and stored it at correct temperature. Tasted it 3 month later and the wine had turned into a bad tasting vinegar not at all a Merlot or Port. It was visible the cork had visible holes and I think that is the reason for the spoiled wine. I contacted the winery and I only got a very arrogant email back - not really trying to help me much - so I know I would not taste nor buy any wine there - as what they present is not really what you get. A wine can go bad, but I think customer service is most important. Not found here.
3. ...Then she launched into a rant against the distillery next door and a few other wine makers. An elderly couple entered as this was going down and the phone rang. She took the call without greeting the newcomers and proceeded to gab loudly while walking towards the back of the warehouse. When it became obvious that she had no intention of coming back we left...
I still shake my head in disbelief every time I read these. All three of these reviews were uncalled for, not because of consumer critics gone wild but because each winery behaved in ways they should never behave. First, why would a winery turn away customers when they are open? Winery tasting room hours are an issue in Colorado. I've tried to visit a winery when it was supposed to be open, only to find the doors locked and the lights off. When customers take time out of their busy (or not busy, who cares) lives and are looking for reasons to give wineries money, wineries should treat them well. I can see no reason why a winery representative wouldn't want to open a fresh bottle at the end of the day for a group of people pleading to taste their wine (fine, maybe the legal requirement to not serve intoxicated individuals would be a good reason). You never know who the customer might be. I actually spoke with a restaurant owner about this same winery a year or two ago and he relayed a very similar story. He said that he would not serve this winery's products because of the poor customer service.
Ok, now on to the second review. Bad bottles happen. When they do, the winery should do the right thing and replace the bottle at no charge to the consumer. Maybe the next bottle would have been bad too, but the act of listening and caring is what this customer obviously wanted. As I will keep saying over and over, wineries are more in the customer service business than the wine business. Excellent customer service can go a long way. This review could have been glowing had the winery ponied up $38, plus shipping, to make the customer feel appreciated. It amazes me when I hear people complain that wineries or even restaurants won't take back product because of quality concerns. Just a few weeks ago, I tweeted that I was drinking a bottle of Two Shepherds Grenache. I described the bottle to the winemaker, who had responded to my tweet, and he said that the wine sounded off to him and he'd send a replacement bottle. I didn't even ask for him to do that, but that kind of proactive customer service is more likely to secure a loyal customer than an arrogant reply.
I used this third example not to illustrate more poor customer service, but unnecessary industry squabbling. The small alcoholic beverage producers in Colorado all have to work together. Why a winery would bash another winery is beyond me, yet I hear local vintners continually put down other vintners. Instead of focusing on the negatives, producers need to focus on the positives and grow together rather than competing against each other. Complaining about neighbors or industry partners just makes the complainer come across as petty. I know I'd rather support a winery that is support of their neighbors. Just as Robert Mondavi is famous for promoting California and Napa Valley above his eponymous winery, small Colorado producers need to start banding together and promoting each other.
As unfortunate and unnessary as each of those reviews were, wineries should be paying attention and do something about them. I still think negative reviews are the time when a winery's true customer service ability can shine. Thankfully, I was able to find an example of just this. I noticed that Jay Chrisitianson, owner and winemaker at Canyon Wind Cellars and Anemoi, responded to 95% of the reviews on TripAdvisor. To the positive reviews, Jay personally thanked the reviewer. To the one less-than-positive review, Jay thanked the reviewer for her comments and offered a solution to the complaint. Customer service doesn't get much better than that.
Wineries should not be afraid that customers might post bad reviews on blogs or TripAdvisor any more than they should be afraid of Wine Spectator publishing scores about their wines. Wineries need to adopt the mindset that every single customer interaction is the most important one. Try not to give consumers things to complain about, but when complaints happen (and they will) please act in an appropriate and kind manner. The goal of every winery shouldn't necessarily be to sell more wine, but make their customers sell it for them. There is nothing quite as powerful free brand ambassadors: consumers need to be thought of as part of your marketing department. In this age of social media, you may not know who your customers are or with whom they will communicate.
Out of curiosity, I decided to browse Yelp and TripAdvisor specifically for tasting room recommendations in the Grand Valley AVA of Colorado. I saw lots of positive and overly glowing reviews of most wineries. However, a few caught my eye and made me want to bang my head into a brick wall. Without naming names, I wanted to share three of these reviews, each about a different winery, with you.
1. This was by far the worst experience I have ever had at a winery. We arrived for a wine tasting about 35 minutes before their tasting room was scheduled to close, and there were still a few people at the bar doing wine tastings. We were immediately greeted by this man who seemed agitated that we were there, who rudely exclaimed that they had already closed their tasting room for the day. Since we had driven an extra half hour to visit their winery we pleaded with him to give us a tasting, at which time he got confrontational and ordered us to leave his establishment...
2. ...We bought a bottle - price is $38 - and stored it at correct temperature. Tasted it 3 month later and the wine had turned into a bad tasting vinegar not at all a Merlot or Port. It was visible the cork had visible holes and I think that is the reason for the spoiled wine. I contacted the winery and I only got a very arrogant email back - not really trying to help me much - so I know I would not taste nor buy any wine there - as what they present is not really what you get. A wine can go bad, but I think customer service is most important. Not found here.
3. ...Then she launched into a rant against the distillery next door and a few other wine makers. An elderly couple entered as this was going down and the phone rang. She took the call without greeting the newcomers and proceeded to gab loudly while walking towards the back of the warehouse. When it became obvious that she had no intention of coming back we left...
I still shake my head in disbelief every time I read these. All three of these reviews were uncalled for, not because of consumer critics gone wild but because each winery behaved in ways they should never behave. First, why would a winery turn away customers when they are open? Winery tasting room hours are an issue in Colorado. I've tried to visit a winery when it was supposed to be open, only to find the doors locked and the lights off. When customers take time out of their busy (or not busy, who cares) lives and are looking for reasons to give wineries money, wineries should treat them well. I can see no reason why a winery representative wouldn't want to open a fresh bottle at the end of the day for a group of people pleading to taste their wine (fine, maybe the legal requirement to not serve intoxicated individuals would be a good reason). You never know who the customer might be. I actually spoke with a restaurant owner about this same winery a year or two ago and he relayed a very similar story. He said that he would not serve this winery's products because of the poor customer service.
Ok, now on to the second review. Bad bottles happen. When they do, the winery should do the right thing and replace the bottle at no charge to the consumer. Maybe the next bottle would have been bad too, but the act of listening and caring is what this customer obviously wanted. As I will keep saying over and over, wineries are more in the customer service business than the wine business. Excellent customer service can go a long way. This review could have been glowing had the winery ponied up $38, plus shipping, to make the customer feel appreciated. It amazes me when I hear people complain that wineries or even restaurants won't take back product because of quality concerns. Just a few weeks ago, I tweeted that I was drinking a bottle of Two Shepherds Grenache. I described the bottle to the winemaker, who had responded to my tweet, and he said that the wine sounded off to him and he'd send a replacement bottle. I didn't even ask for him to do that, but that kind of proactive customer service is more likely to secure a loyal customer than an arrogant reply.
I used this third example not to illustrate more poor customer service, but unnecessary industry squabbling. The small alcoholic beverage producers in Colorado all have to work together. Why a winery would bash another winery is beyond me, yet I hear local vintners continually put down other vintners. Instead of focusing on the negatives, producers need to focus on the positives and grow together rather than competing against each other. Complaining about neighbors or industry partners just makes the complainer come across as petty. I know I'd rather support a winery that is support of their neighbors. Just as Robert Mondavi is famous for promoting California and Napa Valley above his eponymous winery, small Colorado producers need to start banding together and promoting each other.
As unfortunate and unnessary as each of those reviews were, wineries should be paying attention and do something about them. I still think negative reviews are the time when a winery's true customer service ability can shine. Thankfully, I was able to find an example of just this. I noticed that Jay Chrisitianson, owner and winemaker at Canyon Wind Cellars and Anemoi, responded to 95% of the reviews on TripAdvisor. To the positive reviews, Jay personally thanked the reviewer. To the one less-than-positive review, Jay thanked the reviewer for her comments and offered a solution to the complaint. Customer service doesn't get much better than that.
Wineries should not be afraid that customers might post bad reviews on blogs or TripAdvisor any more than they should be afraid of Wine Spectator publishing scores about their wines. Wineries need to adopt the mindset that every single customer interaction is the most important one. Try not to give consumers things to complain about, but when complaints happen (and they will) please act in an appropriate and kind manner. The goal of every winery shouldn't necessarily be to sell more wine, but make their customers sell it for them. There is nothing quite as powerful free brand ambassadors: consumers need to be thought of as part of your marketing department. In this age of social media, you may not know who your customers are or with whom they will communicate.
Monday, June 10, 2013
An antagonistic approach (a reputation you get when you question authority)
This weekend, a colleague of mine introduced me to a friend of his at the third annual Colorado Urban Winefest. Part of his introduction include a reference to my wine writing. He referred to me as an "antagonistic blogger." Both of those terms are used pejoratively in the world of wine writing. Now I have no problem being called a blogger. I write about wine on this blog. I have also contributed to Palate Press, Sommelier Journal, Wine Spectator and Decanter. So I am a wine blogger, and I also consider myself a wine writer.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
What the climate study actually said...
Last week, the wine writing world was ablaze with abject proclamations and naive denials about the predicted changes of the spatial distribution of viticulture suitability put forth by Hannah et al. (2013) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The idea that the Earth's climate is changing is indisputable. That those changes will affect viticulture is also incontrovertible. How those changes will manifest is up for debate. But all the writers and bloggers that had to put there two cents in about the article are missing the point of the study., as well as failing to critically analyze what was actually described.
First of all, the article was not focused on what will become of the world's wine regions. The study's goal was to estimate conservation conflicts in land use in areas currently not altered by viticulture. The researchers used a variety of environmental variables critical to viticulture to assess the spatial suitability under predicted conditions in 2050 (actually, the mean of 2041-2060) using 17 global climate models. The authors found that the areas currently suitable for viticulture may decrease and new areas at higher latitudes and altitudes may became suitable for production of Vitis vinifera winegrapes. They concluded that such a redistribution of wine production may result in substantial economic and conservation consequences in both areas.
Hannah et al. were not trying to sound any alarm bells in Napa. They were, however, trying to raise awareness for conservationists in the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Planning Area and other places potentially affected by future viticulture. They mentioned that investment in new varieties and changes in vineyard management could lead to innovative adaptions in extant wine production regions. While they mentioned that, they were not overly concerned with what may happen in Napa or Sonoma because they sought to estimate where grapevines might be planted in the future so that conservation strategies can be addressed in areas likely to be affected by potential indirect impacts of climate change (i.e., wine production).
Several other facts overlooked by many of the previous commentators include the parameters used to estimate suitability. First, the authors only used 21 common vinifera varieties. Now, we all know that there are way more than 21 varieties of vinifera grapes with varying degrees of environmental tolerance. And when you throw in the countless hybrids and non-vinifera species suitable for wine production, the potential for viticulture suitability is increased exponentially. This means that the loss of suitability in current regions is greatly exaggerated. Likewise, this also means that potential areas suitable for viticulture are also underestimated.
Second, the scale of the models is something others have alluded to. The grid resolution in the viticulture suitability portion of the study was only 2.5 arc-minutes. Depending on where the grid is located on the geoid, that equates to about 2.5 - 3-mile resolution. Now, obviously that is not fine enough resolution to make the sweeping statements that so many have about the death of California viticulture. Yet, tt is enough to make general conclusions about changes global viticulture. All the authors said, was that a changing climate will significantly affect viticulture and that vintners and conservationists should consider as many adaptations as possible to mitigate the changes as much as possible.
Finally, a third thing that I have not seen mentioned in any other review of the study is of the minimum temperature constraint. Wisely, Hannah et al. did address the fact that overwinter minimum temperature is an important limiting factor in viticulture suitability. Napa vintners don't have to fear the killing winter freezes that make viticulture in Colorado so extreme. Sure, frost at the wrong time of the year is a problem, but no where near the issue of getting to -15 C. However, what they did used for this parameter was the mean minimum temperature in the coldest month. A vine does not care what the mean minimum temperature is. The maximum minimum temperature is what is going to kill a vine. If it it gets to -35 C for even a few hours a grapevine will die. This vital information is lost if the mean minimum temperature for that month is only -12. Their model will assess that area as being suitable when in fact it is not. So, they may have overestimated the new area suitable for viticulture in 2050. As often is the case, using means when extremes are the important parameter can change the story.
Am I saying that California viticulture is going to be just fine in 35 years? I am not. I am also not saying their will be no more vineyards in Napa as many others are incorrectly assuming. What I am saying is wine writers failing to see the whole picture and that may come from failing to critically analyze a scientific study that is more about conservation than it is about predicting the future for Napa Valley viticulture. Hell, when one prominent writer claims that El Niño is the biggest driver of the ocean's temperature I know not the take what he says seriously...
First of all, the article was not focused on what will become of the world's wine regions. The study's goal was to estimate conservation conflicts in land use in areas currently not altered by viticulture. The researchers used a variety of environmental variables critical to viticulture to assess the spatial suitability under predicted conditions in 2050 (actually, the mean of 2041-2060) using 17 global climate models. The authors found that the areas currently suitable for viticulture may decrease and new areas at higher latitudes and altitudes may became suitable for production of Vitis vinifera winegrapes. They concluded that such a redistribution of wine production may result in substantial economic and conservation consequences in both areas.
Hannah et al. were not trying to sound any alarm bells in Napa. They were, however, trying to raise awareness for conservationists in the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Planning Area and other places potentially affected by future viticulture. They mentioned that investment in new varieties and changes in vineyard management could lead to innovative adaptions in extant wine production regions. While they mentioned that, they were not overly concerned with what may happen in Napa or Sonoma because they sought to estimate where grapevines might be planted in the future so that conservation strategies can be addressed in areas likely to be affected by potential indirect impacts of climate change (i.e., wine production).
Several other facts overlooked by many of the previous commentators include the parameters used to estimate suitability. First, the authors only used 21 common vinifera varieties. Now, we all know that there are way more than 21 varieties of vinifera grapes with varying degrees of environmental tolerance. And when you throw in the countless hybrids and non-vinifera species suitable for wine production, the potential for viticulture suitability is increased exponentially. This means that the loss of suitability in current regions is greatly exaggerated. Likewise, this also means that potential areas suitable for viticulture are also underestimated.
Second, the scale of the models is something others have alluded to. The grid resolution in the viticulture suitability portion of the study was only 2.5 arc-minutes. Depending on where the grid is located on the geoid, that equates to about 2.5 - 3-mile resolution. Now, obviously that is not fine enough resolution to make the sweeping statements that so many have about the death of California viticulture. Yet, tt is enough to make general conclusions about changes global viticulture. All the authors said, was that a changing climate will significantly affect viticulture and that vintners and conservationists should consider as many adaptations as possible to mitigate the changes as much as possible.
Finally, a third thing that I have not seen mentioned in any other review of the study is of the minimum temperature constraint. Wisely, Hannah et al. did address the fact that overwinter minimum temperature is an important limiting factor in viticulture suitability. Napa vintners don't have to fear the killing winter freezes that make viticulture in Colorado so extreme. Sure, frost at the wrong time of the year is a problem, but no where near the issue of getting to -15 C. However, what they did used for this parameter was the mean minimum temperature in the coldest month. A vine does not care what the mean minimum temperature is. The maximum minimum temperature is what is going to kill a vine. If it it gets to -35 C for even a few hours a grapevine will die. This vital information is lost if the mean minimum temperature for that month is only -12. Their model will assess that area as being suitable when in fact it is not. So, they may have overestimated the new area suitable for viticulture in 2050. As often is the case, using means when extremes are the important parameter can change the story.
Am I saying that California viticulture is going to be just fine in 35 years? I am not. I am also not saying their will be no more vineyards in Napa as many others are incorrectly assuming. What I am saying is wine writers failing to see the whole picture and that may come from failing to critically analyze a scientific study that is more about conservation than it is about predicting the future for Napa Valley viticulture. Hell, when one prominent writer claims that El Niño is the biggest driver of the ocean's temperature I know not the take what he says seriously...
Thursday, December 13, 2012
So I lied... (or at least a change of heart)
Yesterday, I tweeted that I was abstaining from writing a blog post about Robert Parker, Jr.'s announcement regarding the changes taking place at the Wine Advocate. I had a change of heart. This seemingly game-changing news story has been so blown out of proportion that I figured I had to throw my two cents (and common sense) into the bloggers' ring of buffoonery. Yes, the way this announcement was handled could have been improved, but that seems to be Lettie Teague's fault (which comes back to Parker for personally selecting her to write the story). Aside from that, this news isn't really worthy of the massive attention it has received.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Five social media personalities to whom Colorado wineries should be listening
A few weeks ago, I spoke about social media at VinCO 2012 in Grand Junction, CO. I was supposed to provide a broad introduction into social media tools that wineries can use. My talk consisted of a summary of Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare, Yelp, CellarTracker and WineBerserkers.com, but due to so many questions I was only able to get through the Facebook part and a rushed 2-minute primer on Twitter. My goal next year for the conference is to have a full day of social media workshops where each session is dedicated to only one platform, but that is a topic for another day.
Social media isn't just about how wineries can get their brand in front of consumers' eyes, it is about building relationships. One of the best ways that wineries can build relationships is by listening. Listening is important to find out what consumers want to hear, what critics are saying and simply gaining a broader knowledge of the industry as a whole. Most of the winery owners in Colorado do not have an extensive wine background. None are as knowledgeable about wine as they could be (some may think so, but are not...). The biggest reason I dove head first into the social media realm of the industry is to learn things from those that know more than I. Wineries should do the same. So, today I am offering a list of the five most important social media personalities (other than myself, of course) to whom Colorado wineries should be listening. They all share a commonality, too. See if you can guess what it is.
Social media isn't just about how wineries can get their brand in front of consumers' eyes, it is about building relationships. One of the best ways that wineries can build relationships is by listening. Listening is important to find out what consumers want to hear, what critics are saying and simply gaining a broader knowledge of the industry as a whole. Most of the winery owners in Colorado do not have an extensive wine background. None are as knowledgeable about wine as they could be (some may think so, but are not...). The biggest reason I dove head first into the social media realm of the industry is to learn things from those that know more than I. Wineries should do the same. So, today I am offering a list of the five most important social media personalities (other than myself, of course) to whom Colorado wineries should be listening. They all share a commonality, too. See if you can guess what it is.
Friday, September 16, 2011
I ain't afraid of no ghosts (or Nine Walks Sauvignon Blanc)
As I read a few old wine-related articles on the Internet this past week, two things struck me. First is the continual discussion about ethics and disclosure by wine writers. I reread Dr. Vino's post examining how much Robert Parker, Jr. supposedly spends on wine each year for review in his Wine Advocate. The common theme in the comments thread and many other blog posts since was that most people don't care if writers receive free samples or even trips. The thing that readers want is transparency and disclosure of a publication's policies (and I include blogs as publications). If you accept wine, money or other "services" to publish, don't pretend that you don't. If a reviewer is honest about his or her relationship with the wines and wineries he or she reviews, consumers will be able to judge the content on its merits and not suspect a hidden nefarious agenda.
However, the other side of coin reveals that some people believe that bloggers are shills that only give positive reviews to keep receiving free samples. The argument is that you never hear critics bashing wines when they drink with the winemakers, or when we lowly bloggers receive samples. Some might even give good reviews to keep the samples coming and are afraid to admit they didn't like a wine. Well, I have no problem with doing so. A few weeks ago, I received a sample of Nine Walks Sauvignon Blanc from the Baddish Group in New York. I don't want to suggest that others won't like the wine, but I did not. In fact, a very similar sauvignon blanc was deemed best white at the NextGeneration Wine Competition. I did not like that New Zealand sauvignon blanc either. Actually, google the wine and you will find more than a handful of other bloggers that also posted (almost unanimously positive) reviews about the same samples. Both my wife and I barely could finish our glasses and we gave the bottle to my mother-in-law who did not find it as offensive. I'm sorry that I did not like the wine, but if a winery or public relations company wants my opinion, I'm going to give it.
2010 Nine Walks Sauvignon Blanc, Marlborough, New Zealand
I love screw caps and this wine does not disappoint in the ease of opening. It pours a normal bright yellow color. Only when I put my nose in the glass do I begin to wonder if I will like the wine. The usual grass and lime aromas are quickly overpowered by lots of green pepper. Not bad in and of itself, but when all I can taste is acidic and unripe green bell pepper and bitter asparagus. I know that New Zealand sauvignon blancs are known for those traits, but I prefer more mineral and grapefruit flavors as opposed to unripe vegetables. I actually left my glass to sit for an hour with the hope that the greenness would blow off. Nope, still undrinkable. We put the remaining 3/4 of a bottle in the fridge knowing that my mother-in-law was coming over the next night. Now, she's not a wine drinker, but does enjoy a glass of vino here and there. I let her try a sip before pawning it off on her and her response was that she might be able to cook with it. I do not recommend this wine and in fact, this was probably one of the worst wines I've tasted in the past few months. But, like I said, others might like this grassy and green style (see NextGen Competition) so take my advice with a grain of salt. 12.7% alc Sample $11. Below Average
However, the other side of coin reveals that some people believe that bloggers are shills that only give positive reviews to keep receiving free samples. The argument is that you never hear critics bashing wines when they drink with the winemakers, or when we lowly bloggers receive samples. Some might even give good reviews to keep the samples coming and are afraid to admit they didn't like a wine. Well, I have no problem with doing so. A few weeks ago, I received a sample of Nine Walks Sauvignon Blanc from the Baddish Group in New York. I don't want to suggest that others won't like the wine, but I did not. In fact, a very similar sauvignon blanc was deemed best white at the NextGeneration Wine Competition. I did not like that New Zealand sauvignon blanc either. Actually, google the wine and you will find more than a handful of other bloggers that also posted (almost unanimously positive) reviews about the same samples. Both my wife and I barely could finish our glasses and we gave the bottle to my mother-in-law who did not find it as offensive. I'm sorry that I did not like the wine, but if a winery or public relations company wants my opinion, I'm going to give it.
I love screw caps and this wine does not disappoint in the ease of opening. It pours a normal bright yellow color. Only when I put my nose in the glass do I begin to wonder if I will like the wine. The usual grass and lime aromas are quickly overpowered by lots of green pepper. Not bad in and of itself, but when all I can taste is acidic and unripe green bell pepper and bitter asparagus. I know that New Zealand sauvignon blancs are known for those traits, but I prefer more mineral and grapefruit flavors as opposed to unripe vegetables. I actually left my glass to sit for an hour with the hope that the greenness would blow off. Nope, still undrinkable. We put the remaining 3/4 of a bottle in the fridge knowing that my mother-in-law was coming over the next night. Now, she's not a wine drinker, but does enjoy a glass of vino here and there. I let her try a sip before pawning it off on her and her response was that she might be able to cook with it. I do not recommend this wine and in fact, this was probably one of the worst wines I've tasted in the past few months. But, like I said, others might like this grassy and green style (see NextGen Competition) so take my advice with a grain of salt. 12.7% alc Sample $11. Below Average
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
