Wine Advocate to start winery consulting service

A new consulting service, "Wine Benchmarking" by Robert Parker's Wine Advocate, being launched this fall was introduced to the Colorado wine industry. I've reached out to Editor-in-Chief Lisa Perrotti-Brown and will update this post with more information when/if I get it.

Described in the announcement, the Wine Advocate is providing detailed advice to wineries for $800 per winery. For this fee, wineries will get two of their wines assessed by Wine Advocate reviewers and receive two tickets to a "Wine Benchmarking Seminar" in February 2018. Additional wines for evaluation may be submitted subject to availability and volume pricing is available on request. It appears that the main difference between this evaluation and the normal published evaluation is that wineries will receive personalized notification of where their wines sit qualitatively to their peers. The Wine Advocate reviewers will also provide specific actionable advice that may be taken in the vineyard and winery to address detected shortcomings - as well as possible opportunities for future wine quality enhancement. This information will be provided to wineries in confidential, sealed envelopes after February's seminar.

It would appear to me that this new service may result in a new direction from the fiercely independent critical approach Mr. Parker has espoused for years. However, this publication is Mr. Parker's now in name only. I am all for wineries hiring consultants to help with their businesses, but I don't see how an independent critic can start taking money from those he/she is reviewing and still claim complete separation from the trade. I can't imagine how this statement: "it is imperative that I keep a distance from the trade. While this may be misinterpreted as aloofness, such independence guarantees hard‑hitting, candid, and uninfluenced commentary" remains on the Writers Ethics page on RobertParker.com form much longer.

Don't get me wrong, as a proponent of small regional wineries, I think this could be a great opportunity for wineries to improve their wine quality, improve their scores and increase sales. Yet, shouldn't this kind of feedback be what wine reviews are all about in the first place? I've been advocating that all regional wineries submit wines for critical review to Wine Advocate, Wine Enthusiast, and Wine Spectator. Critical feedback is very important to the wine industry. So is for-hire consulting services. My personal hunch is Mr. Parker had nothing to do with this. 

Dr. Harry Oldman on Andy Warhol Wines

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.

Harry Oldman on Killing the Geezers that lay the Golden Eggs

Hello, friends, Dr. Harry W. Oldman here! It has been a while since I've come here to put pen to paper - or do these young whippersnappers call it fingering the computer - partly because I wanted to see what the reaction would be when I said to myself I might cease writing. About a year ago, I took a position with a big-name wine producer, but recently left. My non-disclosure agreement only allows me to say good things about them, but I can't identify them by name. Anyway, I'm back because the wine world needs more old white guys to keep it from destroying itself. Without us, I'd be surprised if the wine industry would survive more than a few weeks. Millennials and bloggers - scum of the earth - are intent on destroying what we worked so hard to achieve: delicious wine.

There used to be hedonism in the wine business. I know, because I know some wonderful women winemakers who... well, let's just leave it at me knowing them. I don't want to get in trouble because the FCC won't let me be, or let me be me. So, let me see... well, we don't have hedonism anymore. No, now, because of all those slack-line-walking bloggers, we have another form of prejudice that’s just as pernicious: asceticism.

Read, for example, this piece, from The New York Times Magazine, that refers to "a band of upstart winemakers ... trying to redefine what California wine should taste like." This group of self-proclaimed arbiters of taste wants wine to be minerally and flavorless. They think wine should have no perceivable alcohol! We are basically living a second-coming of the temperance movement.

Okay, let's break this down.

The Quest for Certainty Blocks the Search for Meaning...

"The quest for certainty blocks the quest for meaning. Uncertainty is the very condition to impel man to unfold his powers." - Erich Fromm, 1947

That quote from Fromm's Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Ethics is a peak into his into his views on human nature, but as I read it the other day the first thing that popped into my mind was the 100-pt wine rating system. I know, I know, this horse has long been dead. Perhaps this was my first thought because I actually found myself defending the system over the weekend. My friend, Jeff Siegel, made the statement that the 100-pt system is useless. I countered that it is quite useful as a means to convey information about one person's perception of a wine to another. However, I acknowledged that the system is quite flawed. Jeff, in all his wisdom, correctly pointed out that 'flawed' implies it can be corrected.

There is no way that this system of using numbers to portray an authoritative characterization of a wine's quality can be fixed to correct the false sense of certainty it has created. The true meaning of a wine cannot be replaced by a number, yet the wine world in which we live has been corrupted by the quest for perfection. Yes, information is conveyed but at what price?

There are those consumers and critics alike who understand that a wine's true worth is not found in the pedigree of the cultivar, or the reputation of the region, or the celebrity of the winemaker, but in the collection of traits that leads to an experience. A number draws a sand in the line; Whoever is not with me is against me (Matthew 12:30). Wow, I never thought I'd quote the Bible on this blog! Only by erasing the number from the equation can we erase this false dichotomy of good and evil, or right and wrong. Wine is neither good nor evil. Wine is communal. You have the right to love a bottle I can't stand.

Wine is meant to be enjoyed, shared, and celebrated. Arguments are part of the fun, but the quest for certainty and the quest for high scores has replaced the true meaning of wine for too many consumers, critics, and winemakers. Only naked from certainty that numbers imply, can we then drive forward to experience wine in its true beauty.

The Day After Tomorrow (or, The Next Big Thing)

Coloradan Syrah is the next big thing. Spanish Txakolina is the next big thing. Arizonan Malvasia is the next big thing. Greek Assyrtiko is the next big thing. Californian Chardonnay is the next big thing. French Sauvignon blanc is the next big thing. Mexican Nebbiolo is the next big thing. Oregonian Pinot noir is the next big thing. There is no next big variety when it comes to wine. People who claim grape X is the next big thing are wrong. People who claim that the traditional big grape varieties are the only important grapes and "there's really no good reason for consumers to seek out esoteric wines" are also wrong. The closest thing to the next big thing in wine is variety itself: diversity.

Union des Grands Crus de Bordeaux is in Denver this week

The Union des Grands Crus de Bordeaux (UGCB) is an organization formed in 1973 by a group of Bordeaux wineries that is something of a marketing program that puts on tasting and educational events in France and abroad. The organization now represents 133 wineries, both classified and non-classified producers. Every year, winery representatives tour the U.S. with their wines, but usually only visit New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Last year was the first time the tour found its way to Colorado.

This year, half of the group will be in Denver on Thursday, January 29 (the the other half is in Las Vegas that night). The Châteaux owners and winemakers from over 60 of the most prestigious Bordeaux producers (sadly, no First Growths...) will pour and discuss their wines. I can't think of another opportunity in Colorado to taste such a collection of historic and respected wines. As an added benefit (and because of Colorado liquor law) the event is a fundraiser for the Denver Public Schools Foundation, but hosted by Applejack Wine & Spirits. For a full list of the participating producers and to buy tickets, click here.

The 2012 vintage will be featured at the tasting, though I would hope some producers bring some examples properly aged Bordeaux wine. 2012 is the second in a trio of less-than-ideal vintages for Bordeaux. The vintage started cool and wet, and finished with heavy rains around harvest time. Though I haven't tasted much 2012 Bordeaux, I've read that merlot from the Right Bank produced more favorable wines when compared to the later-ripening cabernet sauvignon from the Left Bank. Many of the top sweet-wine producers even declared that they would not produce any wine in 2012, but instead sell-off their wine in bulk to less prominent producers.

I don't drink much Bordeaux, frankly because the price of admission is so steep. Many of the wines that will be poured at the UGCB tasting cost between $50 and $300 per bottle. The First Growth producers, who will not be in attendance, sell their wines for around $1000 per bottle. Prices have come down some since consumer demand (especially in China) of the heralded 2009 and 2010 vintages caused prices to skyrocket. Still, with three lower-quality vintages currently languishing in the market since the critically acclaimed 2010, supply and demand are still out of sync when it comes to general pricing for the region. Nevertheless, I will be quite interested to see what is in the glass on Thursday night to see if there is some value to be had. I hope to see you there!

Matt Kramer got it wrong about bullies who put down wine

Without wine lore, and wine tasting, and wine talk, and wine labels, and, yes, wine writing and rating—the whole elaborate idea of wine—we would still get drunk, but we would be merely drunk. The language of wine appreciation is there not because wine is such a special subtle challenge to our discernment but because without the elaborate language—without the idea of wine, held up and regularly polished—it would all be about the same, or taste that way. —Adam Gopnik, The New Yorker

Two days ago, in Wine Spectator, Matt Kramer penned a polemic against nameless skeptics of the sensory value of wine. In Kramer's defense, he attempted to use an article by Adam Gopnik (yes, I misspelled his name (twice) in a comment over on the Jackson Family Wines blog, and for that I apologize) in the The New Yorker as evidence this anti-intellectualism bullying. The problems with him basing his condemnation on Gopnik's article are twofold. First, the article is more than ten years old. If you haven't read it, I strongly suggest that you do so. Yes, it reads as if it were written yesterday (or maybe tomorrow) and that is the sign of a good writer. But nevertheless it was written at a different point along the wine industry continuum and was actually an editorial on the 2004 state of wine prompted by William Echikson's book, Noble Rot. Second, and more important, Kramer completely missed the point of Gopnik's article. Kramer chose to quote Gopnik out of context. He should have started his article with the full quote that I've provided above. Gopnik actually accomplished what Kramer was attempting to do by making the case that wine talk and wine description are an integral "part of what lets the experience happen."

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.

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.

Dr. Oldman channels Oprah to expose a doping scandal that will rock the wine world...

After his surprising Boxing Day interview, Dr. Harry Oldman thought that today would be the perfect day to share his next interview with us.

I had so much fun with my interview with my anonymous wine critic friend (though I hope the interview wasn't the real reason he is no longer a critic...), that I thought I'd try my hand again at asking another famous wine personality some tough questions. Bobby P and I go all the way back to his early days as the world's first blogger, a camp which I too have fallen into. Together, Bob and I would take on the heathens of the wine world on Prodigy's Wine Forum. It had been some time since we last talked, but I've long defended him from the many sheep of the Interwebs. When Bob agreed to sit down with me I decided that I had better improve my interview skills, so I watched countless hours of the best interviewer I could think of: Oprah. I've followed Oprah from her very start on AM Chicago, but spending a week straight of watching reruns gave me all the insight I'd need to make this a newsworthy interview sure to cause a ripple in the space-time-wine-blogger continuum. One day, I am sure that this interview will be as talked about as any interview Oprah did with Tom Cruise, Lance Armstrong or Lindsay Lohan. Make sure that you are sitting, because what I'm about to share with you will knock your tastevins off!

Variety's the very spice of life

                               The Sycophant
Who waits to dress us arbitrates their date;
Surveys his reversion with keen eye;
Finds one ill made, another obsolete,
This fits not nicely, that is ill conceived;
And making prize of all that he condemns,
With our expenditure defrays his own.
Variety's the very spice of life,
That gives it all its flavour.
     -William Cowper, The Task (1785)--'The Timepiece' (Book II, lines 599-607)

Wine is an immensely diverse product. Flavors and aromas vary widely depending on grape cultivars, places of origin and wine styles. Wine quality and price is as diverse as the number of SKUs available on the retail shelf. The wine world is a wide world of variety - and that is a good thing. Wine's diversity, and those who cheer it on, should not be discredited as being "a losing path." Wine does not fit nicely into some Platonic universal. Every person tastes wine differently and every person has an idea of what Wine should taste like. Some people like big, bold wines while others prefer light, delicate wines. Some drink only red wines, whereas others only drink white wines. Some only drink wines from a specific place, others explore the vast universe of fermented grape juice. Being able to choose to drink a wine from the United States of America, France, Italy or any other country is something that should be celebrated. Being able to choose from a variety of styles not expected from a specific place is also something that should be celebrated. Pleasure seeking through wine should also be celebrated, but so too should the idea that wine can offer more than just a party in your mouth.

Dr. Oldman on the Wine Writers Symposium

I was in Napa Valley two weeks ago for Premiere Napa Valley, but I was unable to attend the Wine Writers Symposium. Others have written a few accounts of what transpired during the workshops and sessions at the secluded Meadowood Napa Valley resort and spa. With not being there, I find it interesting to hear about the fun and informative events attended by a whole host of wine writers. I think it is pretty cool that simple bloggers, or people new to the world of wine writing, can hang out with established writers from Food & Wine, Wine Advocate and Wine Enthusiast as well as columnists from the New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle and Wall Street Journal. My extern, Dr. Harry Oldman, was disappointed that I was not going to chime in on an event that I did not attend, so he asked if he could. I know I shouldn't let him post anymore, but he can be very persuasive...

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.

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!

Marketing myopia in the wine world

This morning, my good pal Steve Heimoff published a blog post about how wineries can get famous. He raised some interesting points about the changes that have taken place in mass communication between the present and 1994 when the movie Disclosure "made Pahlmeyer a star." Obviously, he discussed the rise of social media, but concluded that a critic's score was the "best way to get huge notice by the public."

Prognostications old, prognostications new... (A look back at 2013 and a peak at 2014)

A little over a year ago, I wrote an article outlining my five predictions for 2013. Today, I want to briefly examine those statements and make a few new guesses for 2014.

My first prediction came on the heels of Robert Parker, Jr. taking on foreign investors and yielding editorial control of the Wine Advocate to Lisa Perrotti-Brown, MW. Going against popular belief at the time, I said that the Wine Advocate would expand and increase its popularity. Well, I didn't quite nail this, but the publication did not shrivel up and die like many other people thought it would. Many wine aficionados still wait with anticipation for the release of each issue. Wine prices still jump when Parker (or his other reviewers) throw high numbers at already expensive wines. I still think Robert Parker and his henchmen will remain pertinent (but not dominant) in the American wine industry, but will look to expand to Asian markets as they rapidly grow.

My first prediction may have been a push, my second prediction was both spot on and a bust. I thought that regional wine, and especially Colorado, would see more coverage in the major publications (Wine Advocate and Wine Spectator). Wine Advocate maintained the status quo on ignoring wine from the other 47 states despite having a reviewer living in Colorado (Jeb Dunnuck) who is eager and willing to taste and review Colorado wine. Dunnuck had personally told me that he wanted to get CO reviews into the Wine Advocate, but "the powers that be" have squashed that idea.

The Wine Spectator actually took a step forward before jumping three steps back. In 2013 alone (prior to a policy change), Wine Spectator reviewed more than 115 Colorado wines, doubling the number of Colorado wines reviewed by the magazine the previous 20 years combined! Moreover, both James Moleworth and Harvey Steiman had written relatively positive blog posts about Colorado wine (read more on my take here). But unfortunately, the gains regional wine saw in 2013 looks to have all but evaporated going into 2014. An assistant tasting coordinator at Wine Spectator informed several Colorado wineries that Wine Spectator will "not [be] tasting any wines from Colorado at the moment. Furthermore, we have a new policy which requires all importers and wineries to send the info sheet with samples listed that they would like to submit and then they wait for our approval." For this, they were bestowed a Curmudgie by local and cheap wine proponent, Jeff Siegel. Unfortunately, I don't think regional wine will gain much traction with the large wine publications in 2014.

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!

Hooked on a Feelin' ... (1800 words on authenticity and Matthiasson wines)

Authenticity is one of the words buzzing its way around the tiny little realm that we call the wine industry. The term even made its way into a Huffington Post story yesterday about common food terms that have lost all meaning. In our little world, one camp (producers, consumers and writers) clamors for authentic wines, while the other (more producers, consumers and writers) bemoans the abstract idea of a wine's authenticity. The whole argument over "authenticity," as it concerns wine, is really over the definition of what is "authentic."

Well, I'll dip my toes into the water on this subject. Authentic wines are wines of undisputed origin and wines (and producers) worthy of trust. Authentic wines can be made in small quantities by an individual or, albeit more difficult, in an industrial setting by a team of enologists in a lab. Authentic wines can be single-vineyard, single-clone wines or blends of unlikely varieties. To me, the idea of an authentic wine is tied to the relationship between the consumer and the producer. This is where trust in the origin of the wine comes into play. I find it easier to have a connection with people, but as my buddy Joe Roberts so eloquently put it (I'm sensing a Pulitzer...) consumers can have a "relationship with a f*cking bag of candy." Proponents of authentic wines want to feel connected to a wine's origin, whether that be the soil, the grower or the producer. They want to know everything they possibly can about how, and perhaps more importantly why, a wine was created.

Oldman on questions...

Harry Oldman chimes in with his nonsensical babble once more:

As a man with more wine experience than most, I have developed a keen eye for what really matters in this intoxicating industry. I've met more winemakers than I can count and it doesn't matter that I had to repeat Algebra three times in middle school because Arithmetic is the only type of mathematics that matters in wine. 97 points more more than 96 points. Easy as pie. But not that pi. That doesn't mean a 97-pt wine is better than a 96-pt wine, because we all know that comparing wines is like an MMA fight between a kung fu panda and a jujitsu jackass. For one, they both are from different continents. But both are distinctly mammalian. Donkey meat is rubbery and full of ferality. Panda is rare, succulent and full of fresh acidity. It's a question of taste and not fact. Or maybe the other way around. Now where was I?

Throwing up a roadblock for certain cars... (Why Wine Spectator's change in policy is bad for the industry)

The Wine Spectator has never been a big proponent of regional American wines. This is not news. In the past few years, New York wines started to get more coverage, but that was due more to the hard work of the Finger Lakes Wine Alliance and its former executive director Morgen McLaughlin than an inherit interest from the Wine Spectator. The occasion review of wines from Arizona, Colorado or Virginia would appear at times in the past few years as well. But for the most part, coverage of wine from the other 46 states was virtually non-existent.