Five predictions for 2013

2012 has been an eventful year in the wine industry. There are more licensed American wineries than ever before (almost three times as many wineries as breweries...). California (and Colorado) had a bumper crop of high (not exceptional) quality. The Rudy Kurniawan story made headlines in the non-wine world after he was arrested for producing and selling millions of dollars of fraudulent wine. And in probably the biggest news that wasn't really wasn't that big (see yesterday's post), Robert Parker, Jr. announced that he was stepping down as editor-in-chief of the Wine Advocate, opening a second office in Singapore and sold a share of the ownership to three Asian investors (rumor is they aren't all Asian...). So what will 2013 bring in terms of worthy wine news?

Here are five prognostications:

The fiction of cult wine

The word "cult" gets thrown around a lot in the wine industry. The idea of cult wine started in the 1990s with the rise of critically acclaimed, limited production California cabernet sauvignons such as Bryant Family Vineyard, Grace Family Vineyards, Harlan Estate and Screaming Eagle. The initial prices of these wines were high to start with, but not absurdly so. Bryant released at $36, Grace Family at $25, Harlan at $65 and Screaming Eagle an astonishing $50. These big names aside, the first California wine to actually eclipse the triple digit price tag was Diamond Creek with their 1978 Lake Vineyard release. It wasn't until customers began flipping the wines at auction for many times what they paid to the winery after the wines received numerous 99 and 100-point scores from Robert Parker that their prices began their stratospheric rise. The age of cult wine was born.

Wine critic vs. wine writer (which is more important?)

A few recent posts by W. Blake Gray got me thinking about the difference between wine critics and wine writers. Wine critiquing and wine writing are two different activities that are often confused as the same thing. Dave McIntyre, wine columnist for the Washington Post, eloquently explained that "the writer tells wine's story in a way that hopefully gets the reader thirsty, while the critic can tell the reader which wines are worth buying." This isn't to say that they are mutually exclusive, and in fact most wine critics will claim they do both. But can someone do both at the same time? To paraphrase McIntyre, critical analysis of wine (i.e., blind tasting) takes wine out of its context, but for wine writers context is the story.

What's a winery's responsibility?

What is a winery's responsibility? Is the responsibility to the consumers or to itself? Should a winery always strive to make the best wine possible or should it simply offer commercially viable (i.e. not flawed) wine at a fair price? Should a winemaker only make wine he or she likes or should consumer preferences be considered? Should a vineyard be planted with popular variety, such as cabernet sauvignon, because it will sell or should a lesser-known variety, like petit manseng, be grown if it is better suited for the site?

From the cutting room floor...

A few months ago, I wrote an article about five female social media personalities who are important to the Colorado wine industry. The list caught Wine Spectator's editor Thomas Matthews' eye. He asked me to sit down with meteorologist Jennifer Broome to talk about her thoughts on the local wine wine industry. How awesome is it that the country's most influential wine periodical is interested in Colorado Wine! I spent several months working with the magazine's editors polishing the piece and last week Wine Spectator published the highlights of the interview on their website. Please check it out and share it with people you know who share your love of local wine!

As it happens and as I knew would happen, only a handful of the questions were selected to be published. I want share the rest of the interview with you here.