The public have been warned against false price promotions on wine for quite some time now, but the practice still continues. I have been researching this and found an article in the press over 3 years ago, and I reproduce a snippet of it below.
Supermarket shoppers are being ripped off by bogus 'half-price' deals on millions of bottles of wine, a leading drinks boss has warned.
High street giants are misleading customers who think that they are getting a great deal but are actually just paying the correct price, according to Jean-Manuel Spriet, chief executive of Pernod Ricard UK.
The practice of 'marking up, only to mark down' has been rife for years, according to industry experts. The supermarket pretends to be offering a 'great discount' on a £7.99 bottle of wine, but the real price of the wine is £3.99.
'They make the wines designed for sale at £3.99, introduce them at a higher price, and then bring the price down,' said Mr Spriet.
'They start at £7.99 and are discounted down to half price which is crazy.
This article was in The Daily Mail, but over the years there has been similar comment in The Telegraph, The Observer and The Times amongst others.
Do not be foooled by these false promotions - what I like to call "The DFS syndrome" - if you are paying £3.99, you are getting a £3.99 wine - not a £7.99 wine at half price.
Another misleading type of promotion was the one that was prevalent in Threshers/Wine Rack/Haddows where the offer was "Buy 3, only pay for 2". What they omitted to mention was that the single bottle price had been inflated by a third in the first place. The holding company of this chain, First Quench, has just gone into administration, so its promotional tactic obviously didn't fool the public.
And whilst I'm on the subject of false promotions, do not be taken in either by the "Half Price" case offers in the Sunday Supplements by many of the larger mail-order retailers. Do you honestly believe that a company could afford to lose half their revenue, and pay the large amounts needed to advertise in the Weekend Press? Of course they couldn't - the wines were never that price in the first place - well strictly speaking they had to be by law - but it was still a false figure solely for the purpose of halving it later.
On our website the reductions are shown against the price that we have seen charged for those wines previously. No false figures - just genuine reductions.
Thursday 26 November 2009
Thursday 12 November 2009
7th Continent Wines
Diageo is the world’s biggest drinks group with brands such as Johnny Walker, Baileys, Gordon’s, Guinness and countless others that are almost household names. Being formed from takeovers and mergers between spirits producers and breweries it never really had a presence in the wine market. That was until 2006 when it sent eyes rolling in sockets all over the drinks world with the announcement of a new Australian wine brand. In a retail environment ever more dominated by multi-nationals and multi-grocers, the trade could have been forgiven in thinking that it needed another million-case monster like a hole in the head. Bearing in mind however that Australia has been one of the most dynamic wine performers of the last decade, particularly in the UK and US, the lack of an Aussie wine in the group's portfolio had been glaring.
The name chosen for this brand was “7th Continent”, obviously identifying Australia, but Diageo surprised the trade even more by the totally different marketing strategy adopted. For a start it wasn’t a big, sweet, blowsy Blossom Hill type range with a Bush Tucker hat. Additionally Diageo eschewed the accepted wisdom that a brand needed to launch at 'entry-level' with two or three varietals, then move consumers up through a succession of reserves and premiums to some notional winemaker's indulgence. No, they went straight in at a £7.99/£8.49 level, but not as many other brands had done at this level just for the contrived purpose to be "Bogged Off" (BOGOF - buy one, get one free for the uninitiated) in the future to generate sales.
There were eventually up to 15 wines in the range, but the wines were not inter-regional blends of the sort that powered Australia to its dominant position in the UK, but were specific regional expressions. Here wine drinkers could compare and contrast Cabernets and Merlots from several individual regions, and see how a Hunter Valley Shiraz, a Clare Valley Riesling or an Adelaide Hills Viognier were far superior to multi-regional blended wines.
Diageo consciously wanted to make consumers reassess what they knew about Australia; to readdress the 'deep-cut, gondola end' imagery that had hurt the country's image over the last few years and to provide a trade-up brand for younger wine drinkers who came into the category through Australia, but had migrated elsewhere when looking for a special occasion wine.
The thinking was logical, laudable even – yet despite getting listings with Threshers, Tesco and others, the brand ultimately failed. Probably because the whole 'Brand Australia' hype had sunk deep into the psyche of the wine-buying public all over the world, getting across the regionality message proved hellishly difficult to achieve. Market research can show all it likes about consumers wanting a new, more upmarket Australia, but there's a big difference between the focus group and the supermarket aisle.
Their loss is our gain though, as www.binendwines.co.uk is now able to offer some of this range at prices showing up to 40% less than the original prices. The original prices were genuinely in the £7.99/£8.49 range – not the false levels one sees everyday in supermarkets in the “Was £7.99 – now half price at £3.99” offers. As has been stated here and in the national press, such “half-price” offers are totally false – all of these wines promoted in this manner have been specifically produced to sell at £3.99 in the first place.
So, forget Lindemans, Hardy’s, etc and all the other multi-regional blends – experience the taste of regional Australia and see how trading up can bring you far better wines with individual characteristics. Except with our discounts, you don’t have to trade up in price.
The name chosen for this brand was “7th Continent”, obviously identifying Australia, but Diageo surprised the trade even more by the totally different marketing strategy adopted. For a start it wasn’t a big, sweet, blowsy Blossom Hill type range with a Bush Tucker hat. Additionally Diageo eschewed the accepted wisdom that a brand needed to launch at 'entry-level' with two or three varietals, then move consumers up through a succession of reserves and premiums to some notional winemaker's indulgence. No, they went straight in at a £7.99/£8.49 level, but not as many other brands had done at this level just for the contrived purpose to be "Bogged Off" (BOGOF - buy one, get one free for the uninitiated) in the future to generate sales.
There were eventually up to 15 wines in the range, but the wines were not inter-regional blends of the sort that powered Australia to its dominant position in the UK, but were specific regional expressions. Here wine drinkers could compare and contrast Cabernets and Merlots from several individual regions, and see how a Hunter Valley Shiraz, a Clare Valley Riesling or an Adelaide Hills Viognier were far superior to multi-regional blended wines.
Diageo consciously wanted to make consumers reassess what they knew about Australia; to readdress the 'deep-cut, gondola end' imagery that had hurt the country's image over the last few years and to provide a trade-up brand for younger wine drinkers who came into the category through Australia, but had migrated elsewhere when looking for a special occasion wine.
The thinking was logical, laudable even – yet despite getting listings with Threshers, Tesco and others, the brand ultimately failed. Probably because the whole 'Brand Australia' hype had sunk deep into the psyche of the wine-buying public all over the world, getting across the regionality message proved hellishly difficult to achieve. Market research can show all it likes about consumers wanting a new, more upmarket Australia, but there's a big difference between the focus group and the supermarket aisle.
Their loss is our gain though, as www.binendwines.co.uk is now able to offer some of this range at prices showing up to 40% less than the original prices. The original prices were genuinely in the £7.99/£8.49 range – not the false levels one sees everyday in supermarkets in the “Was £7.99 – now half price at £3.99” offers. As has been stated here and in the national press, such “half-price” offers are totally false – all of these wines promoted in this manner have been specifically produced to sell at £3.99 in the first place.
So, forget Lindemans, Hardy’s, etc and all the other multi-regional blends – experience the taste of regional Australia and see how trading up can bring you far better wines with individual characteristics. Except with our discounts, you don’t have to trade up in price.
Wednesday 22 April 2009
Bordeaux vs New Zealand
The sound of jaws crashing to the floor echoed around Pall Mall a few weeks ago. High up in the penthouse suite of New Zealand House, 30 or so UK Masters of Wine, sommeliers, wine buyers and journalists had joined in a special blind tasting. The results were to say the least, astonishing.
They were comparing the very best from Bordeaux with wines from Gimblett Gravels, a sub-region of Hawkes Bay in New Zealand’s North Island. This 800-hectare appellation is centred on the gravel of the old Ngaruroror River, and local winemakers believe the soil and climate to be so exceptional that their terroir is up there with the best to be found in Bordeaux. The Gimblett Gravels wines are made from the classic Bordeaux varieties of Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, Merlot, Malbec, and Petit Verdot. The tasting compared six 2005/2006 New Zealand wines with six 2005 clarets.
Some of Britain’s finest tasters were there, including Jancis Robinson, Michael Schuster and Oz Clarke, along with buyers from the likes of Waitrose, the Wine Society and Berry Bros and Rudd. Many of them seemed confused and unsure. The tasting sheets were handed in and the marks added together to reveal a collective top six. The first three spots (and fifth) go to Bordeaux, and the experts nodded their heads knowingly. Their fourth and sixth favourites though were from New Zealand; a pretty good showing they all agreed, with applause all round.
Then the bombshell. The wine’s identities were revealed and they gasped when they discovered which were the Bordeaux wines. The top three were: 2005 Château Lafite-Rothschild (£975), 2005 Château Mouton-Rothschild (£675), and 2005 Château Angélus (£295). Just off the podium in fourth was 2006 Sacred Hill “Helmsman” at – wait for it – a staggeringly modest £17.95 a bottle. 2005 Château Haut-Brion (£700) was fifth, and 2006 Newton Forrest “Cornerstone” – at just £15 a bottle – was sixth.
Bordeaux as we all know is seriously overpriced, but this result has driven it home. Why spend almost a grand a bottle when you could spend barely £18 for something jus as good. It can’t be for the rarity value: 25,000 cases of 2005 Château Lafite-Rothschild were produced, compared with just 130 of the 2006 Sacred Hill “Helmsman”.
At www.binendwines.co.uk we can’t offer you any of the wines listed above – the Bordeaux are frankly beyond the scope of this modest business, and the New Zealand wines are only available from the direct importers. However given that in most instances, the best of these vintages is yet to come following lengthy cellaring, perhaps you would like to avail yourself of a more mature example.
Newly listed in late April is the 2000 vintage from Trinity Hill Cabernet/Merlot by the renowned winemaker John Hancock. But what is more you don’t even have to pay £18 or even £15 for it – though there are other outlets selling it for around £15. My price for what is very limited stock is just £5.95 – the bargain of the year so far. But hurry – when it’s gone – it’s gone!
They were comparing the very best from Bordeaux with wines from Gimblett Gravels, a sub-region of Hawkes Bay in New Zealand’s North Island. This 800-hectare appellation is centred on the gravel of the old Ngaruroror River, and local winemakers believe the soil and climate to be so exceptional that their terroir is up there with the best to be found in Bordeaux. The Gimblett Gravels wines are made from the classic Bordeaux varieties of Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, Merlot, Malbec, and Petit Verdot. The tasting compared six 2005/2006 New Zealand wines with six 2005 clarets.
Some of Britain’s finest tasters were there, including Jancis Robinson, Michael Schuster and Oz Clarke, along with buyers from the likes of Waitrose, the Wine Society and Berry Bros and Rudd. Many of them seemed confused and unsure. The tasting sheets were handed in and the marks added together to reveal a collective top six. The first three spots (and fifth) go to Bordeaux, and the experts nodded their heads knowingly. Their fourth and sixth favourites though were from New Zealand; a pretty good showing they all agreed, with applause all round.
Then the bombshell. The wine’s identities were revealed and they gasped when they discovered which were the Bordeaux wines. The top three were: 2005 Château Lafite-Rothschild (£975), 2005 Château Mouton-Rothschild (£675), and 2005 Château Angélus (£295). Just off the podium in fourth was 2006 Sacred Hill “Helmsman” at – wait for it – a staggeringly modest £17.95 a bottle. 2005 Château Haut-Brion (£700) was fifth, and 2006 Newton Forrest “Cornerstone” – at just £15 a bottle – was sixth.
Bordeaux as we all know is seriously overpriced, but this result has driven it home. Why spend almost a grand a bottle when you could spend barely £18 for something jus as good. It can’t be for the rarity value: 25,000 cases of 2005 Château Lafite-Rothschild were produced, compared with just 130 of the 2006 Sacred Hill “Helmsman”.
At www.binendwines.co.uk we can’t offer you any of the wines listed above – the Bordeaux are frankly beyond the scope of this modest business, and the New Zealand wines are only available from the direct importers. However given that in most instances, the best of these vintages is yet to come following lengthy cellaring, perhaps you would like to avail yourself of a more mature example.
Newly listed in late April is the 2000 vintage from Trinity Hill Cabernet/Merlot by the renowned winemaker John Hancock. But what is more you don’t even have to pay £18 or even £15 for it – though there are other outlets selling it for around £15. My price for what is very limited stock is just £5.95 – the bargain of the year so far. But hurry – when it’s gone – it’s gone!
Monday 20 April 2009
Wine buyer screwed.
From "The Sydney Morning Herald"
Neville Sloss, from Teven, received a glossy wine brochure in the post offering him a beautiful lever-action corkscrew valued at $70 free if he bought the special dozen bottles for $99. "Fantastic offer if you could use the corkscrew," he writes, but points out: "Every one of the dozen wines has a screw top!"
Neville Sloss, from Teven, received a glossy wine brochure in the post offering him a beautiful lever-action corkscrew valued at $70 free if he bought the special dozen bottles for $99. "Fantastic offer if you could use the corkscrew," he writes, but points out: "Every one of the dozen wines has a screw top!"
Screwcaps, plastic or cork?
Screwcaps, plastic or cork?
What are the issues?
Have you noticed the increasing number of wine bottles sealed with screwcaps, and wondered why? It’s because of a small war that is taking place. Over the last few years, the wine trade has been embroiled in a conflict. You wouldn’t have thought that the rather boring-sounding issue of bottle closures would inflame passions, but it has, and to a remarkable degree. One the one hand we have the traditionalists who feel that cork is the only decent way to seal a wine bottle; on the other, we have the screwcap crusaders who are on a mission to eradicate cork and have all bottles sealed with alternative closures. Who’s right?
Cork is a remarkable natural substance. Because of its cellular wall composition and structure and it has elastic and compressible qualities that make it ideally suited to sealing wine bottles. A decent cork will provide a good seal on a wine bottle for thirty years, possibly longer, allowing the wine to develop and mature into something special. And despite corks providing a good seal, it’s relatively easy to extract them using one of a wide array of different designs of corkscrew. Added to this, taking the cork out has become a valued part of the tradition of wine. It may sound silly, but there is something special about uncorking a bottle.
So what is the problem? The dirty secret of the wine trade is that one in twenty bottles of wine is ruined as soon as it is bottled by problems with the cork. Chief among these is what is known as ‘cork taint’. This is when a wine takes on a musty odour caused by a chemical called 2,4,6-trichloroanisole (TCA) that is present in some corks. TCA itself is produced by microbes that live in the small pores, called lenticels, that run throughout cork bark. In extreme cases, it’s hard to miss a ‘corked’ wine: the mustiness can sometimes be overpowering. In other situations, the taint is more subtle, reducing the fruitiness of the wine, giving it a subdued aroma, usually with a faint whiff of damp cardboard or old cellars in the background.
The problem with TCA is that it is incredibly potent: most people can detect it at concentrations as low as 5 parts per trillion, which makes it hard to eradicate. To give you a better idea of this figure, it’s equivalent to one second in 64 centuries. Where good data have been collected, the frequency of cork taint hovers around 5% of bottles sealed this way. The other main problem with corks is that because they are a natural product, they are variable, and some fail by letting oxygen in which then spoils the wine.
Cork taint hasn’t always been such a big issue. In the past, it is likely that many people weren’t as aware of the problem and happily drunk corked wine. But with the increasing quality of cheap wine (which makes any taint more likely to be spotted) and the fact that consumers are now generally better informed, a vocal body has sprung up who have decided that they’re not going to put up with this situation any longer.
The cork industry has been slow to address the issue. Initially they went through a period of denial, funding PR campaigns to persuade people that cork is the natural option. They hid behind an environmental smokescreen, claiming that if people ditched cork, then the Iberian cork forests—a precious ecological resource—would be under threat. Finally, they realised that research on the problem would be a better use of resources, and while there are now some promising techniques in development, there is still no solution that results in taint-free corks.
So what are the alternatives? Surprisingly, modern science hasn’t been able to come up with a synthetic substance that shares cork’s properties of elasticity and compressibility. While there are a number of synthetic corks on the market, they’re really only suitable for wines destined for immediate consumption (that is, within a year or two). The problem has been that the plastics used can’t provide a seal equal to that of real cork without being impossible to extract from the neck of the bottle. The result is that plastic corks tend to be permeable enough that the wine tends to oxidise after a couple of years, although they are fine for everyday wines that are usually drunk on release. Of course, it should be pointed out that some makes of plastic cork are more efficient than others, and product development is occurring all the time, so we may yet see serious plastic alternatives to corks (they may already exist, although I haven’t yet seen good data indicating this). For now, then, the leading contender to cork is therefore the screwcap.
Screwcaps provide a pretty good seal—better than cork, in fact. In addition, they are easy to open: you don’t need a corkscrew, you just twist them off. Because they are manufactured and not a natural substance, they provide a much more uniform seal than corks. Added to this, there are plenty of reports of 20 year old screwcapped bottles being opened and the wine tasting fresh and lively.
So how come all wines aren’t sealed with screwcaps? This is what a vocal element in the wine trade are calling for, after all. There are three main problems. First, screwcaps have a ‘cheap’ image in the minds of many consumers. People associate screwcaps with bargain basement plonk. Some markets, particularly those in traditional European wine producing countries, are highly resistant to alternative closures such as screwcaps, whereas others, such as Australia and New Zealand, are more accepting. Second, people like corks. They’re natural, they look and feel right, and the ritual of getting the corkscrew out is part and parcel of the wine drinking experience. Thirdly, while most experts agree that the screwcap is the closure of choice for fresh white wines and easy drinking reds, there’s some debate about whether they are suitable for red wines destined for long ageing.
The reason for this doubt is that people like the way that fine wines evolve over time when they are closed with a fault-free cork. Screwcaps provide a better seal than cork. The question is, is this seal likely to be so good that it prevents the wine from ageing properly over, say, 20 years? Wine ageing is a complex process that takes place largely in the absence of oxygen, in what is called a ‘reductive’ environment. But could it be that the trace amounts of oxygen that get through the seal provided by the cork are an intrinsic part of the ageing process? The scientists don’t know for sure, and as yet no one has done the proper experiments that will settle this issue once and for all.
However, it is worth emphasizing that only a very tiny fraction of the wines made worldwide will require extended cellaring. For almost all other wine styles, the screwcap is likely to be the optimum closure. It’s likely for one reason and another that cork will always be with us, but unless someone comes up with a cure for the curse of cork taint, expect to see screwcaps gaining ground over the next few years.
What are the issues?
Have you noticed the increasing number of wine bottles sealed with screwcaps, and wondered why? It’s because of a small war that is taking place. Over the last few years, the wine trade has been embroiled in a conflict. You wouldn’t have thought that the rather boring-sounding issue of bottle closures would inflame passions, but it has, and to a remarkable degree. One the one hand we have the traditionalists who feel that cork is the only decent way to seal a wine bottle; on the other, we have the screwcap crusaders who are on a mission to eradicate cork and have all bottles sealed with alternative closures. Who’s right?
Cork is a remarkable natural substance. Because of its cellular wall composition and structure and it has elastic and compressible qualities that make it ideally suited to sealing wine bottles. A decent cork will provide a good seal on a wine bottle for thirty years, possibly longer, allowing the wine to develop and mature into something special. And despite corks providing a good seal, it’s relatively easy to extract them using one of a wide array of different designs of corkscrew. Added to this, taking the cork out has become a valued part of the tradition of wine. It may sound silly, but there is something special about uncorking a bottle.
So what is the problem? The dirty secret of the wine trade is that one in twenty bottles of wine is ruined as soon as it is bottled by problems with the cork. Chief among these is what is known as ‘cork taint’. This is when a wine takes on a musty odour caused by a chemical called 2,4,6-trichloroanisole (TCA) that is present in some corks. TCA itself is produced by microbes that live in the small pores, called lenticels, that run throughout cork bark. In extreme cases, it’s hard to miss a ‘corked’ wine: the mustiness can sometimes be overpowering. In other situations, the taint is more subtle, reducing the fruitiness of the wine, giving it a subdued aroma, usually with a faint whiff of damp cardboard or old cellars in the background.
The problem with TCA is that it is incredibly potent: most people can detect it at concentrations as low as 5 parts per trillion, which makes it hard to eradicate. To give you a better idea of this figure, it’s equivalent to one second in 64 centuries. Where good data have been collected, the frequency of cork taint hovers around 5% of bottles sealed this way. The other main problem with corks is that because they are a natural product, they are variable, and some fail by letting oxygen in which then spoils the wine.
Cork taint hasn’t always been such a big issue. In the past, it is likely that many people weren’t as aware of the problem and happily drunk corked wine. But with the increasing quality of cheap wine (which makes any taint more likely to be spotted) and the fact that consumers are now generally better informed, a vocal body has sprung up who have decided that they’re not going to put up with this situation any longer.
The cork industry has been slow to address the issue. Initially they went through a period of denial, funding PR campaigns to persuade people that cork is the natural option. They hid behind an environmental smokescreen, claiming that if people ditched cork, then the Iberian cork forests—a precious ecological resource—would be under threat. Finally, they realised that research on the problem would be a better use of resources, and while there are now some promising techniques in development, there is still no solution that results in taint-free corks.
So what are the alternatives? Surprisingly, modern science hasn’t been able to come up with a synthetic substance that shares cork’s properties of elasticity and compressibility. While there are a number of synthetic corks on the market, they’re really only suitable for wines destined for immediate consumption (that is, within a year or two). The problem has been that the plastics used can’t provide a seal equal to that of real cork without being impossible to extract from the neck of the bottle. The result is that plastic corks tend to be permeable enough that the wine tends to oxidise after a couple of years, although they are fine for everyday wines that are usually drunk on release. Of course, it should be pointed out that some makes of plastic cork are more efficient than others, and product development is occurring all the time, so we may yet see serious plastic alternatives to corks (they may already exist, although I haven’t yet seen good data indicating this). For now, then, the leading contender to cork is therefore the screwcap.
Screwcaps provide a pretty good seal—better than cork, in fact. In addition, they are easy to open: you don’t need a corkscrew, you just twist them off. Because they are manufactured and not a natural substance, they provide a much more uniform seal than corks. Added to this, there are plenty of reports of 20 year old screwcapped bottles being opened and the wine tasting fresh and lively.
So how come all wines aren’t sealed with screwcaps? This is what a vocal element in the wine trade are calling for, after all. There are three main problems. First, screwcaps have a ‘cheap’ image in the minds of many consumers. People associate screwcaps with bargain basement plonk. Some markets, particularly those in traditional European wine producing countries, are highly resistant to alternative closures such as screwcaps, whereas others, such as Australia and New Zealand, are more accepting. Second, people like corks. They’re natural, they look and feel right, and the ritual of getting the corkscrew out is part and parcel of the wine drinking experience. Thirdly, while most experts agree that the screwcap is the closure of choice for fresh white wines and easy drinking reds, there’s some debate about whether they are suitable for red wines destined for long ageing.
The reason for this doubt is that people like the way that fine wines evolve over time when they are closed with a fault-free cork. Screwcaps provide a better seal than cork. The question is, is this seal likely to be so good that it prevents the wine from ageing properly over, say, 20 years? Wine ageing is a complex process that takes place largely in the absence of oxygen, in what is called a ‘reductive’ environment. But could it be that the trace amounts of oxygen that get through the seal provided by the cork are an intrinsic part of the ageing process? The scientists don’t know for sure, and as yet no one has done the proper experiments that will settle this issue once and for all.
However, it is worth emphasizing that only a very tiny fraction of the wines made worldwide will require extended cellaring. For almost all other wine styles, the screwcap is likely to be the optimum closure. It’s likely for one reason and another that cork will always be with us, but unless someone comes up with a cure for the curse of cork taint, expect to see screwcaps gaining ground over the next few years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)