Comments on: Washington Brands vs Brand Washington

By: Sean P. Sullivan

Sean P. Sullivan — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 19:18:40 +0000

Mike, thanks for the post. I have been thinking a lot about the WSJ article this past week. I do believe there is an issue in Washington at the moment that Lettie touched on, firesaling large volume CA wine is creating problems for WA wineries that can’t compete with those prices without going out of business. Not sure how it’s going to play out.

I agree that the branding issue has yet to be solved despite much work. We’ll see if the wineries can unlock the branding code.

By: Mike Veseth

Mike Veseth — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 00:32:22 +0000

I agree with you, Paul. I think the hidden message in the WSJ article is that (some) California wineries are the ones that are having trouble competing — hence the fire sale prices.

By: Paul Gregutt

Paul Gregutt — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 00:28:08 +0000

Mike, I scratched my head at some of the statements in the WSJ story. Apart from a few minor misstatements of fact, the general focus seemed awfully negative. She only found two wineries that were doing well? I could easily name two dozen, and most of the rest are getting by because they only make a few hundred cases. Pahlmeyer at $45 is a decent buy, but I fail to see how Washington can’t compete. I’m seeing Washington wines being offered at Costco, Garagiste and Full Pull at sensational prices – often under $20 – that could compete. Lettie Teague can’t find Washington wines in her neighborhood bodega because NY liquor laws are even worse than ours!