Comments on: Washington Wine’s Identity Crisis

By: Crocodile Chuck

Crocodile Chuck — Sat, 09 Apr 2011 07:05:24 +0000

I respectfully disagree with Jeff -WA Riesling has ALWAYS been cool-since the eighties!

I echo Rod and Cathy’s points above. And one more-why do wine regions HAVE to be cool-the analogy is a bubble in a financial asset class. What goes up, must come down. The problem arises when there has been too much malinvestment in capacity and production as the bubble grows. Slow and steady wins the race…..

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:14:11 +0000

Interesting choice of WA wines in that lineup. That Cayuse wine is actually grown and made in Oregon. The WWC doesn’t want to talk about that. In a big head slapper, neither does the Oregon Wine Board. But, that is another discussion. Interesting that it was chosen. I wonder why?

The problem with WA is not really at the top end. There are plenty of people in the Seattle Metro Area to buy those wines. Take the St. Michelle portfolio out of the equation and what mid-to-low tier priced wine do you have with wider distribution? Cathy is 100% correct on this point.

If you want to get recognition, you’re going to have
to have a CA vs. WA wine competition. Ask folks on the East Coast if WA makes wine. You’ll get many strange looks. How much did that WS Wine of the Year help the WA wine industry?

You need to take straight aim at California. Price vs. Quality ratios….etc, etc, etc. Value and style are what WA have. Consistency too. But the Wine Curmudgeon is 1000% right. The avg. US consumer thinks only CA makes quality wine…plus, they beat the pants off those damn French.

I agree with Mr. Veseth, I would beat that Riesling drum all day long. You have amazing QPR (which CAN compete with German offerings), and you have big money behind it. You even have German money in that game too. Didn’t it dawn on someone from the WWC that folks from Deutschland were buying up Riesling vineyards, left and right? WA never made Riesling cool, or at least hasn’t yet.

By: Mike Veseth

Mike Veseth — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 22:28:06 +0000

Thanks for this, Lyn. Hopefully we can learn from your success (without accidentally copying your description).

By: Lyn Bevin

Lyn Bevin — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 22:20:45 +0000

I find this really interesting as Hawke’s Bay in NZ has had similar issues over the years. (I’m the EO of the regional wine association). Over the last seven years there has been considerable discussion as to what Hawke’s Bay should hand it’s hat on – Merlot, Syrah, blended reds etc. Some feel we should focus on diversity however this can be difficult for tradtional wine consumers to get their heads around. The simplest way forward has been to distinguish ourselves from Marlborough and Sauvignon Blanc with a red wine platform.

What really stood out in your article was the descriptor “old world structure and new world fruit” as this is a phrase we have used for quite some time. We’re also the oldest wine region in NZ and the second biggest – the red wine story has allowed us to tell the history, the terroir and other varieties as well.

Have a look at http://www.winehawkesbay.co.nz/docs/HBWG%20Email%20version%20of%20Interactive.pdf if you’d like to see how we tell our wine story to international media and trade.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:17:01 +0000

The premise of the seminar is flawed. To try to put one singular stamp on a state that grows such a wide variety of grapes in so many different areas seems crazy, although I understand the desire. As a wine professional since 1991 I love being able to put forward a wine as representative of the region, but even Chablis has producers who use oak and those who do not, resulting in very different wines.
Chablis and Barolo (part of the seminar’s tasting) have about 10,000 acres and 4,300 acres (Wikipedia) planted respectively. They grow only one grape each, Chardonnay and Nebbiolo.
While Walla Walla has much less vineyard acreage (1,800 according to WallaWallaWine.com) more than a dozen varieties are planted. There may not be a “Singular Style” for this AVA much less the entire state.
If a consistent goal of finding “the right” grapes for certain areas continues then perhaps, with enough time, a style will emerge. In the meantime, wineries offering double digit bottlings from five or more varieties (one Washington producer offers 29 different wines from 19 varieties) will hinder a cohesive identity.
They also make things more confusing…but perhaps more interesting as well.

By: Wine Curmudgeon

Wine Curmudgeon — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:12:56 +0000

Isn’t that the problem that all U.S. wine regions that aren’t California have? Consumers expect all U.S. wine to taste like California wine, so producers who aren’t from California are caught between a rock and a hard place.

By: Cathy

Cathy — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 17:00:48 +0000

I love Washington wine, but I agree there’s a wide range in style. For example, I’ve found Washington Cabernet Sauvignon to be consistently good, but there’s little in common between the velvetiness of Seven Hills, the high-end fruit bombs of Sineann and the very structured Fidelitas cabs that require some bottle age. But the larger issue is that I can find none of these on store shelves in the Midwest. Few Washington wineries beyond Columbia Crest, Chateau St. Michelle and various bottlings of K Vintners appear to have wide enough distribution to help Washington build a reputation at all. On the other hand, if you drink wine at all, you will have had Cabs and Chardonnay from California. So my question as a consumer is this: What’s the end game? For the high-end, lower production wineries, I suppose it’s raising the bottle price. But reaching the broad distribution necessary to build a national reputation likely would mean lots of consolidation among the myriad of small wineries that seem to make up most of the wine business in Washington. I love those small wineries, and will travel to find them, but people like me are a pretty small subset of wine consumers.

By: Rod

Rod — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 15:45:59 +0000

Great summary of the event, I was at the seminar too, and 100% agree with your conclusions. Furthermore, I reject one of the underlying, yet unstated, premises of the session: That a wine region has to have a style to be great. This looks at the state as being too narrow. Does France have a singular style, does Italy, does Spain, realistically does California? No, and much of the wine world is starting to move to thier focus to micro-regions like AVA’s. It is going to take a long time for the larger “consumer” audience to learn but it will happen. What the title of the seminar should of been is, “Is the Washington Wine Commission’s Market Arm to Impatient?” The french have been making and selling wine for 1000s of years, we have been doing it for 60, some time GREAT things take a little time for full recognition.