NA Wine & the Second Glass Test: Bolle Bubbles, LVMH’s Bet, South African Spritz

LVMH Bets on Booze-Free Bubbles at $100-Plus a Bottle” was the Wall Street Journal headline. The story, which you may have read when it came out last month, is that luxury goods conglomerate LVMH was buying a 30 percent stake in a (luxury) non-alcoholic wine start-up called French Bloom. The new NA wine boasts both good DNA (one of the founders and the winemaker are members of the Taittinger Champagne clan) and a bold business plan. The WSJ reports that

The brand sells bottles of sparkling white for $39 and sparkling rosé for $44, mostly in high-end bars and restaurants, or through luxury retailers. Its latest nonalcoholic fizz, La Cuvée Vintage 2022, which accounts for a small percentage of its production, sets consumers back $119 a bottle.

While the brand initially expected customers would mostly be pregnant women and nondrinkers, it estimates that about 80% of its clients drink alcohol.

NA Wine Challenges and Opportunities

I think the logic of the investment was pretty simple for LVMH. Someone is going to develop a non-alcoholic luxury sparkling wine brand, so they might as well do it themselves and capture the high end of the market. The acquisition is driven, at least in part, by the same logic that led Moet Hennessy to create an international network of wineries to satisfy the local thirst for sparkling wine. Argentina, California, Australia, China, and India. And now in NA-land, too.

What I found particularly interesting about the French Bloom article was the discussion of winemaking challenges. Making quality NA wine or beer is not as easy as just taking the alcohol out. Millions of dollars are being invested in innovative processes to make the NA products as appealing as their alcoholic shelf-mates. The WSJ reports that,

When a wine is dealcoholized, it loses about 60% of the aromas. “We have to start with something that has, we like to say, wider shoulders, versus if you dealcoholized a Chardonnay from Burgundy, you’re not left with a lot,” …

French Bloom sources its grapes from the Languedoc region of southern France, where the sunny climate results in grapes with naturally high alcohol content and sugar levels. They also harvest the grapes two to three weeks early, depending on the year, to have maximum acidity. They then age the wines in new oak barrels from Burgundy. … The wine is “undrinkable before the dealcoholization process,” said Frerejean-Taittinger. “It’s so overpowering.”

The goal, as we here at The Wine Economist have proposed, is for NA wine to pass the “Second Glass Test.” An NA wine should remind us of the type of wine it represents (an NA Sauvignon Blanc should remind us of a Sauvignon Blanc) and it should be good enough that you ask for a second glass. It is a simple test but, as we reported last year, one that many wines seem to fail. Either they don’t really taste like the wines they mimic or they just aren’t that fun to drink. Sad!

Bolle Sparkling Wine Passes the Test

LVMH’s investment in French Bloom provides evidence, if any is needed, that NA wine is a thing. We haven’t had an opportunity to put French Bloom to the Second Glass Test yet, but we could not resist an invitation from the makers of Bolle Non-Alcoholic Sparkling Wines to give their wines a test drive.

I was intrigued by the innovative production process. There are several ways to remove alcohol (French Bloom uses a process called vacuum distillation). The Bolle method first ferments the grape juice in the usual way, removes the alcohol, then adds a little grape juice, and allows a second fermentation to replace some of the characteristics that were lost earlier in the previous process. It is a clever idea, don’t you think?

The resulting wine has less than 0.5 percent ABV, which is within the “non-alcoholic” range. Does the second fermentation put the magic back in the bottle?  Does Bolle pass the Second Glass test? There was only one way to find out.

We tried the Bolle sparkling Rosé and were quickly convinced: this is probably the best NA wine we have tasted so far. Did it remind us of Blanc de Noir sparkling wine? Yes. Would we accept a second glass? Absolutely. The wine was nicely balanced, dry, but with some of the fruit that we have found missing in earlier “second glass” trials. Whatever they are doing at Bolle the results are excellent.

The Bolle sparkling Rosé is made with a combination of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir wines. We are looking forward to trying the Bolle sparkling Blanc de Blanc, which is Chardonnay blended with Sylvaner. The grapes are from Spain and the NA wine process happens in Germany. Production is still quite limited, so the best way to purchase Bolle is probably directly from the winery website.

Abstinence NA Spirits

As long as Sue and I were testing NA wines we could not resist an invitation to expand our experiments to include a NA spritz product. One of the best things about a trip to Italy is the excuse it provides to enjoy an Aperol or Campari spritz. We make them at home, too, and they bring back that warm Italian feeling.

Abstinence Spirits sells a range of non-alcoholic spirits products that are made in South Africa using the distilled essence of botanicals of the Cape Floral Kingdom. There are a variety of interesting NA spirits both bottled straight and used in NA RTD spritz beverages. We were tempted by the lemon spirits (I was thinking lemoncello), but could not pass up the Abstinence Blood Orange Aperitif, which is flavored with African wormwood, cinchona bark, allspice, clove, blood orange, and spice distillate.

We tried the spritz as directed with both tonic water and soda and the result was a split decision. I liked the tonic spritz because it reminded me of an Aperol spritz, and I’d definitely take a second glass if offered. Sue admitted the resemblance to Aperol but found the drink just too sweet (both the NA spirits and the tonic are sweetened).  The soda spritz was less sweet but lacked a bit of the bitter punch we were expecting.

Two cheers, not three, for the Abstinence Blood Orange aperitif, but we will keep experimenting. Lots of innovation in the NA beverage category. Watch for our next report in a few weeks.

Strength in Numbers: VITÆVINO and Wine’s Global Battle for Hearts & Minds

There is a lot of work to do to restore wine to the place (in the market, in society) that many of us believe it deserves. Here in America, for example, we have recently concluded the successful launch of Come Over October, a program that seeks to replace the image of wine as dangerous alcohol with the idea of wine as an integral part of healthy and satisfying lifestyles.

What I liked best about Come Over October 2024 was that it provided a broad umbrella that wineries and wine regions big and small used to reach out to their customers. By seizing the opportunity, wineries and others generated a grassroots buzz. It is a very good beginning. The question now is, what next?

The headwinds that wine faces are global, not just local, and come from several points of the compass. So it is a good sign that Come Over October is not an isolated response. I want to draw your attention to two international movements that seek to advance wine’s agenda on different levels and in different ways.

VITÆVINO Declaration

Wine is threatened both from below (diminished consumer appreciation) and above (neo-prohibitionist government policies). Come Over October is meant to address the former problem. In Europe, a movement called VITÆVINO has been mobilized in part to take on the latter. The program is supported from above by powerful European industry groups (Comité Européen des Entreprises Vins, Confédération Européenne des Vignerons Indépendants. Copa-Cogeca and European Federation of Origin Wines), but also seeks to draw support from grassroots advocates.

Wine’s essential identity is under attack, according to VITÆVINO, and it is important to take action.

Wine is facing a significant existential threat as a growing anti-alcohol movement increasingly seeks to demonize alcoholic beverages. The responsible and moderate consumption of wine — which is the way the overwhelming majority of wine consumers enjoy it — is being stigmatised by the removal of the distinction between alcohol abuse and the moderate wine consumption within a healthy and balanced lifestyle.

Policy-makers, wine industry professionals, and wine-loving citizens are invited to sign the VITÆVINO Declaration in order to protect and preserve wine’s cultural role, value its socio-economic impact, and to give voice to moderation.

VITÆVINO went live on October 1 (what is it about October?). About 10,000 individuals (some of whom can be seen in this collection of video presentations) have signed the declaration so far, mainly in Europe but around the world, too, including a few in America. Significantly, some of the first to sign were elected members of the European Parliament, where alcohol regulation is an important issue.

The discussions that produced VITÆVINO began several years ago when European wine industry leaders realized that the wine industry was being increasingly attacked by anti-alcohol forces. Ignacio Sánchez Recarte, general secretary of the Comité Européen des Entreprises Vins, determined that an organized two-prong approach was needed, both political action at the national and EU level and also the development of broad-based grassroots support for wine culture and the wine industry.

This campaign invites everyone — from wine producers and exporters to sommeliers, bartenders, policymakers, and wine lovers alike — to unite in support of wine. It encourages participants to defend a product that embodies agricultural heritage, cultural legacy, and a symbol of conviviality. Together, we assert the right to enjoy wine in moderation, preserving its legacy and securing its future.

The next step is to broaden and deepen the movement by encouraging more stakeholders around the world to sign the VITÆVINO declaration, making it a true global movement, and to forge alliances with other groups such as Fondo Vitivinícola Mendoza in Argentina and Come Over October in the United States.

Looking ahead, our plan is to gather as many signatures as possible to amplify the voices of those advocating for wine worldwide and to create a united platform for wine supporters globally.

Beyond our ambition to expand both numerically and geographically, we aim to build a network grounded in shared goals and values. To start, the campaign’s results will be presented at the European Parliament in mid-January 2025, hosted by MEPs. We also encourage everyone in our field to feature VITÆVINO at wine and agricultural events with a dedicated stand or corner. Additionally, we are developing an art-based project to further support our mission, with details to be shared soon through our dedicated channels.

Wine in Moderation

Come Over October and VITÆVINO are both relatively recent initiatives, but Wine in Moderation traces its history back to 2007-2008. Originally focused on Europe to provide a countervailing voice to neo-prohibitionist policies and rhetoric. It is now a global movement, although it has not caught fire here in America yet.

When I mention Wine in Moderation to my friends in California, they seem to roll their eyes (maybe it is just my imagination). I think what they hear is Wine in MODERATION and wonder why in the world they would want to tell people to drink less wine. But the intended message, as I understand it, is WINE in Moderation, promoting wine as a natural element of a healthy lifestyle.

A 2019 Wine Economist column asked, “What Can We Learn from the Wine in Moderation Movement?” The answer, in part, was this.

Wine in Moderation movement members are given the tools they need to spread the word, which is a model that could work here in the U.S. Leadership is needed, of course, but it seems to me that our many regional wine associations and wine companies, too, would benefit from bringing a coordinated message into their diverse communications programs.

I can imagine a program with a general message agreed at a high level, but implemented with creative local twists and turns by the dozens of regional wine associations around the U.S. Such a plan would share the creative energy (and cost) while leveraging wine’s broad and diverse base.

Work together? Is that realistic? Well, what’s the alternative? In Europe, as George Sandeman said, the alternative was being regulated like tobacco. The alternative here in the U.S. might be a  gradual (and then sudden) wine market bust.

Obviously I was skeptical when I wrote those words back in 2019 that the industry could come together to address market challenges, but recent events in the U.S. and across the global wine patch make me more optimistic.

Will Come Over October, the VITÆVINO Declaration, Wine in Moderation, and other initiatives solve the wine world’s problems? Silver bullets are hard to find and hope is not a strategy. Much hard work is required and strength in numbers is welcome, too. It is a good thing that many individuals and groups are tackling the problem on different levels and in different ways.

>>><<<

Thanks to George Sandeman for alerting me to the VITÆVINO Delaration project and to Susana Garcia Dolla for introducing me to Wine in Moderation a few years ago when we were both speakers at a meeting in Porto.  Special thanks to Gaya Ducceschi, Head of Wine & Society and Communication for CEEV for answering my questions about VITÆVINO (some of which are quoted in the text above).

Wine & Value: Push, Pull, Squeeze

A cynic, according to Oscar Wilde, knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. For some reason, this characterization is often associated with “dismal science” economists like me. Today’s Wine Economist column hopes to make an exception to Wilde’s rule by focusing on wine’s value problem and how understanding it can help explain recent market trends.

Price versus Value

Inflation is on everyone’s mind these days (both as an election issue and in more general terms), so it is not surprising that there is concern about the high cost of wine. But when I look at other consumer categories (as I did on The Wine Economist several weeks ago), I find that price isn’t as important to consumers today as value.

Consumers seem to recognize that sometimes when you pay less you get less. They are willing to pay more when they believe they get better value. A focus on value and not just price is not new, of course. Although it is easy to imagine that the Two Buck Chuck boom of a few years ago was driven by low price, it was true that there were even cheaper options. Many of the wine drinkers who embraced TBC cited value as the appeal. TBC is a two dollar wine, they’d say, that tastes like a five dollar wine.

Push versus Pull

Many wine consumers have shifted up a shelf or two on the wine wall in recent years in a process called Premiumization. Why have they done this? Did they wake up one morning and think that they just weren’t spending enough on wine? Probably not. Maybe they were pulled up by the higher quality of more expensive wines. I am sure that is the case for many.

But it is also possible that they were pushed up by falling quality and poorer value of the wines they had been drinking before. Did the value proposition of those mainstream wines deteriorate?

The Big Squeeze

Both wine producers and winegrape growers have been squeezed in recent years as costs have risen faster than price. One way that winegrowers have reacted is by increasing vineyard yields. This can be often be done without affecting grape quality, but only up to a point, as I understand it. When growers are squeezed so hard, quality can suffer and this can affect the perceived value of the resulting wine.

I know some growers who believe the value problem comes from a different source. They see wineries, caught in a cost squeeze themselves, substituting cheaper imported bulk wine (there is a lot of it on the market these days) for higher-cost domestic wine. California growers might argue that this dilutes quality.

Whatever the reason, the demand for wines below $10 (and now above $10, too) has been falling for many years. There are certainly many reasons for this phenomenon, but I think the value hypothesis is part of the problem. Value-seeking consumers have reacted to changing circumstances by shifting their wine-buying behavior, pushed by lower value here, pulled by high perceived value there, and squeezed by general economic conditions.

Some Implications

If budget-constrained consumers find themselves forced to move to higher price points in order to find the value that you used to get at lower cost, then it is not surprising that they have reduced the volume of wine they purchase.

If consumers believe that white wines give them the value they seek at lower cost than red wines, this might explain some of the red-to-white wine shift that we are seeing.

If correct, my speculations about value explain some but surely not all of the changes we have seen in the wine industry and raise an interesting question. Are the wine industry’s reactions to the current crisis addressing the cause of the problem or only the symptoms?

Global Market Trends: Is White Wine the New Red?

The global wine market is in flux these days and much of the attention is focused on falling consumption in the post-pandemic era. Global wine consumption actually peaked a few years ago, as the graph above shows, but the trend was disguised for a while by Covid pantry-stocking and other factors.

The falling sales volume is a stark fact that concentrates the mind, but it isn’t the only wine market change to consider. The strong trend of premiumization seems to have lost momentum, too, which may be related to a growing affordability crisis affecting many products including wine. (It is noteworthy that both Burberry’s luxury stores and Dollar Tree budget stores are experiencing sales declines associated with strained consumer budgets.) Do consumers think wine is good value for money?

Bottle of White? Bottle of Red?

Another trend that bears watching is the shift (in both production and consumption) from red to white wine (increased rosé sales are also part of this pattern). The change is so dramatic that last year the  OIV produced a special report on the topic. The OIV data for wine production shows a dramatic shift from red to white (see below). Like the decline in global wine consumption, this trend started a few years ago but has picked up steam (and attracted attention) recently.

The figure below provides a demand-side picture of the situation. Global white wine sales (by volume) held up better in the current climate than did red wine sales, so white’s share of the pie has grown. Changing production is a response to shifts in demand. Good news for white wine producers like New Zealand. Not-so-good for red wine producers like Argentina and Spain.

The changing color of wine shows up in both the data and on the store shelves. We have encountered more examples of white wines made from red grapes, for example, as producers look to align production with demand within the constraints of existing vineyard varieties. White Malbec from Argentina? It was the surprise hit of one of our tastings. White Pinot Noir from Oregon? Yes, that’s a thing now, too, and it can be very nice.

The China Syndrome

Part of the global decline in red wine production and consumption is no doubt due to the collapse of the Chinese wine market in the last ten years (wine production and sales in China are disproportionately red) as shown in the graph below.

French Paradox?

The pattern of changing red-white consumption differs considerably among the largest consuming countries. In France, for example, the volume of red wine sales has trended down for many years, with white and pink wines holding their own.

Do you remember the “French Paradox”? That was the title of the 60 Minutes program segment about how the French stay healthy in part by drinking red wine. It helped power a red wine boom in the U.S. Well, it looks like we have another paradox on our hands now as French red wine consumption slip slides away at the same time, we are told, that consumer interest in health has increased.

American Exceptionalism?

In the United States, on the other hand, red wine sales by volume have been stagnant (premiumization has pushed value up, however). White wine sales (and pink too, to a lesser extent) have risen modestly as measured by volume (see below) The red shift in U.S. wine consumption is less pronounced than in China or France … so far.

(Note that the OIV data shown here end in 2021, before U.S. wine consumption began to sharply decline.)

The NIQ sales data for the U.S. (found in the most recent issue of Wine Business Monthly) suggest that this red-to-white trend may be accelerating.  Total sales value for the most recent 52 weeks, for example, was $9,172 million for red wine and $7,857 for white wine (red still leads by dollar value). But this pattern changes when you look at the most recent four survey weeks, where white wine’s $619 million outpaces red wine’s $583 million. Seasonal factors surely account for some of white wine’s lead, of course, but it still comes as a surprise.

The shift is more dramatic when measured by volume of sales. For the most recent 52 weeks the numbers are 72.9 million cases of red wine versus 79.9 million cases of white wine. White’s lead lengthens for the most recent four weeks. Measured white wine sales were 6.2 million cases compared with 4.7 million cases of red wine.

The patterns of red-to-white sales shift differ by country, but the fact of the global trend seems pretty clear. What’s behind this surprising change in consumption patterns? Every time I come up with a simple answer to this question I quickly find a reason to dismiss it, so I won’t bore you with my theories. I note that the OIV report is long on factors but shorter on analysis, too.

The Curse of Corporate Wine-Think Déjà Vu?

The global wine industry continues to adjust to the “new normal” market environment, with recent news stories focusing on strategies to support demand (Come Over October), grubbing-up programs to reduce grape supply, and restructuring wine winemaking businesses (Vintage Wine Estates bankruptcy, Duckhorn Vineyards acquisition, etc.) after a surge of consolidation fueled by cheap money came to a sudden end.

The restructuring has sometimes returned wineries to the people and families that founded them. In other cases (here I am thinking specifically about Stags Leap Wine Cellars and Col Solare in Washington State) a family-winery partner (the Antinori family) has acquired control from its unintended private-equity co-owner. I hesitate to generalize, but the situation suggests that the advantages of family ownership and control in the wine business are becoming clear again.

I wrote a series of columns about family versus corporate wine regimes back in 2015 and I thought it might be useful to re-publish excerpts from two of them now because the issues they addressed seem relevant again today. Hope you find them interesting.

The Curious Dominance of Family-Owned Wine Businesses in the U.S.

May 5, 2015

Last week’s column about the rise and fall of the Taylor Wine Company of New York raises a number of interesting issues and one of them is the singular importance of family-owned and privately-held businesses in the U.S. wine industry and the very mixed record of publicly-listed wine corporations. In retrospect, a case can be made that Taylor’s downfall began when they made the initial move from family ownership to public corporation.big10

The conventional wisdom holds that family-owned and privately held firms can be very successful, but their scale and scope are necessarily limited. Corporations, it is said, can have better access to capital and may be able to negotiate risk more successfully because of limited liability structure. You might expect the largest firms in any given industry to be corporations and this is true in some industries, but not in others.

Wine Exceptionalism

Wine is one exception to the dominant corporation rule. Here (above) is a table of the ten largest wine businesses in the U.S. market (measured by estimated or reported volume not value of sales) for 2014 and 2003. The data are from Wine Business Monthly, which publishes an analysis of the 30 biggest U.S. wine firms each February.  I’m looking at just the top ten to keep the analysis simple, although I should note that these ten firms collectively account for about three-quarters of all wine sold in the U.S.

Looking at the 2014 data, you will note that only four of the top ten firms (those in italics) are public corporations or subsidiaries of public corporations. The other six are family-owned or, like The Wine Group, privately-held and together they produce more than half of all the wine sold in America. [editors note: There was a typo in te graph, which should list The Wine Group not The Wine Company.] The bias towards private- and family-ownership is even stronger if we look at the next 20 wineries where only a few corporate names like Pernod Ricard make the list.

Looking closely at the 2014 numbers it is hard not to be impressed by the growth of family firms Delicato and Jackson Family Estates and also the success of Ste Michelle Wine Estates, which seems to behave like a privately-held firm even though it is a subsidiary of a public one, albeit in a different line of business (Altria specializes in tobacco products, not drinks).

All in the Family

Family- and private-owned wine companies are if anything more important today than they were before the Great Recession. Why are family-owned wineries so vibrant despite their structural economic limitations?

The conventional answer to this question — and there is in fact a substantial academic literature dealing with family businesses and even family wine businesses — stresses the ways that family businesses take a multi-generational approach and are able to negotiate the trade-off between short run returns and long run value. Corporations, it is said, are sometimes driven too much by quarterly returns and end up sacrificing the long term to achieve immediate financial goals.

When business requires a long run vision, it is said, families gain an advantage. Wine is certainly a business where it is necessary to look into the future if only because vines are perennials not annuals like corn or soybeans and successful brands are perennials, too.

Another school of thought examines issues of trust and transactions costs within the firm and the ways that family ties can reduce internal barriers and make interactions more effective.  It is commonplace to say that wine is a relationship business and family firms may have advantages in this regard. I have knows some family wine businesses that even go out of their way to work with family-owned distributors and so forth.  I think one author saw family-to-family links (the Casella family and the Deutsch family) as keys to the success of Yellow Tail brand wine.

Maybe the Real Question Is …

There are good explanations for the success of family-owned wine businesses, but sometimes they feel a bit ad hoc, tailored to explain a particular case and less capable of generalization.  And they often fail to fully account for the fact that many family businesses (and family-owned wine businesses) either fail or, like the Taylor family, end going over to the dark corporate side. Family relationships can be good, bad or ugly — you cannot think of the Mondavi family story without channeling an episode of Family Feud) and not every new generation wants to stay in the business. So there must be something more here than simple families think long-term. But maybe we are actually asking the wrong question.

Maybe the question isn’t why family-owned wine businesses are so strong and instead why corporate owned wine businesses are sometimes so ineffective. Is there something about wine that turns smart corporate brains to mush (not all of them, of course, but maybe some of them)? Come back next week for some thoughts on this provocative question.

The Curse of Corporate Wine-Think?

 May 12, 2015

Protecting Assets versus Leveraging Them

One difference that I have noticed about family wine businesses versus some of the corporations regards the role of key assets such as brand and reputation.  Many family wineries that come to mind seems to see their role as protecting brand and reputation so that they will continue to provide benefits well into the future. Some corporations that come to mind, on the other hand, seem to focus on leveraging brand and reputation in order to increase short run returns.

What’s the problem with leveraging a brand? Leverage has the potential to increase returns in any business, but it also increases risk. And one risk is that the integrity of key assets can be undermined by the leverage process itself.

An example? Well, I hate to pick on Treasury Wine Estates because they have seen enough bad news in the last few years, but one of my readers emailed me in dismay when a news story appeared about Treasury’s latest market strategy. I’ll use this as an example, but Treasury isn’t the only wine corporation that I could pick on and maybe not even the best example

One element of Treasury’s plan is to develop brands for the “masstige” market segment, which means taking a prestige brand and levergaing it by introducing a cheaper mass market product that rides on the iconic brand’s reputation. 

Masstige? Sounds like something from a Dilbert cartoon, which means of course that it is a totally authentic contemporary business term. Prestige fashion house Versace, for example, seems to have developed a masstige product line for mass market retailer H&M. The line was launched in 2011 and I’m not sure where it stands today. Maybe it was a big success? If  masstige  worked for shoes and dresses, how could it be a bad idea for wine?

I’m sure a prestige association helps sell the cheaper mass market products, but I can think of some examples in the wine business (Paul Masson? Beringer?  Mondavi?) where it might have undermined the iconic brand itself a little or a lot, which seems self-defeating. I know that has happened in the fashion field (think about how the Pierre Cardin brand was diluted by cheap logo products) so I imagine it could be a factor in wine, too.

Think Global, Source Global

Here’s another example. Regional identity is more important in wine than in some other industries and Treasury owns some famous “wine of origin” brands — wines associated with particular regions, which are valuable assets.  But my worried reader was concerned about Treasury’s plan to source globally to expand the scale of some of these regional brands.

“Building scale via sourcing breadth is one of the most critical platforms necessary for the globalization of wine brands,” according to the report. Gosh, that even sounds like corp-speak, doesn’t it? Logical, I suppose, but maybe locally-defined brands need to be locally sourced to maintain authenticity? Maybe consumers would be suspicious of a Stags Leap wine, to make up an example, that is sourced from Australia or some other distant place as a way of leveraging its brand power? I wonder just how flexible these terroir-based brand concepts are in the real world where consumers are the ones who decide what is authentic and what is bogus.

Global Market Moral Hazard

Some big wine corporations that have had troubles in recent years seem to have made the mistake of thinking that big global markets will soak up all that they (and the other big firms) can produce. It’s a matter of global-think. The global markets are huge. There’s always a market for another dozen containers somewhere in the big world of wine, or so it might seem, and so the risk of failure is misunderestimated, to use a GW Bushism.

In finance we would say that the false sense that the global market is always there to bail you out leads to moral hazard and this is probably true in wine, too.  Moral hazard encourages excessive investment and promotes booms and the busts that often follow. What seems to be true for an individual company is not necessarily true for an industry and misunderstanding this sort of risk is downright dangerous in an industry like wine, which is by its nature subject to cycles and booms and busts.

If private- and family-firms avoid the tendency to think global when their markets are local and thus avoid misunderestimating risk and if they really do work to preserve rather than leverage key assets it might help explain their lasting power and influence. Lots of “ifs” there, but its a theory. What do you think?

Is October the Month You Finally Try Non-Alcoholic Wine?

Is October 2024 the month you finally try non-alcoholic (NA) wine? Maybe you’ve never sampled NA wine before or perhaps you have and were disappointed. In either case, this might be a good time to see what’s going on.

The Case for NA Wine

The NA wine market in the U.S. is growing, which is worth noting since the overall wine market continues to struggle. NA wine sales have grown by more than 25 percent over the last year, albeit from a relatively small base.  On an anecdotal level, we have watched as the NA part of the wine wall at our local upscale supermarket has grown from one lonely bottom shelf to two shelves and now three. Given the competition for shelf space, that says a lot.

Sue and I got interested in non-alcoholic wine a few years ago when a good friend of ours was in a severe cycling accident. Recovery from the concussion she suffered was slow and the doctors said no alcohol, not even wine. But a glass of wine in the evening lifts the spirits, so the search was on for an alternative with the taste and feel of wine, but without the alcoholic kick.

Our initial research was a bit disappointing because NA wines were not always easy to find and the selection was generally limited. This was especially true in on-premise situations. There was almost always NA beer available, but NA wine? Not so much.

Since then the NA category has exploded, especially for NA beer and NA spirits. At one point, for example, U.S.-made Athletic NA beer was the best-selling brand of beer at Whole Foods stores. NA brews from Europe are popular, which makes sense because the combination of active anti-alcohol movements in Europe and strict drink-driving laws pushed up the demand for these products early on.

A recent shopping trip revealed three or four varieties of a single inexpensive California NA wine brand at the local Safeway store. But the Metropolitan Market across the street offered nearly 20 different NA wine SKUs ranging from about $10 to nearly $30. The wines came from the U.S. (Washington and California), Germany, New Zealand, and South Africa.

The Second Glass Test

Writing in The Wine Economist in December 2023, I proposed “The Second Glass” test for NA products.  NA beer and wine ought to remind you of the regular product and not be, like the sparkling apple cider we used to serve non-drinkers at our parties, a liquid placeholder for wine. And it should be tasty enough that you’d want a second glass and not just nurse the first one until it is time to go home.

Good NA beers satisfy the Second Glass test, but so far we have not found many wines that do. Either they don’t remind us of the equivalent wine (a NA New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc, for example, ought to remind you of a NZ Sauvignon Blanc) or they just don’t make you ask for that second glass. The growing interest in NA wines is such that the Second Glass test article is by far the most-read single article on Wine Economist so far this year!

The NA wine section at your local upscale supermarket probably isn’t as large as the equivalent NA beer space, but at least it exists (I still haven’t seen NA wine on a by-the-glass on-trade list), so maybe it is time you checked it out. October is just around the corner. Maybe that’s the time.

Why October?

October has sort of evolved into a month to think about how wine fits into your lifestyle. It started, I think, with the advent of something called Sober October, which is sort of an echo of Dry January. Why October? Because it rhymes with Sober, I suppose. Sober October provoked the creation of a movement called Come Over October (which only rhymes if you have a pretty bad head cold), which stresses the sort  of social gatherings that are wine’s natural environment.

Water keeps us apart, I like to say, but wine brings us together. That’s the spirit of Come Over October to me and the program is receiving lots of support from wineries and retailers that are happy to remind consumers that wine is about people and sharing, not alcoholic content.

Since Come Over October is about bringing people together, alcohol is neither necessary nor sufficient to participate and it seems to me that this is your opportunity to give NA wine a test run if you haven’t tried it or a second chance if you have. I know some readers will object to bringing NA wine into the conversation, but if consumers are interested in NA products and if wineries can profitably make good ones, then it seems like we should embrace the opportunity. Imagine if cola makers rejected the idea of sugar-free colas or if coffee producers turned their backs on caffeine-free coffee. You’d think they were nuts.

Meet ZERONIMO and Dr. LO

Our most recent NA wine experiments have involved brands from ZERONIMO and Dr. LO. The ZERONIMO wines are imported from Austria. Although they are produced in relatively small quantities, they have found markets in both Europe and America. Production has expanded from 3000 bottles to 60,000 bottles of four different wines.

White wines and sparkling wines are the types of NA wines we most often see on store shelves, so we were interested to try the ZERONIMO Sparkling Select ($39.30), a blend of Pinot Blanc, Chardonnay, and Sauvignon Blanc. It was very dry and refreshing. It passed the second glass test for me, but Sue said it was on the edge for her because of the acidity.

We have not seen or tried many red NA wines. The highly-rated (98 points!) ZERONIMO Leonis Red Blend ($69.40) is a blend of Blaufränkisch, Zweigelt, and Cabernet Sauvignon that spends two years in oak.  It is light-bodied, as you might expect from an Austrian red, and showed oak influence without tasting woody. It is the first red NA wine we’ve tried to pass the second glass test, but I wish I had been more successful in teasing out the fruit.

Dr. LO is a line of NA wines from Loosen Bros., the well-known producer of Mosel wines. There is both an alcohol-removed Riesling and an NA carbonated Riesling in the portfolio. Sue and I are predisposed to like Mosel Riesling wines in general and we admire Loosen wines in particular. And it seems like they might be a particularly good base for NA treatment since the regular wines start out with relatively low alcohol levels. The alcohol is removed using the vacuum distillation method which, Loosen argues, creates a more balanced NA wine, when combined with the low initial alcohol level.

We really wanted to like still Dr. L Riesling (and we did) but it didn’t fully pass our second glass test. It was tasty and refreshing, giving us the fruit we missed in the earlier tastings, so we’d happily have another glass, but to be honest it didn’t remind us of Riesling wine. That’s a subjective assessment, of course, but that’s our finding. Your mileage may vary.

Come on Over

If October is the month when we make a point to invite friends and family over to share wine, food, and fun, then it is not a bad time to try out some of these non-alcoholic wine products. There will be some folks who want to avoid or limit alcohol consumption for health or religious reasons or who have volunteered for the role of designated driver.

They are going to be looking for something tasty to drink while avoiding alcohol. Why shouldn’t it be wine?

Bordeaux Bloodbath? Grubbing Up Deja Vu

You’ve probably seen the news from Europe. The headline on Politico read, “Bordeaux bloodbath! France pays winemakers to dig up vines.”  The French government has allocated €120  million to subsidize the removal of as many as 30,000 hectares of grape vines in the Bordeaux region due to unfavorable market conditions, according to EuroNews. That’s about €4,000 per hectare. The Bordeaux program is part of a bigger plan to take as many as 100,000 hectares (out of a total of 800,000) out of production.

It seems to me that the numbers are both big (100,000 hectares removed?) and small (€4,000 per hectare). American growers will rue the fact that they generally don’t receive subsidies from anyone when they are forced to grub up vines. The French are both lucky and not.

Grubbing up is a hardy perennial. France isn’t the only country that has to pull out surplus vines today and this isn’t the first time, either. I looked back in The Wine Economist archives to see when the topic of grubbing up first appeared on these pages. Here is what I found. You’ll note that I was skeptical about the EU program when I wrote this back in 2008. New Zealand’s earlier vine-pull scheme turned out well, I noted, but ripping out vines is only a temporary fix unless there are associated policy and structural changes to alter the market balance. I expect the same holds true today.

>>><<<

Grubbing Up / The Wine Economist / May 6, 2008

Grubbing up is one of my favorite wine economics terms. It means to pull the vines up by the roots and replace them with other agricultural crops. It is a harsh term, just as it sounds, because it is the opposite of wine — it is anti-wine. Grubbing up isn’t something that a wine lover contemplates with ease, but sometimes it is necessary. The European Union’s Council of Ministers has recently finalized a grubbing up scheme for the EU and it is probably a good idea, even if it may not work.

Watering Down the Wine Lake

The problem is that EU wine production vastly exceeds demand with the result that thousands of liters of wine must be bought up by the EU each year and distilled into alcohol to prevent prices from dropping through the floor. The distillation price support only encourages continued production, waste and expense. It is a mess — a wine lake, as people say — and it has to stop.

A fairly radical plan was introduced a few years ago, one that would have paid farmers to grub up thousands of hectare of vines and introduced market reforms to allow (by deregulating) and to encourage (through supporting programs) European winegrowers to compete more effectively with New World winemakers who are taking their markets.

The package that the Council of Ministers agreed last week is significant even if it is less radical than the original initiative (Decanter magazine called it “watered-down” — never a good thing when you are talking about wine). The program called for subsidies to encourage winegrowers to eliminate up to 175,000 hectares of vines (versus 400,000 hectares in the original proposal), limit chaptalisation (the addition of sugar in the wine-making process) rather than eliminating it, and market-based reforms that encourage and enable winegrowers to compete on world markets (through varietal labeling of wines) rather than hide behind protective barriers.

I’ve been reading up on the details of the final EU plan and it is pretty interesting.  The program includes money for grubbing up, of course, and deregulation of wine labels, removal of some vine planting restrictions (so marketable grape varieties can replace uneconomic grubbed up varietals), funds for wine promotion abroad, and so forth. Like any EU program, it is a complicated balance of economic reality, fiscal feasibility and political necessity.

The idea is to help the European wine industry transition to a new market environment, where export markets are growing, domestic markets shrinking and competition is fierce. It is not unreasonable to think that policies like this could work. They worked in New Zealand in the 1980s, for example.

Lessons from Kiwi Wine History

New Zealand today is famous as one of the great success stories in the world wine market. A small nation in an unlikely location, it punches above its weight in the global wine market, holding the title as champion exporter. Not in quantity, obviously, but in price. New Zealand has the highest average export price of any wine producing country.

But such was not the case 25 years ago. New Zealand suffered from a surplus of mediocre wine that could only be sold domestically behind high protective barriers. The industry collapsed with many failed firms from a combination of bad wine and surplus production. The government paid to grub up vines and then opened the market to international competition. Cheap but better wines from Australia flooded in to fill the domestic bulk wine market, leaving New Zealand producers only one choice — make better wine for export. They have done so brilliantly. Their success inspires the EU reforms.

It would be a mistake to think that what worked so well in New Zealand in the 1980s will work equally well in Europe today. It is unlikely that the EU would be willing to let its wine sector reach the sort of crisis that New Zealand experienced and that motivated the dramatic reforms implemented there. If big change comes from big crisis, as I believe (I wrote a book on this theme), then Europe is unlikely to see big change. The social cost of crisis is just too great. The guiding principle of EU policy is to prevent crisis, which makes change that much harder to effect.

Comparing New Zealand to Europe is problematic in other ways, too. New Zealand’s wine production is tiny — a drop in the bucket, really — whereas European producers account for well more than half of all the wine in the world. New Zealand’s grubbing up program may have been difficult, but only 1500 hectares were uprooted rather than the “watered-down” 175,000 set for the EU.

Changing the Rules of the Game

The principle of the EU wine reform scheme is sound, yet many reports that I have read are pessimistic. I think this is mainly because the final reforms are so much more timid that the initial proposal. But there are other reasons for concern.

One thing that economists have learned over the past 25 years is that institutions matter. This is another way of saying that economic forces do not always produce the same results. If the “rules of the game” are different the laws of economics will produce different results. Institutions are the rules of the game in life. Dani Rodrik, my favorite development economist, makes this point in his recent book One Economics, Many Recipes. The nature of local institutions, public and private, formal and informal, shapes the economic landscape in important ways.

This idea applies to the EU reforms in particular. Take the grubbing up scheme, for example. An incentive to repurpose large but unprofitable vineyards in Australia, for example, might well meet with an enthusiastic response because the institutions of wine growing there are different, with large vineyards and a consolidated industry. But European vineyards are much different and represent a completely different model.

Many vineyards (where much of the inferior surplus wine originates) are tiny inherited plots of a hectare or so, frequently on sites with few viable alternative uses. The rules of the game here are much different. A hectare might produce 20-30 tons if badly overcropped and, at perhaps $500 per ton at the local cooperative, gross revenues are too small for a family to live on but too great (compared to alternative uses) to give up. It’s an institutional trap that might be solved by consolidation, but making large vineyards out of these scattered small plots is necessarily costly and difficult.

Under these circumstances growers are likely to hang on to their vines for years rather than accept a modest one-time payment. Grubbing up might need to be forced, not voluntary, to have much effect.

New regulations to allow wines to be labeled according to grape variety (rather than the traditional local geographic designation) might be attractive to a large and distinctly commercial wine producer, but much wine in Europe is still produced by cooperatives that have little to distinguish their wines from others apart form the local designation. What advantage would they have as simple varietals in a world awash with good varietal wine?

A Certain Vision of Wine

It is possible to envision a future where the reforms can work, where the marginal vineyards have gone out of production, where consolidation has increased efficiency and where branded varietals can compete with the world market. (I have even seen some early attempts at EU branded varietals in the discount bins of a local store — more about this in a future posting.) I think it is possible that this vision may be realized — eventually.

But oh, it is such a big jump. The institutions of the small family vineyard and the local wine cooperative seem to me to make these reforms much more difficult. New Zealand’s success will be difficult to repeat.

Wine Economics 101: the Three Vs of Wine

We often talk about trends and problems in the wine industry, but I think we all know that wine isn’t a single business about which it is easy to generalize. Different countries or regions have different business characteristics, for example, and making and selling multi-million case brands like Gallo’s Barefoot differs greatly from much smaller and more local operations.

The wine industry doesn’t come in one size or shape that fits all and doesn’t run at a single speed. Significantly, while all or most parts of the “wine patch” face challenges from climate change and declining consumption of beverage alcohol, the specific conditions vary and can change quickly.

So when a journalist asks me about what’s happening in the wine industry, as happens frequently, I have to stop, pause, and think. Which wine industry are we talking about?

Wine and the Three Vs

The Financial Times recently published an interview with Stephen Cronk, co-founder of the Provençal Rosé producer Maison Mirabeau, about the perils and rewards of starting a wine business more or less from scratch.  Mirabeau has achieved great success in just a few years. How did it happen? Here’s an excerpt of the Q&A.

Was there a seminal moment in your business? Probably when I met a British Master of Wine in the Languedoc in 2008. He told me about the three Vs: viticulture, vinification and vendre, farming vines, winemaking and selling. Up until then I thought I would focus on buying a vineyard. He said don’t buy a vineyard yet: build a brand. Looking back, it was absolutely the right advice.

The idea of the Three Vs is important. There is a romantic image of winemaking that looks like this. Lovingly hand-tended grapevines surrounding a modest winery, with a cozy tasting room next door where most of the wine is sold (often by the winemaker herself) to loyal customers.  This is the idea of wine that defines the industry for many people. But, from an economic standpoint, it is a bit misleading because it suggests that wine is a single business when it is really, as the Financial Times story points out, it is really more like three.

Growing grapes is agriculture. It is a risky capital-intensive business that requires specialized equipment and knowledge. Growing wine grapes successfully and profitably is a considerable achievement. Making wine is also a risky capital-intensive business. It requires specialized equipment, some of which is only used once a year.

Finally selling wine is a risky capital-intensive business, too. It is risky because selling wine like selling anything else is affected by market forces beyond individual control. It is capital intensive because building a brand or establishing networks of personal or professional relationships to facilitate sales can consume a good deal of time and money. Many winery owners have told me that, going into the business, they thought that growing grapes or making wine would be their biggest challenge, but selling wine and tending to customers sometimes is the hardest part.

Specialization and Exchange

Because all three businesses are capital heavy and all three are risky, there is a strong incentive for specialization at the firm level and for the industry to take advantage of Adam Smith’s principle of the division of labor. Smith said that the division of labor was determined by the extent of the market and so it is not surprising that it is most fully realized in the wine business by very large wine companies that specialize in one or two but seldom all three wine industry segments.

Some of the largest winemaking facilities here in Washington, for example, are mainly engaged in contract wine production for other firms, which market the wines under their own brand names. And some large wine firms sell big volumes of wine with few direct employees, relying upon purchased grapes, contract production, and bulk wine purchases to feed their efficient marketing and distribution pipelines.

Specialization and exchange is Adam Smith’s recipe for efficient production, but the situation is never as simple as that (and nothing is ever very simple in the wine industry). Remember that each of the V-factors is risky and the risks are very different. Engaging in just one V-function means you only have to account for one set of risks, not all three, but from an industry viewpoint the risks are always there. And in some cases division of labor can magnify them.

Risky Business

All three wine industry functions are risky in part because they involve lags. The final market for wine is constantly evolving, for example, but firms that specialize in marketing have to make plans many months or even years in advance, so there is always the risk that the last quarter’s market plan is no longer relevant. That’s a problem.

Wine production involves lags, too, and they can be much longer. The wine that a producer can sell today is based on decisions made one, two, three, or more years in the past. Time lags mean that costly shortages and surpluses are more likely, creating instability. The viticulture V is also subject to lags and they are much longer than the previous ones just because of the time it takes to bring grape vines into production or to alter the product mix on existing vines.

One implication of this situation is that, while sometimes the Three Vs are in synch and tell the same story, sometimes they are not and you get a different reading on the health of the industry depending upon which V you consult. Arguably this is the case today, when the disruptions of the pandemic era and rapid inflation are working their way through the system at different speeds.

Market Dynamics

There is a certain degree of instability baked into each wine industry segment’s cake. What happens when we fit them all together? Under some circumstances, the result can be benign or even beneficial as cycles offset one another the way that the sound waves your noise-canceling headphones emit silence the racket around you. But it is also possible for cyclical factors to compound, making the overall wine industry riskier than its individual segments.

Is this one of those times when risks are compounded because instability in each segment feeds the others? Risky business(es).

>>><<<

I recently discussed some of these wine economics themes and more with “Wine Behind the Scenes” podcast host Laurel Simmons. Click on this link to listen to our 30-minute conversation.

Is Wine a Good Value?

These are challenging times for many (but not all) consumers. Rising housing and interest costs are squeezing budgets. Pandemic-era stimulus check bank balances are going or gone. Student loan payments, paused for a time, are back again.

Faced with tight budget constraints and rising debt costs, consumers are struggling to cut costs without sacrificing their standard of living, which means they are more and more focused on value for money. Perhaps the most obvious indicator of this trend is the surge in purchases of store-brand supermarket products at the expense of similar but more expensive name-brand products. But, as the financial news reports, the changes in buying patterns go far beyond that.

Do You Want Fries with That?

Two recent news reports suggest that consumers want value, not just lower prices. A Wall Street Journal story about casual dining restaurant chain Red Robin (see article link below), noted a two-prong strategy to get diners back. Step one was to improve food quality. Step two was to expand the number of “bottomless” offerings so that there is a sense of abundance and value, even when (like me) diners rarely ask for free extra servings. Menu prices have not declined, but business traffic is up. Value sells

The Economist newspaper’s “Schumpeter” business columnist recently compared fast-food king McDonald’s value strategy with casual Mexican chain Chipotle (see article link below). McDonald’s has struggled in the post-pandemic era and recently introduced $5 meal deals in an attempt to regain its lost reputation for good value.  Chipotle, on the other hand, has actually raised its prices. Which strategy do you think would be more successful?

Chipotle wins, at least according to the Economist columnist, who argues that Chipotle is better value despite being more than twice as expensive as the McDonald’s meal deal. Maybe, as the column notes, the demographics of the two food chains are too different to make a comparison valid. But perhaps restaurant dinners look beyond price in calculating value. Schumpeter reports having two generous meals from his Chipotle order, but not wanting to even finish the salty McDonald’s $5 meal.

Price vs Value?

If value for money is a rising priority for many consumers it is fair to ask if wine provides good value? Or is wine’s value proposition one of the reasons the industry is facing headwinds these days?

This is an awkward question because different people have different ideas of what makes something a good value and also because wine comes in so many different price/quality combinations. When I asked my university students to do an economic analysis of the wine wall at a local Safeway store, for example, they found wines as cheap as about $2 per bottle equivalent and as expensive as about $225 per fancy glass bottle.

How can you generalize when there is such wide variation? One way is to look at average cost per serving of wine and other alcoholic beverages. Every study that I have seen suggests that wine is more expensive per serving than either beer or spirits using average price data. So there is reason to believe that consumers might see a value problem with wine.

The way that wine is packaged is a value problem, too. Many consumers hesitate to open a 750 ml wine bottle for only one or two glasses because they are afraid that what’s left will quickly go bad, making the bottle purchase an even worse deal than the per-serving averages suggest. (By comparison, beer comes in single-serving containers and spirits can keep for a long time, so they don’t suffer the same wasted money problem.)

Well, you might say, if this wine is too expensive, trade down to cheaper brands. Indeed, wine can be very cheap (per bottle or per serving) if that’s what you really want. But, good value isn’t the same as cheap price, as McDonald’s problems show.

And, indeed, consumers have for several years moved away from inexpensive wines, calculating perhaps that they are not worth even the low price charged. The premiumization trend has plateaued, too, suggesting that perhaps higher price doesn’t always mean better value.

It’s in the Bag?

If consumers are feeling the budget squeeze (and many are) and looking for value in wine as they are, apparently, in fast food and casual dining, where will they go? Some will abandon wine and indeed cut ties with beverage alcohol, generally. Some will drink less but focus on quality when they do. Others will try to find the spot on the wine wall with the best value proposition. Where is that?

NIQ market data reported in Wine Business Monthly finds only a few bright spots on the wine wall, one of them is for “premium” 3-liter bag-in-box wine selling at about $5 per bottle equivalent.  Sales of wine in this format have held up pretty well while sales of glass bottle wine at about the same price point have fallen. Maybe that Red Robin sense of abundance applies here, too.

Clearly, the economic side of the wine market equation, with its focus on disposable income, consumer budget constraints, and value for money, is not the whole story when it comes to today’s challenging environment. But I am convinced that it is part of the story and one, perhaps, that should be taken more seriously. The people who are having trouble selling other consumer goods have got the message.

What is wine’s value proposition? Food (or maybe drink) for thought?

>>><<<

Blake Gray’s recent Wine-Searcher.com column is one example of what a value-driven wine marketing strategy might look like.

Here are links to the articles referenced above.

Economist newspaper “What Chipotle and McDonald’s say about the consumer slowdown.”

Wall Street Journal “Bottomless Fries, Floats, and Broccoli. One restaurant chain’s bid to get diners.

Collio DOC: Wine, Brand, & Identity in Italy

[This is the third and final article in a series inspired by our recent visit to Collio DOC in north-east Italy. Click here to read the first report and click here to read the second.]

What does it take for a wine region to stand out in today’s crowded market? Excellent wine, of course, but good wine isn’t enough because there are lots of quality wines around the world; consumers need a reason to buy one instead of another.

Brand and Identity in Wine

What else does it take? There are many ways to think about it, but in my book Wine Wars II, I focus on two necessary (but perhaps not sufficient) factors: brand and identity. Brand is the image that distinguishes your wine from the competition. Identity is the quality that defines the brand.  Many wines suffer from the lack of a memorable brand. Others may have a brand, but its power is limited because it doesn’t actually stand for anything. Put wine, brand, and identity together and much can be achieved.

Sometimes an iconic wine can define a region, giving it a brand and identity.  The market for wines from Bolgheri on the Tuscan coast, for example, was shaped by Tenuta San Guido’s famous Sassicaia, Bolgheri, Sassicaia, Super-Tuscan.

Sometimes a singular event can provide the spark. Here in the United States, for example, the Oregon wine industry’s rise to prominence was at least partly due to success at the Wine Olympics of 1979. I wrote about this in the Wine Economist on the occasion of the Eyrie Vineyards’ fiftieth birthday:

The Wine Olympics was a competition, sponsored by the French food and wine magazine Gault Millau, that featured 330 wines from 33 countries tasted blind by 62 judges. The 1975 Eyrie Pinot Noir Reserve attracted attention by placing 10th among Pinots, a stunning achievement for a wine from a previously little-known wine region.

Robert Drouhin of Maison Joseph Drouhin, a Burgundy negociant and producer, was fascinated and sponsored a further competition where the Eyrie wine came close second behind Drouhin’s own 1959 Chambolle-Musigny. Thus was Eyrie’s reputation set (and Oregon’s, too). It wasn’t long before Domaine Drouhin Oregon (DDO) was built in the same Dundee Hills as Eyrie’s vineyards — a strong endorsement of the terroir and international recognition of the achievement.

Oregon wine was a thing, the Willamette Valley was the brand, and Pinot Noir was the identity. Oregon produces other good wines besides Pinot Noir. And Pinot Noir grows in other parts of Oregon. But the wine, brand, and identity were established anyway.

Building Brand Collio

Collio DOC, which hugs the Slovenian border in north-east Italy, has long been known for its excellent wines and it is home to many strong private wine brands. Sue and I visited Livon on our recent trip, for example, enjoying the delicious wines and the amazing view from the tasting room deck. The sleek wines are easily identified by the distinctive art nouveau-style label, which is just risqué enough to have been banned by authorities in at least one state in the American South!

A strong regional brand benefits all producers, so the Collio Consortium, which celebrates 60  years in 2024, has worked diligently to establish the image and reputation of the region and its wines.

Sue and I encountered the “SuperWhites” campaign about 20 years ago at an event in Portland, Oregon (not “Porland” as printed on the event poster shown at the top of this page). Sponsored by Slow Food Friuli and supported by a range of regional organizations, the promotion was inspired by the success of “Super Tuscan” red wines. The idea is that Friuli (and Collio) are to Italian white wines what the Super Tuscans are to Italian reds.

Although the Super Whites theme seems to have run its course, the commitment to collective effort persists, along with the color of the Collio wine region, bright yellow, is still very much alive. (I think of it as Tour de France Yellow Jersey yellow, but that’s just me). Yellow is Collio’s color, featured in all the promotional literature, the capsules found atop many of the wines, and even a bright yellow Vespa scooter that seems to show up in many photos of the region. If you are in Collio and you see yellow,  you can’t help but think Collio wine.

More recently there has been an effort to promote a trademark Collio wine bottle shape, which is also shown in the photo above. The distinctive bottle actually requires a special cork to seal it properly. Adopting it is a serious decision from a practical standpoint.

The Collio bottle shape is instantly recognizable on store shelves and when you look around at what is on tables at a restaurant. Although its use is strictly voluntary, not mandated by consortium rules, we saw it almost everywhere and sensed a certain pride in the identity. It makes a strong statement about the Collio brand project.

Collio’s Identity Quest

If Collio has been purposeful and successful in building a regional brand, the road to a specific identity to back up the brand is less clear. Indeed one person we met told us he thought that Collio was still searching for an identity.

Thirty or forty years ago Collio was pretty much synonymous with a wine they called Tocai, made from the Tocai Friulano grape variety. The grape variety’s name is still the same, but the wine can’t be called Tocai anymore because of objections from Hungary’s Tokaji region. Now the wine is Friulano and if you ask for a glass of local white wine at a bar or restaurant, it’s what you’ll get (and happily drink, I think).

Having lost control of its signature wine’s name, some winemakers in Collio looked in a different direction for a regional identity. The result, we discovered when we visited in 2019, was an emphasis on white wine blends under the name Collio Bianco. The wines we tasted on that trip were terrific. White wine blends are under-appreciated. But aside from their high quality, the wines didn’t have enough in common to be the foundation of an identity. Some were blends of native grape varieties. Others were blends of traditional grape varieties like Chardonnay, Sauvignon, and Riesling. Others combined native and traditional grapes.

The Collio wine identity remains a work in progress and perhaps that’s how it always will be. What all the wines really share is not color or grape variety but sense of the place, shaped by the local ponca soils and hillside vines. If I had to pick a grape variety it would probably be Tocai Friulano, but why do that? It seems like it would exclude so many great wines and accomplish very little.

No, I think Collio isn’t any particular wine. As we suggested in the first two articles in this series, it is best to think of it as a particular place and a deep experience. You don’t just drink Collio DOC, you experience the place through the wine. I know that that’s inconvenient when it comes to marketing, but important indeed when it comes to the wine.

>>><<<

Sue and I recently received a very thoughtful gift, a copy of The Food of Italy by Waverly Root (1971). We turned quickly to the section on Friuli and found this:

“Our wines,” laments a writer from Friuli, “are more exquisite than renowned.”

More than 50 years have passed and I think the wines are even more exquisite, if that’s possible. Renowned? Not as much, but the word is getting out there and Collio’s reputation is fast catching up to its reality.