image: ExelWines.co.uk

Ok, everyone… calm down.

Pour another glass of something nice.

Have a sip. Relaaaaax.

Feeel zeee tension leeeaaaving your body…

Every once in a while, we get a roundup/list/ranking of wine websites, and then oscillate between being happy for some of the sites on the list, and getting bent out of shape about the ones that aren’t on it (or taking issue with the reasons/methodology/stats behind the construction of said list).

The latest is an attempt at measuring and ranking wine blog influence by a Scottish wine purveyor, Exel Wines.

For me, it’s great to see so many passionate people’s excellent wine-centric websites included. Other than the additional bit of exposure that it brings to those websites, and the potential for discovering some new (to you) and interesting (to you) wine blogs listed therein, I think that the following popular Internet meme/graphic accurately sums up how much of a f*ck most of you ought to be giving these lists in general:

Read the rest of this stuff »

Recently, the Drinks Business reported that, according to Vin-X’s head of procurement Martin Pruszynski, “fine wine investment has been the best overall performer when total growth across major asset classes since 1988.”

No no no no no no NO.

Not again.

It seems that almost every year I write this retort. My view on this has not changed one iota in the last twelve months, despite Martin Pruszynski’s assessment that fine wine prices have outpaced the Dow Jones and S&P 500. The Vin-X findings are, in my opinion, closer to smoke-and-mirrors than to anything substantial.

Bear in mind that I am NOT an investment expert, and therefore I am NOT offering any true investment advice here. But I did semi-retire (in terms of being able to switch career gears) at the age of 40, so make your own assessment of how well I manage money, and the value of my opining on the subject. And my opining in a nutshell is that “investing” in fine wine (in terms of hoping it will accrue in value, and that you will actually be able to realize that gain) is basically a a really, really poor way to utilize your money…

Read the rest of this stuff »

image: wsj.com

If you read Lettie Teague’s recent WSJ column entry, titled How Millennials Are Changing Wine, you will find some interesting data suggesting that Millennials are not, in fact, changing wine nearly as much as many of us think that they are.

First, you’ll have to wade through polemics such as the opening quote from New York sommelier Jason Jacobeit, who decries his generation’s focus on feeling connected to a brand when it comes to purchasing wine: “A lot of mediocre wine is being sold on the basis of a story.”

I’ve got news for you, Jason: “a lot” is too subjective a term (a lot of money to me, for example, isn’t a lot of money to Bill Gates), and “mediocre” even more so, but based on what we know from real wine sales numbers, a lot of wine that we might generously call “so-so” or “mind-numbingly-boring” is sold to every generation of wine drinkers, in volumes that far eclipse what we might collectively think of as higher quality – or at least more interesting – vino.

Back to Teague’s WSJ piece: I’d also advise you to skip the latter section of the article, in which Lettie recounts a tasting with a “mini-focus group” of millennial wine drinkers. Given that this group consisted of “two men and two women ranging in age from 25 to 32,” it’s laughably dangerous from a statistical standpoint to draw any conclusions whatsoever on millennial wine drinking habits from the results of their conversation.

The real meat of the WSJ article lies in the sneak peek that it gives to an August Wine Opinions study of 2,634 wine drinkers, spanning in age groups from Millennial to Gen X to Baby Boomer. Through that study’s results, we get some fascinating insights into how U.S. wine drinkers actually approach buying their wine…

Read the rest of this stuff »

In what apparently is Pennsylvania’s latest attempt to prove that it is, in fact, the single worst state in the Union for wine lovers, a recent ruling by Chester County Judge Edward Griffith has put the kibosh on saving a few thousand bottles of wine confiscated from resident Arthur Goldman (who was caught in a sting operation and charged with buying wine outside of the PA state monopoly system, and selling wine in the state without a license). Sorry, but getting angry makes me write run-on sentences, ok?

Through the ruling, the judge Griffith has paved the way for dumping of the confiscated wine (much of which is top-notch stuff), pissing off the state’s wine lovers. The ruling also denies a request by nonprofit Chester County Hospital to have the wine sold to benefit the hospital (presumably, pissing off everyone else in the state, too).

A quote from the judge:

“Since the liquor code makes no provision for condemned wine to be sold for any purpose, the wine may not be delivered to a hospital for sale.”

We cannot fault the judge for upholding current law, since that’s his job. And that law – the PA liquor code – exists, in theory, to control the flow of alcohol in Pennsylvania, and, you know, protect the children! Like the children that are served by… Chester County Hospital!

Ostensibly, however, the PA liquor code seems to be more and more a vehicle to protect the money coming in to the state’s coffers from the alcohol sales controlled by the PA Liquor Control Board. You know, the same board that serves PA’s wine-buying public by spending taxpayers’ dollars inefficiently; instituting expensive, failed initiatives that it’s unclear are even wanted by its customers; selling wine that has been shown to have high levels of arsenic; and committing fraud.

In other words, I don’t think that Pennsylvania is going to be upgrading its wine consumer advocacy grade of “F” anytime soon.

Cheers!