A while back I asked readers to share their views on the meaning (or, more accurately, the lack of meaning) of the term "old-vine." Is there any point to putting it on wine labels if there's no legal definition? For some vintners, old-vine might mean 15 years old; for others it could mean 80. Who's to say? No, I'm not about to rehash the whole drama: I actually have something new to add to the discussion.
While researching my February "Marketing Matters" column for Wines & Vines, I conducted an online survey of California vintners to find out where they stand on the issue, and received 172 resonses. Here's what I found out:
- 71% believe the term "old-vine" should be regulated (this was surprising to me--I thought everyone was fed up with rules!)
- When asked how old an "old-vine" vineyard should be, 63% chose 50 years old as the minimum legal age, while 28% chose 20 years old as the legal minimum.
- 39% of survey participants who said they their wines as "old-vine" said their "old-vine" vineyards are only 15-49 years old. (So what happened to that 50-year minimum?)
Of course, the real question is: What do wine-drinkers think the term means? Do they care? I did a little online survey for that too:
- More than half of the people who responded had no idea that there's no legal definition of "old-vine."
- Most (84%) said they don't think "old-vine" wines are any better than younger-vine wines (take that, wine marketers!). Even so, 63% said they think there should be a legal definition of the term.
W&V subscribers can read the full story online. In the meantime, I'll pour myself a tasty glass of Beaujolais Nouveau.
More Time To Blog: HA!
When I embarked on this latest chapter of my wine-writing career--that is, being a free agent rather than a magazine staffer--I optimistically announced to readers (and to myself) that I would now have more time for blogging.
As if.
I quicky discovered that without a regular paycheck, I would have to hustle to pay the bills. Pitch, pitch, pitch! Thankfully, I've had plenty of people come to me with offers of work, which has kept me amazingly busy--and as a result, kept me from spending my time on Ye Olde Bloge. (Write something I'm not getting paid for? You gots to be kidding!)
I think that's the trouble with professional writers having recreational blogs: When you spend your whole day writing, it's not always that thrilling to sit down at the end of the day and write some more--and it's even less motivational when you're doing it for free. The most avid wine bloggers, I've noticed, are people who don't spend eight hours a day writing about wine. Go figure.
Of course, the bonus of blogging is that you don't have to pitch your blog topics to some editor, who may very well reject them and crush your pathetic little dreams. You can be as controversial/goofy/irreverent as you damn well please.
Don't think I'm giving up on the blog, though. I've just returned from an amazing winery tour of Western Australia, where I collected plenty o' blog fodder. (I not only saw kangaroos, I ate 'em!)
Stay tuned, patient readers! As soon as I deal with these deadlines...
Posted at 02:34 PM in Random Comments | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)