I was in Oakland this year and tacked on a day trip to visit Napa for the first time, hoping that I’d find some hidden gems or change my feelings about the region and the wines but left unimpressed. They may have succeeded in turning the region into a playground for the ultra rich, but it’s hard to put into words how sterile and anonymous it all felt. Even when we visited a winery known for their sustainability, the staffer we tasted with couldn’t answer basic questions about their agriculture or wines but talked on and on about how expensive the wines of their neighbors are.
I think the natural wine movement and regions like Burgundy, Piedmont, etc. appeal to people because the wine itself is often just one part of the experience in tandem with learning about the land and the people, while regions like Napa and Bordeaux have put less emphasis on any of this while emphasizing prestige and glamour instead. I’m certainly not the kind of consumer choosing between Richard Leroy and Petrus, but if the choice before me is an anonymous Cabernet blend or a wine with a story to tell about its home and the people that produced it, I’m always going to pick the latter.
For me, the wine itself, including it's style, aromas, tastes and backstories, is a vital part of the total experience and lends to the enhancement of said experience. For example, I was recently in Porto with my wife and we found ourselves amongst a small group, in a dimly lit, damp, stone cellar experiencing traditional Fado music by some very talented and passionate musicians. Now, on it's own, the music and environment certainly was wonderful, but the fact that we shared a bottle of fine aged, local Tawny Port that we had learned about earlier in the day, took the whole experience to another level! I must admit, even though we're not really big fans of Port wines, it was a magical evening!
I read the article too and I thought it was thought-provoking: splitting demand into services and goods clarifies what people are looking for (though they haven’t accounted for the big correction post-covid of course).
It’s not that people don’t want wine—quite the opposite. Rather, consumers value access, rare tastings, community… That’s why I disagree with the conclusion that wine is less desirable.
This writing really got me thinking! I wonder where luxury foods fall in all of this and if there's a decline there as well. Things like caviar and such, where the appeal and 'experience' is how out of reach it is to the common folk. I think drinking expensive Bordeaux or caviar in a specific place that is only for the few is what makes the wine a luxury experience. For example - A bottle of Petrus at Carbone, versus just drinking a bottle of Petrus, period. Is it the bottle at an exclusive place that is hard to access the thing that makes it a luxury experience? Great article to make for great conversation!
It's true, I often think about this - like a bottle of Petrus at home is expensive, but not nearly as expensive as at Carbone. But who opens a bottle of Petrus at home? But maybe they should? lol
I really think you are on to something here bringing up cocktails in this context. In my mind it kind of emphasizes a third factor here between the “good” and the “experience” and that is our own creativity. I love making cocktails, yes, definitely the classics, but also making my own versions or tweaks. Also making my own ingredients. In summer I make my own raspberry liqeur which works wonders when you exchange the maraschino for it in an aviation (and adding a splash of absinthe as well, arguably making it a totally different drink but that only proves my point :)) This year I also made lilac syrup which is fantastic mixing it with (a very generous dollop of) dry gin and lemon juice. I think making cocktails allows you to use your creativity to enhance the “experience” in a way that opening an extremely good bottle of wine does not, at least not in the same way.
I was in Oakland this year and tacked on a day trip to visit Napa for the first time, hoping that I’d find some hidden gems or change my feelings about the region and the wines but left unimpressed. They may have succeeded in turning the region into a playground for the ultra rich, but it’s hard to put into words how sterile and anonymous it all felt. Even when we visited a winery known for their sustainability, the staffer we tasted with couldn’t answer basic questions about their agriculture or wines but talked on and on about how expensive the wines of their neighbors are.
I think the natural wine movement and regions like Burgundy, Piedmont, etc. appeal to people because the wine itself is often just one part of the experience in tandem with learning about the land and the people, while regions like Napa and Bordeaux have put less emphasis on any of this while emphasizing prestige and glamour instead. I’m certainly not the kind of consumer choosing between Richard Leroy and Petrus, but if the choice before me is an anonymous Cabernet blend or a wine with a story to tell about its home and the people that produced it, I’m always going to pick the latter.
Great point - I think you’re right about the appeal of those places.
For me, the wine itself, including it's style, aromas, tastes and backstories, is a vital part of the total experience and lends to the enhancement of said experience. For example, I was recently in Porto with my wife and we found ourselves amongst a small group, in a dimly lit, damp, stone cellar experiencing traditional Fado music by some very talented and passionate musicians. Now, on it's own, the music and environment certainly was wonderful, but the fact that we shared a bottle of fine aged, local Tawny Port that we had learned about earlier in the day, took the whole experience to another level! I must admit, even though we're not really big fans of Port wines, it was a magical evening!
I read the article too and I thought it was thought-provoking: splitting demand into services and goods clarifies what people are looking for (though they haven’t accounted for the big correction post-covid of course).
It’s not that people don’t want wine—quite the opposite. Rather, consumers value access, rare tastings, community… That’s why I disagree with the conclusion that wine is less desirable.
I think The Economist is only thinking of wine that falls into the luxury goods category and m not the entire constellation of wine, right?
This writing really got me thinking! I wonder where luxury foods fall in all of this and if there's a decline there as well. Things like caviar and such, where the appeal and 'experience' is how out of reach it is to the common folk. I think drinking expensive Bordeaux or caviar in a specific place that is only for the few is what makes the wine a luxury experience. For example - A bottle of Petrus at Carbone, versus just drinking a bottle of Petrus, period. Is it the bottle at an exclusive place that is hard to access the thing that makes it a luxury experience? Great article to make for great conversation!
It's true, I often think about this - like a bottle of Petrus at home is expensive, but not nearly as expensive as at Carbone. But who opens a bottle of Petrus at home? But maybe they should? lol
maybe the typical Petrus lover will never open this at home because then...where is the show at!? lol
well, there you go! Exactly
I really think you are on to something here bringing up cocktails in this context. In my mind it kind of emphasizes a third factor here between the “good” and the “experience” and that is our own creativity. I love making cocktails, yes, definitely the classics, but also making my own versions or tweaks. Also making my own ingredients. In summer I make my own raspberry liqeur which works wonders when you exchange the maraschino for it in an aviation (and adding a splash of absinthe as well, arguably making it a totally different drink but that only proves my point :)) This year I also made lilac syrup which is fantastic mixing it with (a very generous dollop of) dry gin and lemon juice. I think making cocktails allows you to use your creativity to enhance the “experience” in a way that opening an extremely good bottle of wine does not, at least not in the same way.