Tag Archives: wine lawsuits

Winebits 966: Calorie labeling, lawsuits, wine retail

wine ingredent label
Is a version of this label coming soon to wine in Australia?

This week’s wine news: Australia likely to mandate calorie counts, one more wine lawsuit, and where to open wine shops

• On the label: Australian wine will soon list calories, part of a push by the country’s food minister to “increase labeling on alcoholic drinks to inform consumers of their hidden and often high calorific content, in an effort to reduce obesity rates.” The story is a little vague, since it’s a reprint of something behind a paywall, but it looks like the plan will go into effect toward the end of next year. If it happens, this would leave the U.S. as the biggest holdout from listing calories, ingredients, and or nutritional information for wine.

• Lawsuit time: Regular readers know that the WC gets a kick out of wine lawsuits, and there’s another fine one on the horizon. E&J Gallo, whose La Marca brand controls about one-quarter of the Prosecco market, is suing the company and importer of Bollacini Prosecco, contending that the latter has copied the La Marca bottle design. There’s a picture of the two bottles at the link, and they don’t look especially similar. But what do I know? I didn’t think anyone would confuse Cristal, the celebrity Champagne, with Cristalino, the cheap Cava, in a similar lawsuit. And Cristal won that lawsuit easily.

• Where are the stores? Majestic, a British wine retailer, wants to let its customers pick its new store sites. The chain, with 201 shops across the United Kingdom, says shoppers could win a year’s supply of wine if they help it find the perfect location. The WC can’t decide how serious Majestic is; as noted here many times, every wine drinker (me included) thinks the perfect retail location is across the street, with ample parking, an unlimited selection, and cheap prices. How Majestic can reconcile that with its needs is going to be past difficult.

Winebits 744: Winery lawsuits, Portuguese wine, neo-Prohibitonists

wine lawsuitsThis week’s wine news: Esther Mobley explains why wineries sue each other, plus Portuguese wine may be ready for the big time and we’ll all get fat if we drink wine

• Bring on the lawsuits: Esther Mobley, writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, explains why there are so many winery lawsuits: “All the good [names] have been taken, basically. And don’t even think about coming up with a name that sounds similar to an existing wine. You’ll be fighting a court battle in no time.” Which, of course, is grist for the Wine Curmudgeon’s wine press; intellectual property, baby! The story describes what seems to be the never-ending glut of wineries suing each other, and her analysis seems to be spot on.

• Portuguese wine: The WC has long wondered why Portuguese wine isn’t more popular, given its quality, value and often stunningly low prices. Now, Oz Clarke, the British wine expert, says Portuguese wine’s time is here. He told a London wine tasting that “Portugal is a country that said, ‘we don’t need Cabernet to prove our worth. We don’t need Chardonnay and Sauvignon to try and squeeze our way into a crowded marketplace.’ ” A man after the WC’s heart, yes? The caveat here is that Clarke said these things at an event sponsored by the Portuguese wine trade group. Still, his point is well taken for those of us looking for wine that hasn’t been focus-grouped to death.

• Fat, fat, fat: Drink wine and gain 14 pounds — or even more. That’s the result of a study conducted by a group called DrugAbuse.com, which should tell us all we need to know about how legitimate the survey is. I mention it here, despite the blog’s usual ban on these stories, because it assumes that no one can drink wine in moderation and that drinking wine is as bad as stuffing your face with fast food. Note to the neos: I have not had anything from McDonald’s in decades. How does that survey?

Winebits 693: Wine marketing, wine lawsuit, Big Beer wine

cheap wine
“Where are those $10 wines that Eric Asimov wrote about?”

This week’s wine news: Retailer takes New York Times’ Eric Asimov cheap wine recommendations to the next level. Plus, Jackson Family sues Gallo in what could be a lawsuit for the ages and Anheuser-Busch announces wine deal.

• Cheap wine from Asimov: New York Times wine critic Eric Asimov is the best wine writer in the word, even though he regularly downgrades $10 wine. So imagine my shock — and pleasure — to see a couple of quality $10 wines in a recent column. Asimov cited the La Vielle Ferme red and Masciarelli Montepulciano d’Abruzzo, both of which I drink regularly, as well as the Las Vascos cabernet sauvignon. Hopefully, Asimov will take a look at the Hall of Fame and find others he can recommended. Equally as impressive? An e-mail from retailer Saratoga Wine Exchange touting the wines and offering a mixed case for $120. Wine marketing comes in for a lot of criticism on the blog, but this is one case where a retailer has figured it out.

• Bring on the process servers: I’ll just quote this, since not even I can think of anything to add: “Jackson Family Wines, the ninth largest wine company in the U.S., filed a lawsuit last month accusing [E&J] Gallo, the world’s largest wine company, of infringing on Jackson Family’s copyright for La Crema with a new Gallo wine called Cask & Cream.”  Jackson sued Gallo in the 1990s, claiming the latter’s Turning Leaf infringed on Jackson’s flagship chardonnay and lost. So quickly, from a couple of Google searches: It costs more than $1 million to defend this kind of lawsuit, or about 12,000 cases of Gallo’s Barefoot wine. The cost of filing the lawsuit is more or less the same, which works about to about 7,000 cases of Jackson’s chardonnay. Which, when you think about it, isn’t all that much to a Big Wine company.

• Bud Wine? Again, so damned weird all I can do is quote: “The Wine Group and Anheuser-Busch continue their collaborative partnership with the release of 101 North which is now available nationwide. A popular-priced wine brand inspired by its California roots and the iconic U.S. Highway 101, the brand celebrates the spirit of adventure and discovery. The approachable, new collection was made to explore with rousing blends of richness and bold fruit flavors in every varietal. At launch, 101 North Wines are available in Cabernet Sauvignon, Chardonnay, Pinot Grigio and Moscato.” Wine from the company that makes Budweiser? And if Churro, the blog’s associate editor, had written a post as poorly as that news release is written, I would have fired him. Is it any wonder I worry about the future of the wine business?

Winebits 691: Cocktails-to-go, wine bars, Grape-Nuts

cocktails-to-go
Yes, perhaps even in Texas — where you can still can’t buy wine in some Dallas suburbs.

This week’s wine news: Texas is one step closer to cocktails-to-go, which would have been unthinkable a year ago. Plus, are supermarkets and wine bars ready to resume consumer wine tastings, and even Grape-Nuts got caught in pandemic supply chain shortfalls

• Yes, in Texas: Texas is one step closer to legalizing cocktails-to-go, which would have been unheard of just a year ago. The state house approved the measure 144-1 last week. But, since this is Texas, there’s still much more legislative to-do to watch. The state senate has not voted the bill out of committee, and that often means it won’t come up for a vote in the full senate. Which, if that happens, means the bill is dead this session. Still, that the bill has come this far — and with the support of legislators usually opposed to liberalizing the state’s restrictive liquor laws — means the bill could pass, even if has to wait for the next session of the Legislature in 2023.

• Resuming wine tastings? Retail wine bars and tastings, which mostly went away during the pandemic, may come back in a big way later this year. That’s what one consultant told the Supermarket News trade magazine. Mark Landini, noting that in-store wine tastings and wine bars have become crucial to many high-end food retailers, says “we’re seeing optimism on the long-term prospects for wine bars and taprooms, including takeout and outdoor settings in addition to the in-store trend.” Retailers like in-store wine service not only as perk for customers, but because those who stay for a glass of wine tend to buy more groceries.

• Yes, even Grape-Nuts: The pandemic’s shock to the supply chain showed up in a variety of ways in the wine business, with some brands missing from store shelves for extended periods of time, as well as a can shortage that left some canned wines in short supply. But why not, if even a staple like Grape-Nuts cereal went missing? The Shelby Report says consumers paid as much as $110 a box for the breakfast staple, as pandemic-related shortages and price gouging sent prices soaring. A company spokeswoman says the company will reimburse consumers who paid more than $10 a box, provided they can provide a receipt. And I thought not being able to buy La Vieille Ferme rose regularly was bad. Perspective is all, yes?

Photo: “Cocktails to go” by Tom Coates is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

Winebits 690: Liquor laws, Millennials, wine lawsuits

Liquor laws
Will the pandemic lead to further loosening of restrictive three-tier laws?

This week’s wine news: The liquor industry hopes to continue to ease three-tier in the wake of the pandemic, plus why Millennials don’t drink more wine and a Pythonesque French wine lawsuit

• After the pandemic: How much liquor law change came during the pandemic? The Hill, which covers the Congress and government, reports that 33 states and the District of Columbia now allow to-go sales of alcoholic beverages at restaurants and bars. Before the pandemic, no state allowed to-go sales. And some of you doubted three-tier was easing up. In fact, says The Hill, the pandemic “did more to liberalize alcohol regulations than anything since the end of Prohibition.” The piece is worth reading, especially for its almost shocking disbelief in how alcohol is regulated in the U.S. It’s worth noting that The Hill’s readers are congressional staffers who may not know or understand three-tier, and will likely be stunned to find out buying wine isn’t like buying a computer on Amazon.

• Health and younger consumers: There’s a lot of jargon in this article from the Wine Intelligence consultancy, but wade through it and you’ll discover that younger consumers are interested in lower- and no-alcohol wines because they want to be socially responsible and because they don’t want extra calories. Which leads the Wine Curmudgeon to wonder: How many younger consumers know that a glass of wine has just 125 calories, about the same as a bottle of light beer? Oh, that’s right — they can’t know. Wine doesn’t have ingredient and nutritional labeling the way beer does.

• French wine lawsuit: The French rate wine quality in many regions through an agency called the National Institute for Origin and Quality, which administers the various grand cru and premier grand cru designations. In St. Emilion in Bordeaux, lawsuits by disgruntled wineries unhappy about how they were ranked have increased so sharply that the application fee to be ranked has risen 10-fold since 2006. That’s because the application fees need to cover the cost of defending lawsuits. So more lawsuits, higher fees. Which, no doubt, adds to the number of lawsuits (“I’m not paying that much money not to be ranked!”), which leads to higher fees.

Winebits 688: The “three more reasons why I worry about the future of the wine business” edition

coravin This week’s wine news: An argument about how to score wines closed with Coravin, plus another intellectual property lawsuit, and the dismal future of restaurant wine

• Dancing on the heal of a pin: Fair warning: British wine critic Jamie Goode considers me one of the people out to ruin the wine business, so some may see this as petty. But his latest complaint strikes me as worth noting, regardless. Should wine critics disclose if they’ve used the ultra-pricey Coravin opener when tasting a wine? The most common Coravin costs $300 – talk about taking wine drinking to a place where only the rich can afford it. Frankly, I’d rather buy 20 bottles of Domaine Tariquet. So no, I never use the Coravin when I taste my $10 wines.

• One more lawsuit: This lawsuit isn’t about wine, but it does involve a wine company. Big Beer’s AB InBev, has sued Constellation Brands because the latter used the Corona brand name for its new line of hard seltzer. This is one of those times when I almost wish I had taken my mother’s advice to go into the law, since the suit is incredibly complicated and I’m sure the billable hours will go on forever. That’s because AB InBev sold the Cornoa brand in the U.S. to Constellation in 2013, but kept the brand in Mexico and elsewhere. So, when Constellation decided to market Corona hard seltzer, one would have thought that this would have been settled beforehand. But apparently not (though, to be honest, the WC does appreciate intellectual property lawsuits where only the attorneys get rich.)

• Not good news: The full-service restaurant business, already devastated by the pandemic, may not be back to normal until 2024. And that, of course, is bad news for restaurant wine and the smaller producers, distributors, and importers that account for some of the most interesting restaurant wine lists. The assessment comes from the Rabobank consultancy, via Wine Industry Insight. Rabobank predicts that chains will reach their pre-pandemic level more quickly than independents, which may still be 10 or 15 percent below that mark in 2024.

Winebits 684: Drizly, tannins, wine lawsuits

drizly
How much wine can you fit into an Uber car?

This week’s wine news:  Uber buys booze delivery service Drizly ($1.1 billion!), plus tannins may work against Covid-19 and yet another terrific wine lawsuit

• Uber-Drizly deal: And yes, the exclamation point in the subhed is warranted. Some five years ago, I interviewed one of Drizly’s co-founders, Nick Rellas, and $1.1 billion was about the last thing on his mind. We spent much of the time talking about how Rellas started the company by delivering booze for a Massachusetts liquor store to get an idea about how delivery worked. But there it is, one year into the pandemic — the company is worth $1.1 billion to Uber, the ride sharing and delivery service. The wise guys and analysts can debate and pontificate about the deal as much as they want, but that an alcohol delivery service is worth that much money in a country where alcohol delivery is still illegal in many places is difficult to believe.

• Bring on the tannins: One more reason why health news is banned from the blog, save for stories to show why it is banned from the blog: Taiwanese researchers claim that tannins in wine can help fight Covid-19 by inhibiting the activity of two key enzymes within the virus. This is, of course, exciting news, save for one thing: How are we supposed to get tannins into Covid-19 patients?

• Let the lawyers loose: The Wine Curmudgeon has long had an almost Pythonesque fascination with wine lawsuits, the sillier the better. So consider this: Rapper Drake is suing two retailers for discounting his $400 Champagne. The details are — pun fully intended — priceless, with the rapper and his partner alleging conspiracy on the part of the retailers and the brand’s former distributor. Their goal? To destroy Drake’s bubbly top benefit the competition. The WC has just one question: How surprised was Drake that the wine business was just as nasty as the record business, which is infamous for being nasty?

Photo: “uber” by stockcatalog is licensed under CC BY 2.0