I was a little affronted this week when I read the front page of the local Border Morning Mail Friday July 15th. "Bottom of the Barrel" the front page read. "Industry expert gives Rutherglen Wineries a blast" the subtitle. The article was based around some comments made by Winestate Magazine editor Peter Simic during their annual north east Victorian tasting.
Simic has blasted the Rutherglen region labelling the region "smug, self satisified and dangerously complacent". Other comments included, "These old wineries believe the world owe them a living" and "the established wineries are basically sitting back saying we are really important you should take notice of us". Most of the comments seemed to centre around the lack of fortifieds entered into the regional taste off for Winestate. Simic was quoted as saying "Tokay, Muscat, Port and Sherry is what the region is famous for and if things are tight in the industry then you think it is a critical time to be marketing in our magazine".
Finally we get to the crux of the issue. Simic is brassed off that local wineries did not submit their fortifieds, many of which are a scarce resource, and pay $25 per entry, for the dubious privelige of having them rated in Winestate Magazine. Simic is a wine journalist and is therefore allowed to comment as he sees fit, but excuse the pun, this reeks of sour grapes.
I do not know of another region that works harder at championing its own icon styles. The Muscat of Rutherglen Network was borne of a regional desire to promote the outstanding fortifieds of the region, domestically and abroad. An entirely new classification system was devised to better educate the drinking public on Rutherglen Fortifieds. I do not believe that a closer association exists in Australia between region and grape, than Rutherglen and Muscat. It has absolute, no questions asked ownership of the style, largely because of the promotional efforts of the abovementioned network.
To blatantly disregard and deride the efforts of the Rutherglen Winemakers smacks of either ignorance or an agenda. In this case I suspect the latter. Most of Rutherglens top fortifieds have any number of gold medals, trophies, 100 point RPJ ratings, and numerous other accolades to their name, so forgive the regions complacency if we dont fork out for yet another Winestate review.
Sorry for such a large post but I am mightily pissed off.
LL
(Humble employee of a Rutherglen Winery)[/code]
Peter Simic blasts Rutherglen.
Winestate is a joke of a magazine. Just ignore it. Rubbish wine tastings.Rubbish content. Rubbish opinion. Check out those auction prices on 95 Limestone Ridge ..and then spot the other vintages on there that were never made in the "What's it worth" section (they finally removed 95 John Riddoch after being told a few times)...and make sure you read your 'free copy' of the advertorial "Wine and Spirit Insider" magazine. The whole thing smacks of sharp practice and looks like a big industry love in.
Pffffffffffffft.
GW
Pffffffffffffft.
GW
What Gary said. 
Also, probaly the smart producers in Rutherglen treated Winesate with the disdain they deserve.
As you say Roughred, a case of sour grapes from Peter Simic. If he can't get the free samples, he can't review the wine. Also, that $25 "admin entry charge" is not popular. According to Simic, the magazine circulation is flat and they have to cover rising costs some how, so why not slug the wineries.
The larger comapnies may not mind paying it, especially for large volume products, but then its possibly waved for large advertisers anyway.
Also, probaly the smart producers in Rutherglen treated Winesate with the disdain they deserve.
As you say Roughred, a case of sour grapes from Peter Simic. If he can't get the free samples, he can't review the wine. Also, that $25 "admin entry charge" is not popular. According to Simic, the magazine circulation is flat and they have to cover rising costs some how, so why not slug the wineries.
The larger comapnies may not mind paying it, especially for large volume products, but then its possibly waved for large advertisers anyway.
TORB wrote:What Gary said.
Also, probaly the smart producers in Rutherglen treated Winesate with the disdain they deserve.
As you say Roughred, a case of sour grapes from Peter Simic. If he can't get the free samples, he can't review the wine. Also, that $25 "admin entry charge" is not popular. According to Simic, the magazine circulation is flat and they have to cover rising costs some how, so why not slug the wineries.
The larger comapnies may not mind paying it, especially for large volume products, but then its possibly waved for large advertisers anyway.
Coincidentally up at the Barossa last week I heard a couple of Wineries choosing not to send wines to Winestate because of the $25 fee - it could be a growing trend.
Cheers
Ian
Forget about goodness and mercy, they're gone.
-
JamieBahrain
- Posts: 3754
- Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:40 am
- Location: Fragrant Harbour.
Unfortunately, in Hong Kong they wrap the magazine in plastic. I bought a copy recently - I promised myself never again - and was lured by the title " Barossa Benchmarks " with a list of wines I'm always interested in.
I felt ripped off when I found no article, but the usual one line tasting note & star rating. Just crap!
A bit of outspoken controversy may reinvigorate this lame duck magazine. Always found the Winestate parochial so I wouldn't expect any topics close to home. Which explains the Rutherglen swipe.
I felt ripped off when I found no article, but the usual one line tasting note & star rating. Just crap!
A bit of outspoken controversy may reinvigorate this lame duck magazine. Always found the Winestate parochial so I wouldn't expect any topics close to home. Which explains the Rutherglen swipe.
yep, its very ordinary. Dropped my subscription.
I guess the only way to revive the magazine from it's flat sales is to produce something that wine lovers will find interesting..... Basic concept, I know, but it looks like they have missed this key point
I guess the only way to revive the magazine from it's flat sales is to produce something that wine lovers will find interesting..... Basic concept, I know, but it looks like they have missed this key point
"............ anything, as long as it's red"
Kevin
Kevin
This might read a little more in line with everyones thoughts:
The Rutherglen region has blasted the Simic labelling his magazine "smug, self satisified and dangerously complacent". Other comments included, "This stale old magazine believes the world owe it a living" and "it is basically sitting back saying I am really important you should take notice of me". Most of the comments seemed to centre around the lack of interest in entering fortifieds into the regional taste off for Winestate. The winemakers were quoted as saying "Tokay, Muscat, Port and Sherry is what the region is famous for and things are tight in the industry but we dont think its critical we pay $25 to have our wines appear in this magazine".
Snicker snicker...
The Rutherglen region has blasted the Simic labelling his magazine "smug, self satisified and dangerously complacent". Other comments included, "This stale old magazine believes the world owe it a living" and "it is basically sitting back saying I am really important you should take notice of me". Most of the comments seemed to centre around the lack of interest in entering fortifieds into the regional taste off for Winestate. The winemakers were quoted as saying "Tokay, Muscat, Port and Sherry is what the region is famous for and things are tight in the industry but we dont think its critical we pay $25 to have our wines appear in this magazine".
Snicker snicker...
Australia reputedly has the most crowded magazine market in the world. Once upon a time, over 25 years ago, Winestate was an important magazine and for many years no one could touch it.
For a very long time, it had a lot of credibility as a publication and and most wine lovers saw it as a must subscribe publication. Unfortunately, over the intervening years the publication has become stale. To make matters worse, many serious wine lovers think it completely lacks credibility and there are continuing questions over its independence.
Winestate will tell you they are fiercely independent and that advertising revenue has no bearing on the ratings of any wines. When many readers look at the ratings, they often have trouble believing that statement.
In years gone by, on a number of occasions I have actually written or faxed the magazine with inquiries or questions about their rating system and have never received a response, let alone a satisfactory explanation; and that was before Torbwine when I was just a subscriber.
Times change, and now as well as a multitude of newspaper wine columns, competitive wine and lifestyle magazines, there is the Internet. Winestate just keeps doing the same old thing. I can't remember the last time I saw a feature that actually held much interest. The last one was probably a large taste off between multiple vintages of top Australian Cabernet Sauvignon labels like Cullen, JR, MW etc and a few Bordeaux contenders. That was probably over a decade ago. In an ever-changing world, same old, same old does not cut it. And then of course, many true wine lovers have found the Internet making publications like Winestate redundant; and that's only as far as the readers are concerned.
As evidenced by the lack of enthusiasm by the Rutherglen wineries, it looks like some of the producers are waking up to the real usefulness (or not, as the case may be) of Winestate.
By their own admission (in a letter to wineries justifying the $25 administration charge) they have stated that it will be extremely difficult for them to increase circulation revenue. So if circulation is not going up, it's hard to increase advertising rates and revenue is flat.
Once upon a time, they were important, but it's becoming less so as every day passes.
For a very long time, it had a lot of credibility as a publication and and most wine lovers saw it as a must subscribe publication. Unfortunately, over the intervening years the publication has become stale. To make matters worse, many serious wine lovers think it completely lacks credibility and there are continuing questions over its independence.
Winestate will tell you they are fiercely independent and that advertising revenue has no bearing on the ratings of any wines. When many readers look at the ratings, they often have trouble believing that statement.
In years gone by, on a number of occasions I have actually written or faxed the magazine with inquiries or questions about their rating system and have never received a response, let alone a satisfactory explanation; and that was before Torbwine when I was just a subscriber.
Times change, and now as well as a multitude of newspaper wine columns, competitive wine and lifestyle magazines, there is the Internet. Winestate just keeps doing the same old thing. I can't remember the last time I saw a feature that actually held much interest. The last one was probably a large taste off between multiple vintages of top Australian Cabernet Sauvignon labels like Cullen, JR, MW etc and a few Bordeaux contenders. That was probably over a decade ago. In an ever-changing world, same old, same old does not cut it. And then of course, many true wine lovers have found the Internet making publications like Winestate redundant; and that's only as far as the readers are concerned.
As evidenced by the lack of enthusiasm by the Rutherglen wineries, it looks like some of the producers are waking up to the real usefulness (or not, as the case may be) of Winestate.
By their own admission (in a letter to wineries justifying the $25 administration charge) they have stated that it will be extremely difficult for them to increase circulation revenue. So if circulation is not going up, it's hard to increase advertising rates and revenue is flat.
Once upon a time, they were important, but it's becoming less so as every day passes.
Why would you want to pay $25 to send your precious fortifieds every year to a magazine of dubious repute? If I were the wineries in question, Peter Simic's diatribe would have only confirmed my suspicions. It reeks of such heightened arrogance to assume that your magazine is so important that anyone who doesn't send in a sample is lazy or complacent.
Winestate lost me ages ago. The design and layout is outdated, the reviews deficient, the South Australian bias annoying, and there are only so many times I want to read about the French influence on the Australian wine industry. I also don't like to read that Italy's finest wines go well with pizza and pasta, nor that the award winning Grampians Shiraz from Cathcart Ridge comes from the Strathbogie Ranges!
Winestate lost me ages ago. The design and layout is outdated, the reviews deficient, the South Australian bias annoying, and there are only so many times I want to read about the French influence on the Australian wine industry. I also don't like to read that Italy's finest wines go well with pizza and pasta, nor that the award winning Grampians Shiraz from Cathcart Ridge comes from the Strathbogie Ranges!
-
bacchaebabe
- Posts: 1222
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 5:04 pm
- Location: Sydney
I must say, I haven't bought it for about four years at least and used to be a regular buyer. I guess the more you learn, the less you need publications like Winestate.
BUT, I do shop at Vintage Cellars occasionally! Gotta buy your beer and spirits somewhere and they're only 50 metres from my home. If they have a special, I don't mind paying $1 more per bottle than the cheapest elsewhere for the fly buys, cellar shares and convenience but shelf prices are beyond a joke - even with their 20% off sales. It's always good for a laugh to walk in and have a look around though.
BUT, I do shop at Vintage Cellars occasionally! Gotta buy your beer and spirits somewhere and they're only 50 metres from my home. If they have a special, I don't mind paying $1 more per bottle than the cheapest elsewhere for the fly buys, cellar shares and convenience but shelf prices are beyond a joke - even with their 20% off sales. It's always good for a laugh to walk in and have a look around though.
Cheers,
Kris
There's a fine wine between pleasure and pain
(Stolen from the graffiti in the ladies loos at Pegasus Bay winery)
Kris
There's a fine wine between pleasure and pain
(Stolen from the graffiti in the ladies loos at Pegasus Bay winery)
Singing with the chorus here!
Winestate covers always look good, but I browse in the store and within 30 seconds I see the content fails to live up to the expectation. Haven't bought since I was young and ignorant, and even then I couldn't figure out the ratings.
And yes, I tend to wander around Vintage Cellars (near work) on Thursday nights thinking 'You must be joking!' Who buys at these prices?
cheers,
Graeme
Winestate covers always look good, but I browse in the store and within 30 seconds I see the content fails to live up to the expectation. Haven't bought since I was young and ignorant, and even then I couldn't figure out the ratings.
And yes, I tend to wander around Vintage Cellars (near work) on Thursday nights thinking 'You must be joking!' Who buys at these prices?
cheers,
Graeme
Peter Simic was quoted in the Albury Wodonga Border Mail as saying:
“We are the buying guide for the major chains and supermarkets.†Are we therefore to take it that Dan Murphys etc read Winestate before deciding what to stock, and if a particular wine, or winery, is absent from those hallowed pages, it risks being overlooked? What a joke. Robyn Pfeiffer was also quoted as saying it would cost Pfeiffers $500 to send their 19 wines for the chance of being reviewed, and that it would cost another $500 for photographs of the wines to be included with the review. Of course there was no mention from Peter Simic of the impact on Winestate itself if producers don't send in their wines.
“We are the buying guide for the major chains and supermarkets.†Are we therefore to take it that Dan Murphys etc read Winestate before deciding what to stock, and if a particular wine, or winery, is absent from those hallowed pages, it risks being overlooked? What a joke. Robyn Pfeiffer was also quoted as saying it would cost Pfeiffers $500 to send their 19 wines for the chance of being reviewed, and that it would cost another $500 for photographs of the wines to be included with the review. Of course there was no mention from Peter Simic of the impact on Winestate itself if producers don't send in their wines.
Re: Peter Simic blasts Rutherglen.
, and pay $25 per entry, for the dubious privelige of having them rated in Winestate Magazine.
To put this into context, it costs $60 per entry into the Royal Queensland Wine show which, many would agree, IS a quality operation (I'm not sure what it costs to enter the other main shows).
Despite the wine show awards' lack of real-world relevance, I'm sure that from a marketing perspective, those little gold stickers do more to push the bottle out of the bottle shop than a 4 or 5 star rating in Winestate.
-
Guest
Wine Publications
Will throw my 2c in.
I think Aust Gourmet Traveller has improved heaps over the past year and provides a good allround wine overview on regions as well as wine reviews with a diversity of writers. It is my preferred wine mag which when coupled with TORB and Winefront is essential reading.
What do others think?
NN
I think Aust Gourmet Traveller has improved heaps over the past year and provides a good allround wine overview on regions as well as wine reviews with a diversity of writers. It is my preferred wine mag which when coupled with TORB and Winefront is essential reading.
What do others think?
NN
-
KMP
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:02 am
- Location: Expat, now in San Diego, California
- Contact:
PaulS wrote:Peter Simic was quoted in the Albury Wodonga Border Mail as saying:
“We are the buying guide for the major chains and supermarkets.†Are we therefore to take it that Dan Murphys etc read Winestate before deciding what to stock, and if a particular wine, or winery, is absent from those hallowed pages, it risks being overlooked? What a joke. Robyn Pfeiffer was also quoted as saying it would cost Pfeiffers $500 to send their 19 wines for the chance of being reviewed, and that it would cost another $500 for photographs of the wines to be included with the review. Of course there was no mention from Peter Simic of the impact on Winestate itself if producers don't send in their wines.
I read this as well and was shocked by it. I don't know how many wine magazines actually charge to review a wine but it smacks not only of extortion but a serious conflict of interest on the part of both Winestate and the winery. How much confidence should the reader have in a review that had to be paid for? Absolutely zero is the answer.
The one thing that puts Robert Parker Jr. above this sort of BS is that he at least does not charge for his reviews, in fact he apparently attempts to pay for as much of the wine he tastes as he can. He's not perfect at doing this, as his recent biography reveals, but his ethics stand out against this type of extortion. No wonder he has started a bun fight with Oz wine journalists.
The $500 for a picture of the wine in the magazine may well be a genuine cost, but if its part of a review of the wine it should not be something that the winery has to fork out.
Mike
Link to the Border Mail article. From the Editorial is seems the paper agrees with Simic.
Re: Wine Publications
Anonymous wrote:Will throw my 2c in.
I think Aust Gourmet Traveller has improved heaps over the past year and provides a good allround wine overview on regions as well as wine reviews with a diversity of writers. It is my preferred wine mag which when coupled with TORB and Winefront is essential reading.
What do others think?
NN
Do you mean Gourmet Traveller Wine or the orginal magazine? The thing that annoys me most about Wine is the blurring between advertising and content. Overall it seems to be aimed more at the novice than those of us who drop in here 5 days a week.
David J
Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake 1Ti 5:23
Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake 1Ti 5:23
-
Guest
Re: Wine Publications
Anonymous wrote:Will throw my 2c in.
I think Aust Gourmet Traveller has improved heaps over the past year and provides a good allround wine overview on regions as well as wine reviews with a diversity of writers. It is my preferred wine mag which when coupled with TORB and Winefront is essential reading.
What do others think?
NN
Winefront is essential reading when it eventually arrives, as delivery seems sporadic. Has anyone seen the June issue yet, as it is now past mid-July?
Trev
Just one more little thing...Rutherglen Rare is probably called Rare for a pretty good reason...erm...it is Rare. There is no way known as a producer that I would send a bottle of this stuff out the door, pay postage and $25 for the priviledge so that some boozy hacks could say - 5 Stars.. the Rare class was quite brilliant and much better than Grand. Tell us something we don't know.
I think they should give the DRC and Leroy a spray next for not sending samples in for their Pinot Noir benchmarks tasting...
GW
I think they should give the DRC and Leroy a spray next for not sending samples in for their Pinot Noir benchmarks tasting...
GW
-
Guest
michaelw wrote:n4sir wrote:Coincidentally up at the Barossa last week I heard a couple of Wineries choosing not to send wines to Winestate because of the $25 fee - it could be a growing trend.
Cheers
Ian
Look out for a spray on Barossa wineries in the next edition
Only if Gary is involved in the publication
Hunter, where's that region?
As for reading material, you can't go past Winefront Monthly despite it's sporadic appearance in our Inboxes. I'd much rather it arrive with a little irregularity given its outstanding readablility, enthusiasm and wide coverage.
Winestate is all gloss and no substance.
As for reading material, you can't go past Winefront Monthly despite it's sporadic appearance in our Inboxes. I'd much rather it arrive with a little irregularity given its outstanding readablility, enthusiasm and wide coverage.
Winestate is all gloss and no substance.
Cheers - Steve
If you can see through it, it's not worth drinking!
If you can see through it, it's not worth drinking!
Heartening to see the informed drinking public deem Winestate to be as irrelevant as I do. The response from the region has been one of quiet indignation thus far, but they know to hold a grudge in Rutherglen. I wish them luck getting samples for the next NE Victorian tasting.
And remember Simic..
"The toes you step on today may well be attached to the legs that are holding up the arse that you need to kiss tomorrow"
LL
And remember Simic..
"The toes you step on today may well be attached to the legs that are holding up the arse that you need to kiss tomorrow"
LL
-
Guest
TORB wrote:Australia reputedly has the most crowded magazine market in the world. Once upon a time, over 25 years ago, Winestate was an important magazine and for many years no one could touch it.
Ric,
Going back 16 & more years Wine & Spirit Magazine was around and that was a significantly superior magazine to Winestate from a number of aspects, not the least being Mark Shield's column. Unfortunately it was swallowed up by Winestate and the glossy wine magazine market was pretty barren until AGTWine came along.
I still have a number of old W&S mags in the library to read & reminisce.
-
Guest
NN,
I believe AGT wine magazine has gone downhill. Too much NZ stuff. If I'm going to read about non-Aussie wines, make it diverse, not just a big dose of NZ stuff in the hope it might sell a few more copies over there. I'm far more interested in French, US, Italian etc than NZ.
But hey, that's just my view, and I'm sure some out there love the stuff from the shaky isles.
Cheers
Mike
I believe AGT wine magazine has gone downhill. Too much NZ stuff. If I'm going to read about non-Aussie wines, make it diverse, not just a big dose of NZ stuff in the hope it might sell a few more copies over there. I'm far more interested in French, US, Italian etc than NZ.
But hey, that's just my view, and I'm sure some out there love the stuff from the shaky isles.
Cheers
Mike
-
Guest
OK, as a small producer I am not excited by the submission fee for Winestate, but can I say in defence of the magazine....
I have been on a Winestate tasting panel and there is absolutely no relationship between the results and any advertising revenue - it's not even an issue and I think it's a bit offensive to suggest tastings are biased in this way, not only to the mag but to the tasters who give up their time freely to participate. Tastings are blind and much debate occurs where discrepancies occur between tasters. Virtual show-conditions exist and the recent tasting I was involved in lasted all day and was conducted with integrity, and with a view to obtaining the most accurate results for the readers.
I understand complaints by some people re tasting consistency. Although tasters can change a great deal from issue to issue the tasters are generally well-experienced and qualified to provide their opinions - at least as much as most wine critics. Consistency - how different is it really to wine shows? I see as much inconsistency between wine shows as I do between magazine and critics reviews. Variations between show results for my own wines have been wild. You take the good with the bad.
I understand that in order to provide readers with benchmarking opportunities, Winestate will buy wines of recognised and significant producers at retail price should those wineries not submit. I know from the recent tasting I was involved in this was the case.
Again, as a producer, all submissions to reviewers and wine shows is a marketing exercise and comes out of the marketing budget. Said it a thousand times - you win some, you lose some.
Regardless of your own opinions on this, I believe it is very true that the trade is influenced by results in Winestate. I make and sell wine for a living and I see the benefits of a 4+1/2 star rating in Winestate - I've seen retailers buy based on reviews in the mag. Of course the wine has to be good and I have to be confident of a positive response to my wines before submitting them to any show/reviewer. If submitting wines to Winestate or wine shows wasn't a valuable sales tool I wouldn't bother at all. Of course I am selective in who gets the wines - particularly with shows, and after a while you understand which reviewers will be more receptive to your styles and brand.
A recent wine of mine was very positively received by Winestate, AGT WINE and Max Allen in the Weekend Australian mag - all at the same time. Without doubt the biggest customer/trade response came via the Max Allen review, secondly through Winestate, and thirdly through AGT WINE (even though the wine in question was rated in their Top 20 for its style for the year). I realise that the readerships are different but I am in the business of selling wine, and I know which reviews I value for their capacity to earn revenue and which ones I value for the capacity to inflate ego!
In my younger wine-passion days I learned enormously from Winestate and I think it still has its place today. It aint perfect but I don't think any contemporary is either.
I have been on a Winestate tasting panel and there is absolutely no relationship between the results and any advertising revenue - it's not even an issue and I think it's a bit offensive to suggest tastings are biased in this way, not only to the mag but to the tasters who give up their time freely to participate. Tastings are blind and much debate occurs where discrepancies occur between tasters. Virtual show-conditions exist and the recent tasting I was involved in lasted all day and was conducted with integrity, and with a view to obtaining the most accurate results for the readers.
I understand complaints by some people re tasting consistency. Although tasters can change a great deal from issue to issue the tasters are generally well-experienced and qualified to provide their opinions - at least as much as most wine critics. Consistency - how different is it really to wine shows? I see as much inconsistency between wine shows as I do between magazine and critics reviews. Variations between show results for my own wines have been wild. You take the good with the bad.
I understand that in order to provide readers with benchmarking opportunities, Winestate will buy wines of recognised and significant producers at retail price should those wineries not submit. I know from the recent tasting I was involved in this was the case.
Again, as a producer, all submissions to reviewers and wine shows is a marketing exercise and comes out of the marketing budget. Said it a thousand times - you win some, you lose some.
Regardless of your own opinions on this, I believe it is very true that the trade is influenced by results in Winestate. I make and sell wine for a living and I see the benefits of a 4+1/2 star rating in Winestate - I've seen retailers buy based on reviews in the mag. Of course the wine has to be good and I have to be confident of a positive response to my wines before submitting them to any show/reviewer. If submitting wines to Winestate or wine shows wasn't a valuable sales tool I wouldn't bother at all. Of course I am selective in who gets the wines - particularly with shows, and after a while you understand which reviewers will be more receptive to your styles and brand.
A recent wine of mine was very positively received by Winestate, AGT WINE and Max Allen in the Weekend Australian mag - all at the same time. Without doubt the biggest customer/trade response came via the Max Allen review, secondly through Winestate, and thirdly through AGT WINE (even though the wine in question was rated in their Top 20 for its style for the year). I realise that the readerships are different but I am in the business of selling wine, and I know which reviews I value for their capacity to earn revenue and which ones I value for the capacity to inflate ego!
In my younger wine-passion days I learned enormously from Winestate and I think it still has its place today. It aint perfect but I don't think any contemporary is either.