The Auswine Forum

Just what is a fair comment on a tasting note published on the net?

I don't put up TN's on red wines or those wines that I don't enjoy, as we make the stuff and it is poor form to bag the opposition. Having said that I do believe its more than OK to give favorable reviews of wines that rock your socks..just not your own.
So I was a bit dismayed to find a TN for our Warrabilla 02 Reserve Shiraz on the net from some Adelaide based individual I've never heard from with some of the most negative comments I've ever seen published.

Amongst other things..".Interesting the region is not nominated" (its all my own local fruit from the Parola's Vineyard 8 km from the winery). Trying to say something were we? Boring...Etc etc etc.
They couldn't even get the region right..Rutherglen is not central Vic.

Totally accept his right to his opinion, though I, Halliday , wine shows and Winestate disagree..it could even be a corked bottle.

The web seems to bring the worst out of some people...opinions are a bit like backsides..everyones got one...just the real arseholes like to make themselves feel a bit better by flinging theirs publicly.


Cheers
Smithy

Smithy
Advice: Contact the individual and point out factual mistakes. These should at least be corrected. Try to do so without spitting the dummy as reasoned attitude now will help you in the unlikely event it turns nasty. On their part, they'd be wise to correct factual errors (and adjust the wording re: vineyard source with the aid of your clarification).

A positive attitude from you might even make a good impression with them (i.e. they don't like your wines but respect your attitude). I wouldn't stoke the fire.

Their opinion: Yes, we agree that they're entitled to their opinions. They're even entitled to share them on the web and IMO they shouldn't change them because the winemaker doesn't like it. Only with bad reviews do positive ones mean anything. You're not making Middle of the road wines, so you're going to get bad reviews from people who flatly can't stand the style. On the flip side you get enough positive ones.

Winemakers (in general, not targeted at you more than anyone else) love reading positive reviews and aren't too bothered about the writers skills or prejudices if they get a good rap. On the same basis, I don't think it's fair to challenge someones right to comment on the basis that you've never heard of them.

If you think it's more sinister than that, then I don't think the approach need be different, but it would be sensible to take copies of all correspondance and web postings. The worst thing you could do is to lose your cool though.

regards

Ian

rooview wrote:However in Australia, it seems we have few critics with the balls to tell it how they really see it (or more correctly, publishers and/or editors).

It's worse over here!
British wine writers are notorious for never actually criticising any wine. They will say "better than plenty of wines from XYZ region I could name", but never actually name those wines. Maybe the perks of the job are too good to risk rocking the boat.

FWIW I think Australian critics generally play hard and fair, with good technical skills and set a fine example for others to follow. Maybe that's in part down to the training/experience they received via the show system I so dislike

regards

Ian

smithy wrote:Just what is a fair comment on a tasting note published on the net?

Smithy,

I haven't seen the review so I can't comment on specifics, but to me a fair tasting note (published on the net or elsewhere) is one that conveys the authors genuine opinion of the wine, be it good, bad or mediocre. Of course, the surrounds of the tasting note should be factual (in your example, the location and specification of the region) and you would be right to ask for a correction on these points.

The internet and wine reviews from non-professionals are something that wineries are going to need to get used to. If the wine is good, the positive comments are going to counter-act any negative comments. People will also gravitate towards the sites of those that find their palates are similar (just like professional reviewers) and the better sites should be toward the top of search engine results if people are searching for your wine (as long as you've given them a chance to review it).

I think that some of the Australian wine review sites by people not writing about wine for a living are excellent (TORBWine, Winorama, Winetastic and others) and these are the opinions that people may take notice of, rather than inaccurate sites.

In the end you can't stop all negative comments as there will always be someone who won't like wines that everyone else likes. If you focus on the positives Smithy, the boom of amateur wine reviews is a great chance for smaller wineries to get exposure to people specifically looking for new and exciting wines to try.

I'd guess this is the post:
http://winereview.wordpress.com/2005/08 ... 02-review/

If wine reviews were always positive, they wouldn't be called reviews, they would be called bulls**t.

smithy wrote:The web seems to bring the worst out of some people...opinions are a bit like backsides..everyones got one...just the real arseholes like to make themselves feel a bit better by flinging theirs publicly.

Nice attempt at denigrating anybody that bothers to post a TN, view or thought on wine in this forum Smithy. I beleive I have gained more knowledge concerning drinking and buying wine via amateur websites and forums over the last year than from any other source. Also, such sites have turned me to smaller wineries that I otherwise may not have purchased from. So for someone in your position public reviews could be a valuable source of advertising/marketing attracting new wine buyers. We all must be wary of sh@#$ing in our own backyards...

Smithy,

I agree you should have a beef with any factual content, but as for the critical element, an anonymous review like that would not influence all that may people IMHO. Looking at the scoring system they use it is not actually all that bad anyways.

Glen

Red Bigot wrote:I'd guess this is the post:
http://winereview.wordpress.com/2005/08 ... 02-review/

Surely that can't be the quote.

It hardly meets Smithy's comment "some of the most negative comments I've ever seen published". If it is, he's got to be joking.

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of Smithy's negative knee jerk reaction to anyone who has the temerity not to love his wines.

GRB beat me to it, by this scale its very good.

90-100 = outstanding fine wines
80-89 = very good
70-79 = good wines, of some character
60-69 = industrial, commercial quality
Note: point scores inevitably take some account of price (a $10 wine that scores 90 is not quite the same as a $100 wine that scores 90 pnts).

NOt sure how you assess if its industrial wine, thats one term that really, really, really shits me

I think you should stop acting like a big baby and accept that some people just don't like your wine. Thats fine. Loads of people do. It is not exactly a scathing review anyway..actually it is not much of a review at all. Take a deep breath and relax big fella...
GW

Smithy - have a look at Ric's site for an article from 3-4 months ago about how NOT to handle a situation like this.

Secondly, I think anyone can post whatever they like. If they don't like a wine what is wrong with posting the review. Winemakers are living in some sort of fairyland if they think that they should never have their work criticised. Why should wineries be a sacred cow? Plenty of other businesses have negative remarks published about them, actors, singers, filmmakers and writers for a couple of examples. Why should wine be exempt from negative assessments?

Having said that a reviewer should only post a negative review after checking that they are 100% spot on. Given the potential for bottle variation they should try more than one bottle before panning a wine and as you said they should at a minimum get their facts right.

Get in touch with the person and have a chat about it. But don't be defensive or shirty about it or that will make it worse.

Can I also ask if you take the same issue with Ric's comments on the wine Smithy?

"The big, brooding nose that was tight but showed lifted alcohol. Deeply-seated, strong fruit delivered plum and blackberry; the fruit showed slightly stewed characters. Full-bodied with a solid structure and simple complexity. My score 14.2,"

To me, they are aspects to this note that are more negative (although some more positive) than simply being "boring".

Also Smithy, you need to take his score in context with how HE scores, if you read his other reviews you will see 82-88 are very common, above that quite rare.

Steady on people. If we all can't have a little rant every now and again, how boring would we be? (Better to let it out than bottle it up Smithy and EXPLODE later on with innocent bystanders/tasters/grapes in harm's way).

I think we should all form a virtual circle while Smithy and the Adelaide guy slug it out mano a mano, and we all chant "fight! fight! fight! fight!" .

Just trying to bring a little levity to a post that is headed in a negative direction (from my point of view).

Me, I'm going out to try to fling my a#$%hole !

What is the big deal? :confused:
82 is the bottom end of "Very Good"
Is this a marketing post?

Sorry, but "storm in a teacup".

i for one am interested in which wines people have not enjoyed - and why

i say the following not in order to inflame but simply as market feedback - it is smithy's comment not the review which means that i will probably never be in a position to comment on warrabilla's offerings

and then there are the wineries like jeanneret, noon and pauletts - where the people are so damn nice that you would buy their wine regardless of reviews

and now a comment that is probably not remotely relevant to this particular discussion: in my experience it is best not to post post drinking - some of my most reasoned arguments have looked like maddie ravings and some of my most hilarious observations have looked rather lame in the morning light

that said - respect to smithy for not posting anonymously

unlike the coward that is me

perhaps i will try his wine after all

Had the '02 Reserve the other day and liked it. It was a tad disjointed and 'stewed' straight out of the bottle, but that blew off after an hour in the glass and the blackfruit, acid and tannin came nicely into balance. A decent decant is a good idea.

Unique and enjoyable wine IMO.

Thanks for the feedback guys.
We don't mind fair intelligent comment. I know our styles aren't for everyone, so if someone who doesn't know where Rutherglen is doesn't glow admirably for the wine, well that's life.
What does annoy me though is that a google search for Warrabilla turns up in spot no 11 this gentlemans rant.
Hey, I've spent 25 years making wine got the degree to go with it and I don't dish out what this does.

Call it petty if you like but I do get annoyed that anyone with a bad attitude and a belly full of grog can really damage the hard work done by not just me , but the whole team.

Having said that, I should contact him direct.

And Marsala.....Nothing gets me more riled than the term "Industrial Wine!"


Cheers
Smithy

post us up a bottle for the next brisbane wine club dinner and we will put it to the test.

smithy wrote: Call it petty if you like but I do get annoyed that anyone with a bad attitude and a belly full of grog can really damage the hard work done by not just me , but the whole team.

I can't believe I am reading this rubbish you are writing. The only one doing your wines a disservice right now is yourself. None of this would have been noticed if you had not drawn it to our collective attention.

Ratcatcher wrote:Smithy - have a look at Ric's site for an article from 3-4 months ago about how NOT to handle a situation like this.

Open Mouth and Extract Foot

As far as my TN is concerned, this was made blind in a line up of almost 50 wines.

"Wine 31 - was unveiled as Warrabilla 2002 Reserve Shiraz

The big, brooding nose that was tight but showed lifted alcohol. Deeply-seated, strong fruit delivered plum and blackberry; the fruit showed slightly stewed characters. Full-bodied with a solid structure and simple complexity. My score 14.2, group score 16.55, ranking 21st. Brian rated the wine 16.0, Lawry rated it 16.5 and Andrew rated his wine 19.5, which was higher than he rated his own Parolas. By comparison, in the interests of being scrupulously fair, if his score is removed, the wine would average 15.56 and would have be ranked 36th."

I don't dish out what this (guy) does.

Not sure about that Smithy. You have been pretty scathing of thin green unripe styles in the past. Although you don't name names it's not far off.

And yes, competitors shouldn't be slagging each other off, especially in a subjective field like wine tasting, but there is nothing wrong with a person with no vested interest in the industry posting their personal views, good or bad. Most of your customers won't have a degree in winemaking so what he has to say may have more relevance for them than what you do.

I think it may be a bit much to assume he has a bad attitude and a bellyfull of grog just because you don't agree with his comments. He may have a great palate.

You really should read Ric's article and the link to Cam's website and the comments from readers on Cam's article.

I don't think most consumers would be on your side on this one.

This is all too remniscient of Cam's tasting note problems. I think you should definetely contact him directly and nicely, because from my perspective after reading the blog this seems like a massive over reaction.

smithy wrote:I don't put up TN's on red wines or those wines that I don't enjoy, as we make the stuff and it is poor form to bag the opposition. Having said that I do believe its more than OK to give favorable reviews of wines that rock your socks..just not your own.
So I was a bit dismayed to find a TN for our Warrabilla 02 Reserve Shiraz on the net from some Adelaide based individual I've never heard from with some of the most negative comments I've ever seen published.

Is there any indication that the writer is in the wine industry? I appreciate you as a producer not bagging out other wines, but personally I have no problems telling everyone about the wines I dislike. If the writer being ranked 11 on google is that important to you, perhaps you should send them another bottle in hopes that the first was faulty. At the very least sending them a bottle will make them feel more favourable. But if you are heavy handed about it, well you saw what happened in Cam's case, and the negative publicity that followed for that winery.

I am not taking sides here, my views have been expressed in the article already, and others have already said what I would have stated in realtion to Andrew's comments.

However a couple of points. Firstly, there is no name associated with that site that I could find. When you click on the "About" button here is what it says...

"This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress."

When you click on the "Who writes the reviews" link, here is what it says.

"Contributors include members of the Wine Marketing Group of the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, University of South Australia.
Note: point scores inevitably take some account of price (a $10 wine that scores 90 is not quite the same as a $100 wine that scores 90 pnts).

Very short on detail as to who etc.

It is mainly a chap called Dr Byron Sharp. He is a wine enthusiast and a professor of Marketing Science. I reckon Smithy should get him onside..he could use a bit of help in this department....
GW

TORB wrote:
When you click on the "Who writes the reviews" link, here is what it says.

"Contributors include members of the Wine Marketing Group of the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, University of South Australia.
Note: point scores inevitably take some account of price (a $10 wine that scores 90 is not quite the same as a $100 wine that scores 90 pnts).

Very short on detail as to who etc.

And if you browse the site you will see there are about 2 dozen people associated with the institute and nothing onthe group iteself. A quick browse of a few of the reviews indicates significant variability in the style of the reviews. My guess is that the blog is a teaching aide for students of wine marketing.

I reckon about the best thing you can do is sit down with a bunch of winemakers and rip into each others wines.
We arent here to seek glory and love we are here to make the best wines we can. Sure its not nice when someone says that you just plain screwed up but it helps to lif tyour game.

Having said that reviewers arent realy helpful for this

Having read some of the reviews on the site, and assuming that a lot of the contributors are students of wine Marketing then the forum suffers from the usual problems when students are learning about tasting wines; they spend a lot of time trying to find faults with wine as this is seen to be a 'real' assessment of a wine. In all of the reviews that I read all of the wines had faults of some sort.

I haven't tried the wine in question but I would suggest that one takes the review of it with a grain of salt, based on the other reviews. Don't think there is one review where someone/anyone writes "Man, this is a really good wine"

Having said that, it is a pain that the review shows up early on in the Google search. I would suggest that one ignores it and hope that when most people read the review they will take it in context with all the other reviews.

Other comments from other forum contributors are right; don't get overly grumpy about it because the only person it reflects badly on is you.