Wine store layout

DJ · Post by DJ » Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:12 pm

I visited a store which I don't usually today and everything was by variety.
My usual is alphabetical by maker and ultra premiums by region and then maker.
What do you find easier?
I was completely put off - good thing I only needed beer.
By variety worked when I worked at VC but I think that was because we hand sold such a lot - but for a bulk joint?

Gary W · Post by **Gary W** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:54 pm

Variety or Region. Alphabetical is non sensical. It assumes you know what you are looking for.
GW

GrahamB · Post by **GrahamB** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:00 pm

Gary W wrote:Variety or Region. Alphabetical is non sensical. It assumes you know what you are looking for.
GW

Alphabetical is DM style. Ok if you are looking for a producer as GW suggests. A nightmare from a sales by variety perspective.

Santa · Post by **Santa** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:26 pm

I prefer variety. Alphabetical assumes you don't need to browse. Unless you know exactly what you are going to purchase when entering the store, it is interesting to browse around your favourite varieties, noting any new labels etc.

707 · Post by **707** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:49 pm

Variety or region and definitely whites well away from the reds.

I took a wrong turn in my regular retailers the other day and found out he actually sells whites !!!

Red Bigot · Post by **Red Bigot** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:45 pm

rooview wrote:How can any wine lover not enjoy white wines? What's wrong with you lot.

What is wrong with preferring reds? :shock:

There are too many good reds to be had to bother with whites.

Davo · Post by **Davo** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:29 pm

Red Bigot wrote:
rooview wrote:How can any wine lover not enjoy white wines? What's wrong with you lot.

What is wrong with preferring reds?

There are too many good reds to be had to bother with whites.

Yep I am limited by etoh consumption.

I have a half a bottle a night ( unless the night calls for more) to try and put some moderation into my life and preserve what is left of my liver.

Invariably if I have a glass of white I end up opening a red so that I can have something I really enjoy which means I drink more than half a bottle.

Therefore I rarely open a white, unless I am deglazing the pan or making a sauce :lol:

SueNZ · Post by **SueNZ** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:17 am

Varietals for local wines (ie. Aus and NZ). Region for foreign wines (i.e. everywhere else).

Craig(NZ) · Post by **Craig(NZ)** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:33 pm

Numerical by Parker Points. Im busy, put the 100 pointers near the door, anything under 90 points take 25% off and throw it in a clearance bin :lol:

Mahmoud Ali · Post by **Mahmoud Ali** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:57 am

In Canada, where I usually live, wines are arranged by country and region. Argentina/Chile, France, Bordeaux, Italy, etc. And in each country section the whites and reds are either separated or put next to each other if they stock the producer's red and white. Thats how I prefer it and its what I miss here in Australia where most stores have hardly any foreign wines. It makes for an interesting wander through a store just to see what foreign wine may be on offer.

I agree that stocking wines alphabetically makes very little sense. Displaying wines by variety seems to be the best idea since most Australian wines fall into the shiraz, cabernet, blends and a small group of other varieties. Arranging wines by regions is also a good idea but a large portion of Australian wines are multi-regional blends, and because even the best producers make multi-regional blends, this section would end up being the largest part of the store.

I would like to see a combination of the two systems. Display the wines regionally, Hunter, Clare, Adelaide Hill, Margaret River, Geographe, etc. and then seperate the rest of the wines by variety. That way you get to look for the distinctive wines by their vineyard location. It may also serve to highlight to the average drinker that there is a difference between choosing a wine based on variety alone and wines that display the characteristics of the region. Just a thought.

By the way, there are wine stores in Canada and the US that will display wines by the Parker and Wine Spectator scores. Even on their web sites you can get their wines to display by Parker points. I am not kidding.

And what is wrong with drinking white wines when the food or occasion calls for it? It seems that any reference to white wine will elicit some kind of negative comment. Its okay to say "what's wrong with only drinking red wines?" but I don't see people saying its wrong to drink red wines. It is often the case that the "red wine drinkers" make the diparaging remarks about white wine. What gives? Just because one type of wine is your favourite tipple is no reason to harangue those who appreciate other wines.

To all the fine wines in the world, if only I could afford most of them,

Cheers.............Mahmoud.

Red Bigot · Post by **Red Bigot** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:46 am

Mahmoud Ali wrote:And what is wrong with drinking white wines when the food or occasion calls for it? It seems that any reference to white wine will elicit some kind of negative comment. Its okay to say "what's wrong with only drinking red wines?" but I don't see people saying its wrong to drink red wines. It is often the case that the "red wine drinkers" make the diparaging remarks about white wine. What gives? Just because one type of wine is your favourite tipple is no reason to harangue those who appreciate other wines.

To all the fine wines in the world, if only I could afford most of them,

Cheers.............Mahmoud.

Mahmoud, the answer of course is nothing if that is your preference, except those who prefer reds will usually find a red that goes with any food/occasion. Apart from exaggerating a little ("any reference to white wine will elicit some kind of negative comment") if you go back and read the comments by the people who (strongly) prefer reds you will find they are not disparaging the people who drink white (other than occasionally in jest), in fact it's often the other way around. The "disparaging" in this thread was from rooview: "How can any wine lover not enjoy white wines? What's wrong with you lot." Maybe he just left off the smiley?

And if you are referring to this recent thread, I can't see anything disparaging here either: http://forum.auswine.com.au/viewtopic.php?t=6394

Lets get it straight, people here who drink mostly/exclusively reds don't give a rat's @rse what other people drink, but we don't much like being told we are wrong in our personal preferences.

I took the Red Bigot tag way back in an early incarnation of this forum when another member told me in no uncertain terms that I had a narrow, misguided palate and was a "red bigot". There have been a lot of similar comments over the years since, not frequently, but in sporadic bursts.

Let me repeat, we don't care who drinks whites, just don't try to foist them on us or tell us we should drink them too.

Mahmoud Ali · Post by **Mahmoud Ali** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 3:17 am

Hi Red Bigot,

I agree that "disparaging" remarks are often in jest but my point is that they are the first to come up in threads like this. You refer to rooview's comments but in fact they were in response to 707's comment, in jest of course, about white wines in stores being well away from reds and that taking a wrong turn in his/her regular retailer's store he/she discovered that "he actually sells whites!!!"

In the thread you directed me to I found that the first reference to white wines was Michael McNally's comment "Welcome to the forum J. Cut down a bit on the whites/bubbles and you'll fit in fine." Jest or no jest, a remark that implies that you shouldn't drink too much white wine in order to "fit in" to the forum.

I don't think that anything I said remotely suggests that people who prefer red wines are wrong in their personal preferences. However, I could be accused of saying that those who make disparaging remarks about white wines are wrong. Red wines are routinely discussed but the moment a white wine is brought up out comes a pejorative remark. In fact, similar remarks are often made about Hunter Valley reds.

People should drink whatever they want. There are good wines from many different countries and there are good wines in all the different categories, red, white, sparkling, desert, and fortified. If you don't like a particular type or style it may not be the fault of the wine. Criticize the wine if you must, not the entire category.

Cheers...........Mahmoud.

Daryl Douglas · Post by **Daryl Douglas** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 7:45 am

The bigot thing is sometimes overdone here, especially given that the self-proclaimed, self-professed bigots do drink white wines....just the styles they prefer, which happen to be champagne, dessert white wine or fortifieds (thinking mostly tokay). Brian has even admitted that since his conversion, he's allowed himself to be coerced into allowing something as disgusting as riesling to pass his lips. :shock:

Hypocracy is most often the result of bigotry :lol:

I've been enjoing a few whites in the warmer weather to better complement food; been guzzling Di Bortoli Windy Peak Victorian Chardonnay 05, the best $10 chard I remember in recent years. The mouthfeel is unctuous, almost like a viognier.

Don't worry about it.

Cheers

daz

Red Bigot · Post by **Red Bigot** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:04 am

Mahmoud Ali wrote:People should drink whatever they want. There are good wines from many different countries and there are good wines in all the different categories, red, white, sparkling, desert, and fortified. If you don't like a particular type or style it may not be the fault of the wine. Criticize the wine if you must, not the entire category.

Cheers...........Mahmoud.

Mahmoud, again you exaggerate: "Red wines are routinely discussed but the moment a white wine is brought up out comes a pejorative remark." Most white threads are just ignored by the red drinkers.

Ok, here in a nutshell is why I drink almost exclusively reds:

For my personal tastes, apart from Champagne and some sweet dessert wines, there is no white wine I've ever tried where I could not easily think of a red wine that would give me much greater personal satisfaction. If that's criticising a whole category, so be it.

I do regularly taste white wines and have done ever since I decided many years ago that reds were what interested me. I've found nothing to change my mind.

A similar principle applies to Hunter reds, I found I didn't really like them in the mid-80's and although I periodically try some recommended by Hunter fans I still don't like most of them. I think you'll find there is similar divided and strong opinion on Hunter reds on the other forums.

As I don't have an addictive personality I've never succumbed to the masochistic pursuit of pinot. I do adore good pinot, but I'm yet to find one I can afford that I want to drink much of. (No suggestions thanks, I already try some Australian ones that I see raved about on the various forums).

Maybe it's just like minds finding each other, but the three regular wine tasting groups I attend, one had been going for nearly 30 years, for two of them the mention of a possible tasting of whites is met with little suppport and almost never happens and in the third there are cheers when the normal first bracket of whites is replaced with rose or pinot, or sangiovese, or sparkling red.

I don't know how many bottles of wine there are left in my drinking life, but I intend to drink as few as possible that don't satisfy my particular tastes.

Mahmoud, your comments aren't new, there are a fair number of long-term regular posters who strongly prefer red wine and if that comes across to you as unfairly criticising white wine, then you've had your say, but I don't agree with you on the extent or severity of the issue. FWIW the "red bigot" influence on the forum has actually waned over the years as Ric and I and some others like 707 post less here due to the time spent on our own sites and other personal interests.

Also just to fuel the fire a little, even for those that drink whites, reds seem to be much more popular, a quick check on winorama shows TN for 1072 reds and only 388 whites. ;-)

Red Bigot · Post by **Red Bigot** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:07 am

Daryl Douglas wrote:... been guzzling Di Bortoli Windy Peak Victorian Chardonnay 05,...almost like a viognier.

daz,
I'd like to say that is insulting to the chardonnay, but that might offend some people. ;-)

Daryl Douglas · Post by **Daryl Douglas** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 1:29 pm

Red Bigot wrote:
Daryl Douglas wrote:... been guzzling Di Bortoli Windy Peak Victorian Chardonnay 05,...almost like a viognier.

daz,
I'd like to say that is insulting to the chardonnay, but that might offend some people.

Michael McNally · Post by **Michael McNally** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 11:45 am

Mahmoud Ali wrote:In the thread you directed me to I found that the first reference to white wines was Michael McNally's comment "Welcome to the forum J. Cut down a bit on the whites/bubbles and you'll fit in fine." Jest or no jest, a remark that implies that you shouldn't drink too much white wine in order to "fit in" to the forum.

Hi Mahmoud

I respect what you are trying to say about people drinking/posting what they want, but as to your observations on my comments, you are wrong. Whether it was a jest or not is critical. It was a jest which relied on irony. The OED defines irony as

1. A figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used

People can do, drink or say what they want as long as the intention or consequence of doing so does not hurt other people.

Warm regards

Michael

True Blue · Post by **True Blue** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:43 pm

Prefer to have varieties/wine types grouped together.eg if I want a Shiraz,I want to just look in the Shiraz aisle.Which is why I find Dan Murphy's layout of putting wines under same label together,frustrating and time consuming when looking for a particular type of wine. Means you have to walk up and down every aisle ,to find all the shiraz they have. Fine when you're browsing but not when the wife is waiting in the car wondering why you are taking so long looking at wine.
Then again I realise that's exactly why.It means you have to look at everything they,ve got. Anyone who's been to the likes of Ikea,Toys r Us will know what I'm talking about.
PS doesn't matter which wine shop I'm in,the wife still doesn't understand why it takes so long! :twisted:

Daryl Douglas · Post by **Daryl Douglas** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:10 am

I agree that wines should be grouped by variety but that can get messy as well.

How should the wines be ordered within the varietal groupings? Alphabetically? By price?

Mahmoud Ali · Post by **Mahmoud Ali** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:19 pm

A Dan Murphy outlet has just opened nearby and I went in for a quick look. I noticed that they had the foreign wines on wall shelves sorted by country with appropriate flags set on top. Then there were floor shelves/displays of Australian wines sorted by states, WA, SA, NSW, etc. And of course there were the long rows of wines that I didn't check but assume were in some sort of order, alphabetical or varietal.

Michael, you are right to caution me about your quote. I did know that what you said was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. In trying to make my point about the multiplicity of comments about white wines I used your quote only because Brian referred to the thread in which I found it. I did not mean to imply that your comment was ambiguous or not in jest.

However, on the subject of irony, I don't think there was any irony in your comment. It is clearly in jest, or tongue-in-cheeck as I mentioned. Let me explain. In a popular song by Alanis Morisette called "Ironic" she talks about it being ironic in having one thousand spoons when all you really need is a knife. It sounds funny but that is not irony, unless of course it turns out that a spoon would have sufficed. She goes on to say among other things that irony is like rain on your wedding day. Well thats not irony either, just bad luck. It would be ironic if the person who was getting married was a meteorologist. Michael, your comment is more like a tease but could be ironic if in fact you were a white wine drinker (now I'm teasing).

Brian, on the question of reds and whites you may be right in thinking that I exaggerate. I didn't mean to do so but perhaps in trying to express my views I put too sharp a point on my comments. I understand where you are coming from but I'd like you to know that my "objections" are closer to being my problem. I will explain in a later post as there is a long history and I don't think I can be as brief and succinct as you, perhaps under a seperate post.

I should add by way of clarification that my cellar is about 90% red and the whites are comprised of dessert, Champagne (never enough), and older whites (Riojas and German riesling from the 70s and 80s and Australian reislings and semillons from the 90s). So, as you can see, I too prefer reds!!

Isn't wine fun?

Cheers..........Mahmoud.

Grey Ghost · Post by **Grey Ghost** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:32 pm

RB

It's age - experience - call it what you will and anybody who can remember the kookaburra at the flicks HAS to be as old as me. Need to change you soubriquet then to the OldRB and Ric to TOORB - I'll keep mine as Grey until all my hair drops out (too much gone already).

I agree, we have to drink what we like - I like whites as well as reds - with a cellar of some fine reds and one or two Rieslings and a couple of stickies from Germany and France. Just as you do, I refuse to be reined-in by the concepts of others. Should you visit here, I shall offer only reds and accept only reds should we ever meet. I shall enjoy, whatever.

Back to the thread - region then varietal would get my vote.

GG