The Auswine Forum

Hi Good Peoples,

I have just visited the Squires Forum on the ebobpen site and noticed a thread with 57 responses titled "A Demand for action of Parker and the Wine Advocate."

The author of the thread then "demands/suggests" that Parker should send out his monthly missive on staggered dates so those all around the country get it at on the same day. He claims its unfair because some people are getting the word from upon high prior to others and they get a jump on all the high point wine.

The mind boggles!

Also, the number of posts about the Shotfire Ridge Shiraz and Quartage which Parker rated as 93/94 is incredible. Heaps of them on a number of boards about people rushing out to buy the wines and complaints from those that missed out.

Apparently the Kurtz wines both have just been rated as 93 too and whilst all the above mentioned wines are great value, these things are like busses, miss one and there will be another one in 10 minutes.

Having tasted all these wines they are all eminently drinkable with lashing of fresh fruit and I rated them as Recommended with between 3 and 5 stars for value so they are good buying. I can not believe these scores and just shake my head every time I see the fuss over these wines.

What do you guys think, lets get some discussion going?

Hi Ric

Thought both Shotfire's are terrific wines for the money, lashings of fruit and not too much oak, good value for money.

Points, well, I'll pass, never use em, I'm just not accurate enough to say a wine is one point better than another wine, must be my brain lacking something!

As for 'must not miss' ... remember, there's always another wine! At any price point!

Ric,

You've raised two separate points here

1. Whether or not Parker should distribute the Wine Advisor electronically in order to address the impact of the delays in the mail service.
2. That you disagree with his ratings.

I'll limit my response to the first point.

While understanding the WA's reticence for online distribution in that it provides the opportunity for indiscriminant onforwarding I don't accept it.

Those who have embraced online distribution have see their subscription base enhanced, not contracted by going online, I would say this includes Campbell and Burghound as well. People who point to the 'woes' of the music industry shoud take a look at Janis Ian's groundbreaking take on the topic atthis link for a reality check.

The WA is a special case here, high scores do affect prices and demand, immediately and worldwide, like it or not. As such a delay of days for domestic distribution, let alone weeks for print copies to reach Australia, mean that segments of the industry and consumers are seriously disadvantaged by not having timely access to the information.

The closest analgy here is the Reserve Bank releasing interest rates, which also affect pricing and demand, which occurs to the whole market at one time.

I don't subscribe to the WA due to delays and the shipping cost. If the Wine Advisor were available online I would say that the subscription base would increase markedly.

TORB,

It certainly is interesting. The thing that has amazed me is where:

1. someone has tasted a wine and really liked it. they have the chance to buy some in good quantity at a good price, but hold off to have their view 'confirmed' by Parker.

OR

2. someone reads a detailed TN posted to the forum, they love the sounds of the wine, the TN gives a strong recommendation. again, they have the oppourtunity to buy but hold off for 'confirmation' from Parker.

THEN

3. The points come out, they're two days late in recieving their copy of the magazine, and the wines they had the chance of buying 6 months ago are all sold out or have tripled in price.

Then the whinging begins about 'how unfair' it is, when in reality they had already discovered the wine, had the chance to buy it, but were too gutless to follow through and buy it off their own bat without 'confirmation'.


JWR

Murray wrote:Ric,

You've raised two separate points here

1. Whether or not Parker should distribute the Wine Advisor electronically in order to address the impact of the delays in the mail service.
2. That you disagree with his ratings.

I'll limit my response to the first point.

Ar gees Muzza, its been ages since we have had a good points debate.

The closest analogy here is the Reserve Bank releasing interest rates, which also affect pricing and demand, which occurs to the whole market at one time.

Interesting how you used money and the RBA as an analogy. Money is only good for what you can spend it on, its not much good as insulation for a house, fish bait etc but it can enable you to purchase those things. In many ways wine is only good for one thing, drinking because after all its only fermented grape juice. In the quest for social status, urinal bragging rights and I have have it at all costs mentality of some purchasers, that fundamental underling basis of wine is sometimes forgotten.

You cant drink points or labels and the smart consumers just enjoy whats in the bottle, not all the BS around it.

Ric

How to describe a good wine:

If YOU like it, then it is a good wine and go for it.

Graham

Ric,

That's not in dispute, and points chasers will remain points chasers, that's not in dispute either. People will buy wine based solely on seeing your single word 'Outstanding', irrespective of how many words you put before that word in a tasting note.

I'm not discussing whether or not this is appropriate or right.

As I said, WA points do influence the market, like it or not, and the current distribution practices of the Wine Advocate are unfair to the subscribers the Wine Advocate is supposed to be the advocate for.

I don't give a fat rodent's back end in regard to Bob's scores. Full stop!

I hate those rodents, heads up each others rectum heading for the cliff, who rush to buy wines Bob rates highly, hence decreasing my ability to buy wines which I have bought for years, by either rapidly diminishing availability or rapidly increasing price.

Don't blame Bob. He just drives the bus, er bandwagon.

When Parker eventually gives a wine the nod how long has it been available to the average punter? Probably years. Several vintages.

If you hadn't heard about it before RPJ gave it a gong you were obviously destined to miss out.

Some of these wines are made in small amounts to begin with - add to that the variable vintage factors (rain, drought, etc), people finding out through other means (ie: not wine critics) and the loyal mailing list customers and you've got not a lot of wine to go around once it scores 99.

Some of these producers, once they score an RPJ nod, then set out to exploit their once loyal customers by doubling the price and reducing allocations. Only some.

Others remain the same and prefer that their wine is consumed rather than bought for investment and resale in the secondary market. Hence they retain their customers and many more years of goodwill.

As said before, if you like it - buy it. Don't stand around like a shag on a rock waiting to see if your palate is calibrated to RPJ (and others) or awaiting confirmation from the others knobs at the urinal!

Just for the sake of argument chaps, would you also say the same thing about Langtons Classifications ?

Davo wrote:I hate those rodents, heads up each others rectum heading for the cliff, who rush to buy wines Bob rates highly,

Ahhh. I didn't realise how much I've missed you, Davo.

Celia

Davo, you contradict yourself. If you didn't give a toss, you wouldn't be riled about the lemmings!

I think there is a learning curve, and that many of the people haven't been into wine that long.

Speaking from my experience years back, I was willing to chase highly scoring wines because there was a bewildering number of them and I wanted to maximize my chances of getting a good one. Only over time did I learn to experiment and to sense which wines I would probably have a good chance with.

It also took a little time to learn that my personal tastes often differed with those of Parker of the Wine Spectator reviewers.

So, I think many of the "Lemmings" are just earlier on the curve. Personally, I dread the Parker issue on Australia now because when his tastes happen to coincide with mine, a favorite wine make go up in price or become unavailable.

Brian

markg wrote:Just for the sake of argument chaps, would you also say the same thing about Langtons Classifications ?

Mark,

Thats a very good question. Langtons however does not rate individual vintages of each wine, they just classify the label. Also Langtons classification does not not have much effect on the pricing on the primary market and does not impact availability.

Actually TORB, in the Langtons pocket books, the wines are rated by vintage by Caillard.
And I think you'd also be surprised at the impact the classification has on pricing (or is that vice versa, seeing as the ratings are effectively based on consistency and performance in the secondary market).

kenzo wrote:Actually TORB, in the Langtons pocket books, the wines are rated by vintage by Caillard.
And I think you'd also be surprised at the impact the classification has on pricing (or is that vice versa, seeing as the ratings are effectively based on consistency and performance in the secondary market).

So are you saying that some people may buy their wine based on its performance in the secondary market ?

kenzo wrote:Davo, you contradict yourself. If you didn't give a toss, you wouldn't be riled about the lemmings!

Simon, You pedant.

Actually trying to make 2 different points. The first being that I don't even read Bob, or for that matter any other reviewer, because I don't give a poo what they think, let alone what they rate. This being because I almost never (there are always exceptions) buy wine without tasting it first so I only ever buy what I like. Other peoples opinions matter little to me in this regard.

So I really don't give a rats about ratings, from that point of view.

However, point 2, the lemming shuffle as a secondary process of Bob's, or anyone elses rating, I do give a poo about as it does affect me. But only in that I just have to find something else to drink, and with the rate of expansion in the wine industry in Oz that is not a huge problem.

In fact I found two great wineries, new to me anyway, and both with wines at more than reasonable prices just recently.

Mark,

Indeed I was somewhat hinting at the the circular nature of it. Yes, I hypothesize that some buyers might want to try or "own" a wine based on the way they see it perform at auction.
"what's that wine that everyone seems to be scrambling for", or, "that wine seems to be a good investment - will buy some". If this is perpetuated, then to some extent the wine cements itself in the hierarchy.
The Langtons classification appears to be based on a wine's performance over time on the secondary market (as well as quality) - buyers with less knowledge will certainly use it as a guideline for their purchases, thereby ensuring that the wine is sought after, and thus continues to perform at auction.
A bit like the stock market in some cases I guess though; if the quality (company) isn't actually there (doesn't actually do anything) then the potential is there for it to collapse rather quickly. eg certain flash-n-the-pan, hype better than quality labels.

Obviously there are exceptions to the rule; I don't think buyers are so avid about chasing wines such as Wolf Blass Black Label nowadays, and I suspect its presence in the classification (if its still there) is perhaps more a nod to lineage?

Davo, I have deliberately used the words "hypothesize" and "hierarchy" in the text above so that I won't contradict your post
How about a picture of your Laverda donk as an avatar, there's a lad?

erg - think you kill't the forum - might wanna delete that and repost as a pic!

Laverda donk.

Ha Ha I went one better.

Don't worry Gav, I will remove it, in a little while

Not sure that the Langton's classification is a driver of much, rather than an essentially re-active measure. After all, their self-imposed rules about a 10-year track record would seem to mitigate against a Parker-inspired-like rush to snap up all available quantites of a new discovery.

By definition, therefore, I would expect it to follow trends rather than set them. Rosemount Show Chardy dropped off the list, along with the fortifieds, due to lack of support from the punters. Conversely, the elevation of Wendouree Shiraz to the first rank doesn't appear to have had any effect on prices. Just thinking about it, what's the rationale for dividing into 4 grades anyway? Listing in itself indicates investment-worthiness, whereas the grading is their estimation of the quality of the wine? Certainly buying and reselling the Exceptional as opposed to the merely Distinguished doesn't seem to me to indicate a greater profit potential - heck, for the last 5 years how much money could be made out of the 7 'Exceptionals'. Or are they supposed to be 'blue-chip' as opposed to the lesser wines?

Anyway, something that's updates every 2 years is hardly likely to have the market on tenderhooks awaiting it's latest judgements.

Having said that, I value enormously Caillard's tasting notes in the Pocket Guide. Of the annual guides, I buy Halliday infrequently, Oliver less and less (I want words, not numbers) - Penguin is too capricious (lastest issue has no TN for Bin 389, for Gawd's sake), and the remaining guides all seem to specialise in quaffers at best. If Caillard's was updated every year - and had some decent distribution behind it - it'd be the best easily.

cheers,
Graeme

Torb

Laziest money I ever made was courtesy of Parker. Involved magnums of a 99 pointer bought for under $300 and sold for $2000! Net profit was $6000.

It was a freakish opportunity and I am not usually involved in the perils of wine investing.

That was a huge financial significant on what was really just four bottles of wine. So I can understand the greedy side of the American wine drinker, reference a staggered Parker release.

I am sure the wines went to the US and my profits were pumped back into the industry-Jasper Hill, Craiglee and Rockford from memory.

Langton's Books are good and i enjoy the notes too. Sometimes the scores seems too high though.