For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

That was proposed by this dude Newton back in the 1600's. I'm sure he had more than few people call him 'crazy' but it turns out that Isaac was onto something. He's got a modern day counterpart on this theory.

'Hang Time': You may have to pay for it

It seems that Andy Beckstoffer (he of myriad single vineyard Cab fame) is stirring the soup over what has become 'S.O.P' in Napa and probably the rest of California.

"Beckstoffer, who owns more than 1,000 acres in the Napa Valley, contends that the practice of leaving fruit on the vine from what used to be a standard 24 Brix to upwards of 30 percent sugar levels in recent harvests, shrinks the grapes as much as 25 percent. And it's costing him money.

Additionally, Beckstoffer believes that longer hang time is sapping the strength and energy of his vines and making them susceptible to disease."

I have absolutely no doubt on the 'averages' that Andy is putting forward, and simple mathematics would make it obvious that there would be a monetary loss because of smaller grape size. The effect of longer hang time on the vines themselves is something that I haven't really thought about. It would seem that a plant produces fruit for one main reason: So that it will be taken away from the plant. I'm not versed in all things horticulture but it would stand to reason that fruit remaining on vine longer than 'naturally' designed could/would have a detrimental effect.

"Beckstoffer further says the notion of paying him by the acre for his grapes, instead of by the ton, is an idea he's "not sure works. You can't pay me enough. It's not a dilemma that gets easily solved. We're not talking about overproducing. They're reasonable parameters."

Not sure it works? I'll admit that I understand the concept of 'négociant' wines but I know very little about the way prices are negotiated. And for the record, that's exactly what every bottle of wine that says 'Beckstoffer Vineyard' is, a négociant wine. Think about that the next time you spout off about a French wine with the old 'It doesn't say 'Mise en Bouteille au Château, this wine can't be any good'. Maybe Andy was knocking back too many single vineyard Zins and his judgment was impaired, but paying for grapes by the acre seems to me ridiculous. I would think that Andy's reputation is pretty well established and that at this point, he could command a premium. Maybe I'm wrong, but I see people get all sorts of misty-eyed when the see the 'B'-word on a label. So why agree to a 'per acre' pricing plan. If the quality is there, pay up sucka!

By the way, I understand that Becks says that he doesn't have any 'hard' data to back up his suspicions but why hasn't someone dropped a dime and called the Germans? Or hell, the Canadians for that matter. The amount of hang time required for a Riesling vine to produce a trockenbeerenauslese would make your average Cab cry like a schoolgirl. Maybe they have to replant these things every other year in Germany, but I doubt it. I'll admit that it's like comparing apples and oranges but a vine is a vine, right?

One more thing, the 'volume' loss per grape is precisely why you won't find a TBA for less than $100. So little juice, so many people that 'get' Riesling.