You get what you pay for.

Looking over the days 'news' I came across the following little dity:

Wine Institute Encourages Developing "California message"

In reading the title alone, my noodle got spinning. I have opined in the past about the attempts of myriad wineries waxing eloquent about the singularity of their 'piece of paradise' on their websites and various other forms of propaganda and then ultimately resolving themselves (or simply embrassing) the umbrella of 'Napa' or 'Central Coast', etc, etc.... It seems to me to be bit of 'having your cake and eating it too'. Couple this with the effective meaningless-ness that is the AVA system in California (as well as Oregon and Washington State) and the message seems pretty damn clear:

Buy our wine...We don't care why, just buy it.

Ultimately, this may be the wish of any and probably all winemakers/wineries. And if so, then what's the point in 'getting out the message' on California?

"We have beautiful regions with distinct personalities, soils and microclimates that rival the world's best, talented and ingenious winemakers and outstanding California cuisine....

Beautiful regions? Sure, buy a post card.
Distinct personalities? I bet. Unfortunately most of those personalities must be viewed through oak/alcohol colored glasses.
Soils and microclimates that rival the world's best? I think you might be getting a little carried away.

You get the drift.

"Though California wines have experienced 12 years of consecutive growth, the U.S. wine market is increasingly competitive."

Let me count the ways. Everybody and their brother now has a winery in California. Hell, the organization that issued this press release counts amongst their members "887 California wineries and affiliated businesses whose members account for 85 percent of U.S. wine production and 95 percent of U.S. wine exports." I wonder where that competition is coming from? With ample help from all sorts of media, the beverage wine has and continues to be marginalized as something more akin to Jordache jeans then a real foodstuff and an item that should be part of your daily regiment.

"The wine media can also be powerful influencers of brand preference."

Genius.

"Offer your customers more experiences with you, such as sending video clips of winery principals..."

I know I'm in the severe minority, but I need a movie of some ass-clown running around his vineyards extolling the virutes of 'the loam' like I need a hole in my head.

And now the latest nominee for 'Master of the Obvious':

Nancy Light recommended that vintners identify one or two unique characteristics about their wineries to differentiate themselves from the competition. Winemakers might even consider focusing marketing attention on one varietal or a particular wine style that would be memorable and create a "halo effect" for the rest of their portfolio.

At the risk of sounding like a totally jaded bastard, shouldn't those one or two unique characteristics be found somewhere close to the bottle...like inside it?!? And as far as the 'halo effect', Ms. Light is way ahead of the curve on this one. I can't really think of more than two or three hundred wineries that have come up with some sort of silly name for their totally unique 'proprietary blend'.

Light also suggested adding suppliers and other trade customers to the newsletter mailing list and emphasized treating tasting room visitors like "royalty."

I guess the old 'Treat 'em like shit and they'll come back for more' approach didn't really pan out.

Thanks for the advice. It's a good thing I didn't pay for it.
Unfortunatley, someone else did.