WSJ on Wine Advocate and the travel/ethics issue

Linda,
Sorry, I missed the whole article. I had heard most of this stuff already, just not a dollar figure. I thought this was already discussed and answered by Parker that this was an informational trip. And one that won't happen again. $25,000? Have no idea why it cost them that much to fly, house, feed and transport him.

The blind tasting issue some have expressed on this board isn't one I agree with, so I could care less about that. I simply don't buy the fact that if you see the label, it somehow changes what's in the bottle. But that's another topic.

By "various people's books", I assume you are referring to importers. I would imagine some importers do hold back wines they think won't show well. But most of the importers he tastes with are very good and I suspect there is very little of that going on. Why does this bother you?

The article also brings up lavish dinners with importers. Interesting, but I believe they were talking about Bern's steakhouse in Tampa. Jay has been doing that for years and everyone pays their own way. However, what people want to see, they will. Perception is reality or so the saying goes.

I see Posner is still spitting his bullshit to all who will listen. He states he has no agenda, and I believe he may not have an agenda with regards to his wine shop. Maybe it's just the need for attention? Who knows or cares.

Does Jay review your wines? I don't believe they are in Maryland, or at least I've not seen them. Anyway, thanks for clarifying.

Mark

To clarify what Sue has said, those wineries may be the only ones (I'm guessing here) he sees in that country. However, if other wines have been submitted or an importer of said country tastes with Miller, then other wines will get reviewed. As far as I know, only scores of 85 or greater make it into WA, with a few exceptions.

mark

So I will ask this question again, as I did in the other post - only this time clearly. If $25,000 was spent to bring the Jay Miller of RP fame to the country, paid for by the wineries, who were asked to pony up $ 500 a piece to underwrite the trip... Was it ONLY the wineries that paid the $ 500 that were included in the WA, did those wineries recieve preferred status at the tasting, were they noted during the tasting ?

If so, and again, very clear here - Is this not a pay to play and if so, what makes this alright in the world of wine rating with a publication that holds so much power over sales with wineries ?
Thanks
Linda

Linda, Hi....

Your questions are perfectly in order. Part of the problem in responding in the specific is that we have no way of knowing how much money was actually spent in this case. Nor do we know the "method" of payment by various wineries or whether the institute underwrote the entire trip. Nor do we know the mind set of the people (including the critic) involved.

Let me thus respond in general. If specific wineries contribute to a critic's trip and those are the only ones visited and whose wines are tasted, that is indeed a problem. On the other hand, even if a trip is so sponsored all can be fair so long as the critic has the integirty and intelligence to realize that, to figure it into his/her calculations, to extend the trip on his or the publication's account in order to visit and taste at other wineries. Intelligent critics are always aware when visiting wineries that someone is "trying to sell them something". In that, the critics are also aware that it is their function to decide on "what is worth buying" when evaluating the notes. The critic who is unaware of that or is aware and chooses to ignore it is an ass.

As to the lunches that accompany many of those visits, I'm quite sure that as an act of politeness you would invite me to lunch if I paid a morning visit to your winery. I would accept that invitation if it did not interfere with the rest of my day's visits and tasting schedule and would accept it because after a tasting one can work up quite an appetite. More important though,at such a lunch meeting although we might become close friends or lovers, we would both be learning .....from my point of view, more about you as a winemaker/owner of a winery, about the local wine scene,etc and we would be sharing philosophical reactionsto wine, wine theory etc. I see nothing improper about such meals so long as they are kept within reasonable bounds (not the French Laundry, thank you) and so long as both people are aware of the unwritten "rules of the game" and each person's roles within that game.

On the other hand, I would most likely quite politely refuse your lunch invitation if that were to take time that might otherwise have gone to visiting one or two more wineries.

As to business or first class, in my own case I'm rather fortunate. No matter who has paid for my tickets (my publisher, myself, an inviting organization), I am well known at enough airports that I usually get upgraded without even having to spend my frequent flyer miles. Even when I'm not upgraded, the people at the business-first class lounges of many airports know me well enough to let me use their facilities..... Invite me for a jaunt on your private yacht though and unless it is under 12 feet in length I will probably say thanks but no thanks.

Again, I am not comenting on the specific case as I have no way of verifying details. If you should want to go further on these issues with me, please post away.....

Best
Rogov

The Parker/Wine Advocate brand has been a remarkable success story but, like all brands, it is not immortal and the road to its ultimate demise is looking more visible.

I doubt whether the brand will last longer than RMP's own working life. His taste for big, hedonistic and often woody fruit bombs has struck a chord with a lot of consumers, particularly first generation wine drinkers. However, he is probably slowing down already and has had to take on a number of colleagues who dilute the brand. They do not all have the same taste as himself; indeed, some, e.g. David Schildknecht, appear to have much more finesse in their approach, but this is no doubt confusing for the faithful. Perhaps more serious though, as highlighted in this thread, some of these colleagues are compromising the brand's reputation for integrity and are in some ways throwing the great man himself into somewhat unfavourable light.

So, even though the brand may be with us for a few more years, the post-Parker era is on the horizon. Let us hope that in wine criticism there will no longer be one dominant figure like him with his huge influence on prices and styles.

[David M. Bueker]

One comment to add on the subject of Parker's dominance in the marketplace: it simply isn't true, at least not everywhere.

I've had long conversations regarding buying patterns with 3 significant wine shop managers on the east coast, and they report getting 10x more phone calls and visits regarding the Top 10 (and even the Top 100) from Wine Spectator than they do from Parker's rag. Parker moves the geek market. Wine Spectator moves a more wide spread group (in the USA). Kosta Browne is a great example of where Parker has given ok ratings (some informally on the board, and two in print), but Spectator has lavished praise & the wines fly (at steadily increasing prices).

Check out the shelf talkers (all most people see of any wine mag), and there are many more quoting Wine Spectator than Parker in most shops.

... and to add to David's comments.

In the UK Parker has very limited impact - except for Bdx where I believe he has a major impact on investment wine prices (specifically new release wines - for older wines Broadbent seems to have at least as much influence). Over here there is a great dilution of influence, with no critic leading or defining the market. There are influences that occasionally will cause a run on a wine - newspaper columns, Decanter wine mag, wine competitions, highish profile wine critics (Jancis, Oz, etc.), even occasional TV programmes (e.g. David Clark's burgundies).

Some merchants do still trade on Parker scores - one or two are even in thrall of his assessments, as much so as the e-bob faithful. Most flag good scores because they're a business and it would be daft to ignore when you had a 'Parker 98 point' wine on your list. There are a few though who look on his work and influence with disdain. I recall one shop saying that I could bring any reference book in when browsing the shelves - except for any of Parker's!!

Generally, even amongst the geekiest of wine geeks in UK, Parker's influence is at best minor, though there are certainly a good number who treat his scores as inversely related to likely interest or who have learnt to spot certain features that Parker sees as positive and recognise they would see it as a negative, rather than a positive. For those trading wines, or investing in them, he is a more significant factor, but possibly not to the extent that you'll see in the US.

We still do get a knock-on from WS or WA going big on a wine / winery, as the winery can put up it's prices, selling more in the US and the knock-on lower UK volume helps justify / maintain the new higher price.

regards

Ian

... and to add to David's comments.

In the UK Parker has very limited impact - except for Bdx where I believe he has a major impact on investment wine prices (specifically new release wines - for older wines Broadbent seems to have at least as much influence).

Parker's influence is negligible amongst geeks and also quite limited amongst the general public in the two continental European countries which I know best, namely France and Belgium. Nevertheless quite a few merchants quote his scores and even his tasting notes, particularly in Flanders. In France and French speaking Belgium, RVF and Bettane/Desseauve are probably the most influential and oft quoted critics. The British critics are ignored.

However, Parker's world-wide influence still outstrips that of other critics particularly with the newly rich wine buyers from Asia and Russia who go for trophy wines. His impact on prices and styles of such top level wines remains big. And it seems to me important that he has an audience amongst US geeks and, I suspect, amongst other US buyers of top wines.

WS is an even more negligible force over here but I suspect that its brand will outlive Parker's.

Linda,
if I'm not mistaken, from my memory of the various articles the $500 figure and the $25K figure were separate trips:
Miller took a trip to Australia, the $25K tag (for 11 days- mindboggling!)paid by Wines of Australia, a group of 40 wineries. I very much doubt that they arranged for him to visit non-member wineries.
Miller took a trip to Argentina, paid for by Wines of Argentina, a group of 100 wineries. I believe it was reported other wineries were invited to "participate" if they paid $500 towards the trip.

There is a post from a Spanish winery owner (and self-importer) on another forum expressing her frustration at not getting rated in WA after sending samples for 2 years (apparently it is highly rated within Spain). This is after Miller's posting that the big importers have scooped up the better wineries. There's an unconscious bias playing itself out.

Mark,
While Dr Wysocki's opinion might be only "educated opinion, " I find that far more persuasive than self-evaluation of one's abilities, a notoriously inaccurate measure. I'll note that Mr Matthews said that at WS they limit tastings for official scores to 2 panels of 20-30 wines per day. Some writers might taste 100 in a day, but those aren't used for scoring. The answer to the question of course is an actual experiment. Someone who feels they are "accurate" on 200 wines and believes in point scores should do a simple public test: taste through 175 wines, then retaste blind 15 of those wines drawn randomly from the first 100, and compare scores and comments. Would be revealing one way or the other.

My groups taste sometimes non-blind, sometimes single blind, sometimes double-blind. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. The most obvious disadvantage to blind is overrating the forward drink now wine and underrating the more backward/austere.

David,
I agree the WS has more influence on the US market in general. My impressions (anecdotal, I have no real data):WA has more of the over $100 market (except in Burgundy). Parker scores drive the market/prices for Bordeaux, and to a lesser degree Rhone and over-$100 Cal Cabs. In the past WA scores have been the driving force behind Australia and Spain, but that has waned as he turned over those areas. Burghound is easily the most important factor in serious Burgundy, though WS might drive sales on some lower end stuff. Of course with small production and geeky audience a rave from Gilman or Kolm can sell out a wine, too. WA is basically irrelevant, though if David S was given space it might gain relevance.

WS probably rules in most other California, S. America, Tuscany, etc. Piedmont and Germany seem less point-driven - have a lot of geeky buyers who get their favorites, but certainly every critic can move a wine with a very high score (I've bought German because of Gilman and Kolm, never because of Rovani or WS, though I might because of David S). No one can drive port, it just languishes.

As a long time poster on what was once solely Mark Squires' Bulletin Board and is now the eBob board, I have seen a conspicuous shift in how issues are handled that might reflect poorly on the current host. It should be no surprise that the shift happened a little while after the merger.

After 7 years of posting there, I have been banned. No email sent to me, just no longer can access my login info.

The interesting part is that I have not really touched on this issue in over a month on the Parker board.

[David M. Bueker]

Seems odd since your profile shows last activity just 15 minutes ago. You're also not identified as a former member (as some folks are).

Posner, you didn't see that coming? Blind? You've been on their collective ass for quite some time..... Especially Miller's.... Don't know why this should be shocking for you. I'm shocked they let you hang around getting attention as long as they did....

mark

[David M. Bueker]

Uh-oh, Mark's a human shield. Check out all those elipses! What a give away!

funny David...

Uh-oh, Mark's a human shield. Check out all those elipses! What a give away!

Maybe it's a Maryland thing?

Elliptically yours,
Mark Lipton

Dale,

Are you saying you want to do a test? I'm game... Get ten people together all chipping in 20 btls.. It will be a test of stamina over anything else....

mark

Maybe it's a Maryland thing?

Oh here we go................

[David M. Bueker]

We could do a cellar reduction party at my house!

Once again, I wonder if some of us are holding wine critics to standards higher than those required for sainthood.

Well, you need to be dead first for sainthood

[David M. Bueker]

Parker has managed to turn wine into gold. I think that's a miracle.

Just a personal data point - I have done over 200 wines in a day 6 times. I've done over 100 another 10-12 times. Things start to blur pretty quickly if you don't take short breaks and have some food & water to clear stuff out.

Wow - you 'da man! Was this trying out for Laube's job?

.. It will be a test of stamina over anything else....

or cajones...

After all the brouhaha I am beginning to wonder how many people who actually purchase wine have ever even heard of Robert Parker or the Wine Spectator. Am going to do a thoroughly informal experiment and have my assistants visit one supermarket and the most popular branches of the two best wine shops in Israel to do a random sampling. Will do the same thing on my next visits to Paris, Verona and The Big Apple.

Best
Rogov

P.S. As to death before sainthood - I will certainly die but not a chance in hades or anyplace else that I'll ever be thought of as a potential saint. I do not immediately recall each of the seven deadly sins, but I'm sure I've strenuously violated quite a few of those.

.. It will be a test of stamina over anything else....

or cajones...

Would those be cojones from Cahors?

Seems odd since your profile shows last activity just 15 minutes ago. You're also not identified as a former member (as some folks are).

I am unable to log in. I get a message that reads

Daniel Posner, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

1. Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
2. If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.