Brent's post on the complexity of champagne production got me thinking about wine's origin and the amount of value we associate with specific wine regions. The industry definitely attributes a lot of value (and marks up the price tag) for wines that come from 'high end' regions like Champagne, Cote de Nuits in Burgundy, or first growth Bordeaux. I'm interested to hear whether people in the class associate extra value to specific regions, and whether the origin of a wine actually increases your willingness to pay for it. For example, are you more willing to pay for a wine if its labeled 'Napa Valley Cabernet' vs generic California Cabernet? And are you more likely to spend extra money to purchase a sparkling wine labeled 'Champagne' instead Prosecco or a different type of bubbly?
I'm also curious to learn more about whether these perceptions about origin vary based on demographics such as age and familiarity with wine. My guess would be that older or more educated wine drinkers are more likely to pay extra for wine from a specific region compared to younger consumers, but curious to hear what others think on this too!
I think this a really interesting question, and I've thought about it a lot while making buying decisions at Costco or Trader Joe's. Oftentimes, my decision depends on what I'm buying the wine for, and who I'm buying it for.
ReplyDeleteIn November 2015, the Wall Street Journal had a great piece discussing this same topic (http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-millennials-are-changing-wine-1446748945). The main points in the article include:
- Millenials don't take much stock in the numerical rating system, and don't want to feel "duped" into buying expensive wines just because of where it's from or a critical opinion
- Millenials are, however, interested in some sort of information about what they're drinking, and prefer to read stories or reviews online about the wine before choosing
The article also goes into how winemakers and marketers are adapting to the millenial customer, including engaging (and paying) key influencers.
I enjoyed reading this article too. It was the ending that resonated with me most.
Delete"But to truly claim their position as the most powerful consumers in the world, they’ll need to develop a broader context and a deeper understanding of the entire world of wine—and not just an appreciation of a good story or a few obscure grapes."
I think it is good that millennials are, generally speaking, willing to try something new and to listen to the stories behind the wine. But it is still possible to make relatively uninformed decisions based on these two characteristics alone. If there is an bias towards particular varietals because they are "trendy," people run the risk of - in the process of seeming to be open-minded - actually closing themselves off from the possibility of learning and enjoying an even broader range of experiences with wine.
That's a really interesting reference. Anecdotally, in Germany, my uncle has noticed that the student population (18-25 year olds) are becoming more interested in the actual provenance and subtleties of taste vs. the same age group 10 years ago, and across the board. So he in his shops has radically expanded the range of niche/boutique whiskies, rums, grappas, and other liquors because his younger customers are really interested in trying new peaty Scotches and discussing the subtle differences in methodologies from one distillery to the next. His hope is that this will ultimately also drive a longer-term uptick in interest in the wine offering.
ReplyDeleteFrom a personal (and uninformed) POV, I'd say certain AOCs like you describe would increase my willingness to pay a small premium for the wine I purchase for my own consumption. Given the importance of the Chinese market nowadays, I think it's interesting that a number of earlier studies dating back to 2005-2006 generally concluded that Chinese consumers are market followers and because of their relative lack of depth of wine knowledge would readily substitute COO (country of origin) for actual appellation or brand. One study showed COO to be the single most important factor for consumers. French wine, unsurprisingly, was at the top of the list for foreign producers, although interestingly even back then domestic (Chinese-produced) wine enjoyed the highest preference among domestic consumers (https://faculty.washington.edu/karyiu/confer/beijing06/papers/zhuo-li-hu.pdf) (although I would argue that this was probably because Chinese wine dominated the low-end spectrum of the market). Nowadays, it seems the conventional wisdom is that the Chinese market is becoming increasingly educated about wine in general and there's increased growth and competition along all price points for wine but (1) the Chinese still prefer red wine by a significant margin, (2) the newer generations are willing to spend more for perceived higher-end products (versus the traditional preference for economy of price over quality) and (3) the priority of public/trophy consumption over private, personal use would suggest that COO would still remain one of the most important factors for consumers. I'd expect that as the market matures even further, however, that consumers would noticeably begin to drill down to specific AOCs and perhaps even further to the numerical ratings systems, but the end story is that origin/labeling will probably remain of paramount importance in that market for the foreseeable future.
ReplyDeleteJeff
I personally will pay extra for wines that are from regions I have visited - this is especially the case if I went to a winery in the area. For instance, I will pay a premium for really good white wine from New Zealand given some of the associations I have from traveling and drinking wine there. Unfortunately I have not been to too many other wine regions.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this breaks down a bit for me when I think about California. Given the proximity and the number of times I have been there (Napa and Sonoma), I will often recognize the winery on a wine menu at a restaurant. Given how familiar I am with the price points (we are members of a few wine clubs), I find myself pretty intently focusing on the wine. Further, my wife and I often like to try something new and different (as opposed to going with a California wine), as we tend to drink these wines quite a bit, especially on trips out to the vineyards.
I feel that at this early stage in my wine exploration, it may be better to consolidate as one's palette adjusts to the various flavors, acidity, and extraneous aromatic bodies. True, various regions may emphasize different textures and, tannins, and flavors that stem from temperature variation and crop yield, yet beyond this, I'd rather commit to vertical tasting over horizontal tasting- preferring different wines from the same winery and then expanding my pallete to various vintages, than different regions. I believe a step-by-step process may be best if one wants to become an expert. I understand this is methodical, and may be too structured for many who want to enjoy the fruit of the vine, but what I tend to do- is binge on regions for months at a time to get a flavor for the taste, and than expand. So yes, I would pay extra, but that would be contingent on what I'm looking to explore within that frame of time, and if the region has a story that I desire to learn.
ReplyDeleteWhen I'm buying wine for someone else, I do pay extra attention to the region it emanates from, as I think the connotations are pretty strong for most people who have received a wine gift from me. However, I think the overall country it comes from seems to matter more to them than which winery in which subregion -- when I got a gift for a Francophile, he thought it was extra thoughtful that I responded to his love of France. I think these country associations can also serve as a barrier to appreciation on the flip side; if I bought a German wine for someone, he/she would be a bit confused why I thought to choose one from a lesser-appreciated country perhaps more celebrated for its beers.
ReplyDelete