dbp
Posts: 9
Joined: 1/17/2008
Status: offline
|
Definitely an interesting read; thanks for the link. I almost entirely agree with the article. I'm from Portland, and have probably tried over 100 Oregon Pinot Noirs in the last year, going out tasting a few times a month, on average. I love Pinot Noir... and I love Oregon Pinot Noir, when done well. But to JohnNezlek's question, I absolutely agree that most Oregon Pinot Noirs are way over priced for the quality... however, I guess the same can be said about most wines in the world. But when I can get 2005 Premier Cru Burgundies scoring above 90 points by reputable press for around $35, you need to be doing damn well in Oregon to earn my dollars for Pinot Noir, and I'm a local! I probably do buy more Oregon Pinot at a given price point than I should, due to the enjoyment I get going out tasting, and I like bringing those memories home with me. But yeah, most of the higher end wineries start their pricing structure around $40, and their single vineyard and special bottlings are generally $60-80. While I don't do formal notes when I go out tasting, most of those expensive bottles score in my mind space around 90 points. There's no way that's worth $80.
I think the pricing structure is set by a few of the 50 top wineries the article was mentioning. Certainly many of these top producers DO sell out of their wine. I visited four producers yesterday that have sold out in the last 4 vintages and have no excess stock even for themselves. Some of these wines are great... and since they ARE selling out, they can get away with charging those prices. Perhaps to try and legitimize themselves, the smaller producers are releasing their wines at these prices from the get go. Sometimes this works, but usually not. I was just at Ayoub yesterday, talking to Mo Ayoub. When he hit the scene with his 2004 Pinot Noir, nobody was giving him the time of day. "Who is this guy from Oregon asking $42 for a bottle of wine?" The same guy that said that wound up calling him back a few days later after he tasted the bottle Mo left for him and declared it the Romani Conti of Oregon and bought several cases for his store (that same wine has an average cellartracker score of 94.5). So... sometimes the pricing works, but obviously the vast majority of the wines out there are not up to snuff, and as a result there is this huge wine glut and there is a great perception of over-priced wines (and rightfully so). I'm thinking if we just produced less wine (by further reducing yields) we would not only get rid of this wine glut, but also produce a better product. The argument that these small wineries can't afford to do that is BS, because it costs them MORE to buy the bottles and bottle hundreds of cases only to have them sit in their storage facility..
I totally agree that perhaps the biggest thing that needs to happen is improved marketing. That's very often what sells things, after all... Silver Oak still sells like crazy at stupid prices, right? And that stuff sucks in recent vintages! It's all about marketing and brand image. However, one thing I do disagree about is that all the new AVA's just confuse people. So there's a few extra words on the bottles... big deal. Most people ignore the AVA's anyway. I don't think it necessarily IMPROVES matters, but it doesn't make it worse... you want confusing, look at Burgundy. Sure, they're established, etc. but it took me much longer to wrap my head around that stuff.
Anyway... I kind of babbled. But I liked the article. :-)
David
|
Printable Version
Oregon wine in the market - what's next? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread