Thank you for the piece Simon. It reminds me of many experiences working in branding, and so it got me to thinking that many of your observations apply beyond the fine wine category.
By that I mean any wine that is branded (including price as a signal) to elevate its price above what is necessary to provide a reasonable rate of return to the producer. My personal, not even really tongue-in-cheek, definition of the goal of branding is "to earn the right, in the minds of your consumers, to abuse their loyalty as much as possible". Think Apple gouging consumers on price, paying scant attention to horrendous supply chain issues and completely taking the piss on peripherals...and consumers still can't wait to drop a month's salary on the next iPhone.
That seems to be the goal of fine wine towards the trophy hunters. It also seems to apply to many wines priced even in the £20-30 range in the UK. If one is a cynic one could say it is also going on with heavily branded £6 bottles, as the reasonable rate of return on that fermented probably-not-even-grape juice is, rightfully, zero.
I apologise if that is just a rant, but I thought I'd post it in case something in there was somehow helpful.
Although I have been a columnist since 2006 for a journal called The World of Fine Wine, I have never felt any urge to define “fine” in vinous contexts. Nor, honestly, do I now.
But if pressed I would offer just this:
Fine wine is wine the experience of which prompts reflection on its aesthetic merit and its origins.
To which I suppose I should add the rider that I intend “aesthetic merit” to encompass both delight and deliciousness, and “reflection on its aesthetic merit and its origins” to encompass wonder.
Anything beyond that takes one in the direction of defining a canon (pretentious and needless) or a marketing sector (irrelevant to a wine’s intrinsic merit, and at least mildly distasteful to many of us wine lovers).
There's surely a difference between the 'fine' wines of LVMH and Miroirs for example in that Kagami isn't seeking to extract the maximum price possible. His wines are virtually inaccessible due to the secondary market and scarcity. Sadly, my one experience of them matches most of the classical elite bottles but there is a difference?
Great
Excelente artículo. Hay una cancion de un artista Argentino que refiere a una frase de uno de nuestros íconos literarios, Jorge Luis Borges: "El Lujo es Vulgaridad" https://www.losandes.com.ar/estilo/nada-es-sagrado-el-indio-solari-y-borges-hablan-del-lujo-y-la-vulgaridad/
More than 'fine' view on this subject, thank you.
Thank you for the piece Simon. It reminds me of many experiences working in branding, and so it got me to thinking that many of your observations apply beyond the fine wine category.
By that I mean any wine that is branded (including price as a signal) to elevate its price above what is necessary to provide a reasonable rate of return to the producer. My personal, not even really tongue-in-cheek, definition of the goal of branding is "to earn the right, in the minds of your consumers, to abuse their loyalty as much as possible". Think Apple gouging consumers on price, paying scant attention to horrendous supply chain issues and completely taking the piss on peripherals...and consumers still can't wait to drop a month's salary on the next iPhone.
That seems to be the goal of fine wine towards the trophy hunters. It also seems to apply to many wines priced even in the £20-30 range in the UK. If one is a cynic one could say it is also going on with heavily branded £6 bottles, as the reasonable rate of return on that fermented probably-not-even-grape juice is, rightfully, zero.
I apologise if that is just a rant, but I thought I'd post it in case something in there was somehow helpful.
Preach brother.
“It’s a social lubricant, which allows people to come together and relax. The buzz stimulates conversation, conviviality and happiness.”
Remember a few years ago when these same people pretended they wanted to diversify? Make wine more accessible for marginalized communities. Lol.
The place of the conference alone… Lech…
Bravo, Simon! To the point and movingly written.
Although I have been a columnist since 2006 for a journal called The World of Fine Wine, I have never felt any urge to define “fine” in vinous contexts. Nor, honestly, do I now.
But if pressed I would offer just this:
Fine wine is wine the experience of which prompts reflection on its aesthetic merit and its origins.
To which I suppose I should add the rider that I intend “aesthetic merit” to encompass both delight and deliciousness, and “reflection on its aesthetic merit and its origins” to encompass wonder.
Anything beyond that takes one in the direction of defining a canon (pretentious and needless) or a marketing sector (irrelevant to a wine’s intrinsic merit, and at least mildly distasteful to many of us wine lovers).
There's surely a difference between the 'fine' wines of LVMH and Miroirs for example in that Kagami isn't seeking to extract the maximum price possible. His wines are virtually inaccessible due to the secondary market and scarcity. Sadly, my one experience of them matches most of the classical elite bottles but there is a difference?
Great!