Communicating through the ether is a wondrous thing. Without the marvels of e-mail, a news release about some “new” research that debunks “over a half century of (wine) industry thinking” might never have come to my attention. Had the information been sent via regular mail (the term “snail mail” is so snarky), that by the time it arrived the study would likely have been replaced by a new one.
A December 14 e-mailed announcement of The Wine Consumer Analysis 2010 began with this breathless prose: “Reversing over a half century of industry thinking, a revolutionary study shows that psychology and physiology play a far greater role in consumer choice than previously recognized.” And here’s the “Well, Duh!” part: The
study “demonstrates that a Moscato or White Zinfandel please the most sensitive tasters while most Cabernets suit a small minority of tolerant tasters.”
In what part of the wine world is that news? I’m not sure about Moscato, but why do the people behind this study think sales of White Zinfandel have been counted in the millions of cases? Surely, it couldn’t be that White Zinfandel has the attributes of an easy sale: Attention-getting color and sweet fruity flavors. What’s not to like, even for “sensitive tasters,” whatever that means. Fact is, many White Zinfandels are little more than up-dated Wine Coolers, a not-so-subtle pitch by wine marketing to give consumers a sweet, fruity, soda-like beverage with an alcoholic kick.
Here’s another shocker from the study. Co-author Virginia Utermohlen, M.D., of the Cornell University Division of Nutritional Science claims, “The industry is guilty of alienating the largest segments of consumers who then choose other sweeter beverages or even stop drinking wine.” This may be news to you, Dr. Utermohlen, but not to anyone who has been associated with the wine industry for a while. In terms of sales, a major competitor to wine has traditionally been sweeter beverages like soft drinks and fruit juices, not to mention cocktails mixing spirits into a sweet base liquid. Besides, to alienate is to transfer a responsibility of an action and somehow I find it hard to believe that the wine industry would discharge their responsibility to the very customers they are working to attract.
Study originator Tim Hanni, MW added this to Dr. Utermohlen’s comments: “Our research shows that there is, and always has been, a huge international population that demands sweeter tastes and this important segment will be with us indefinitely.” That’s old thinking on an old problem. And American consumers, including wine consumers, don’t need a study to tell them that they like their beverages sweet.
Earlier in the release, there is this vague statement: “The study of over a thousand consumers was conducted over past years…” Later, Hanni adds this bit of hyperbole: “We have uncovered glaring errors and misunderstandings in the wine industry which have led to the disenfranchisement of millions of consumers and loss of wine market share to other beverages.” Are we to believe then that just over a thousand consumers is a gauge for a huge international population? Talk about Chicken Little!
I could go on, but it seems to me that in these times of low wine sales, consumers are looking for positive encouragement and not rehashed news. Oh, and did I mention that Hanni is selling the study for $500…but you can get a preliminary summary without charge.
6