Daddy Winebucks

Even before getting into the wine business I spent a lot of time in Napa (my wife’s from Marin) and consistently commented how I never, ever saw a CHP or Police cruiser along Highway 29, the main road that flows into Napa and its surrounding burgs.

The observation was a simple one, wouldn’t/couldn’t the men in their black & whites cruise up and down the road, pulling over people who had been drinking and fill up their quota of tickets in about an hour each day, then go home to be with their kids?

Naturally, the conspiracy theorist in me was sure this practice was not implemented was because it’d be bad for business.  Start arresting the paying customers for driving under the influence and well, as traffic increased in court, it would decrease in tasting rooms.

Jury Selection

This was on my mind again when becoming part of the criminal justice system after being called for jury duty last week here in LA.  I can tell you the process, having never served, is about what you’d expect, a motley collection of prospective jurors (your humble blogger included) gathering for the right of passage know as civic duty.  All the usual suspects were there, the green carded citizen for whom English is probably not even their third language, the hot shot businessman who spends the entire time in the jury selection room wheeling and dealing in an otherwise silent room in full view of the sign which reads, “Please respect your fellow jurors and use your cellphones outside.”

You didn’t hear this from me but if you own Apple stock, SELL.

And of course, the person for whom jury duty is such an inconvenience that they’ll say just about anything to get out of service.  Give them a reason to claim an exemption, and they’ll try and squeeze through any hole.  Financial – my husband and I just lost our jobs.  Caring for someone else from 8am-5pm – I’m home schooling my kids and my 80-year old mother.  Prejudice about the case – what’s the charge again, I’m sure I’m for it.

Someone even claimed to know the defendant was guilty because, “he wouldn’t have been arrested if he wasn’t.” To which the judge replied, do you feel that way for all crimes – murder, assault, rape – if they’ve been accused, are they guilty?  “You have a point, but I think this guy is guilty.”

Word to all – except that waste of human space – pray you are never sitting in the defendant’s chair – these are your peers, people…

At some point during the jury selection I realized the case was a DUI and although I wanted to serve, figured either the defense or state would not want someone in the alcohol biz to be helping decide the case.

Turns out they liked me, they really liked me!!!

The Trial

According to the facts, the defendant was stopped at 2:30 am on the 101 Freeway after CHP noticed him straddling the lanes.  He did okay on his FST’s (field sobriety tests for you layman) but not good enough that he wasn’t arrested and brought in to take a breath test.  The test, administered an hour later registered a .13 twice and the accused was booked on suspicion of DUI and driving with a BA level above .08.

The state called two witnesses, the CHP officer and a criminologist who explained FST’s, absorbtion rates, accuracy of ECIR machine tests, etc.  All straightforward testimony, all believable.  The state called one witness, a hired gun (paid $2500 for an hour’s work – having never met the defendant and only looking at the police report – who testified that based on  the FST report, the defendant probably had a BAC level of .04-.06, making him then innocent of the first charge of DUI.

Two days of testimony later we go into the room.

The Deliberation

After being selected as the foreman (no doubt for my boyish good looks and raffish charm) we discussed the case for about an hour before I called a hands up vote that came up unanimously, GUILTY on both counts.

The Aftermath

I followed the judge’s instructions to not discuss the case, visit the scene of the crime or do any investigating on my own via the internet but after getting back from court on Thursday, I immediately went to Facebook and searched the guilty parties name.   He came up first on the list – on a public page no less – and I kid you not, this can’t be made up – in every photo the person had on their page, there is a drink in their hand – even one with them passed out on the floor with a proud comment by them describing the scene.

First I laughed, not only at how dumb this person is (have fun trying to get a job with your DUI conviction and your obvious alcohol problem, but also because I then knew we did the right thing.

But that humor was quickly replaced by anger, that this person flaunts their stupidity in the rest of our faces, as if to say, the law doesn’t apply to me – and that the day I kill someone you love, maybe, but a small maybe, I’ll learn my lesson.

So now I’m rethinking the merits of letting people drive up in Napa (if in fact they are lenient about allowing people to drive after hitting the wineries).  But even so, we as individuals have to take responsibility for our actions on the road when we’ve had even one drink.

And when we get our long hoped for tasting room, I’m going to make deals with limo companies, taxis and our guests, giving them discounts for *not* driving after tasting our wines.

It’ll be money well lost…

Lets go back a few years, okay 25, to my first Spring Break – Ft. Lauderdale 1984.  Ah, those were the carefree days of hitching a ride and cruising the strip, drinking at Penrods and of course, meeting the high school girls (who told us they were in college) in the room next door and “hanging out” – where are you Lydia Rudnicki – if that was your real name?

This year was a little different.  My room was just as messy, clothes strewn everywhere, but instead of empty beer cans the trash was overflowing with empty water bottles and juice boxes, the copy of Hustler was replaced by the latest in the “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” series and the TV was not tuned to MTV playing Motley’s Crue’s, “Home Sweet Home” but rather the soothing sounds of Sponge Bob (what else?).

The goal here though is is not to take you down the wonderful, magical memory lane of what Spring Break used to be – though if any mad scientist out there has some sort of go back in time formula, a la “17 Again” I’m your guinea pig – but more to discuss a topic that burns a hole in my brain everytime I swagger up to a bar these days to find a nice wine by the glass to enjoy.

Unfortunately it seems, the further up the food chain you go, the further down the ladder of interesting choices to be found BTG there seems to be.  Granted, at a big resort I don’t expect the Food and Beverage Manager to be able to buy wines directly from the winery, nor do I suspect that they are authorized to use anyone other then Enormo Wine Distribution, Inc. but please, if I have to look at another chalk board with a Ravenswood or Coppola or Kendall Jackson or Stonestreet or even Kim Crawford (whose wines I really like) only to order a beer instead…

As always, let me say that none of the wines I roped into one block above are bad, all are enjoyable, but they’re more enjoyable at $10.00 a bottle, not $10.00 a glass (the general rule of thumb for by the glass pricing).

I’ve paid more and would continue to pay more for an interesting glass of Tempranillo from a small producer in Spain, or better yet a boutique CA winery making great Syrah, Riesling or Cab.

Full disclosure:  we sell a lot of wine by the glass and its helped enormously to build our mailing list with people who took the suggestion of ordering something they’ve never heard of, paying $20.00/glass and loving it.

So for all the wine buyers out there, give a small shop a chance to wow your customers with something other than the wines being forced upon you.

It would have made my recent Spring Break trip about as sweet as a high school sophomore named Lydia…

Wine Futures, or put another way, paying for  the privilege of owning a wine years before it will ever see the inside of a bottle, have been taking a hit lately, as more and more people (noticeably cash poor) are foregoing this practice in favor of, oh, what’s the word…sanity maybe.

For years the major French wine houses – and even some cult brands here in the States -  have sold their wine to willing consumers well before their release date as a way to not only raise capital for these expensive wines but I say also as one more example of snobbery in belonging to an elite club of folks for whom money was clearly no object.

And now that the economic landscape continues to flow along with the speed of continental shelf drift, suddenly the idea of spending one’s money on something that doesn’t quite exist, no longer seems like such a good idea.

Shockingly perhaps, I’m amazed that other industries did not catch on to this practice and use it for their own gain.  You know,  walk into a Best Buy ready to plunk down $1500.00 on a new flat screen and as the helpful salesman rings you up for the full price he says, “Here’s your receipt.  We hope to be shipping these TV’s by 2013.  And boy is it going to be worth the wait.”

You’d go for that transaction right?

What I love about this story is that once again this financial mess is righting the world on its proper axis.  Or am I the only fool who expects to physically get something when I buy it?

Yes, wine does take time to mature properly, even to merely allow it to attain a quality that warrants it reaching a consumer’s hand.  And yes, many of these wines are of the blue chip variety that are sometimes bought and sold like stocks (and we all know how good that’s going).

But there’s a certain arrogance that comes from profiting on your product, a cash advance if you will, on simply the promise that said product will deliver everything its advertised to be.  Again, imagine not  being able to test drive a car before you drove it off the lot.  Wouldn’t happen. Couldn’t happen.

As a wine consumer I have expectations that a certain wine in a certain year will be of great quality.  Hey for many of these fine wines and their equally fine winemakers, the wines in question will be decent in even sub par years.

So I’ll tell you what, I’ll buy your wines when they’re released.  As for the cash you need to make them, well, that’s going to have to come out of your pocket.  And I’m happy others are starting to feel the same way.

I was hoping to find a subject to write about as a break from the rigors of Grape Madness and truth be told it’s a topic I had started formulating in my head a few weeks ago and forgot about it, until  I opened today’s Times.

Once again the subject of selling wine in supermarkets is on the checkout stand in New York.  And although the person flying the flag the highest, Tom Wark at Fermentation will most certainly write about this with more passion and eloquence than me (if he hasn’t already), I’m continually mystified by the fact that as a person in the business of selling wine, some consumers, depending on geography, simply cannot buy it.

Thanks, America.

Growing up in and around New York City, I was not aware that one could not buy wine in a grocery store, mostly because we did not drink wine at my house.  So when I moved to California and saw wine on the shelves at the then Westward Ho market (now a Whole Foods), across from my apartment building, I suppose I always assumed you could buy it everywhere.

Not the case in my home state though, where a powerful political cabal of distributors, liquor stores and of course religious folk are fighting a proposal by Governor Patterson to raise revenue by allowing grocery stores to sell wine.

I mean, what man of the cloth doesn’t want to be seen going into Freddy’s Liquors on 46th & 9th?

The late (unbelievably) great, Bill Hicks used to say that the only reason the two most destructive drugs, tobacco and alcohol were legal was that they were the only two the government made money on.  He’s right.  But then how come wine is not as easily obtainable where hopefully responsible ADULTS can buy it alongside the liquid motherlode, beer?

The argument that allowing people to buy wine at a grocery store will put independent liquor stores out of business sounds so  tired these days that they may as well make the old crotchety guy on his lawn yelling at the neighborhood kids their spokesperson.  Need these retailers look any further than the states around them (Hi New Jersey) to see that it should always be about convenience for the customer?

A quaint concept to be sure, you know, allowing the people who keep your lights on the ability to buy everything they need in one place.  And the follow up argument is, well, if they can sell wine, let us sell cheese, because really, what better place to buy aged Gouda than a liquor store.

In fairness, I do see some of their argument, but it’s the same argument made by independent bookstores against Amazon and the local hardware store against Home Depot and yet I drive through LA everyday and see signs of life from both.  Just as there are signs that both are in trouble in 2009.

Last I checked the country was in a bit of a financial downturn.  Isn’t it time to allow businesses to make money selling legal products to legally appropriate consumers where ever they may roam?

Doesn’t get anymore Land of the Free than that…

I had a friend from England once describe to me the difference between Brits and Americans.  If a fancy car with a fat cat drove by an American, the Yank would think, “I’m going to be like that guy someday” where the working class Brit would say, “He’s going to be like me someday.”

Well that day has pretty much arrived and I’d say the Brits have won.

The economy is bad.  No one can stop writing about it, thinking about it, strategizing ways to make money off of it.

See Gourmet Magazine, long of the Eating the Four Star Lifestyle, at Four Star Prices and Viking appliance ads now including tips on how to stretch that food dollar, Leftovers: They’re Not Just for Broke Losers Anymore.  Over at Food & Wine, a long time favorite of mine, their entry into the economic swoon – other than sort of pink slipping great wine writer Lettie Teague -  is at least having Ms. T continue the Wine Matters column, this month focusing on the least expensive bottle of wine on a wine list.

My simple question is, why weren’t these types of stories being run anyway, perhaps as a way to gain readership among these  publications.  For when the Bernie Madoff’s of the world and his suddenly less well-off friends (along with anyone else who gets a 401K statement each month) stop dining out and traveling to France, Spain & Italy, ad pages decline to the tune of 42% for Gourmet and 30% for F & W.   At the same time, titles like Everyday with Rachael Ray, which caters to “regular” folk is up 7%.

For many of her viewers and readers, this blogger included – she brings me back to my two years spent in Upstate NY – we’ve been living this way since long before Wall Street decided to take our money with them to Greenwich.  I buy wine at Trader Joes, my lunches are generally leftovers, we’ve always preferred to find some group of friends to eat with on Sunday night rather than go out.  And I suspect most of you are drifting in the same boat too.  So why has it taken the glum news to shake us of habits we should have been avoiding anyway?  What happened to everything in moderation?

I won’t go so far as to say that I’m glad we are facing these tough times (see: my 401K) but I do see the value (pun intended) to losing the glutton of the past and instead focusing on not only the here and now, but understanding that if you’re drinking great wine that cost $250.00 and I’m drinking great wine that cost $10, we’re both drinking great wine.

Thus, who needs to be the fat cat in the fancy car anyway?  Lets meet in the middle and all be Aussies instead!

I enjoy recycling, though I’m still suspect of where all that plastic, cardboard, and newspaper goes when my blue can gets picked up each Thursday.

One of these days I’m going to follow the truck after it leaves my house, watching as it winds all the way around town before it drops off somewhere.  Maybe once there I’ll sneak in on foot while the driver isn’t looking and snoop around the processing plant only to find out that our recycling is being made into food.

Wait, that’s the plot for “Soylent Green.”

In one area though, I’m such a pack rat for recyclable goods that I’m starting to rethink the clutter I’m creating.  I’m referring to the (at last count) 45 empty wine bottles that grace the top of my wine cabinet and now also occupy space in the kid’s rooms.

Some of these bottles are obvious keepers, my collection of wines from 1966 (the lucky year for wine my wife was born in): Latour, Fonseca, et. al., while others have sentimental values for other reasons, our first trip to France together, some 1997′s from the year we were married, a 1990 d’Yquem from our millenial new year’s celebration.

Some, like the 1982 Chateau Beychevelle, have great stories attached to them.  Linda and I, then newly engaged were given some wine to start our collection with.  So we took this bottle to a nice restaurant where it was opened as we were told the menu.  One of the items, “Osso Buco” was unknown to us both and I proceeded to ask her, “What’s Osso Buco?”  To which our nosy neighbors at the table next to us hissed under their breath, “They’re drinking 14 year old wine and don’t know what Osso Buco is?”

But other bottles have no real discernible right to be taking up space around my house, where they must be polished, dusted and arranged each time the house is cleaned.  I give you exhibit A, the Carr Vineyards 2003 Pinot Noir.  I do recall it being a very nice wine but keeping the bottle?  Forever?

I’m not going to throw that one away though, maybe I drank it at some point after Joss was born (2/10/03) or maybe I thought I’d buy more someday.

But from this moment forth, I’m going to be much more selective with the bottles I keep around like some wine museum, space that can now be used for my new products I bought at Whole Foods cardboard box collection.

The rain is falling again in Los Angeles, washing bad memories off the sidewalks of life.

And it’s a weather pattern that always reminds me of Wally’s famed parking lot sale, since wet is typically the forecast during this once a year weekend.

Back in my carefree days, circa 1999 BC (before children) I lived at the beach, breathed cleaner air, and actually had money to buy wine.  I always enjoyed Wally’s because the small store made me feel like I wasn’t selecting from every wine ever produced (see: The Wine House – which I’m also a fan of).

But now that I live in the “country” and shop for wine that gets cellared for 3-4 days, wine shops, as I’m mentioned previously, are not on my buying radar.  Each year though, Wally’s has a big tent sale in their parking lot, and from everything I’ve heard, bargains abound in the “you’ve got to be kidding me” range.

I’ve heard of top flight Bordeaux’s going for $25.00 and California Cabs priced so low they’re practically giving them all away.  So this year, when a friend invited me to join him under the big top, I said yes, stack of dollar bills in hand so thick you’d have thunk I just hit a slot machine at a strip club in Vegas.

I’m not sure how crowded they usually get on a Friday afternoon but the amount of wine housed outside was impressive, even if the crowds were a bit sparse.  I pulled out a wet shopping cart and headed to the aisles like a contestant on “Supermarket Sweep”,  envisioning myself running through and loading up my cart while others grabbed and clawed at my hands, hoping to get that last bottle of 2000 Harlan for $47.00.

Okay so maybe people we’re a bit guilty of hyperbole when it comes to the deals to be had at the Wally’s sale.  Or maybe those people had enough money to feel that getting a 2005 Mouton Rothschild for $579.00 was a steal, marked down from $1,000.00.  And I suppose if you just look at it from a math perspective that is a really good deal.  But a bargain?

I walked the aisles, tempted by the many quality wines on the floor but only pulled the trigger four times, three really, if you disclude the $8.99 (was $12.99!) bottle of 2007 Montepulciano called Quattro Mani (four Hands) that is made by “four celebrity Italian winemakers”, none of whom are listed, that was a good buy for me – and a very nice wine – but not the kind of juice I was looking for.

My big purchase was two bottles of 1996 Chateau Rieussec for $54.00.  A good price on a good wine that normally sells at Wally’s for $75.00 but I did find online for cheaper, though with shipping probably would have been about the same.

But the pricing in general as with all things are whatever a customer will pay you for something they want.  If you had had your eye on that 2005 Bordeaux but felt $1K was better spent paying the gas and electric bills, maybe that 50% discount was enough to make you reach for the plastic and support our teetering economy.  All it did for me was beg the question of exactly what Wally’s profit was even at that reduced price.

For those of you who had the displeasure to shop for a car, we’ve all been told, “I’m only making $500.00 on this ($40,000 car).  Really?  Really?  Color me incredulous.  My guess is that Wally’s still made a tidy profit on those bottles at almost $600.00, which then begs the follow up question, where is the wine buying world headed.

We’ve all heard that auction prices are down, if non-existent, and save for the folks who are still pocketing big paychecks (fill in the richest person you personally know here), most of us are happily spending $10.00 and feeling okay about it.

There were plenty of people filling their shopping carts with high priced items though.  Here’s hoping that some of them invite me over when they pop those prizes…

In these recessionary (depressionary?) times, lets see a show of hands.  How many of you are still going out to eat on a regular basis?  Sadly, and perhaps stupidly, mine is high above my head – and yes, I am typing with one hand…

Granted, some of these meals are at Chili’s with the kids, where the wine choices run the wide spectrum of quality, from Yellow Tail Shiraz to Yellow Tail Chardonnay, to some Pinot I can’t recall, so off in color I could have sworn they poured Ben’s fruit punch in a wine glass by mistake.

Many of these meals though are at fine dining establishments where, as the resident wine “expert” among my circle of friends, the task of picking a wine for the table usually falls on me.   Now I can look at this as a compliment, this assurance that I will take good care of everyone and their wine enjoyment needs.  But for me, now more than ever, it’s a pressure I could easily do without.

Call me a wine snob but I just cannot bring myself to order a Ravenswood Zinfandel at a nice restaurant.  It’s a wine I’d gladly bring home to make with veggie pepper steak and mashed potatoes any night of the week, but when I’m out to dinner, my eyes always fall on the Gevrey Chambertin’s or Brunello’s.  They just do.

And while this is a boon for the restaurant, it’s often an ethical battle for me.  For what exactly constitutes spending too much on a bottle of wine when eating out?  For me, spending $75.00 (on a roughly $30.00 bottle when buying retail) is not much of a stretch.  Not from a financial standpoint, I’m by no means rich, but I know at somewhere between $50.00-75.00, I’m going to get a good bottle of wine that will go well with the food we’re ordering.  But what of the people you’re dining with who don’t drink a lot of wine, who might not feel so wonderful in dropping that kind of money (usually times two before the meal is over) putting the bill at $150.00 before the food is even figured in?

So I sit looking at the list, then back at my dining companions, trying to size up their pain threshhold (read: financial health) and order accordingly.  I’ve even been known to tell a sommelier, give me your best bottle of wine under three figures.  That actually works well since now I’ve put the burden on them.  Sure, he or she could come back with a $99.00 bottle, fully within my parameters, but more likely, they end up pretty much where I was, $50-75.00.

Now, I know what you’re saying, “Hey, Daddy Winebucks, why don’t you just bring your own wine?”  Good question.  I do it all the time.  But because I am the way I am, and because lets be honest, my living is largely made on the backs of restaurant sales, I always buy a bottle of wine off the menu as well, thereby placing me in the throes of my dining out dilemma.

So what’s a guy like me to do, when people all across the financial pie chart are looking to save money?  Well if I listen to that little voice inside my head, or even the actual voice I’ve used to discuss this subject with my wife, I’m thinking this:

Go out less, but order good wine more.

How’s that for a little homespun Franklinesque wisdom?

I remember back in my software days, when we first starting selling through Amazon, that daily rush of going on our product page and scrolling down to see where we ranked in sales for the previous day.  And while it was hard to feel competitive in a field in which we had virtually no competition, that any victory was a hollow one, I was powerless to not look.

Seeing us ranked sometimes as high as #5 in all software sales was really exciting, a highlight to the start of each workday.  To think that somewhere out in the world, there was another developer, searching their own rankings, seeing themselves hover at #788 and wishing they were us.  What a buzz!

But alas, humility has a nice way of leveling your life, so now, as I view my blog stats at the start of each day, my general mood is more of a buzz kill.

Visits to Daddy Winebucks look more like an EKG readout or Richter Scale chart than they do say, the stock market of ten years ago.  Put another way, if my stats were like my 401K, well, actually they are.  Maybe I should stop looking at them too.

When I started this blog last August, it was not with the intention of building an audience.  I truly did it in advance of a possible blog for the wineries, a way to familiarize myself with the form so when it came time to “blog” for real, I could do so confidentally.  But somewhere along the way I realized that it was another great, creative outlet for writing.  I’ve since joked that I should write my novel in progress as a blog, as I seem much better at working in 500 word intervals than trying to navigate the world of 50,000 words.

And yet each day I peek at those blog stats, I get my fuzzies when I see double digits and must admit to feeling a little down when I see that once again my “rank” is 5…

For those who do read this regularly, my sincere thanks.  I’ve no intention of quitting, for like Van Halen in the late 70′s, I’m still going to play for 2 people as though they’re 20,000…

Cheers!

With Hollywood awards season in full swing, I’ll admit to disliking these shows.  And not just because given my wife’s profession (Entertainment journalist, now Entertainment Webtrix) I have not been able to watch one with her for the last fifteen years as she’s always working.

No, my main problem is that most awards of this nature are just so grossly subjective and impossible to truly judge, that they’re simply unfair.  Certain films or TV shows, or actors or Costume Designers find themselves at the right place at the right cultural time, working on a project that has everything going for it and in return the public and critics respond.

In some of these cases, like the amazing “Slumdog Millionaire” it’s all deserved – in my subjective opinion – while others, (and I apologize to Heath Ledger wherever he is because I think he was a very gifted actor), ride a wave of Hollywood narcissism that awards for something noteworthy but not necessarily award worthy. Then again, there are those who feel he’ll be fully justified to win his Oscar posthumously and therein lies the problems with award shows.

Both Woody Allen and Bill Cosby have both decried them as an unfair barometer on talent.  For how can you really judge Penelope Cruz’s brilliant, funny turn as Maria Elena in “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” against Kate Winslet’s Nazi guard in “The Reader?”  Was Ms. Winslet more convincing as a Nazi then Cruz was as a Spaniard?

(Editors Note:  Ms. Winslet is not a Nazi while Ms. Cruz actually is a Spaniard).

Yet the academy is forced each year to decide who was “better” in instances such as this.

This leads me to a thought I had last week.  That the wine business is a perfect industry for an awards show.  The reasoning being simple.  Rather than having to judge a comedy against a drama (much like trying to select the best wine of the year by drinking Cabernet from the US versus a Merlot from France) it’s much easier to pick five Pinot Noirs from Oregon, all made in the same general region by different winemakers and selecting a winner.

In this scenario all creativity started out on a level playing field, with artists working off the same canvas.  Think of it as giving five film directors the same script, with the same actors, etc. and judging it based on what the director was able to bring to the table.

The “Winey’s” could be given out in multiple varietal categories, while other technical awards could be given to bottle design, best writing on the back, best foreign wine, etc.  Then you could perhaps have a category for best winemaker, where the judges could select based on a collection of factors that went into a particular winemaker’s vintage for that year – I’m really liking this…

So picture if you will downtown Napa in the summer, wine luminaries stepping out of pick up trucks, dressed in their finest t-shirts and shorts, making their way onto a gravely, red, claylike “carpet” to the pop of flashbulbs.  Copia has been rechristined the Napa Wine Arts Theatre and as the crowd makes their way into the venue and the lights go down, the whole world watches an awards show that can be truly deemed fair.

Okay, wine entreprenuers (I’m looking at you, Vaynerchuk), this one’s on me.

I’m not sure we’ll get E! to cover it (sorry, Linda) but I cast the first vote for Food Network Coverage with Giadada DeLaurentis as host…

Who’s with me???