On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:50:43 GMT
"James Silverton" > wrote:

> Emery wrote on Sat, 12 Jan 2008 11:22:56 +0100:
>
> ED> Belgian customs authorities destroyed over 3000 bottles of
> ED> "counterfeit champagne" from CA, labeled "California
> ED> Champagne." "Of course there is no such thing," explained
> ED> the customs official I saw interviewed.
>
> ED> The wine from Gallo brand André was destroyed at the cost
> ED> and with agreement of the (un-named in the reportage)
> ED> owner.
>
> Andre is not a "Champagne Process" wine (fermented in the
> bottle) but a cheaper Charmat process (tank fermented) wine.
> However, finding the pompous indignation of the French a bit
> irritating, I think I am going to continue to use and drink
> bottle-fermented "California Champagne", especially given the
> extension of the Champagne district boundaries (did they or did
> they not reach Algeria?)
>

I don't get your point. The French weren't indignant at all, nor pompous
beyond the usual point. They simply reported a story that happened
in Belgium. Why don't you lash out at the pompous Belgians?

The Champagne appellation is being enlarged to include several similar
terroirs that can historically show they grew grapes prior to the current
classification. There's a penury of fruit in Champagne, that pushes the
prices up for everyone. What's with the Algerian crack?

What you drink is your own get out. Belgian customs seized these goods
because they are in violation of labelling laws. I happen to agree with
these laws, but that's immaterial. By European law (not French, BTW)
the stuff is counterfeit.

I posted the story simply because I thought it funny to call low-end juice
like André "counterfeit champagne." I don't intend to start a flame fest,
but your response seems unnecessarily provocative. If you were being
tongue in cheek please accept my apology, I didn't get it.

-E


--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies
Questions about wine? Visit http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com