On Mar 15, 3:32�pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> �Steve �wrote �on Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:20:42 +0000:
>
> �??>> Steve �wrote �on Sat, 15 Mar 2008 10:12:04 +0000:
> �??>>
> �??>>>> How far can you "widen the vineyard" to increase
> �??>>>> production/profits before you dilute the "terroir"?
> �??>>
> �SS>>> This article partly addresses your question
> �SS>>>
> �??>>http://www.wine-pages.com/guests/tom...-expansion.htm
> �??>>
> �??>> It all sounds very plausible but industrial flacks are
> �??>> good at that! I will await the rationalizations when the
> �??>> zone is expanded to include California :-) In some ways, I
> �??>> was reminded of a common preamble to Vatican announcements
> �??>> of a radical changes: "As the church has always
> said.........".
>
> �SS> Are you saying Stevenson is an industrial (industry?)
> �SS> flack? �Why do you think that?
>
> I used to think that Elliot Spitzer was an honest crusader
> against fraud too!
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Stevenson is probably the most respected independent expert on
Champagne. Certainly he is a fan (would be ridiculous to become an
expert if one didn't like), but he is scarcely a flack, as he is very
capable of slamming vintages or individual wines he dislikes.

As noted, all of the villages proposed to be added are well within the
historic area that is noted for Champagne production, it's not as if
there an expansion into Ile de France (or Belgium) - or even into
greater Champagne-Ardennes.

I certainly don't know the geography of the area enough to know
whether the expansion will decrease the quality of the wine overall.
If it does, eventually it will rebound as the appeal and value of the
name "Champagne" will suffer. One could certainly make that argument
re Chianti or Crozes-Hermitage. But to me its their choice to make.