"Dan The Man" in oups.com:
|
| ... the more info, the better. It may be true that experienced
| wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to know
| more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they
| can get ... The average American won't know what the heck
| "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.

What ???

The "average American" doesn't know either what the heck Cabernet Sauvignon
means, until learning the phrase. The line of argument here seems to
presume, without saying it or examining it, that US newcomers learn only
about varietal naming when learning about wine, and that this is OK. Yet it
has always been in the newcomer's *own interest* to learn some cross-section
of wine names, not just one sub-set of them. Probably most of the separate
wine labels available in the US are from outside the US and use their own,
much longer-established nomenclature. If there is no interest in learning
some range of wine names, then is this effectively an argument about
catering to ignorance, or laziness? (I don't think that's the whole story
in international varietal naming, but I am referring to the remarks above.


"Dan The Man" in oups.com:
|
| ... today's $4 per bottle plonk drinker might (someday) see a
| substantial increase in his/her paycheck. But the habit of
| shopping by varietal will likely be set in concrete by then.

Why?

|
| In that case, the name Chateau Margaux (one of France's
| most famous) will mean diddly - the drinker in question will
| want to know what is inside.

Chteau Margaux is inside. Precisely. (Next question?)

| And this person, who might now have $104 to spend,
| will be inclined to look for something else.

Has this become an argument now for catering to nouveaux-riches? If so let
us address it in those terms, and in depth. I think that could be
interesting, and more meaty than some of these discussions..

-- Max