The US Code of Federal Regulation [27 CFR 4.21(b)(2)] seems to define
what bottles may be labeled as "Champagne" as follows:

"Champagne is a type of sparkling light wine which derives its
effervescence solely from the secondary fermentation of the wine
within glass containers of not greater than one gallon capacity, and
which possesses the taste, aroma, and other characteristics attributed
to champagne as made in the champagne district of France."

Does this mean that large bottles made in Champagne using the
traditional method *cannot* be labeled "Champagne" in the US?

Conversely, note that *transfer* method products apparently *can* be
labeled "Champagne", since they fit the definition.

What gives?

FYI, you can search the US CFR here
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html

--
=================================================
Do you like wine? Do you live in South Florida?
Visit the MIAMI WINE TASTERS group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/miamiWINE
=================================================

I just saw an ad for Korbel and they touted it as California Champagne.
I thought that France had fought that sort of thing.

In article >,
Leo Bueno > wrote:

> The US Code of Federal Regulation [27 CFR 4.21(b)(2)] seems to define
> what bottles may be labeled as "Champagne" as follows:
>
> "Champagne is a type of sparkling light wine which derives its
> effervescence solely from the secondary fermentation of the wine
> within glass containers of not greater than one gallon capacity, and
> which possesses the taste, aroma, and other characteristics attributed
> to champagne as made in the champagne district of France."
>
> Does this mean that large bottles made in Champagne using the
> traditional method *cannot* be labeled "Champagne" in the US?
>
> Conversely, note that *transfer* method products apparently *can* be
> labeled "Champagne", since they fit the definition.
>
> What gives?
>
> FYI, you can search the US CFR here
> http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html
>
> --
> =================================================
> Do you like wine? Do you live in South Florida?
> Visit the MIAMI WINE TASTERS group at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/miamiWINE
> =================================================

Lawrence Leichtman wrote:

> I just saw an ad for Korbel and they touted it as California Champagne.
> I thought that France had fought that sort of thing.


Here in Australia it has been a number of years since we've been able to
use many terms such as "champagne". And others are being phased out.

It is called "sparkling" if it is not produced in France, I think it
even has to be produced by one of the ~40 000 producers in Champagne to
be called Champagne.

They do...but the US never subscribed to the treaty for that as we were in
prohibition. Therefore legally we are not required to.

Also the EU lost a recent lawsuit in the WTO to protect geographical names.

Personally I feel this was a bad ruling. But it is ruled on and Canada can
go on producing local parma ham


"Lawrence Leichtman" > wrote in message
...
>I just saw an ad for Korbel and they touted it as California Champagne.
> I thought that France had fought that sort of thing.
>
> In article >,
> Leo Bueno > wrote:
>
>> The US Code of Federal Regulation [27 CFR 4.21(b)(2)] seems to define
>> what bottles may be labeled as "Champagne" as follows:
>>
>> "Champagne is a type of sparkling light wine which derives its
>> effervescence solely from the secondary fermentation of the wine
>> within glass containers of not greater than one gallon capacity, and
>> which possesses the taste, aroma, and other characteristics attributed
>> to champagne as made in the champagne district of France."
>>
>> Does this mean that large bottles made in Champagne using the
>> traditional method *cannot* be labeled "Champagne" in the US?
>>
>> Conversely, note that *transfer* method products apparently *can* be
>> labeled "Champagne", since they fit the definition.
>>
>> What gives?
>>
>> FYI, you can search the US CFR here
>> http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html
>>
>> --
>> =================================================
>> Do you like wine? Do you live in South Florida?
>> Visit the MIAMI WINE TASTERS group at
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/miamiWINE
>> =================================================

Mat <Ask@me> wrote:

> It is called "sparkling" if it is not produced in France, I
> think it even has to be produced by one of the ~40 000 producers
> in Champagne to be called Champagne.

I don't quite get what you want to say, but according to Frech
(and EU) regulations, to be called "Champagne", the growing of the
grapes, the vinification, the second fermentation and the final
make-up have to happen within the legal boundaries of the
"Champagne viticole" area. There is no bulk wine shipping outside,
for the simple reason that champagne grape prices are just about
the highest in the world.

Just for the matter of records: You can buy slightly fortified
(16%abv) base wines from the Charente in bulk to distill it into
Brandy, but of course you are not entitled to call it "Cognac",
even if the base wines come from the right origin.

M.

So, how is Korbel getting away with running these TV spots?

Michael Pronay > wrote:

> Mat <Ask@me> wrote:
>
> > It is called "sparkling" if it is not produced in France, I
> > think it even has to be produced by one of the ~40 000 producers
> > in Champagne to be called Champagne.
>
> I don't quite get what you want to say, but according to Frech
> (and EU) regulations, to be called "Champagne", the growing of the
> grapes, the vinification, the second fermentation and the final
> make-up have to happen within the legal boundaries of the
> "Champagne viticole" area. There is no bulk wine shipping outside,
> for the simple reason that champagne grape prices are just about
> the highest in the world.
>
> Just for the matter of records: You can buy slightly fortified
> (16%abv) base wines from the Charente in bulk to distill it into
> Brandy, but of course you are not entitled to call it "Cognac",
> even if the base wines come from the right origin.
>
> M.

Lawrence Leichtman > wrote in news:larry-
:

> So, how is Korbel getting away with running these TV spots?
>
>
They fit the US definition, they could not run the ad in the EU.

"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> There is no bulk wine shipping outside ["Champagne viticole" area],
> for the simple reason that champagne grape prices are just about
> the highest in the world.

Really? I'm not saying it isn't true - I just find it hard to believe,
Michael. Can you give an idea how high that would be?

Just off the top of my head, Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon was selling for
~$5K/ton this year. Of course that wouldn't be from a prestigious vineyard

Naturally this will involve another exercise in metric units and currency
conversion. ;^)

Tom S

"Tom S" > wrote:

>> There is no bulk wine shipping outside ["Champagne viticole"
>> area], for the simple reason that champagne grape prices are
>> just about the highest in the world.

> Really? I'm not saying it isn't true - I just find it hard to
> believe, Michael. Can you give an idea how high that would be?

Well in the pre-Euro era I knew of something like FRF 30 per
kilogram, which is something like EUR 4.50 or USD 6.00 per kg. But
that was years ago, and prices have not gone down, on the
contrary.

The only source I found (youngest price 1997) sets the record at
32 francs for the 1990 pinot noir.

> Just off the top of my head, Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon was
> selling for ~$5K/ton this year. Of course that wouldn't be from
> a prestigious vineyard
>
> Naturally this will involve another exercise in metric units and
> currency conversion. ;^)

I can't even find the exact amount of what a "ton" is in metric.
But whether "long" or "short" ton, the difference to a metric ton
is less than 2 percent - which makes Napa Valley Cabernet now 20
percent cheaper than champagne back in 1990 [1].

[1] Not quite true, in fact, since only grapes from grand cru
(= 100%) villages would get the full price; grapes from lesser
villages achieve their prices according to their place on the
"échelle des crus", the local classifiaction. Every village in the
champagne viticole is classified on a scale between 80 and 100 per
cent.

In ,
Michael Pronay > typed:

> I can't even find the exact amount of what a "ton" is in
> metric.


One ton is 2000 pounds, or 1016.064 KG.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup

In ,
Ken Blake > typed:

> In ,
> Michael Pronay > typed:
>
>> I can't even find the exact amount of what a "ton" is in
>> metric.
>
>
> One ton is 2000 pounds, or 1016.064 KG.



Sorry, wrong ton. One US ton (the kind used in the Napa Valley)
is 907.2 KG.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup

"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> I can't even find the exact amount of what a "ton" is in metric.

An Avoirdupois ton is 2000 pounds, which at 454 grams per pound would be 908
Kilos. [If I'm not mistaken, a metric ton is 1000 Kilos - roughly
equivalent to the Avoirdupois "long ton", which is 2200 pounds.] Anyway, a
metric ton is 1000 ÷ 908 = 110% the weight of an Avoirdupois ton. HTH.

Tom S

Richard Neidich wrote:

> Also the EU lost a recent lawsuit in the WTO to protect
> geographical names.
> Personally I feel this was a bad ruling. But it is ruled
> on and Canada can go on producing local parma ham

I'm very sorry to agree with you. The EU governors are
ridiculous, one should be totally fool to believe these are
simply "errors": this is corruption. They act as (dirty) money
wants.
Just think of this one: the President of EU is born in my same
town, 30 kilometers from Parma, and perfectly knows Parma ham and
how harmful that lawsuit has been for Parma ham. Now his EU is
selling out the DOC and DOCG names so we'll finally have Barolo
from australia and Brunello from Chile, and tomorrow? Only God
knows what they'll be selling off.
I understand why UK and others are still out of the EU.
--
Vilco
Think Pink , Drink Rose'

"Vilco" > wrote:

>> Also the EU lost a recent lawsuit in the WTO to protect
>> geographical names. Personally I feel this was a bad ruling.
>> But it is ruled on and Canada can go on producing local parma
>> ham

> I'm very sorry to agree with you. The EU governors are
> ridiculous, one should be totally fool to believe these are
> simply "errors": this is corruption. They act as (dirty) money
> wants.

What?!

> Just think of this one: the President of EU

There is no "President of the EU".

> is born in my same town, 30 kilometers from Parma,

Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission, is
born in Lisbon, Portugal. Thanks for your perfect enlightenment in
European geography.

> and perfectly knows Parma ham and how harmful that lawsuit has
> been for Parma ham. Now his EU is selling out the DOC and DOCG
> names so we'll finally have Barolo from australia and Brunello
> from Chile, and tomorrow? Only God knows what they'll be selling
> off.

I guess you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Nobody is selling anything off.

> I understand why UK and others are still out of the EU.

The United Kingdom ist member of the EU (formerly known as EEC)
for over 30 years. UK joined January 1st, 1973.

Go home and have your homework done.

M.

"Michael Pronay"

> > is born in my same town, 30 kilometers from Parma,

> Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission,
is

OK, let's add the words "FORMER" and "of the ... commissione" to
what I wrote.

> > and perfectly knows Parma ham and how harmful that lawsuit
has
> > been for Parma ham. Now his EU is selling out the DOC and
DOCG
> > names so we'll finally have Barolo from australia and
Brunello
> > from Chile, and tomorrow? Only God knows what they'll be
selling
> > off.

> I guess you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
> Nobody is selling anything off.

So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"? Is this
defending or selling out?

> > I understand why UK and others are still out of the EU.

> The United Kingdom ist member of the EU (formerly known as EEC)
> for over 30 years. UK joined January 1st, 1973.

OK, let's pinpoint it all: they keep out of the monetary union.

> Go home and have your homework done.

Sure, sir...
--
Vilco
Think Pink , Drink Rose'

Vilco wrote:
>> I guess you have absolutely no idea what you are talking
>> about. Nobody is selling anything off.

> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"? Is
> this defending or selling out?

Oh, I was forgetting one thing: I can't wait to drink my first
Amarone and Barolo from out of Italy...
--
Vilco
Think Pink , Drink Rose'

"Vilco" > wrote:

>> I guess you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
>> Nobody is selling anything off.

> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"? Is this
> defending or selling out?

The EU *lost* the case at WTO trying to *defend* Parma ham by
trying to ban Canadians to use this designation. EU did not "sell
out" anything.

M.

My personal opinion is that is a bad deal. Poor Ruling.

In some cases where tradition has 100+ years the products/geography should
have been protected. Even here in the USA we protect geography. Example:

1) To be Called Florida Orange Juice the product has to be from Florida
2) Same of California Naval Oranges
3) Virginia Peanuts---from Va.

I think on those products native of certain land we should have the law be
respectful of those aspects and protect geographical names that have existed
for over 100 years.



"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> "Vilco" > wrote:
>
>>> I guess you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
>>> Nobody is selling anything off.
>
>> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"? Is this
>> defending or selling out?
>
> The EU *lost* the case at WTO trying to *defend* Parma ham by
> trying to ban Canadians to use this designation. EU did not "sell
> out" anything.
>
> M.

why?

"Vilco" > wrote in message
...
> Vilco wrote:
>>> I guess you have absolutely no idea what you are talking
>>> about. Nobody is selling anything off.
>
>> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"? Is
>> this defending or selling out?
>
> Oh, I was forgetting one thing: I can't wait to drink my first
> Amarone and Barolo from out of Italy...
> --
> Vilco
> Think Pink , Drink Rose'
>
>

Michael Pronay wrote:

>> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"?
>> Is this defending or selling out?

> The EU *lost* the case at WTO trying to *defend* Parma
> ham by trying to ban Canadians to use this designation.
> EU did not "sell out" anything.

There are many ways to "try to defend".
--
Vilco
Think Pink , Drink Rose'

Richard Neidich wrote:

> In some cases where tradition has 100+ years the
> products/geography should have been protected. Even here
> in the USA we protect geography. Example:
>
> 1) To be Called Florida Orange Juice the product has to
> be from Florida 2) Same of California Naval Oranges
> 3) Virginia Peanuts---from Va.

This the same we do here in Italy, also for Parma ham, but in
Canada they decided to ignore these protections. A lawsuit could
have been better used, or at least, after losing the lawsuit, UE
could have took action against canadian "fakes".
They did nothing, exactly as they do nothing against the USofA
import-fees on european goods. That's because european leaders
are divided, and so they are easy to pay, expecially if they get
paid to "do nothing": it's much easier than "do something".
--
Vilco
Think Pink , Drink Rose'

I am sorry but I really don't understand some of your posts on this.

From what I understood the EU did take the case to the courts against the
WTO. They were attempting to protect the geographical naming and therefore
the tradition with that name.

The EU lost the case.

That is all I know.

I really do not understand any of your comments about this. Sorry.
"Vilco" > wrote in message
...
> Richard Neidich wrote:
>
>> In some cases where tradition has 100+ years the
>> products/geography should have been protected. Even here
>> in the USA we protect geography. Example:
>>
>> 1) To be Called Florida Orange Juice the product has to
>> be from Florida 2) Same of California Naval Oranges
>> 3) Virginia Peanuts---from Va.
>
> This the same we do here in Italy, also for Parma ham, but in
> Canada they decided to ignore these protections. A lawsuit could
> have been better used, or at least, after losing the lawsuit, UE
> could have took action against canadian "fakes".
> They did nothing, exactly as they do nothing against the USofA
> import-fees on european goods. That's because european leaders
> are divided, and so they are easy to pay, expecially if they get
> paid to "do nothing": it's much easier than "do something".
> --
> Vilco
> Think Pink , Drink Rose'
>
>

I am sorry but I really don't understand some of your posts on this.

From what I understood the EU did take the case to the courts against the
WTO. They were attempting to protect the geographical naming and therefore
the tradition with that name.

The EU lost the case.

That is all I know.

I really do not understand any of your comments about this. Sorry.
"Vilco" > wrote in message
...
> Richard Neidich wrote:
>
>> In some cases where tradition has 100+ years the
>> products/geography should have been protected. Even here
>> in the USA we protect geography. Example:
>>
>> 1) To be Called Florida Orange Juice the product has to
>> be from Florida 2) Same of California Naval Oranges
>> 3) Virginia Peanuts---from Va.
>
> This the same we do here in Italy, also for Parma ham, but in
> Canada they decided to ignore these protections. A lawsuit could
> have been better used, or at least, after losing the lawsuit, UE
> could have took action against canadian "fakes".
> They did nothing, exactly as they do nothing against the USofA
> import-fees on european goods. That's because european leaders
> are divided, and so they are easy to pay, expecially if they get
> paid to "do nothing": it's much easier than "do something".
> --
> Vilco
> Think Pink , Drink Rose'
>
>

This article might help you:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4022897.stm



"Vilco" > wrote in message
...
> Richard Neidich wrote:
>
>> In some cases where tradition has 100+ years the
>> products/geography should have been protected. Even here
>> in the USA we protect geography. Example:
>>
>> 1) To be Called Florida Orange Juice the product has to
>> be from Florida 2) Same of California Naval Oranges
>> 3) Virginia Peanuts---from Va.
>
> This the same we do here in Italy, also for Parma ham, but in
> Canada they decided to ignore these protections. A lawsuit could
> have been better used, or at least, after losing the lawsuit, UE
> could have took action against canadian "fakes".
> They did nothing, exactly as they do nothing against the USofA
> import-fees on european goods. That's because european leaders
> are divided, and so they are easy to pay, expecially if they get
> paid to "do nothing": it's much easier than "do something".
> --
> Vilco
> Think Pink , Drink Rose'
>
>

Vilco,

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:29:30 GMT, "Vilco" > wrote:

I've rarely read such nonsense.

>Michael Pronay wrote:

>>> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"?
>>> Is this defending or selling out?
>
>> The EU *lost* the case at WTO trying to *defend* Parma
>> ham by trying to ban Canadians to use this designation.
>> EU did not "sell out" anything.
>
>There are many ways to "try to defend".

You're surely not suggesting that the EU took action to defend (among
other names) Parma Ham just so that they could lose the case, and that
they did so because "they" (presumably you're suggestiing it was the
Italian ex president of the European Commission) were bribed to do so.

That is - charitably speaking - the only possible interpretation of
your remarks and is arrant nonsense.


All the best
Ian
(To reply by email PLEASE don't use "Reply to" but
use my name at wanadoo.fr) Thanks.

Vilco,

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:29:30 GMT, "Vilco" > wrote:

I've rarely read such nonsense.

>Michael Pronay wrote:

>>> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"?
>>> Is this defending or selling out?
>
>> The EU *lost* the case at WTO trying to *defend* Parma
>> ham by trying to ban Canadians to use this designation.
>> EU did not "sell out" anything.
>
>There are many ways to "try to defend".

You're surely not suggesting that the EU took action to defend (among
other names) Parma Ham just so that they could lose the case, and that
they did so because "they" (presumably you're suggestiing it was the
Italian ex president of the European Commission) were bribed to do so.

That is - charitably speaking - the only possible interpretation of
your remarks and is arrant nonsense.


All the best
Ian
(To reply by email PLEASE don't use "Reply to" but
use my name at wanadoo.fr) Thanks.

Richard Neidich wrote:

>why?
>
>"Vilco" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>
>>Vilco wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>I guess you have absolutely no idea what you are talking
>>>>about. Nobody is selling anything off.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"? Is
>>>this defending or selling out?
>>>
>>>
>>Oh, I was forgetting one thing: I can't wait to drink my first
>>Amarone and Barolo from out of Italy...
>>--
>> Vilco
>>Think Pink , Drink Rose'
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
The other day in the LCBO (government run liquor store in Ontario) I saw
a bottle of Tocai Friulano made in California. It almost had me fooled
until I read the fine print. As far as I'm concerned the real Tocai
Friulano is made in north eastern Italy.
Regards.
-Paolo

Hi Ian, assume you are home in France....did you ever get the stuff I had
sent to NY and CT for you?

Hope trip was good.

Dick


"Anthony Hoare" > wrote in message
...
> Vilco,
>
> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:29:30 GMT, "Vilco" > wrote:
>
> I've rarely read such nonsense.
>
>>Michael Pronay wrote:
>
>>>> So what does mean for you "parma ham made in Canada"?
>>>> Is this defending or selling out?
>>
>>> The EU *lost* the case at WTO trying to *defend* Parma
>>> ham by trying to ban Canadians to use this designation.
>>> EU did not "sell out" anything.
>>
>>There are many ways to "try to defend".
>
> You're surely not suggesting that the EU took action to defend (among
> other names) Parma Ham just so that they could lose the case, and that
> they did so because "they" (presumably you're suggestiing it was the
> Italian ex president of the European Commission) were bribed to do so.
>
> That is - charitably speaking - the only possible interpretation of
> your remarks and is arrant nonsense.
>
>
> All the best
> Ian
> (To reply by email PLEASE don't use "Reply to" but
> use my name at wanadoo.fr) Thanks.

Anthony Hoare wrote:

>> There are many ways to "try to defend".

> You're surely not suggesting that the EU took action to
> defend (among other names) Parma Ham just so that they
> could lose the case, and that they did so because "they"
> (presumably you're suggestiing it was the Italian ex
> president of the European Commission) were bribed to do
> so.

Now, EU did that lawsuit it because the producers, and the
producers' associations, urged them to do something to defend
theyr products.
Thus forced to act, the EU acted with the results you see. After
having lost it all, what did EU to react? Nothing. Nice...

> That is - charitably speaking - the only possible
> interpretation of your remarks and is arrant nonsense.

Choose the interpretation you prefer.
--
Vilco
Think Pink , Drink Rose'

"Leo Bueno" > wrote in message
...
>
> The US Code of Federal Regulation [27 CFR 4.21(b)(2)] seems to define
> what bottles may be labeled as "Champagne" as follows:
>
> "Champagne is a type of sparkling light wine which derives its
> effervescence solely from the secondary fermentation of the wine
> within glass containers of not greater than one gallon capacity, and
> which possesses the taste, aroma, and other characteristics attributed
> to champagne as made in the champagne district of France."

>
> Does this mean that large bottles made in Champagne using the
> traditional method *cannot* be labeled "Champagne" in the US?

That's a good question. "The Oxford Companion to Wine" book, edited by
Jancis Robinson, says that "Giant Champagne bottles, on the other hand, tend
to favour publicity rather than wine quality (sizes larger than a magnum
tend to be filled with wine made in smaller bottles." If that is correct,
then the big bottles would meet the requirement as long as the secondary
fermentation was done in the smaller bottles.
>
> Conversely, note that *transfer* method products apparently *can* be
> labeled "Champagne", since they fit the definition.

I believe that is correct. It fits the definition for Champagne, it is just
made by a different method. Have you found any US labelling regulations on
the method? I don't recall seeing any, but I haven't specifically looked
for them.

>
> What gives?
>
> FYI, you can search the US CFR here
> http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html

Here is an excerpt from US Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) pamphlet
entitled "What You Should Know about Grape Wine Labels." I believe it is a
summary of the US regulations related to grape wine labels. Under the
heading of Other Designations, it says that the label can have a word like
Burgundy, but it must have the true place of origin, also. Then it lists
some exceptions.
__________________________________________________ _________
VARIETAL DESIGNATIONS
Varietal designations are the names of the dominant grapes used in the
wine. Cabernet Sauvignon, Chardonnay, Zinfandel, and Merlot are
examples of grape varieties. A varietal designation on the label
requires an appellation of origin and means that at least 75 percent of
the grapes used to make the wine are that variety. (Except "Vitis
labrusca" grapes such as Concord which require 51%).
OTHER DESIGNATIONS
Wine labels are not required to bear a varietal designation. Other
designations may be used to identify the wine. Examples are Red
Wine, White Wine, Table Wine.
Designations such as Chablis, Chianti, or Burgundy include wines
similar to those originally made in the geographic regions indicated by
those names but now produced elsewhere. Such wines must include
an appellation of origin to indicate the true place of origin. For
example, "California Burgundy."
Some wines are designated with distinctive names which is permissible
only on specific wines from a particular place or region within the
country of origin, for example, Asti Spumanti from Italy and Bordeaux
from France.
__________________________________________________ __

This is the link to the regulations that was given in the pamphlet.
http://www.atf.treas.gov/regulations/27cfr4.html

Paolo De Tina > wrote:

> The other day in the LCBO (government run liquor store in
> Ontario) I saw a bottle of Tocai Friulano made in California. It
> almost had me fooled until I read the fine print. As far as I'm
> concerned the real Tocai Friulano is made in north eastern
> Italy.

Tocai friulano is a grape variety, so where is the problem?

M.

"Richard Neidich" > wrote:

> Hi Ian, assume you are home in France...

No, he's not as can easily be seen he

> "Anthony Hoare" > wrote ...

Ian is still in UK using his brother's mail account.

M.

"Fred C. Young" > wrote:

> "The Oxford Companion to Wine" book, edited by Jancis Robinson,
> says that "Giant Champagne bottles, on the other hand, tend to
> favour publicity rather than wine quality (sizes larger than a
> magnum tend to be filled with wine made in smaller bottles." If
> that is correct ...

It is not correct (or not anymore). Recently champagne regulations
have changed making bottle fermentation compulsory also for
Jéroboam (3 liter) bottles, a regulation that takes into account
improved glass-making and less breakage risk. Fwiw, Pommery is the
only Grande Marque to my knowledge to ferment even Réhoboams (4.5
liter) and Mathusalems (6 liter) in the bottle.

M.

"Michael Pronay" > skrev i melding
...
> Paolo De Tina > wrote:
>
>> The other day in the LCBO (government run liquor store in
>> Ontario) I saw a bottle of Tocai Friulano made in California. It
>> almost had me fooled until I read the fine print. As far as I'm
>> concerned the real Tocai Friulano is made in north eastern
>> Italy.
>
> Tocai friulano is a grape variety, so where is the problem?
>
> M.
Friulano means 'from Friuli' (Friaul) if I understand it correctly...
Anders

>. As far as I'm concerned the real Tocai
>Friulano is made in north eastern Italy.

BTW, what's the latest on whether it can still be made in Italy? I thought it
was to be phased out a la Tokay Pinot Gris.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

"Anders Tørneskog" > wrote:

>> Tocai friulano is a grape variety, so where is the problem?

> Friulano means 'from Friuli' (Friaul) if I understand it
> correctly...

Yes, and "riesling renano" means "riesling from the Rhine", to
distinguish it from "riesling italico" (= welchriesling). The
terms still relaste to the name of grape varieties and not to
where they are grown.

M.