Chad, the kick in the shin analogy sums up my thoughts as well. If you sell me bad wine and tell me it might be bad, then it turns out to be really bad, I’ll still not be happy with you for selling me the bad wine, even though I got myself into the situation. The 3 pack offer seems fair, though, and overall I wouldn’t be too upset about having $30 worth of wine that would be good for cooking savory dishes where smoke tastes good or to give to people who wouldn’t care.
I hear what you are saying and you make some good points. It will be very interesting to taste these wines and, at least for the pinots, to assess the strength of the kick to the shins as compared to that from Anthill who charged $33 per bottle for their '08 AV. Or, then again, maybe it will be an unexpected hug. Two for flinching.
I guess the thing to me is that you’re engaging in a lot of ‘if this, then…’ and worrying about some hypothetical situations which may or may not match this particular situation. As I started off saying, there’s not one right answer for all wineries here. If they’re trying to pass off heavily tainted wine as acceptable, that’s one thing. IF the wine is lightly tainted and acceptable to most people but they got some pushback and so decided to simply dump this as a second wine (with upfront disclosures) that’s very different. Try the wine, ideally with some friends. If you’re heavily sensitive to smoke notes, dump it.
But if you bought that wine after they disclosed things, I STILL don’t see your grounds for a complaint - they noted what was on, you decided to take a risk and buy some wine. The latter was your freely made choice and you should own that. The only reason for damning them would be if you felt their disclosure was misleading (passing it off as light taint when it was obviously overwhelming).
Unlike Doug, the shin analogy completely fails for me. A kick in the shin is unequivocally a bad thing - this taint might or might not be. This is a matter of taste. And, to reiterate, I think it’s petty to be warned of this, take the risk, then bitch. To use your kick in the shin analogy, if I tell you I’m going to kick you and you STAND THERE… it doesn’t make my action better but you still have to own the decision not to move.
Also… really? We’re worrying about this over $10/bottle wine? Really? If that level of expense isn’t something you can absorb as a loss for experimenting, why buy the wine? You could have simply passed.
I am wrong as Copain has bottled some of the juice in the '08 Tous Ensemble.
To answer the original question that Chad posted- I guess it’s a smart move to have full disclosure that the wines do have smoke taint and your buying at your own risk. I personally would not buy after the experience that I’ve had. Somewhere in back of your mind you’ll always be looking for the smoke whether it’s there or not.
I know that for $10 a bottle it seems like you can’t go wrong, but if it’s a complete campfire you can’t even serve it to non-wine geeks.
I also went in on the Anthill AV bottling. Haven’t cracked one yet, but now I’m equal parts intrigued and nervous. While they explained that the blend included parts of the wine that was usually their SVD bottlings, but not up to par for those; it certainly came with far less disclaimer that the Navarro/Indian Creek does.
One last try and then I surrender. I’m NOT asking about this my perspective as a consumer. I’m neither “worried”, think I have “grounds for a complaint”, nor can I not “absord as a loss for experimenting” all of which I tried to explain in my last email. As a business person myself, I was and am questioning the wisdom of a business taking this risk versus opting for one of the other alternative disposition methods that many other wineries in similar situations have chosen. If anything, I may be engaging in a bit of “what if” which will prove unnecessary if I receive the wine and think no one could possibly be put-off by the level of smoke.
Edit: I forgot, I’m also not planning to take the risk then “bitch”.
I’ve gone through 3 bottles of the Anthill and not had any issue with the smoke. The general recommendation seems to drink these sooner than later. Even more so if you are debating buying more '08 pinots from the AV.
I think it would be interesting to see if there is any correlation between detecting smoke taint and reaction to broccoli. Some of us have taste receptors that make broccoli taste bitter while others don’t. Don't Care For Broccoli? A Bitter Taste Receptor Gene's Variation Suggests An Evolutionary Excuse -- ScienceDaily" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I don’t detect smoke taint and I like broccoli. Is this a new thread?
Hmm… OK, sorry, I did get off on the consumer point of view. I got derailed by your assertion that you’d feel negatively toward them which seemed like a consumer side complaint.
From a business perspective, my answer is “it depends.” On what? Well, on a few things. In no particular order…
-
Can you dump the wines and financially survive? If not, then the issue is between brand damage and going out of business. From a survival of the company viewpoint, that’s easy. Ethically, it’s a closer call of course and much depends on the level of taint. If it’s heavily tainted*, I’d tend to not release it and either try to find financing to see me through or fold… but doing a very bad thing to your customers will haunt your future ventures so it’s wrong ethically and probably from a long term business point of view. NOTE: you knew there were fires, so you’ve had some time to deal with the financial impacts by cutting costs elsewhere, etc.
-
Should you dump the vintage? If it’s heavily flawed, yes, of course. If it’s lightly tainted? That’s a harder choice. I’d tend to grab some recent vintages of my wine, bag them up and blind a group of people on them without telling people what’s up. See if they pick out the tainted wine and see how they react to it. Is the reaction “Holy mother of god what’s wrong with this???” or is it “Hmm… this seems to have a charry note to it…”?
-
Did you try to sell this under the main label and got pushback/returns? From who (long time customers or first timers?) How much pushback? How strong was the pushback? Were people pissed off or just 'this isn’t my cup of tea?"
-
If you didn’t try to sell this under the main label first, you have no market data. You can do the tasting thing I describe in #2, but presuming you and others who taste the wine feel it’s marked but not ruined by the smoke, put it out under the second label and discount it while being honest about the smoke issue.
*Heavily tainted to me means that most or all tasters would feel that the smoke has ruined the wine and that it’s not drinkable or close to non-drinkable.
i also like broccoli and don’t find the Anthill too avertly smokey for my palate.
In for a sampler case of the Navarro.
Thanks Rick. We are on the exact same page now. I agree with your decision scenario outlined above. I think the most interesting question at the moment is your #3, as the offer can be read to sort of imply that they did try to sell under the main label first, but it’s not crystal clear.
In any event, it’s been an interesting debate and now I’m really anxious to get the sampler and try them. Also have a bottle of Anthill AV tee’d up and waiting for tomorrow.
Cheers
I found the catalog Navarro sent out at the beginning of the summer and it looks like they pulled back the Mendocino bottling (their lowest tier product) and re-branded that wine but I think the Indian Creek Reserve (normally the L’Ancienne, the middle tier) is just being released now. Can’t tell how they are handling the Deep End futures as I can not find it on their web page.
They’re good people at Navarro; very consumer oriented. No way they’d try to sneak one past people. Just look at their regular prices! ![[snort.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/bdc3944606213c4dca6c1169cf0a166c8bc4f8c9.gif "snort.gif"){kind=small}
Interesting discussion re the navarro offering. To those who ordered up a 2008 sampler, please report back on your impressions
A tasting note for the 2008 Indian Creek PN Reserve was posted on CT over the weekend and the comments were very favorable. I should receive my shipment the end of next week and will open one right away.
Given how the Anthill Farms tasted, I would not order any. To be honest, I’m still upset at Anthill Farms for their approach, so I guess Navarro is taking a better approach.
I had the 2008 Anthill Farms Anderson Valley and found a strong, unpleasant rubber and smoke element to it. I did not care for it. Also had the Comptche Ridge 2008 and, although the burnt rubber element was not as prevalent, it had an off taste and the wine was not at the same level as the 06 or the 07.
The unpleasant experience I had with the Anthill Anderson Valley makes me much more careful in selecting which of the Anthill wines to purchase. Is it unfair to be critical because of just one wine or just one vintage? Perhaps, especially as many of their other wines have been outstanding. Still, that one experience has me questioning my future purchases.
T.
Long time supporter of the winery. It seems to me that they are being 100% up front. That said, I passed on the offer, even at the great price.
I ordered a case of 750’s (6 regular + 6 reserve). $120 + 6% MI tax delivered to my door seemed like an outstanding deal. I can’t imagine that these Pinots aren’t going to provide enjoayble drinking for a bit over $10 each.
my 6 pack of PN and PNReserve showed up yesterday. i opened a reserve immediately and tasted. Also put a note on CT last night about it.
I would have been severely dissapointed had this had a navarro label on it. the nose was nice but the smoke a bit much for me.
They definitely kept their costs to a minimum with these bottlings. using cheaper glass. Read no punts on non reserve pinot. and navarro corks. still natural for reserve, didnt open a non reserve yet.
They did the right thing in my opinion by addressing the smoke issue head on and not trying to play around with it.
Does anyone know how long ago this was bottled before it was released?
Some bottle rest may do this wine some good.
-smig
+1
I am also interested in any comments on how price affects how objectionable smoke taint is. Is it slight at $10 and horrible at $30 on the same wine with the same taint?