WineAdvisor: When blends break the law

[Steve Slatcher]

Isaac

Winemakers are not allowed to lie, but the definition of truth depends on the regulatory structure. I am basically suggesting, given that wine is made under many different sets of regulations, that bottles could be a little clearer about what is meant by the varietal labels they carry.

For that matter, a few back label words about old world AC-type labelling would be useful too. Perhaps a URL with an explanation.

[Bob Henrick]

Isaac

Winemakers are not allowed to lie, but the definition of truth depends on the regulatory structure. I am basically suggesting, given that wine is made under many different sets of regulations, that bottles could be a little clearer about what is meant by the varietal labels they carry.

For that matter, a few back label words about old world AC-type labelling would be useful too. Perhaps a URL with an explanation.

Steve, why in the world should I look all over the internet to find out what is in the bottle? Just put it on the label, front or back. Simple?

[Steve Slatcher]

For that matter, a few back label words about old world AC-type labelling would be useful too. Perhaps a URL with an explanation.

Steve, why in the world should I look all over the internet to find out what is in the bottle? Just put it on the label, front or back. Simple?

It might be worth trying, but I think you'd find it quite a challenge to summarise AC-Type rules on a bottle label. Looking all over the internet, or worse, is what you have to do now - a URL on the bottle would vastly simplify things.

[David M. Bueker]

It would be nearly impossible to get all the info that people (and the government) want on the label. A summary would be fine (e.g. "primarily (79%) Cabernet, with additions of Malbec, Merlot and Petit Verdot"), then a for more information URL would be no big deal.

[Isaac]

Steve, why in the world should I look all over the internet to find out what is in the bottle? Just put it on the label, front or back. Simple?

That would work for me. After all, not everyone is as computer savvy as we, or even has easy access to a computer or the net.

What it all comes down to is that American consumers have the idea that single-variety wines are superior. Some wine-makers want to trade on that, without having to actually make a single-variety wine to do so.

In fact, that is what is already happening, and has been for a long time. IIRC, it used to be the case that California wines needed only be 51% in order to use the varietal name on the label. Federal law changed that to 75%, but 25% can still change the character of a wine tremendously. So why not 90% for all varieties? Why not 100%?