Because this featured in the national news for days on end last month most readers will know what it is about. Briefly, the Wither Hills wine company produced two quite different sauvignon blanc wines but labeled them identically. One of them, of which there was a very small amount available, secured a top ranking in a Cuisine magazine wine tasting. The other, which comprised the vast bulk of all the wine with this label, was not entered in the Cuisine competition.
It is important to point out that there was no quality issue in either case. By all accounts, both wines were of good quality. However, this is not the point, and whether or not Wither Hills did this deliberately is also not the point. The issue is that wine consumers have a right to expect that every bottle they buy of a wine with an identical label will be identical wine – especially when claims of superiority are made by way of medals or trophies or whatever.
Some Matakana winemakers choose to enter wine shows and others do not, and our reasons for deciding one way or the other are many and varied. However, wine buyers who purchase a Matakana-grown wine which has a medal sticker attached can be more confident that every bottle they buy will be identical, because none of us make large enough batches of wine to cause the problem Wither Hills faced. They produce such a large volume of sauvignon blanc that it is difficult for them to blend the various components into a single batch before bottling.
What this event has highlighted is the fallibility of the wine show system, and the potential for corrupt practise which it allows. It is now up to the organisers of wine shows to take steps to ensure this sort of duplicity cannot happen again.
[ add comment ] ( 16 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 460 )
Random Entry
