A column that originally appeared in Meininger's Wine Business International
It’s always interesting to watch a metamorphosis
– especially when it has commercial implications. Not so long ago, before the
advent of video recorders and catch-up tv, we all tuned in to watch television
programmes at the same times, communicated by letter and fax and got our
information from printed books and newspapers. And the wine industry did most
of its communication through
targeting hospitality, samples and press releases at a group of people known as
wine writers.
The members of the industry – a huge majority, I
fear - who still believe in that strategy, should take note of a keynote speech
given by Andrew Jefford, one of the world’s most highly-regarded, thoughtful
and poetic wine writers, to the fifth European Wine Bloggers Conference – EWBC
- in Izmir, Turkey, last November.
“The creature we used to call ‘a wine
writer’ has died.” Jefford declared, going on to say that writing was now the “the least remunerative of the things
I do.” He may still be a
regular contributor to Decanter and World of Fine Wine magazines, but that part
of his activity represents a shrinking
40% of his income. Tim Atkin another UK-based multi-award-winning critic who spoke
at the EWBC, separately made a similar point, saying that, in his case, the
figure is closer to 25%.
This is not to say that
Jefford and Atkin are no longer in the business of exercising their skills and
sharing their opinions about wine; they broadcast, teach, make public
appearances of one kind or another and are simply no longer financially reliant
on the publishers of newspapers, magazines and books. For Jefford, “There are
no more livings to be made exclusively in the old way”, though there is still a
place for “multi-tasking communicators”.
Who those communicators
are, the nature of the “multi-tasking”, and how they make their livings, is
increasingly blurred and varied. The days when journalists, publishers,
consultants and those public relations executives lived in separate cubicles
are over. James Suckling the former Wine Spectator critic now produces video
clips and a newsletter that are available to subscribers. Jancis Robinson, like
Robert Parker, is now a publisher who employs other wine writers, and Tim Atkin
has recently begun to follow a similar path. (Declaration of interest: I am one
of the people he has asked to contribute to his website.)
Atkin and two other
leading UK critics, Oz Clarke and Olly Smith have become a brand called “TheThree Wine Men” which organises consumer tastings – a business model adopted by
another set of UK critics who call themselves the “Wine Gang”. Similarly, in
France, Michel Bettane and Thierry Desseauve, former employees of La Revue du
Vin de France, are now also both publishers and organisers of an event called
“Le Grand Tasting”.
Wine writers are
involved to varying degrees in wine competitions (as I have been over the
years), in hosting tutored tastings and in writing copy for wine companies’
brochures and websites. They are also, interestingly now offering their
expertise in other ways. British blogger
and newspaper wine critic, Jamie Goode, acknowledges - in his wineanorak blog -
that “Those of us who communicate
about wine have to make a living”. So, “it may be appropriate for skilled,
experienced tasters with particular expertise to charge for consultancy or
benchmarking services”.
For a wine producer or
distributor, this evolution may lead to some lateral thinking. Where
expenditure on the media might once have been limited to samples and
hospitality of one kind or another, today canny marketers are considering the
return on investment of other activities. One exhibitor at a Wine Gang consumer
tasting quietly said to me “It’s cost me a thousand pounds to pour my wine for
a few hundred consumers. I’ve no idea of how worthwhile that part of it has
been, but exhibiting is a cheap way for me not only to get close to five
critics, but also to support their business”. Goode acknowledges the access to
top critics that can be gained by doing well in competitions in which they are
involved.
In Bordeaux, chateaux
owner mutter about the relationships their neighbours have developed with top
critics whom they pay – often quite lavishly – to host dinners and tastings.
Does this kind of payment buy influence? The Spanish regions that funded
tastings by Robert Parker’s former associate Dr Jay Miller certainly thought
so. Until someone accused Miller and Pancho Campo the organiser of these
tastings and the visits that preceded them of offering a “pay to play” scheme.
That same accusation was levelled at Canadian blogger and newsletter publisher Natalie Maclean when it was claimed that anyone who wanted their wines reviewed had to take out a CAN$24 subscription. Maclean denies the charge; I would be surprised, however, if wine companies have not considered currying favour with publishers by subscribing, just as they wonder about improving their chances of a good review in some magazines by paying for advertising. And what might be the benefits of paying a writer to benchmark your wines? Some will decline the invitation, but I suspect that number is shrinking.
As wine writers evolve,
so almost inevitably will the relationships they have with the rest of the
industry. And that, for many people, will probably be something of a challenge.
Great article Robert. What I'd love to see, if I was a wine producer, is any critic who can provide evidence that their reviews in the modern age generate business. If they can't, I'd suggest that wineries look to other ways to generate sales.
ReplyDelete"Generate business" may be a big ask. And arguably it always has been hard to quantify which writer achieved what. In fact, when I was writing for the Sunday Telegraph (circulation 700k) I used to think I actually had a dozen key readers: the buyers for the big chains. I never knew how many buyers of the paper read my words in its pages, but I did see those same words appear on shelf talkers for wines I might have helped to get onto the shelf.
Delete