As you are reading this post an open letter is being sent to the Consorzio del Vino Brunello di Montalcino, the regulatory body of this famous Italian wine appellation, in which I with other wine writers protested against the lamentable practice of organising a fast-track tasting of new vintages for select publications such as the Wine Enthusiast and James Suckling (the story was first brought up by Franco Ziliani and Fred Nijhuis).
Open letter to the President of the Consorzio del Vino Brunello di Montalcino
We, the undersigned international wine writers, express our discontent and indignation with the fact that the Consorzio del Vino Brunello di Montalcino has allowed and supported correspondents of some wine publications in tasting the new vintage of Brunello, 2007, before the official presentation at Benvenuto Brunello this third week of February.
With all due respect to our colleagues from those publications, we find it inappropriate that they would be given the opportunity to taste the wines and publish their opinions in advance, benefitting from the logistic support of the Consorzio that other writers do not have. It is simple bad practice to treate some publications better than others, and doing a disservice to the image of Brunello di Montalcino.
signed: Wojciech Bońkowski [and other wine writers]
I understand readers of my blog might care little whether Mr. Smith tastes Brunello before Mr. Jones. After all, wine writers are there to provide a service to readers, and the minutiae aren’t really relevant. But this latest move from the Brunello consortium (following on a similar action last year) is just another manifestation of a disease that is poisoning Italy: lax standards.
‘Gets a first chance’ – why before the others?
Another symptom of the same disease is currently undermining the Italian wine industry as a whole: absenteeism. I have recently returned from Verona where I attended the official presentation of the new vintage of Amarone, one of Italy’s major wines. But the event was boycotted by nearly all the leading Amarone producers, starting with Masi who controls 20% of Amarone production. In Vino Nobile di Montepulciano, the absentees include La Calonica, Le Casalte, Crociani, Innocenti, and puzzlingly also Avignonesi and Fassati, two of the largest producers of the DOCG (although I’m told by Avignonesi that they simply didn’t bottle any 2009 Nobile). Chianti Classico has succeeded in cleaning the house since its two competitive regulatory consorzios finally merged in 2005 after years of dispute, and many famous producers who formerly refused to join the tasting are now in. But there is still a number of embarrassing absences including household names such as Cennatoio, Casa Emma, Livernano, Castello dei Rampolla, Rietine, Vecchie Terre di Montefili, Villa La Selva as well as the million-bottle Marchesi Antinori who ironically doesn’t belong to the consorzio at all.
The situation is at its most ridiculous in Brunello di Montalcino, where maybe 35% of the best estates are not participating this year. I don’t want to downgrade those who are, but a Brunello presentation without the wines of Biondi-Santi, Soldera (arguably the region’s two top names, they have never taken part), Altesino, Campi di Fonterenza, Casanova di Neri, Castelgiocondo, Cerbaiona, Ciacci, Collosorbo, Costanti, Pian dell’Orino, Piancornello, Pieve S. Restituta (Gaja), Poggio di Sotto, Salicutti, San Giuseppe, Valdicava, Vitanza… It is like Champions’ League without FC Barcelona, Real Madrid, Milan, Inter, Man Utd, Chelsea, Bayern, FC Porto and Lyon (with all due respect to Glasgow Rangers).
Please adhere, Maestro!
Why their absence? Some are very small operations and presumably the cost of participation, a four-digit sum in €, is a burden. Others don’t have the wines bottled and ready (Soldera), although they could show a barrel sample as is universally done elsewhere (a lamentable practice though). One winery I asked quoted ‘logistical reasons’ behind their absence (after impudently inviting me to visit the winery and taste the wine there). In essence these absentees are simply playing solo. They only want to promote their own brand, and see a comparative blind tasting as a potential threat to their ‘reputation’. If the wine comes up at the top, it’s no real gain because it’s already there. If it’s outperformed by a lesser-known cheaper Brunello, there is harm. There is no spirit of cooperation or solidarity and most importantly, no feeling of sharing a common good: the name and international renown of Brunello.
Asked to comment on that, the consorzios of Chianti, Vino Nobile and Brunello hesitated between “we are striving to have as many producers as possible” and “no comment”. In part I understand them: there is little they can do, because consortia don’t have many powers against those who egoistically refuse to join the events, and because of the widespread Italian laissez-aller culture. Consortia are democratic institutions where the tangle of contradictory interests makes it virtually impossible to take any controversial decisions. This is not exclusively an Italian problem (France has the same, and even in civic-conscious Germany there are soloists who refuse to play in tune) but nowhere as outrageous as in Italy at the moment.
Want the word ‘Chianti’ on this label? Play by the rules.
This is where I miss a little bit of authoritarianism. Producers who refuse to take part in a key act of promotion such as the anteprima press tasting should receive a strong suggestion to relabel their wines as vino da tavola. If you choose to stay outside, stay outside full time. The very fact that a producer like Antinori is allowed to keep out of the consorzio, contributing nothing to the community but taking advantage of the brand power of Chianti Classico, generated by the common effort of hundreds of producers, is simply shameful. It is high time this finished. The authorities need to take a strong course on this.
I agree with many of your points here, but I must disagree with a few of them. I too attended the Amarone Anteprima and was disappointed by the producers that decided not to participate.
However Masi is not a member of the consorzio, so they could not participate. You can’t force Masi or any producer to join the consorzio. What bothers me is the wineries that are members but elected not to show their wines.
As for Antinori and Chianti Classico, I understand your point, as you seem to imply that they are somehow taking advantage of this situation. However to ask them not to label a wine as Chianti Classico, even if it is, is a bit much. Again, you can’t make them join the consorzio, so if they make a wine that is indeed a Chianti Classico, you can’t take that away from them.
You may not like the approach they take, but give them their due.
Thanks for your comment Tom. However this is exactly my point: Masi and Antinori should be members of the consorzios. If they want to use a common name, a public good, they must cooperate. Voluntary membership isn’t working: the policy of e.g. Antinori is entirely anti-social. This is exactly what I am condemning. To me, there isn’t a vital difference between a producer who is a member of the consorzio and one who isn’t.
Sorry, I can’t agree with your statement that Masi or Antonori not being members of their respective consorzie is wrong. The common name- Valpolicella or Chianti Classico is the most important thing here- do they makes wines that are representative of their designations and are they playing by the rules (using proscribed varieties and aging the wine for a proscribed period of time to mention only a few requirements)? In both the case of Masi and Antinori, the answer is yes.
Both Masi and Antinori have done a great deal to sell wines from Valpolicella and Chianti Classico, respectively. This has nothing to do with being a member of the consorzio or not. They have their reasons for not joining these organizations. I have no problem with their decision. You, however are giving them a hard time for making wines that help promote these areas the end of the day.
I have a more difficult problem with the wineries that are members of their consorzie who do not participate, whether in Valpolicella or Montalcino. You have listed a number of producers from Montalcino who are not pouring their wines at the Benvenuto Brunello event next week- this is the real problem, it seems to me. If you’re a member, do the right thing and participate.
On this point, I know we agree.
Wojtek dear friend, I agree 100% with the first part of your article. Unfortunately disagree 100% with the last sentences. The Consortia are private associations, voluntary, but the laws DOC, DOCG and DOP are mandatory for all. It’s not good give to private association more powers that public Institutions: would be Nazi! Antinori make also very Chianti, good Chianti without Consortium, unfortunately some producers of Consortium make false and disgusting “chianti” that You knows. I like not the Rivella methods….
@Tom and @Mario: I get your points, but I disagree. DOCG rules are mandatory but they are voted on by the consorzios… so making the consorzio voluntary makes no sense at all! This is exactly the problem. The appellation body should be a public body with more powers, and producers who wish to benefit from using the DOC or DOCG should be more disciplined. Otherwise it’s bordello, as we have currently in Italy. I’m not denying Antinori make very good Chianti, but why they are not participating in a public event such as the yearly press tasting cannot be justified.
No, dear Wojtek. Consortia are private clubs in Italy. In some regions are more Consortia. On Bari are 2 Consortia. What of this 2 must have authorities? As long Consortia are private I like those who fight for full freedom. I can not forget Bierut, Gomulka and Comunism!
Mario, as I said, those “private clubs” have the prerogatives of public institutions. The Brunello Consorzio recently voted the varietal composition of Rosso di Montalcino that is obligatory even for producers outside the club. This just doesn’t make sense.
You don’t reply to my answer. What of 2 Consortium Salento must have… prerogatives?
Prerogatives also are not authorities. Guardia di Finanza have intervened to end the scandal of false Brunello, rather that Consortium do not have anything, just looking, that allowed.
By the way the Consortium of Chianti Classico will be the first starting next June 2012 to have the right to ask a contribution from non-members, since the Consrtium has demostrated that they controls more than 40% of vintners and more of 66,66% of wine bottled under the appellation.
This means that even a no member like i.e. Antinori will have to pay for all the promotional expenses and the brand protection.
let me try to answer to the Mario Crosta’s question about two Consortia in Bari.
The law says that the right to represent the appellation for ALL the producers using that appellation is reserved to the Consortium who demonstrate to control more than 40% of vintners and more than 66,66% of the total production. The law does not refuse a second or even a third consortium in the same appellation but simply it does recognize the biggest.
Thank you for this information Mr. Bonfio. I wasn’t aware of this regulation. But I understand in the case of Chianti Classico, you are talking about the annual fee, not the one-off cost of organising the Chianti Classico Collection anteprima?
Not exactly. Hard to say in english, but let me try.
Chianti Classico Collection is one of several events organised by the Consortium during the year. The entire cost of all events includes all the logistic (let’s say in this way) costs but also the fact that the evnt is promoting at the same time the brand Chianti Classico, the logo with black rooster etc. etc.
This second category of expenses will be in the future, starting next June (first Consortium in Italy), will be divided for ALL the producers and bottlers using the Chianti Classico appellation, either if you are member or not of the Consortium.This is a great news and very important because for decades (decades!) many took advantages of other people expenses to make money without partecipate to the cost of building and protecting the brand. For now it is a good start: you pay just for the reason you put on you lable a name and a brand that somebody else with their money helped to build, then you may not partecipate to the wine tasting, but you partecipate to pay it (or a portion of).
Sorry for my english.
Bonfio,,, the biggest is not the best. Banfi in Montalcino, for exemple…
In any case, I defend freedom. Law is for Socrate’s heroes. We don’t need another hero.
The Consorzio of Vino Nobile di Montepulciano sends the following clarification: “Avignonesi and Fattoria le Casalte do not participate [in the Anteprima] because they didn’t produce any 2009 vintage; Crociani does not participate because the owner Susanna Crociani is currently busy building a new cellar and the estate has no organisational capacity; Fassati does not participate as per the estate’s decision”.
Nice to read about some local wine politics & daily news. Few blogs share that.
Bomba! http://www.winesurf.it/index.php?file=onenews&form_id_notizia=1345
Pingback: Vino al Vino·
I completely agree with Wojcech. My article, I wrote a month or so ago, will be published before Vinitaly and tells nearly the same.
I’m visiting these events since they exist. And I always told the wineries and the consorzii that it doesn’t make sense to write about a wine without the most famous producers.
So, I did (and paid) winery visits by myself and wrote also about the “stars”. With the effect, I didn’t get an invitation to the event the following year, because I wrote also about wineries, who didn’t finance the journalists trips. This is crazy.
Because my readres will not understand, why I write an article on Amarone without Quintarelli, Dal Forno, Masi or Allegrini, they don’t understand, why one is writing a piece on Piemonte missing Altare, Gaja or Mascarello and they don’t even care, why the well known names – that made Chianti, Nobile or Brunello famous – are missing in my article. They want to know – and ask me how the wines are. That’s the point, nothing else.
If the famous wineries are not in the consorzio, bring them in – or bring there wines to the event. The region – and the name of the wine needs it. And we, as the multiplcatos need it, too. Nobody cares on “inner circle circumstances”.
Pingback: Tipicamente·
Pingback: Csúcsborok csúcspontok csúcsfejek | Szomjas Gödény blogja·