Comments on: The Champagne of White Zinfandels?

By: bob rohden

bob rohden — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 22:59:10 +0000

This article was just referenced by the Champagne Bureau Facebook page as proof that “…over 50% of the sparkling wine sold in the U.S. is improperly labeled as “Champagne?”

They cite Gomberg numbers also as proof:
These are the Gomberg numbers cited by the Wine Institute…
Total California Sparkling Wine/Champagne to U.S. Market
2010 4,818.7 thousands of cases

Total Foreign Sparkling Wine / Champagne to U.S. Market
2010 3,769.8 thousands of cases

a lot of noise for 3% of the US wine market.

By: Megan

Megan — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:38:18 +0000

In 2010, I just think this is wrong. The joy of discovering wine is the fact that each wine is unique and from a unique place, that cannot be replicated. Just like people. Why not celebrate this by keeping each place and subsequent wine special? It’s like a bunch of people running around calling themselves Oprah. There is only 1, and it should be kept that way.

By: Laurie

Laurie — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:56:14 +0000

Karen’s comment brings us full circle back to the discussion on whether or not Roederer went overboard protecting the Cristal trademark. Protect it or lose it. It is not unreasonable for interested parties to pursue litigation in order to protect a name.

By: Dave Erickson

Dave Erickson — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 01:53:16 +0000

Marc: Karen’s response says it all:

champagne has become a term that is used more to represent the type of wine being a bubbly as opposed to representing the region it came from. Kind of like how even though I reach for a Puff’s tissue I call it “kleenex.”

By: ChampagneBureau (Champagne Bureau)

ChampagneBureau (Champagne Bureau) — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 21:03:13 +0000

Twitter Comment

Check out @drvino ‘s piece on labeling sparkling wines- [link to post] Let him know your thoughts on the matter!

- Posted using Chat Catcher

By: Karen McCamp

Karen McCamp — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:06:27 +0000

I think I might need to change my name to “average wine consumer”, because to some degree I feel I somewhat present that perspective. I would not have associated the Barefoot white zin champagne with the region of Champagne. I feel the marketers have done their job well here and champagne has become a term that is used more to represent the type of wine being a bubbly as opposed to representing the region it came from. Kind of like how even though I reach for a Puff’s tissue I call it “kleenex.”

By: WineOrigins (CenterforWineOrigins)

WineOrigins (CenterforWineOrigins) — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:06:18 +0000

Twitter Comment

The Champagne of White Zinfandels? Dr. Vino finds a hilarious mislabeled wine bottle [link to post]

- Posted using Chat Catcher

By: Marc

Marc — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:38:24 +0000

Dave – don’t buy it. Problem solved.

By: Dr. Vino

Dr. Vino — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:34:16 +0000

Those who pay $8 for a “California Champagne” may assume that it is not from the Champagne region (or from Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and/or Pinot Meunier).

But in a way that seems like Coke’s recent defense of VitaminWater: “no consumer could reasonably be misled into thinking vitaminwater was a healthy beverage.”

By: Dave Erickson

Dave Erickson — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:18:26 +0000

You gotta love the Gallos. Really, these guys have no shame. They promote the notion of terroir with “Gallo of Sonoma,” and at the same time they put “Champagne” on dreck like this.

So–somebody tell me how Free Markets self-correct abuses like this.

By: the_a_stevenson (Andrew Stevenson)

the_a_stevenson (Andrew Stevenson) — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 21:14:50 +0000

Twitter Comment

RT @drvino The Champagne of White Zinfandels? [link to post] <--- tee hee!

- Posted using Chat Catcher

By: RobinC

RobinC — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:57:42 +0000

Gallo – they know how to make a buck. All they have to do is fool some of the people some of the time.

By: kelkeagy

kelkeagy — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:49:33 +0000

I think most people are aware that Champagne is a region and therefore not applicable to all sparkling wines. I see that Barefoot actually has the California Sparkling designation on the label (although less prominent than the Champagne). So maybe they’re trying to wean their consumers off of that designation… maybe not. However, if drinking sparkling white zinfandel is what it takes to get some consumers to try wine… then I’m all for it.

By: JParadisee

JParadisee — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:39:50 +0000

Even better if you look at the finer print under “Champagne” you see they make this with Charmat method making it even further from having anything to do with Chapagne. Mmmmhh tank fermented white zinfandel…kinda like champagne right?

By: Dr. Vino

Dr. Vino — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:30:55 +0000

Hi Bill –

Yes, the label is grandfathered, not the inventory. So yes, Korbel, Barefoot and quite a few others can still make and market “California Champagne,” perhaps in perpetuity!

In the label above, they made the “California” lighter and in a smaller font, as you can see better here.

Everyone –

Maybe I should have made this a poll? At any rate, tell us your thoughts on the subject of “California Champagne.”