Red Hook Winery, Amazon, calories, Trotter – sipped & spit
LOST: inventory. But not hope.
The winemaker at Red Hook Winery told nonabrooklyn that the ambitious project on Pier 41 has to “assume a total loss” of all wine on the premises in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. They hope to continue but admit that their future hinges on insurance policies paying out. Best of luck to Christopher Nicolson, Robert Foley and Abe Schoener.
SIPPED and SPIT: shipping fees
The Press Democrat has a lengthy story on Amazon wine. In it, they report that the shipping fees will be $9.99 for six bottles and $19.96 for 12. Seems below the market price so make that a SIP for consumers and a SPIT for the wineries, who will likely be doing the fulfillment. [pressdemocrat]
SIPPED: calories
The evergreen wine topic of calories in wine gets a graphic look and comparison to beer over at WineFolly. But, sadly, the graphics choose to make wine look less cal-o-rific, even when a standard wine serving could likely have more calories than a standard beer (a lager). Basic rule: more alcohol = more calories.
GLUGGED: A Nebuchadnezzar of Trockenbeerenauslese? Eegad! [Reuters]
On November 6th, 2012 at 2:17 pm ,Justin Hammack wrote:
Heya, Thanks for mentioning us!
It’s not easy covering calories in wine vs beer. The beer crowd is mad at us for not using a 16 oz pint in the comparison. (because we choose bottle size 12-14oz)
It’s sort of a curious issue. If you consider a pint = 16oz and a wine serving as 5oz, suddenly you’re talking a lot more calories in a ‘beer’ vs a glass of wine.
But you’re right, oz to oz, wine is higher in calories. I look forward to the day someone serves a pint of scotch… (that’d be a lot of calories! hehe!)
Thanks again Dr. Vino!
On November 6th, 2012 at 2:27 pm ,Dr. Vino wrote:
Hi Justin,
Nice job with the art. But the graphic is misleading.
It’s not just that wine has more calories per ounce. It’s that it has more calories per serving when comparing “standard” wine to a lager (standard beer–ale really can’t be considered “standard”). Using data from your chart, it’s 175-187 calories for wine vs 140 – 191 for beer.
And, yes, the 14 oz serving for beer was an odd choice. Better to go with 12 oz (cans bottles) or 16 oz (pints).
On November 6th, 2012 at 3:44 pm ,Sharon Kapnick wrote:
A Nebuchadnezzar of Trockenbeerenauslese–now that’s a mouthful!
On November 6th, 2012 at 5:29 pm ,Justin Hammack wrote:
We did our best to try and pick the ‘middle’ of all options both in beer and wine. (and it’s why we didn’t use 16oz of beer or 5oz of wine)
I’m sorry you find it misleading, it wasn’t our intention. (I think they are pretty equivalent all things considered)
Unfortunately for weight watchers, calories directly correlate to the amount of alcohol someone consumes regardless of how they dilute it in a beverage.
If you can think of good way to communicate that in an image, I’d love to collaborate on something.
Thanks again!
– Justin
On November 6th, 2012 at 5:39 pm ,RobinC wrote:
All I remember is that wine is an appetite suppressant. Excellent. Kudos to Dr. Kalish.
On November 7th, 2012 at 5:37 pm ,Dr. Vino wrote:
An update to the last item in the roundup: 60 cases of the wine that Charlie Trotter was to auction at Christie’s have apparently gone missing on the way to NY: http://bit.ly/TwrxV5
On November 8th, 2012 at 11:55 am ,Amazon wine, now serving | Dr Vino's wine blog wrote:
[…] site appears very similar to what had been discovered previously (read how it works for wineries) and offers exclusively domestic wines with orders fulfilled by wineries. Shipping is $9.99 for up […]