Hardly a day passes by any more without some significant news item concerning Australian wine. In recent days we have seen the movement of Mildara Blass into e-commerce with the 25% purchase of Wine Planet, which would now appear to be adequately capitalised for its forthcoming electronic stoush with Winepros. One of Australia’s most significant small vineyards, Lake’s Folly, has been put on the market after what is already rated as perhaps the greatest (honestly!) Hunter Valley vintage in memory. And, in a classical wine industry paradox, just when another record crop was imminent the overall Australian vintage is looking rather shaky indeed. Could 2000 be the vintage we had to have? It’s very early days yet, but you can hear the sighs of relief from growers, makers and marketers alike as a crop perhaps even 15% below expectations will stave off Australia’s imminent short-term over-supply for another year. With yields most adversely affected in the warmer South Australian regions, grape prices should hold to some degree, the larger companies will rely more on the speculative market for their requirements and smaller companies should be able to hold off fears of takeover for another year. As discussed later this issue, this vintage could even herald a shortage of chardonnay, while cheaper domestic wine prices should hold for the short term. One issue that won’t go away is the way the wine media is rapidly changing. It seems that with every week the media moves closer and closer towards the trade, and that’s not a healthy thing. Readers of apparently independent columns, printed and electronic, have the right to expect that the recommendations presented therein have nothing to do with the wines sold or otherwise promoted by the owners of the medium. Similarly, consumers need reassurance that the writers of wine columns do not profit through the sale of wines they recommend in an apparently impartial way. It’s not enough simply to declare a commercial association with a wine producer or marketer, for more often than not it’s the wines that are not recommended in an article that represent the greatest threat to impartiality. More than ever before, readers of wine related information should be asking themselves who is providing the information they are reading, who is paying them to do it and what other commercial affiliations whose veneer they might be hiding behind. It’s a fine line between being an independent observer and an active participant in the trade you are supposed to be commenting on. Just how fine it is we shall wait and see. In writing this issue of OnWine I have made a deliberate effort to cover a larger proportion of quality wine which will return you some change from a $20 bill. Wines like those of Stonehaven, Water Wheel and Hill of Gold ensure there’s still plenty to choose from. So, as I put this issue to bed, I look forward with great enthusiasm to another avalanche of change – some of predictable, much of it considerably less so – in the weeks prior to the next OnWine Report.
