The flaw is, how many Type 2 wineries, like mine, make wine in a shared facility? No property, no vineyard, no tasting room? And use grapes not from my 12th Generation Estate, but from multiple growers? Like Williams Selyem and Kosta Browne did for years?
It's a rating system built upon the aristocracy and land ownership. "Evaluating multiple vintages" I sell out every year and keep nothing in a library because the inventory cost is too high. But if I have a cellar dug in to my own property, then the cost is zero, or close to it.
Yep, the wineries with a physical property, history, and inventory will likely benefit. How would Michelin evaluate an up and coming winemaker using multiple facilities to make their wine? Or a winery like mine with 18 years of history, no tasting room, no winery property, and sold out vintages with nothing to compare but the most recent couple vintages?
That's a good point and definitely something a lot of other folks are curious about/critiquing about this particular rating system. I'm wondering if their "Michelin Selected" distinction will serve wineries that aren't estate. Or, if not, if they'll come up with a different distinction for wineries like yours or even for new producers who don't have years under their belts but do show promise.
All of that said, I don't think Michelin will be the end-all-be-all in wine ranking systems. Its obviously far too early to say.
They ain't gonna try to hard unless they get paid. The Michelin guide hasn't been to Seattle or Portland but they've been to Mississippi. That should tell us all enough about how this will be done.
So great they come to Sonoma, they'll just cover the same wineries everyone else does and throw in a lotto pick or two so it holds up to scrutiny for wineries like mine. 5000 wineries in CA...how many own property and have a tasting room in a region that paid for coverage. That's your starting point. Then everyone else.
It took 18 years for my wine to get picked up by Suckling.
The flaw is, how many Type 2 wineries, like mine, make wine in a shared facility? No property, no vineyard, no tasting room? And use grapes not from my 12th Generation Estate, but from multiple growers? Like Williams Selyem and Kosta Browne did for years?
It's a rating system built upon the aristocracy and land ownership. "Evaluating multiple vintages" I sell out every year and keep nothing in a library because the inventory cost is too high. But if I have a cellar dug in to my own property, then the cost is zero, or close to it.
Yep, the wineries with a physical property, history, and inventory will likely benefit. How would Michelin evaluate an up and coming winemaker using multiple facilities to make their wine? Or a winery like mine with 18 years of history, no tasting room, no winery property, and sold out vintages with nothing to compare but the most recent couple vintages?
That's a good point and definitely something a lot of other folks are curious about/critiquing about this particular rating system. I'm wondering if their "Michelin Selected" distinction will serve wineries that aren't estate. Or, if not, if they'll come up with a different distinction for wineries like yours or even for new producers who don't have years under their belts but do show promise.
All of that said, I don't think Michelin will be the end-all-be-all in wine ranking systems. Its obviously far too early to say.
They ain't gonna try to hard unless they get paid. The Michelin guide hasn't been to Seattle or Portland but they've been to Mississippi. That should tell us all enough about how this will be done.
So great they come to Sonoma, they'll just cover the same wineries everyone else does and throw in a lotto pick or two so it holds up to scrutiny for wineries like mine. 5000 wineries in CA...how many own property and have a tasting room in a region that paid for coverage. That's your starting point. Then everyone else.
It took 18 years for my wine to get picked up by Suckling.
I'm not holding my breath.
So interesting!