+- WineBoard (https://www.wines.com/wineboard)
+-- Forum: RESOURCES AND OTHER STUFF (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-300.html)
+--- Forum: Wine and Politics (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-7.html)
+--- Thread: "Reserve" (/thread-2902.html)
- barnesy - 09-14-2000
Is there any movement amongst the US wine producers or other parties that would put legislative backing to the term "reserve?" I know with US wines, unlike Italian wines which regulates aging length for the reserve labeled bottles, its buyer beware when it comes to the term reserve.
Barnesy
- Thomas - 09-15-2000
Barnesy, there are a few producers upset over the situation, but I know of no movement to change it. When you think about it, why should producers change the situation? They have a built-in marketing device. Believe it or not, many consumers think the word, reserve, promises a great wine--generally, it means lots of wood.
[This message has been edited by foodie (edited 09-15-2000).]
- chittychattykathy - 09-15-2000
This is part of what is going on in Washington state:
 (Washington Wine Quality Alliance) WWQA
As announced last year, members of the WWQA agree to the following quality standards:
Reserve labeling – WWQA members will limit the use of the word “reserve†on their wine label to small
lot, limited release wines as defined by the WWQA.
Washington Vitis Vinifera grapes – WWQA members agree to produce wines made 100% from vitis
vinifera grapes from Washington State’s federally-approved viticultural appellations.
Geographic terms – WWQA members will not confuse Bordeaux, Burgundy, Chablis or Champagne on
their front labels.
- Thomas - 09-16-2000
Three cheers for the Washington Quality Alliance. An alliance like that was attempted in NY State on more than one occasion, but too many producers are too short-sighted (and not quite marketing savvy either).