Didn't know where to post this

[Tastevin]

A member posted a question the other day about Sancerre which has prompted me to ask you wine lovers a question. But first a preamble.
Back in the mid 80's I spent some time in your lovely Country visiting wine merchants and offering various wines. It was very hard, but enjoyable work as I visited New York, Boston, San Francisco, New Orleans, and Houston. At one call the Buyer expressed an interest in a particular East European wine and said he could sell it as Chablis. When I tactfully reminded him that it was not in fact Chablis, he said that because in the States Chablis was a style of wine it was perfectly legal to label my wine as Chablis. He assured me that this did not only apply to Chablis. Because it would have been illegal in Europe for the wine to be labelled as somthing it was not, I could not accept the order.
My question to you learned people is - does this still apply? Did it ever apply?
Just in case you are thinking of asking - no, I cannot remember the Buyer's name, Company, or in which State this occurred; and yes, my journey was worthwhile. T

[Thomas]

This subject is in trade talks--has been for 20 years. In the US regs chablis, burgundy, rhine, and others are considered generic terms that can be used for wine.

To go any further would be to spark a long conversation on the yeahs and nays of the regulation. I am decidedly against the idea, as is the EU.

[Innkeeper]

Agree with Foodie. The upside of this is that all these generically named wines are becoming rarer and rarer. Even Gallo Hearty Burgundy is losing out big on market share. Among the American public, particularly from women, you still hear a lot of requests for chablis, although it is gradually shifting over to chardonnay or Pinot Grigio.

[Kcwhippet]

I suspect those talks are going to be stalled quite a bit longer. As long as the EU doesn't recognize intellectual property copywrights and anyone in the EU is allowed to pirate US written software and other IP without fear of reprisal, don't expect the US to honor their wine naming conventions. Personally, however, I do believe Champagne only comes from Champagne and not the Korbel factory, there really isn't any such wine as Blush Chablis, etc.

[wineguruchgo]

Producing, labeling and promoting item is one thing. Getting it to actually sell is yet another.

I don't think you will find one wine savvy person who would buy anything labeled Chablis that didn't come from the region. The same with Cognac and Champagne.

Guess we are all snobs somewhere in our lives.

[Kcwhippet]

WGC,

If that's the case, then about 90% of the wine buying public are definitely NOT wine savvy. We sell more Almaden Mountain Chablis and Blush Chablis than all the rest of the real Chablis combined.

[winoweenie]

Send me another box KC. I'm almost out. WW [img]http://38.118.142.245/ubb2/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Tastevin]

Thanks all.
I wasn't being critical Kc, just interested that's all. T

[This message has been edited by Tastevin (edited 01-22-2004).]

[Kcwhippet]

Tastevin,

My post was only meant to show how two entirely unrelated matters can be conjoined by the bureaucrats and politicians we allow to dictate the direction of our lives. I spoke with a former BATF (now the TTB) functionary a few years ago and asked how his bureau could allow US winemakers to label their wines as something they're truly not (i.e., Chablis, etc.). He said that decision was made way above his pay grade and it was tied to many other things going on. However, he said the official reason was that US winemakers had been making wines "in the style of" for over a hundred years and the names they used had become a traditional way of naming their wines. I mentioned to him that I didn't believe wines like Almaden's Mountain Chablis had been around for that long, but he came back with a reply that was essentially "I was only following orders."

[Tastevin]

Thanks again Kc.
Foodie mentioned that in the US regs Chablis, Burgundy, Rhine, and others are considered generic terms that can be used for wine. Do you know how many 'others' are allowed, and what they are? Perhaps there is no definitive list.
Do you, or could you have for instance, Chablis Les Clos; Sancerre; Monbazillac; Barsac; Anjou Rose ; or even a Chateau Latour?
Just in case you are wondering, no I'm not thinking of exporting to the States. [img]http://38.118.142.245/ubb2/smile.gif[/img] T.

[This message has been edited by Tastevin (edited 01-22-2004).]

[Kcwhippet]

Here's what's contained in the BATF regulations. The reason it says these are "examples" of names that can be used is because the BATF wanted to leave the door open to add or subtract other names at their choosing.

"(2) Examples of semi-generic names which are also type designations for grape wines are Angelica, Burgundy, Claret, Chablis, Champagne, Chianti, Malaga, Marsala, Madeira, Moselle, Port, Rhine Wine (syn. Hock), Sauterne, Haut Sauterne, Sherry, Tokay."

[Tastevin]

Wow Kc.
Thanks.
[img]http://38.118.142.245/ubb2/smile.gif[/img] T.