Tim James: On boring wine writers and being priced out of the market

A vicious cold thwarted my plans of getting out at the crack of dawn on Monday to the Sadie new releses trade tasting in order to dutifully report back to you. So I’ve decided to continue in the responding mode that last week had me looking at a comment about what we can expect in the way of vineyard and famous label deaths. Here, observations related to a few marginally interconnected comments that have been niggling at me.

The first comment to a past article has, I fear, a real connection with yet another Sadie-centred column (the tasting report will come next week, if my cold permits my reverent attendance at Rotsvas on the weekend). Someone called Mark, after a gracefully delivered and gratefully received compliment, complained firstly that article with scores are “sooo boring” – well there won’t be any of that next week, but some sort of tasting notes, which are probably just as bad. But Mark went on to complain that “the swartland is now boring like stellenbosch” (his disrespectful avoidance of capitalisation, not mine). And he added: “telling us about the same winemaker over and over again gets a bit too much. Can we not hear something new?”

This is criticism that is only too justified. Generally, wine writers, when they’re not trotting out yet again one of their pet theories, are responding to wines (or invitations to estates) that they’ve been given, rather than to what a bit of reflection would suggest would be a more original and different set of experiences. We do this partly because we’re as lazy as everyone else and it’s easier. But also because it’s an expensive business getting down to Baardskeedersbos or visiting Sakkie Mouton up the West Coast (two of Mark’s suggestions) or buying a set of interesting-looking wines to explore. And we’re mostly under-resourced and earning unhandsomely (and readers are mostly pretty unwilling to pay, as the editor of this website would no doubt agree). Hence, too often we cover similar topics and report on the wines of those producers with the deepest pockets and/or greatest interest in stimulating media coverage.

Don’t think it’s just us local hacks that wait for invitations, it’s also the greatest and richest in our business. Jancis Robinson, for example, comes to South Africa when invited and brought as a guest – as well, of course, as attending the splendid tastings of Cape wine that are put on in London for important foreign journos and dealers. Foreign wine writers who are not well-resourced enough by prestigious pubications to be independent get a great deal of support from local producers and their organisations. Well and good, so they should. But perhaps so should we locals, now and then. (We do, we do – but generally and regularly by the same small handful of producers – which is why we write about them so often, in many cases, though we do also allow some room for genuine interest on our part.)

However, yes, we could do much more than we do in initiating visits and tastings. I do occasionally approach producers and suggest a visit or tasting and I don’t think I’ve been refused – or even not received with pleasure. I’m a bit too squeamish to often suggest that I’m sent wines, being uncertain of what I can deliver and it looks too much like asking for freebies. I do occasionally splash out, at retail, on interesting-looking lower-priced wines according to a vague theme, and report on them. I plan to do more of all of these things!

Money, therefore, is a real consideration when it comes to coverage. And it, as well as a producer who works hard and generously with local wine and wine-ish journalists, forms some sort of connection with my response to another commenter, Jos (a frequent, well-informed and valued visitor to the comment space on this website). When I wrote about the latest Leeu Passant releases, Jos commented that the Mullineux projects (Mullineux Wines and Leeu Passant) “unquestionably produce excellent wines”. But, she added, “they have priced themselves out of the local market”.

I wonder if it is not that, if only with their higher-end wines, they have priced themselves out of the market that would include Jos and me – let’s unscientifically call that the upper-middle market, as opposed to the upper market where Mullineux Schist Syrah and Leeu Passant Chardonnay sell. But there are also plenty of pretty serious wine-people that are being or have been priced out of the upper-middle market and must rest content with the pickings in the middle market. And so on, further down. Sadly, that’s the nature of markets (and producer desire for higher profits). We are still very fortunate here that there are in fact pretty good pickings to be had at all levels.

But we mustn’t doubt that the upper market exists. The Mulllineuxs and most other top-end producers aim to have a balance between local sales and exports – for business reasons apart from anything else. You only need to look at the wine auctions, which are catering very largely to local sellers and buyers, to see that there are clearly enough very rich wine-people around to constitute a market. It’s a tiny percentage of the population – but then these wines are a tiny percentage of what is produced.

The Mullineux projects are particularly “lucky”, I suppose, in that if they aim to have half their sales made locally, then a good percentage of those local sales are made in the Singh’s hospitality business (restaurants and hotels) in Franschhoek, catering above all to wealthy foreigners I’d guess – which is a kind of deferred export, perhaps, in that it’s foreign money. But, generally, the market for luxury goods around the world is doing just fine, as far as I can see.

• Tim James is one of South Africa’s leading wine commentators, contributing to various local and international wine publications. His book Wines of South Africa – Tradition and Revolution appeared in 2013.