The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker

no avatar
User

Robin Garr

Rank

Forum Janitor

Posts

21845

Joined

Fri Feb 17, 2006 1:44 pm

Location

Louisville, KY

It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Robin Garr » Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:43 pm

Belgian Customs Agency Destroys Shipment of American Sparkling Wine Mislabeled “Champagne”

WASHINGTON, DC - Office of Champagne, USA announced today that Belgian Customs authorities seized and destroyed a shipment of over 3,200 bottles of André sparkling wine. The shipment was seized at the port of Anvers, Belgium, on Tuesday. It is the latest in a series of seizures in the last four years, representing important quantities of bottles.

The bottles of Gallo’s André sparkling wine with references to “California Champagne” and “André Champagne Cellars” are in direct violation of export laws in numerous countries that protect the place names of wine regions. Under EU law, use of the word Champagne on wine labels is intended exclusively for wines produced in the Champagne region of France under the strict regulations of the region’s Appellation of Controlled Origin (AOC). These laws ensure that consumers are not misled by falsely labeled bottles. As a result, any U.S. product that misuses the Champagne name and seeks to enter an export market that protects consumers from misleading labels is considered counterfeit. To avoid greater legal liabilities and legal procedures, the owner of the merchandise agreed to abandon it for immediate destruction.

In a press conference today in Brussels, representatives from the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (CIVC), Belgian Customs and the World Customs Organization released a video documenting the destruction (http://www.flow-films.com/materials/champagne.wmv). Leaders of the CIVC, the regulatory body of the Champagne appellation, highlighted the importance of protecting the Champagne name around the world and the serious legal and economic implications for those who violate EU and international laws.

“Since the passage and implementation of more rigorous legislation, customs agents and border patrols throughout Europe have seized and destroyed over 14,000 bottles in the last four years illegally bearing the Champagne name, including product from the United States, Argentina, Russia, Armenia, Brazil and Ethiopia” said Bruno Paillard, Champagne producer and representative of the CIVC.

CIVC General Director Jean-Luc Barbier expressed satisfaction with the seizure and congratulated the Belgian authorities for their vigilance. “The Belgian border authorities have shown great competence and impressive effectiveness in stopping numerous shipments of wines seeking to counterfeit the Champagne appellation’s name.”

The bottles were seized as part of Belgium’s anti-counterfeit operations in place at the Anvers port. Michel Danet, Secretary General of the World Customs Organization, noted that seizures such as these are central to the ongoing battle to halt the trade and traffic of counterfeit goods worldwide. He highlighted the need for all to be vigilant, as counterfeit goods now impact enormous sectors of the world economy including pharmaceuticals, safety devices, and foodstuffs that seek to benefit illegally from the use of geographic indications.

The continued destruction of shipments of American sparkling wine seeking access to the European market also highlights the broader issue of name protection in the United States. While the global wine market moves towards greater protection of products original to a specific region, the U.S. government and some sectors of the American wine industry insist on continuing to mislead consumers.

“While international wine growing place names such as Napa Valley are increasingly protected in Europe, our government refuses to afford that same legal protection to European products in our country. More importantly, it is disingenuous for some American producers to use a legal loophole to masquerade as Champagne and mislead the public,” said Office of Champagne, USA Director Sharon J. Castillo.

Last May, Napa Valley became the first U.S. region to be granted Geographic Indication status by the European Union. Across the globe, consumers agree that a wine label should accurately reflect the content of the bottle. In the United States - a country that prides itself with truth-in-labeling and consumer rights - this is no different. A poll of wine drinkers conducted in November 2006 by Fairbank, Maslin, & Associates revealed that an overwhelming majority of American wine consumers - 80% - want policymakers to correct the problem of misleading wine labels. Equally, 81% believe that wines should only be allowed to use a specific geographic location on their labels if they are actually made in that location.

Champagne, along with 12 other wine regions from around the world, is an original signatory of the Joint Declaration to Protect Wine Place & Origin (http://www.protectplace.com). The signatories include seven U.S. regions - Napa Valley, Sonoma, Paso Robles, Oregon, Walla Walla, Willamette, and Washington State. The Declaration is a set of principles aimed at protecting consumers by advocating truth-in-labeling worldwide.

# # #

About Office of Champagne, USA

Office of Champagne, USA is the official U.S. representative of the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (CIVC), a trade association which represents the grape growers and houses of Champagne, France. The Office works to educate U.S. consumers about the uniqueness of the wines of Champagne and expand their understanding of the need to protect the Champagne name. For more information, visit us online at http://www.champagne.us.
no avatar
User

Dale Williams

Rank

Compassionate Connoisseur

Posts

11773

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:32 pm

Location

Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Dale Williams » Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:56 pm

Great video. Wish someone would destroy Andre in US before it's inflicted on innocents.*

The weird part is that there is apparently a market for it in Europe.

* I haven't tasted Andre in years, but memories are bad
no avatar
User

Keith M

Rank

Beer Explorer

Posts

1184

Joined

Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:25 am

Location

Finger Lakes, New York

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Keith M » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:14 pm

Office of Champagne, USA wrote:The bottles of Gallo’s André sparkling wine with references to “California Champagne” and “André Champagne Cellars” are in direct violation of export laws in numerous countries that protect the place names of wine regions. Under EU law, use of the word Champagne on wine labels is intended exclusively for wines produced in the Champagne region of France under the strict regulations of the region’s Appellation of Controlled Origin (AOC). These laws ensure that consumers are not misled by falsely labeled bottles. As a result, any U.S. product that misuses the Champagne name and seeks to enter an export market that protects consumers from misleading labels is considered counterfeit.

Hmmmmm,

Option 1: Government authorities actually believe that European consumers will think, "ahhh, André --real wine for real people, from California, France."

Option 2: Competitors who produce sparkling wine in Europe do what good capitalists always do--seek to avoid competition.
no avatar
User

wrcstl

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

881

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 2:20 pm

Location

St. Louis

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by wrcstl » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:47 pm

I think this is really funny. I thought Hoke said this does not happen anymore (sorta). Maybe they will take the word off their wine.
Walt
no avatar
User

Hoke

Rank

Achieving Wine Immortality

Posts

11420

Joined

Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am

Location

Portland, OR

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Hoke » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:33 pm

wrcstl wrote:I think this is really funny. I thought Hoke said this does not happen anymore (sorta). Maybe they will take the word off their wine.
Walt


Nope, Hoke didn't say that it doesn't happen.

Hoke said that the EU Trade negotiators agreed to allow the use of the term "Champagne" on wine labels for US companies (who had been grandfathered from prior use, had to be accompanied by a specific statement of location/source, i.e., "California Champagne", blah blah blah). But that was primarily to allow the usage to continue in the US; it wasn't to allow shipping of that product to European countries.

I'm happy that the Belgian Border Guards stand ever vigilant, though, to protect incredibly stupid Belgians from potentially mistaking Andre for Krug Vintage. Lord knows, I do that all the time myself, and don't want to think of some Belge screwing up his frites and mayonnaise with the outre stuff.

On another topic, I'm wondering, now that the Champenoise have announced they are hoping to annex huge swathes of additional land that they can then call "Champagne", just exactly how they are planning on 'splaining that Champagne is so sacrosanct in the first place.

But then, I'm stupid (not Stupid, mind you, just lower case stupid) about stuff like that.
no avatar
User

Oliver McCrum

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1076

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:08 am

Location

Oakland, CA; Cigliè, Piedmont

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Oliver McCrum » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:41 pm

Keith M wrote:
Office of Champagne, USA wrote:The bottles of Gallo’s André sparkling wine with references to “California Champagne” and “André Champagne Cellars” are in direct violation of export laws in numerous countries that protect the place names of wine regions. Under EU law, use of the word Champagne on wine labels is intended exclusively for wines produced in the Champagne region of France under the strict regulations of the region’s Appellation of Controlled Origin (AOC). These laws ensure that consumers are not misled by falsely labeled bottles. As a result, any U.S. product that misuses the Champagne name and seeks to enter an export market that protects consumers from misleading labels is considered counterfeit.

Hmmmmm,

Option 1: Government authorities actually believe that European consumers will think, "ahhh, André --real wine for real people, from California, France."

Option 2: Competitors who produce sparkling wine in Europe do what good capitalists always do--seek to avoid competition.


I have to disagree. I think that US producers would be outraged if people started calling wine from Sicily 'Dry Creek Red', and the better our reputation gets here the more we'll defend it. Just look at the fuss raised about the use of the word 'Zinfandel' by producers from Apulia, when Zinfandel is just one of the names of their shared grape. I don't think many people would defend the mis-use of words like 'Burgundy' and 'Chablis,' why is Champagne different?
no avatar
User

wrcstl

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

881

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 2:20 pm

Location

St. Louis

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by wrcstl » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:45 pm

Hoke wrote:
wrcstl wrote:I think this is really funny. I thought Hoke said this does not happen anymore (sorta). Maybe they will take the word off their wine.
Walt


Nope, Hoke didn't say that it doesn't happen.

Hoke said that the EU Trade negotiators agreed to allow the use of the term "Champagne" on wine labels for US companies (who had been grandfathered from prior use, had to be accompanied by a specific statement of location/source, i.e., "California Champagne", blah blah blah). But that was primarily to allow the usage to continue in the US; it wasn't to allow shipping of that product to European countries.

I'm happy that the Belgian Border Guards stand ever vigilant, though, to protect incredibly stupid Belgians from potentially mistaking Andre for Krug Vintage. Lord knows, I do that all the time myself, and don't want to think of some Belge screwing up his frites and mayonnaise with the outre stuff.

On another topic, I'm wondering, now that the Champenoise have announced they are hoping to annex huge swathes of additional land that they can then call "Champagne", just exactly how they are planning on 'splaining that Champagne is so sacrosanct in the first place.

But then, I'm stupid (not Stupid, mind you, just lower case stupid) about stuff like that.


:D :D :D :D :D :D

Thought I would hear from you. You say, tongue in check, that you are happy the border guards are vigilant and protect the Belgians. I will repeat, as I have many times, we overestimate the average wine buyer's intelligence and I don't care if they are Belgian, Austrailian, French of from the US; if it says Champagne, then it must be.
Walt
no avatar
User

Keith M

Rank

Beer Explorer

Posts

1184

Joined

Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:25 am

Location

Finger Lakes, New York

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Keith M » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:55 pm

Oliver McCrum wrote:I have to disagree. I think that US producers would be outraged if people started calling wine from Sicily 'Dry Creek Red', and the better our reputation gets here the more we'll defend it. Just look at the fuss raised about the use of the word 'Zinfandel' by producers from Apulia, when Zinfandel is just one of the names of their shared grape. I don't think many people would defend the mis-use of words like 'Burgundy' and 'Chablis,' why is Champagne different?

Of course, Oliver, we actually agree, the logic is exactly the same in both cases.

An Italian producer ships some wine to the United States labeled "Sicily Dry Creek Red--Product of Italy." An especially alert ICE Officer seizes the shipment, it is ceremonially poured into San Francisco Bay. A lobbying arm of an association of Dry Creek producers puts out a press release heralding the brave act, protecting the poor defenseless consumers from misleading labels.

Is it . . . ?

Option 1: Government authorities actually believe that American consumers will think, "ahhh, Sicily Dry Creek Red--Product of Italy--finally something from Sicily, Sonoma."

Option 2: Competitors who produce red wines in America do what good capitalists always do--seek to avoid competition.
no avatar
User

Hoke

Rank

Achieving Wine Immortality

Posts

11420

Joined

Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am

Location

Portland, OR

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Hoke » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:01 pm

Walt (and Oliver):

Just for the record, I don't personally believe that anyone (personal or corporate anyone) should be shipping "California Champagne" to Europe. It's counterproductive, imo. Why create problems when you don't need to? I see nothing whatsoever wrong with shipping "California Sparking Wine" to those markets---if it is indeed productive to ship that kind of product into that kind of market.

It's very easy to do a label run. And other producing markets conform to US market considerations and requirements, so why shouldn't we do the reverse? Just makes good business sense.

Oliver: get outraged if you want to. It's probably good for your cardiovascular system to do that occasionally. Then breathe deeply, cleansing breath, and figure that if it's legal here to label things a certain way.....and the EU has said that they (grudgingly, but nonetheless) agree that it is legal and allowable to do that here...then it's gonna happen. Human nature.

And now that you've weighed in on the one topic, what do you think about the other topic I mentioned? That of the Champagne AOC land expansion? Any opinions?
no avatar
User

Dale Williams

Rank

Compassionate Connoisseur

Posts

11773

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:32 pm

Location

Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Dale Williams » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:06 pm

wrcstl wrote: I will repeat, as I have many times, we overestimate the average wine buyer's intelligence and I don't care if they are Belgian, Austrailian, French of from the US; if it says Champagne, then it must be.
Walt


On a related note, last week my in-laws were in town from California. I served a Brocard Chablis with dinner one night. My M-i-L said in a surprised voice " oh, they make Chablis in France, too?" She was amazed to hear that Chablis wasn't always a cheap wine. While serious wine folks will never be "fooled," and people who only buy $6/magnums are never going to be in market for Chablis AC much less Le Clos, the devaluation of the name does damage in the middle.
no avatar
User

Mike Pollard

Rank

Ultra geek

Posts

168

Joined

Tue Oct 09, 2007 6:53 pm

Location

San Diego

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Mike Pollard » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:09 pm

It does not seem to have been noted here but according to the Australian press the wine was destined for Nigeria. Maybe the Champagne was part payment (celebration!) for a share in a few hundred million $ that seems to be always wanting to make its way out of Nigeria.

Mike
no avatar
User

Hoke

Rank

Achieving Wine Immortality

Posts

11420

Joined

Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am

Location

Portland, OR

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Hoke » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:21 pm

Mike Pollard wrote:It does not seem to have been noted here but according to the Australian press the wine was destined for Nigeria. Maybe the Champagne was part payment (celebration!) for a share in a few hundred million $ that seems to be always wanting to make its way out of Nigeria.

Mike


Interesting the press release 'overlooked' that part. You'd think it might be pertinent to the entire story.

Hey, everybody's got something to hide, 'cept for me and my monkey. :mrgreen:
no avatar
User

wrcstl

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

881

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 2:20 pm

Location

St. Louis

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by wrcstl » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:30 pm

Hoke wrote:And now that you've weighed in on the one topic, what do you think about the other topic I mentioned? That of the Champagne AOC land expansion? Any opinions?


I don't like it but find it less offensive than the original topic. The problem is that it happens everywhere in Europe. The one that jumps to mind immediately is Croze Hermitage, an area that makes some very average wines but has expanded their area tremendously to take advantage of a well know wine growing area. What about a 1st Growth buying up more land? For us terroirists it is the land not the winemaker.
Walt
no avatar
User

Hoke

Rank

Achieving Wine Immortality

Posts

11420

Joined

Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am

Location

Portland, OR

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Hoke » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:53 pm

wrcstl wrote:
Hoke wrote:And now that you've weighed in on the one topic, what do you think about the other topic I mentioned? That of the Champagne AOC land expansion? Any opinions?


I don't like it but find it less offensive than the original topic. The problem is that it happens everywhere in Europe. The one that jumps to mind immediately is Croze Hermitage, an area that makes some very average wines but has expanded their area tremendously to take advantage of a well know wine growing area. What about a 1st Growth buying up more land? For us terroirists it is the land not the winemaker.
Walt


I would suppose we should all keep in mind the old 'plus ca change'. Everything changes, baby, that's a fact...

And lord knows we've got our very own series of gerrymandering to fit our wants and needs right here in the US and the AVA system. Can you say "San Francisco Bay" and "Sonoma Coast"?

But it is difficult to defend sacrosanct areas if those areas are perfectly ready to change the zoning laws in a strict bid to increase volume, profits and market share. At that point, what does terroir got do with it, do with it? I have noticed the French are pure as the driven snow only when they wish to be, and then only in their own minds (and their own press releases). :twisted:

And I'd be perfectly happy to discuss ad nauseam that Champagne above all, and Bordeaux as well, has less to do with specific terroir and much more to do with style and manipulation. The only "terroir", except in the ultra-macro sense, of Champagne is occasionally expressed by the Farmhouse producers. But isn't that always the way it is? :D
no avatar
User

Oliver McCrum

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1076

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:08 am

Location

Oakland, CA; Cigliè, Piedmont

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Oliver McCrum » Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:08 pm

Hoke wrote:Walt (and Oliver):

Just for the record, I don't personally believe that anyone (personal or corporate anyone) should be shipping "California Champagne" to Europe. It's counterproductive, imo. Why create problems when you don't need to? I see nothing whatsoever wrong with shipping "California Sparking Wine" to those markets---if it is indeed productive to ship that kind of product into that kind of market.

It's very easy to do a label run. And other producing markets conform to US market considerations and requirements, so why shouldn't we do the reverse? Just makes good business sense.

Oliver: get outraged if you want to. It's probably good for your cardiovascular system to do that occasionally. Then breathe deeply, cleansing breath, and figure that if it's legal here to label things a certain way.....and the EU has said that they (grudgingly, but nonetheless) agree that it is legal and allowable to do that here...then it's gonna happen. Human nature.

And now that you've weighed in on the one topic, what do you think about the other topic I mentioned? That of the Champagne AOC land expansion? Any opinions?


Hoke,

I'm not outraged, this isn't Darfur or anything. Nothing could be clearer (in equity, not in law) than someone's right to protect their name, and no wine region has as good a name (regional brand, if you will) than Champagne does. I think that this comes from a long-time sense of inferiority here with regard to wine; we looked up to France and some other places, and this led some cheeseballs to use French names on their labels. (When I first moved here, I remember being amazed that the word 'imported' seemed to mean 'better,' and the word 'domestic' seemed to mean 'crap,' in the mind of the consumer.) Now we make good stuff here, and we KNOW that we make good stuff here and,quelle surprise, we're calling our wines 'Burgundy' less and we're very proud of our wines (and beers, and cheeses, et cetera). When we're completely mature as a producer and consumer of these kind of products we will be proud of our stuff and not very likely to try to steal the reputations of others.

The Italians have also been guilty of such expansions beyond a classic appellation (the original part is often called 'Classico' now, eg 'Soave Classico'). I think that the expansion would be a mistake unless the new areas are of at least average quality and typicity, and I don't know whether that's true. I presume that the Grandes Marques are behind this, and I can't imagine why anyone would buy GM Champagne these days anyway...
Oliver
Oliver McCrum Wines
no avatar
User

Hoke

Rank

Achieving Wine Immortality

Posts

11420

Joined

Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am

Location

Portland, OR

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Hoke » Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:31 pm

Thanks, Oliver.

I knew you weren't outraged. Just my usual hyperbole. I do always value your opinion.

You make some excellent points about market maturity and self-esteem. And you're quite right. When I started out in retail (more years ago than I usually care to remember) the attitude was normally imported-better/domestic-feh. And that has changed remarkably, hasn't it. As it should have.



The Italians have also been guilty of such expansions beyond a classic appellation (the original part is often called 'Classico' now, eg 'Soave Classico'). I think that the expansion would be a mistake unless the new areas are of at least average quality and typicity, and I don't know whether that's true. I presume that the Grandes Marques are behind this, and I can't imagine why anyone would buy GM Champagne these days anyway...


Thank you for bringing this up. Quite frankly, I had not thought about it when I made the previous post. Guess I was just focused on France, when I definitely should have considered the Italian 'classico' model.

Re Champagne, I've always had a problem with that AOC in particular. For a variety of reasons, but I suppose we should stay focused on the acreage/delimited issue here. I've always found it interesting/curious that there is only one AOC for Champagne/sparkling wine. Of course I subscribe that to the 'nature of the beast', combined with the control the Grand Marques have always exerted. Champagne has always needed the full 'echelles' system to keep its product highly esteeemed (or at least they thought they did).

It would be interesting to consider a classico-styled system applying to Champagne.

Maybe that would allow them to annex Chablis. I heard there's some good Chardonnay grown there. :D
no avatar
User

Oliver McCrum

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1076

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:08 am

Location

Oakland, CA; Cigliè, Piedmont

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Oliver McCrum » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:03 pm

Hoke,

I think Chablis was the poster-child for this kind of expansion before, sadly...and St. Joseph, maybe.

The producer's name is our only real guarantee, as always.
Oliver
Oliver McCrum Wines
no avatar
User

Glenn Mackles

Rank

Ultra geek

Posts

451

Joined

Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:52 am

Location

Virginia

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Glenn Mackles » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:21 pm

Personally I think Andre "Champagne" ought to be destroyed just on the general principle that it is undrinkable.
"If you can find something everyone agrees on, it's wrong." Mo Udall
no avatar
User

Oliver McCrum

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1076

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:08 am

Location

Oakland, CA; Cigliè, Piedmont

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Oliver McCrum » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:30 pm

I was shocked to find that even Schramsberg have given up; for ages they were the only non-cheeseball winery to use the term 'Champagne' on their labels, and they fought it tooth and nail. (Now they say 'Methode Champenoise', which is illegal in Europe too, but they're improving.)
Oliver
Oliver McCrum Wines
no avatar
User

Hoke

Rank

Achieving Wine Immortality

Posts

11420

Joined

Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am

Location

Portland, OR

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Hoke » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:38 pm

Oliver McCrum wrote:Hoke,

I think Chablis was the poster-child for this kind of expansion before, sadly...and St. Joseph, maybe.

The producer's name is our only real guarantee, as always.


Yeah. Producer and (to a certain extent) Importer/Necociant.

I tend to extend trust to those who have earned it (Dressner, Theise, a few others. McCrum.) The poster child (positive and negative) for this would be Burgundy.

Chablis: they really messed that one up, didn't they? Please, sir, may I have another Petite Chablis?
:)
no avatar
User

Paul Winalski

Rank

Wok Wielder

Posts

8880

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm

Location

Merrimack, New Hampshire

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Paul Winalski » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:39 pm

Well, good for the EU, IMO.

Gallo shouldn't be allowed to call their Andre schlock "Champagne" in the USA.

Let alone in the EU, where they have appellation regulations about that sort of thing.

As others have already said, I'm bemused that this is an issue at all.

Why does the EU think it needs to import US schlock fizzy wine, when they have so much fizzy dreck of their own?

As for Gallo, get with the programme, guys. Call your stuff US sparkling wine, or get out of the market.

End of discussion.

Or it ought to be . . .

-Paul W.
no avatar
User

Joe Moryl

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

982

Joined

Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:38 pm

Location

New Jersey, USA

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by Joe Moryl » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:55 pm

Oliver McCrum wrote:I was shocked to find that even Schramsberg have given up; for ages they were the only non-cheeseball winery to use the term 'Champagne' on their labels, and they fought it tooth and nail. (Now they say 'Methode Champenoise', which is illegal in Europe too, but they're improving.)


Actually, Chateau Frank, part of Dr. Frank's in the Finger Lakes, still insists on labeling their rather good methode champenoise sparklers "Champagne". Go visit their tasting room if you want to hear a load of BS as to why.
no avatar
User

Simon J

Rank

Wine geek

Posts

56

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:40 am

Location

Quebec City

Meanwhile in Quebec

by Simon J » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:34 am

Here in Quebec they do not destroy bottles because of the labeling, but they will not allow wine to be sold unless it has French on the label. I quite often find bottles with a white opaque sticker covering the information label on the 'back' of the bottle. I suppose the government sees this as the thin edge of the wedge; if they do not enforce the language and labeling on one product, then they will be flooded with producers who do not bother to translate anything.
The reality is that they are far more likely to enforce this against English labeling than any other language. :roll: I understand the idea though, since 'Quebec is a small island of French, surrounded by a sea of English'......or that is how the argument goes. It does seem trivial though.

Simon (dans la belle province)
no avatar
User

ClarkDGigHbr

Rank

Ultra geek

Posts

481

Joined

Sat May 06, 2006 7:16 pm

Location

Gig Harbor, WA

Re: It's war: Belgium destroys André "champagne"

by ClarkDGigHbr » Sat Jan 12, 2008 4:35 pm

I just had to forward this story to my wine drinking friends. One of them had a great response:

Pretty nice to think that for once, the lawyers and combined legislatures of a wide number of countries actually concocted a law that when followed, results in a lesser availability of badly made bubbly!


-- Clark
Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 0 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign