Following up to Martin

    >>Maybe if Chirac had know that he wouldn't be so bitter.
    >The French don't know the meaning of bitter.

that's why Chirac ordered a lager with his lobster.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap
Photos of both "http://www.lawn-mower-man.co.uk"

Following up to Jim Ley

    >>>Maybe he is looking forward to sampling some of the British sparkling
    >>>wine which recently won top spot in a competition?
    >>Did you manage to find out which competition?
    >Best British sparkling wine wasn't it?

Breaky Bottom and suchlike are producing pretty good wines
nowadays, at a price.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap
Photos of both "http://www.lawn-mower-man.co.uk"

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:11:32 +0100, The Reids
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >Following up to The Rev Gaston
    >>> Jacques Chirac (Ã droite) avec Gerhard Schroder (Ã gauche) et Vladimir
    >>> Poutine à Kaliningrad dimanche (AP)
    >>Chirac is just being a silly child after his humiliation in the polls.
    >>Note that his fellow jesters are the leaders of Germany and Russia -
    >>neither noted for gastronomic excellence.
    >Indeed, I wonder if the Finn will vote for France to get the
    >Olympics?
    >>Maybe he is looking forward to sampling some of the British sparkling
    >>wine which recently won top spot in a competition?
    >we have the terroir and thanks to Bush we are slowly getting the
    >weather!

Don't forget that it was Britain that provided acid rain to northern
Europe and radioactive contamination of the Irish sea.
--
Martin

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:11:33 +0100, The Reids
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >Following up to Martin
    >>>Maybe if Chirac had know that he wouldn't be so bitter.
    >>The French don't know the meaning of bitter.
    >that's why Chirac ordered a lager with his lobster.

LOL, very good :-)
--
Martin

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:11:34 +0100, The Reids
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >Following up to Jim Ley
    >>>>Maybe he is looking forward to sampling some of the British sparkling
    >>>>wine which recently won top spot in a competition?
    >>>Did you manage to find out which competition?
    >>Best British sparkling wine wasn't it?
    >Breaky Bottom and suchlike are producing pretty good wines
    >nowadays, at a price.

It wasn't even the Best British sparkling wine, it won a bronze from
an organisation, where everybody wins a medal for something.
--
Martin

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:02:44 -0700, Go Fig <[email protected]> wrote:

    >In article <[email protected] .com>,
    >Jordi <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Go Fig wrote:
    >> > In article <[email protected] .com>,
    >>
    >> >
    >> > Sure they have a monopoly in a very small region, the rest of the
    >> > growers want these restrictions gone... so they can sell their
    >> > "champagne" on the world market based on quality and price.
    >> >
    >>
    >> But the rest of the growers are not, as per today, making champagne.
    >> The champagne producers are genuinely interested in keeping the statu
    >> quo as the relative scarcity of the champagne allows them to keep a
    >> margin wide enough so that the quality is kept consistent.
    >No, it is about protecting the monopoly, not about quality. The origin
    >of the law is protectionism.

It's about artificially making a product rare so that it can command
a high price.

    >>
    >> > Time will tell, but from the interview I saw on Lou Dobbs with a member
    >> > of a large French growers consortium... this was #1 on their hit list
    >> > and found it a major impediment to international sales.
    >> >
    >>
    >> Driving sales up will make the price go down, which will not be a good
    >> thing in the long run.
    >Employing new people in the champagne industry is good in the short and
    >long run, growers need to change supply based on demand.. not regions.
    >>
    >> It's plain simple, everyone will be able to make sparkling wine with
    >> any of the available methods, only some of them will be able to label
    >> their product 'champagne',
    >A protected class.
    >> the current producers will not allow any
    >> change. The French are very good at this.
    >and some want it to change immediately.
    >>
    >> It's not necessarily a bad thing, Spanish cava is at least as good as
    >> champagne, and has managed to get an international name on his own,
    >Ok, but that doesn't help the guy in France that wants to sell
    >champagne but resides in the wrong region.

If they all sell sparkling wine as champagne, champagne will fetch the
same price as any other plonk.
--
Martin

The Reids ha escrito:
    > Following up to Jordi
    > >> But Champagne is nothing but sparkling wine, that happens to be produced in
    > >> a certain specific area of France.
    > >
    > >Not exactly. Champagne is a very specific sparkling wine made under
    > >very restrictive standards, geography being only one of them.
    > Primarily it must be bottle fermented rather than artificially
    > gassed, other wines of course use this "method champonoise" but
    > dont have the same terroir.

Also it must be made only with three grape varieties, and things like
the fermentation time, the sugar content, the process of sediment
removal, etc. are all regulated.

The famous Lambrusco in Italy is artificially gassed, and this makes it
a cheaper but still decent wine.


J.

On 6 Jul 2005 01:01:13 -0700, "Jordi" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Go Fig ha escrito:
    >> No, it is about protecting the monopoly, not about quality. The origin
    >> of the law is protectionism.
    >It is, but one of the results is consistent quality. Lifting the rules
    >would result in the product losing value and the producers not being
    >able to keep with the costly methods they are using until today.

I think the suggestion that a huge number of vineyards in the world
aren't able to maintain quality is crazy, wine is massively a product
where quality is a key indicator of price, protectionism like this
named region stuff doesn't do anyone any good in the long term.

    >Employing new people is not good if you need X new employees for one
    >year and the next you have to fire them because the margin has dropped
    >down to an unacceptable level,

I'm sure there's plenty of Romanians, Bulgarians, and Turks who'd be
glad of the work given the chance.

    >and firing people is not a trivial issue
    >in France.

So because of crazy economic policies, some rich vineyard owners get
to be even richer?

    >> A protected class.
    >That their consumers appreciate as such.

we do?

Jim.

Jim Ley ha escrito:

    > >It is, but one of the results is consistent quality. Lifting the rules
    > >would result in the product losing value and the producers not being
    > >able to keep with the costly methods they are using until today.
    > I think the suggestion that a huge number of vineyards in the world
    > aren't able to maintain quality is crazy, wine is massively a product
    > where quality is a key indicator of price, protectionism like this
    > named region stuff doesn't do anyone any good in the long term.

Nobody is barring anyone from making good sparkling wine, just from
labelling it as champagne when it is not the case. I have already
provided a number of examples of other sparkling wines who have found a
place in the international market, directly competing with champagne.

OTOH, I've seen Romanian sparkling wines with 'methode champenoise'
clearly stated in the label, that is perfectly allowed.

    > >Employing new people is not good if you need X new employees for one
    > >year and the next you have to fire them because the margin has dropped
    > >down to an unacceptable level,
    > I'm sure there's plenty of Romanians, Bulgarians, and Turks who'd be
    > glad of the work given the chance.
    > >and firing people is not a trivial issue
    > >in France.
    > So because of crazy economic policies, some rich vineyard owners get
    > to be even richer?
    > >That their consumers appreciate as such.
    > we do?

I have only taken a couple glasses of champagne in my life. Lots of
cava, though. Those who buy champagne are implicitly accepting the
markup.


J.

On 7 Jul 2005 00:08:26 -0700, "Jordi" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Jim Ley ha escrito:
    >> >It is, but one of the results is consistent quality. Lifting the rules
    >> >would result in the product losing value and the producers not being
    >> >able to keep with the costly methods they are using until today.
    >> I think the suggestion that a huge number of vineyards in the world
    >> aren't able to maintain quality is crazy, wine is massively a product
    >> where quality is a key indicator of price, protectionism like this
    >> named region stuff doesn't do anyone any good in the long term.
    >Nobody is barring anyone from making good sparkling wine, just from
    >labelling it as champagne when it is not the case.

I didn't say you were, you were arguing in what I quoted above, that
they had to keep their protection of the name, because it was the only
way they could maintain quality, as you're now conceding that is
clearly rubbish as lots of other vineyards maintain high quality
without the protectionism.

Jim.

Jim Ley ha escrito:
    > I didn't say you were, you were arguing in what I quoted above, that
    > they had to keep their protection of the name, because it was the only
    > way they could maintain quality, as you're now conceding that is
    > clearly rubbish as lots of other vineyards maintain high quality
    > without the protectionism.

Without the protection measures low-cost and low-quality alternatives
would make the price and average quality go down sharply, specially in
the export markets.

The most expensive and well-known brands would still keep their share,
but the smaller ones would see their product sales closing to zero,
their place taken by low-cost alternatives with similar labels.

Anyway, it seems you missed some of the conversation, as Go Fig's point
was that lifting champagne's AdO restrictions would be good on the
whole while mine was that, first, Champagne AdO helps keep champagne in
good quality standards and, second, other people are making excellent
wines with no need to put a false label on them.


J.

In article <BEEF1674.6EB0A%[email protected]>,
Earl Evleth <[email protected]> wrote:

    > "La seule chose qu'ils ont faite pour l'agriculture européenne, c'est la
    > vache folle", a affirmé le président à Kaliningrad dimanche, en présence
    > Vladimir Poutine et Gerhard Schroder.
    >
    > *
    > Jacques Chirac (Ã droite) avec Gerhard Schroder (Ã gauche) et Vladimir
    > Poutine à Kaliningrad dimanche (AP)
    > *

Did they understand him directly or did some poor translator have to
relate these comments?

Imagine a translator pausing and Chirac telling her to go on.

Jordi wrote:
    >
    > Go Fig ha escrito:
    >
    >>In article <[email protected] .com>,
    >>Jordi <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>Miss L. Toe ha escrito:
    >>>>But Champagne is nothing but sparkling wine, that happens to be produced in
    >>>>a certain specific area of France.
    >>>Not exactly. Champagne is a very specific sparkling wine made under
    >>>very restrictive standards, geography being only one of them.
    >>All of which many of the grower's would like removed, so they can be
    >>more competitive in a world market that is not familiar with french
    >>terminology.
    >
    >
    > Absolutely wrong, they want them to be as restrictive as possible so
    > that wine from nearby regions can't be called 'champagne'.
For this reason you can find some very good sparkling wines from other
regions Bugey, Loire Valley. For example Montagnieu, Cerdon, Bugey brut.

http://www.vinsdubugey.net/anglais/caveau.htm
    >
    > When it comes to wine, French terminology is the standard (so that you
    > find pinot, chardonnay or cavernet-sauvignon grapes in wines from
    > California to South Africa and from Romania to Chile).
    >
    >
    > J.
    >