The Fragmentation of the Organic Wine

It seems there are professionals i the wine industry that believe that the solution to creating more acceptability of "sustainable", "organic" and "biodynamic" wines resides with: [a} the individual producers to market and sell their products to the consumer; [b} economies of scale; and [c} perceptions of how our actions affect the health of our planet and the health of the inhabitants of our planet.

However, I think there might be other issues summarized by the word "fragmentation".

There seems to be no global regulations for labeling products. It is the port of destination, not the point of origin that is the determinent. Therefore, a producers in the EU shipping wine to the USA would need to comply with US regulations. This, I believe, might preclude many small producers from labeling their products as "sustainable", "organic" or "biodynamic" because it is a costly and confusing process with little global conformity.

Misperceptions abound so I will address just one. My anecdotal research seems to indicate that US wine consumers gravitate to the "organic" wines because they perceive it is "sulphites" that give them headaches and believe "organic" wines do not have "sulphites". US consumers think the wines they drink in Europe do not contain "sulphites" because the bottles do not have the "warning label" they see on bottles in the US.

I realize there is no simple solution, however, I am beginning to think that the "wine industry" (including the "trade organizations") is so fragmented, so competitive, so highly regulated, so provincial, so protectionist, that the wine industry cannot speak with ONE voice. Each producer, importer, distributor, retailer, and trade organization is focused on their own sphere of influence so they cannot, or do not want to, focus on anything else.

I wonder what would happen if all of a sudden the industry, as a whole, realized that it could sell more wine, have a positive affect on the education policies and curriculum regarding alcohol consumption, and more, if they spoke in one voice. Could a "one voice" philosophy result in a severe reduction in the cost of producing and selling these eco-friendly and nutritionally healthy wines? I could be wrong, but it seems that "one voice" would reduce the confusion for the consumer and offer endless possibilities for the wine global wine industry.

What do you think?

Do Ratings Help or Hinder the Wine Consumer?

I believe Ratings help AND hinder the US wine consumer. The US seems to lack a significant "wine culture" and US consumers have been subjected to the 100 point exam scale since the 1st grade -- so ratings are a "familiar" method to judge any product.

Rating hinder the wine consumer because they preclude experimentation, sometime EXCLUDE producers that do not have the finances for "advertising" and generally discount and do not allude to variables such as food, occasion, personal preferences, etc. In addition, there is very vague explanations as to how the components are weighted in the rating.

For me, at the present time, ratings are just another "marketing" tool that drives the producer to make wine for the rating and not representative of their grapes and location. It seems that people who desire the wonderful individuality of wine from different regions suffer the consequences because many wines seem to taste the same.