Tag Archives: Californa wine

Barefoot wine review 2016

Barefoot wine review 2016The Barefoot wine review 2016: an interesting pinot grigio and a pinot noir that isn’t very pinot noir-ish.

The Barefoot wine review 2016 goes a long way toward explaining why the market for wine that costs less than $10 has been eroding for a couple of years — save for Barefoot. These wines are professional and technically competent, but more importantly are made for specific groups who know what they like and will buy what they like.

The pinot grigio ($10, purchased, 12.5%) is more like pinot gris, with sort of soft lemon fruit and more acidity than I expected. This is not a tonic water pinot grigio like similarly priced Italian wines; instead, the Barefoot straddles the line between the two styles. It’s also sweet – not moscato or white zinfandel sweet, but with a touch of residual sugar that you’ll notice on the back of your tongue. There is lots of winemaking going on here, but the result is drinkable, especially if well chilled and of you don’t mind the sweetness. The pinot grigio is American appellation and non-vintage.

It’s not so much that the pinot noir ($10, purchased, 13.5%) doesn’t taste like pinot noir. You can say that about a lot of pinots that cost less than $25 and are made more like cheap red blends. Rather, my sense is that the goal was to make a wine that tastes like the kind of wine that people who don’t drink much wine think red wine should taste like. Yes, a complicated sentence, but it means that the pinot noir is a little rough and not smooth in the way many wine drinkers describe wine. Plus, the tannins are surprisingly noticeable and not well integrated, something that almost never happens with a Barefoot wine. The pinot noir is American appellation and non-vintage.

Finally, a word about the price of the wine, which was almost 50 percent higher than it should have been – $10 instead of $7. I bought both bottles at the same supermarket where I buy Barefoot every year for the review, and that was the price. Call it premiumization or grocery store pricing or whatever, but it means the wines are that much less of a value given the higher price.

More about Barefoot wine:
Barefoot wine review 2015
Barefoot wine review 2014
Barefoot: Almost the best-selling wine in the U.S.

Has all the value gone out of California wine?

California wine
Just don’t expect to find any value around $10.

Where has all the value gone in California wine?

The store employee, who knows his business, didn’t mince words. “You’re not going to find any value here,” he said, waving his arm at the store’s extensive California wine section. “That’s why I tell people to look at Spain and Italy for value. There isn’t any in California any more.”

The Wine Curmudgeon, who had just spent 15 minutes scouring the aisles in a vain attempt to find a $10 California wine to write about (or even a $12 or $15 wine, for that matter) was surprised to hear someone who sold wine say that. But I wasn’t surprised to hear it.

There has been value in wine, even in these dark days, almost everywhere in the world save for Bordeaux and Burgundy. You just had to keep looking. But I’m finding it harder and harder to find value in California. Instead, there are $17 high-alcohol zinfandels that all taste the same; $15 too fruity red blends with cute labels that all taste the same; $12 white wines wearing fake oak disguises that all taste the same; and too much wine costing less than $10 that tastes like it was made without any regard for quality — and that all tastes the same.

This doesn’t mean there isn’t quality, because California can produce the best wine in the world at any price. We know how I feel about Bogle. Rather, it’s that you almost never get more than you pay for anymore, and you rarely even get what you pay for.

How did this happen? Ten years ago, when I started the blog, value was common in California. and I wrote about those wines all the time. Since then, though:

Land prices have skyrocketed. Higher land prices mean more expensive wine, even if the quality of the grapes isn’t any better.

Consolidation, which has shifted producer focus from wine quality to wine marketing. This is the difference between “How much is this wine worth?” to “How much should we charge for this wine, given where it is in our portfolio?”

• Price increases, as producers make up for all the price increases they didn’t take during the last decade.

• Pricing based on styles. This is where a producer will charge more for a cheap wine made to mimic a more expensive wine, because the cheap wine will still be less expensive than the expensive wine. It just won’t be a value, but we’re not supposed to be smart enough to figure that out.

Of course, I’ll keep looking for value in California wine. But given all that has happened, I don’t expect to find much.

Wine of the week: Michel-Schlumberger Maison Rouge 2011

Michel-Schlumberger Maison Rouge One of the Wine Curmudgeon’s regular laments is that it’s much too difficult to find well-priced and interesting California wine, and especially red California wine. Which made me so happy to stumble on the Michel-Schlumberger Maison Rouge — litterally, since it was buried on a bottom shelf and I had get down on my knees to pick it up.

What makes the Maison Rouge ($14, purchased, 13.9%) so interesting? For one thing, it’s wonderfully stinky, with that barnyard aroma that the French do so well in the Rhone. For another, it’s a seven-grape blend where none dominate, each adding a little something to the mix. Who’d have thought carmenere would feel at home in a California red blend? Look for red fruit (cherry? raspberry?), some much welcome earthiness, and pinpoint tannins. If you’re looking for a house wine, this would be an excellent choice — nice on its own, but also fine with most red meat, roast chicken, and even hearty vegetables.

This is another of those all too infrequent wines that reminds us what California winemakers can do when they want balance, thoughtfulness, and style instead of power and alcohol. Highly recommended, and well worth the $14.