Forbes on Kobe Beef (and Champagne)

[Admiral Yi]

True Fact:  Bourbon does not legally have to originate from Kentucky.  But we all know the best stuff does.

I thought it was Bourbon county and I thought that was Kentucky only law.

[derspiess]

also, i feel weird and snooby arguing about wine lol. moreso given the fact that i really do dislike wine


and i think the whole world has. well, first world. Save the US (and canada?)

Snooby Snooby Doo!!!



Anyway, I don't consider myself to a wine snob, either.  As long as it meets certain basic requirements and is not White Zinfandel, I'm pretty lax.

I am a certified beer, whiskey, & cigar geek, however

[Caliga]

True Fact:  Bourbon does not legally have to originate from Kentucky.  But we all know the best stuff does.

I thought it was Bourbon county and I thought that was Kentucky only law.

Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey must be produced in Kentucky.

Believe it or not, there is no Bourbon at all produced in Bourbon County, Kentucky.  AFAIK the only counties that produce it are Franklin (Buffalo Trace, Four Roses), Anderson (Wild Turkey), Woodford (Woodford Reserve), Nelson (Maker's Mark, Heaven Hill), and Bullitt (Jim Beam  ).

[ulmont]

To the extent that "Champagne" is a product of a particular quality, that is protected by enforcing quality standards in production.

What enforcement powers do French vineyards have over American bottlers?

They would not - no more than they could (for example) enforce IP rights over the name "Champagne".

In all cases, the enforcement would have to be local. The US (or state, dunno who has jurisdiction) gov't would have to enforce either:

(1) A system whereby US bottlers were required to use only "sparkling wine" (which some here are advocating); or

(2) A system where US bottlers wishing to sell the same product had to (a) include country of origin on their labels and (b) meet certain bottling quality standards consistent with the description of the product "champagne" (which I am advocating).

French bottlers are out of the picture either way, unless you want a system whereby they are going around the world suing people for violating their IP - and even that would require that local laws be changed to allow for this.

Not really.  There are collective certification marks recognized in the US.  ROQUEFORT is registered, and COGNAC has been determined to have rights even though not registered as a certification mark.

[Admiral Yi]

Believe it or not, there is no Bourbon at all produced in Bourbon County, Kentucky.

My mind has been boggled.  You'd think someone would set up shop to take advantage of the marketing opportunities.

[Caliga]

I think it's called bourbon because Bourbon County used to be *huge*.  Woodford County used to be a part of it and that's where bourbon production actually started (where Woodford Reserve is today).  Sometime in the 19th century a lot of Kentucky's counties were subdivided.

I agree with you, though... it's kind of weird there isn't at least a small producer there.  I think bourbon country is completely redneck so they should be plenty of cheap labor handy.

[derspiess]

True Fact:  Bourbon does not legally have to originate from Kentucky.  But we all know the best stuff does.

I thought it was Bourbon county and I thought that was Kentucky only law.

ATF regs

[garbon]

But it's a goodwill of tradition and standards. Regional foods are held to a higher standard then any Tom, Dick and Harry vineyard. While logically most people know that not all champagne is champagne, people  don't work that way. Look at Garbon he knows he's drinking sparkling wine but is compelled to call it champagne so any bad experience he has with "champagne" he will associate with all champagne, both real and not. This diminishes the real stuff.

I don't equate Andre with champagne from Champagne even though I'll call both champagne.  Nor do I assume that because I bought some sparkling wine from Champagne that it'll be amazing.

iused you because you were the most vehement "champagne by any other name" person here. You may not, and i'll take you at your word, but i feel many consumers, perhaps the majority, would.

Well I certainly equate them all with the general experience I have drinking champagne as for the most part they all give me the same overall feeling. Now its true that I have different thoughts on sweet versus dry versions but that's why I check the label on for things like brut etc.  Even though Gloria Ferrar has its products labeled as sparkling wine that doesn't prevent me from equating them to the same class as those from Moet&Chandon as they are most similar for most of my purposes.  Now never at any point to I think I'm drinking champagne from Champagne when having some from California but that has little to do with the artificially created class names.

[garbon]

but the made in country x thing is usually small and hidden at the back of the label. it can be just as misleading. Champagne is not just a regon, it's also a method and stardard. How do you enforce that stanard. Right now i assume it's like port where it's internally enforced amongst all vineyards in that region. I can start a vineyard, take cheap wine and just carbonate it like pop i can sell it as champagne, but it isn't, not really. Making champange champagne only protects the customer more, in my view.


also, i feel weird and snooby arguing about wine lol. moreso given the fact that i really do dislike wine


and i think the whole world has. well, first world. Save the US (and canada?)

Most places I go to they typically split the wines by the places they are from./you can generally make it out from the label on the bottle.

I don't really understand this whole method thing as brands generally make statements about what their methods are and you can easily find that out. Why do I need the government involved in helping me find out about standards? I guess it would be awful if so & so listed they were doing x but weren't...but it seems to me that such info would eventually get out / if it really made a big difference, I wouldn't enjoy that product.

Now where I do think this is relevant is at times when the gov't decides what can be called cheese and what has to be cheese product etc.  That's important as that's about nutrition and a person might think they are getting some healthy cheese but are actually eating mostly plastic.

[The Minsky Moment]

  The fact that snobs weep tears of frustration at the thought of having to read the labels of the products they must purchase, just like the rest of us, makes me happy.

 
As a self-confessed snob, I found this comment amusing.  Because naturally given my resplendent and highly refined winesnobbines, I can easily identify champagne champagne from the fake stuff (which I hereby now designate as "garbagne"), and in any case would never think of purchasing any wine - sparkling or otherwise -  without carefully reading the label and reflecting on the marque, the designation of origin, vintage (if applicable) etc.  No self-respecting snob would do otherwise.

No: the victims here are the poor, benighted salt-of-the-earth non-snobs who just want to pick up some champagne for a special occassion but end up overpaying for some tank fermented garbagne with a bogus label.  It is only due to my carefully refined sense of noblesse oblige that I condescend to take up the mundane and tiresome task of criticizing such practices.

[garbon]

No: the victims here are the poor, benighted salt-of-the-earth non-snobs who just want to pick up some champagne for a special occassion but end up overpaying for some tank fermented garbagne with a bogus label.  It is only due to my carefully refined sense of noblesse oblige that I condescend to take up the mundane and tiresome task of criticizing such practices.

Do the non-snobs even care? A) They don't know better and B) already like the non-great stuff that they associate with being great...otherwise why would they be buying it?

[Jacob]

Do the non-snobs even care? A) They don't know better and B) already like the non-great stuff that they associate with being great...otherwise why would they be buying it?

Well, if we label things properly the non-snobs will have the opportunity to make the decision for themselves.

[The Minsky Moment]

My understanding is that all French Champagne which doesn't have an appellation d'origine controllee ("Grand Cru Bourgeois") is a blend of different year's harvests.

There is only one AOC designation for all of Champagne (for sparkling wines).  Within the AOC designated area there are a number of different vineyards which all have different ratings and are categorized as different "crus".  However, unlike say in Burgundy, the different crus don't carry their own separate AOC designations.  Both vintage wines (which have to be from a single year), and the non-vintage wines (which don't and typically aren't) are designated as AC Champagne.  If a sparkling wine doesn't qualify under the rules for AC Champagne, then it can't be called champagne in the EU even if all the juice comes from the delimited region.

[The Minsky Moment]

Do the non-snobs even care?

If they don't, they should, and good conscience does not permit me to allow such poor souls to remain mired in darkness and ignorance.

[Barrister]

I dunno Minsky - I've had some fine "champagnes" from Canada and Spain.