Go away for two days and miss the flame war of the year! 1 question
comes to mind,
1. Who doesn;t want their product to be protected from manipulaiton by
others? Idaho Potatoes anyone, or as mentioned Florida Oranges.

I remember my first glass of real champagne. I was at a local wine shop
and walked by a table. "Champagne? No, thanks."

"Why not?"

"You have to be kidding, it is nasty."

"Have you ever had Champagne from France?"

"No"

"Try some of this."

It had body, it had depth of character, and even the fizz tasted good.
It was Taitinger and ever since I have a special place for Taitinger.
there may be "better" but it was my first.

One of my first wine experiences was Hearty Burgundy a product which I
trust has fallen away due to lable laws if not because itwas an afront
to poor taste along with "Chablis" that sweet sticky product taht was to
wine as Yugos were to automobiles.

Of course they poured the "wine" down the drain, Why not? and Bravo.
--
Joseph Coulter, cruises and vacations
www.josephcoulter.com

877 832 2021
904 631 8863 cell

Hi Joseph C,

I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was going on.

Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is that it is
fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to protect their region's
name. Truth-in-labeling and all that.
However, the only people likely to order Andre Cali Champagne are
those who either have no experience with wine in general, or don't
have much money to spend. The French sparklers are certainly several
notches higher than that mass-market stuff, but they come at a price
that wine newbies might be unwilling to pay.

Just my tuppence.

Dan-O

Dan wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):

DtM> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
DtM> going on.

DtM> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is
DtM> that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to
DtM> protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling and all
DtM> that.

True enough in that there is certainly commercial advantage for
the makers of "Champagne" and I can understand their motives.
However, as I think Ed Rasimus implied, limiting competition
makes life easier for them especially if they are allowed to
adjust appellation boundaries for their own convenience.

I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
(truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
Domaine Chandon in California?

Competition on quality can lead to improvement and it is
interesting to see transatlantic competition. Something that
might excite Belgian nationalists a little is that wheat beer
imported from Belgium, like Hoegarden (spelling?), does not seem
any better to me than Blue Moon, made in Texas at one time and
now Canada, I believe.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"James Silverton" > wrote in
news:bPNij.5574$KU.719@trnddc01:

> I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> Domaine Chandon in California?

You should have stopped by at the Publix store in my neighborhood just
before New Year's! Tasted both Chandon and Moet White Star. White Star
was much more interesting while the Brut from Chandon hit with bigger
fizz and little substance. The White Star was a tad less dry than the
brut, but had more in the way of nuance. More fruit with complexity.
Chandon was nice for the money (16US vs. 30US for the Moet) but for a
once a year purchase I would go the extra for champagne.

I have also compared Mumm to Mumm Napa. I think in my experience that
Mumm does a better job with its California product especially in its
upper end.

--
Joseph Coulter, cruises and vacations
www.josephcoulter.com

877 832 2021
904 631 8863 cell

On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
>
> �DtM> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> �DtM> going on.
>
> �DtM> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is
> �DtM> that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to
> �DtM> protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling and all
> �DtM> that.
>
> True enough in that there is certainly commercial advantage for
> the makers of "Champagne" and I can understand their motives.
> However, as I think Ed Rasimus implied, limiting competition
> makes life easier for them especially if they are allowed to
> adjust appellation boundaries �for their own convenience.
>
> I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> Competition on quality can lead to improvement and it is
> interesting to see transatlantic competition. Something that
> might excite Belgian nationalists a little is that wheat beer
> imported from Belgium, like Hoegarden (spelling?), does not seem
> any better to me than Blue Moon, made in Texas at one time and
> now Canada, I believe.
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Blue Moon is brewed by Molson in Canada and is imported into the US by
Coors. While I've never had Hoegarden I don't think that Blue Moon
tastes much like real Belgium wheat beer.

On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
>
> �DtM> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> �DtM> going on.
>
> �DtM> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is
> �DtM> that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to
> �DtM> protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling and all
> �DtM> that.
>
> True enough in that there is certainly commercial advantage for
> the makers of "Champagne" and I can understand their motives.
> However, as I think Ed Rasimus implied, limiting competition
> makes life easier for them especially if they are allowed to
> adjust appellation boundaries �for their own convenience.
>
> I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> Competition on quality can lead to improvement and it is
> interesting to see transatlantic competition. Something that
> might excite Belgian nationalists a little is that wheat beer
> imported from Belgium, like Hoegarden (spelling?), does not seem
> any better to me than Blue Moon, made in Texas at one time and
> now Canada, I believe.
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested that Gallo
can't make and sell Andre. The problem is labelling it "Champagne",
when it is made many thousands of miles away from Champagne. To me
it's immaterial whether you prefer Andre or Krug, I just think
stealing another's reputation is
tacky.

I've loved local proscuittos- just don't call it Proscuitto di Parma.
Smithfield hams are from VA/NC. Fiji water is from Fiji (vile stuff
imo). Tomme de Savioe is from the Savoie. Florida oranges are from
Florida. Make or grow the best damn ham, water, cheese, or fruit you
can, just don't market it using someone else's reputation. Build your
own- that's competition.

The Champagne expansion proposal is apparently to include properties
that historically produced Champagne in the 19th century, until the
codification after WWI. All the areas are within the Champagne
administrative district. In any case, if they expand and it hurts the
quality, it is their decision, as opposed to others deciding what to
market as "Champagne."

Joseph Coulter wrote:
> "James Silverton" > wrote in
> news:bPNij.5574$KU.719@trnddc01:
>
>> I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
>> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
>> wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
>> Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> You should have stopped by at the Publix store in my neighborhood just
> before New Year's! Tasted both Chandon and Moet White Star. White Star
> was much more interesting while the Brut from Chandon hit with bigger
> fizz and little substance. The White Star was a tad less dry than the
> brut, but had more in the way of nuance. More fruit with complexity.
> Chandon was nice for the money (16US vs. 30US for the Moet) but for a
> once a year purchase I would go the extra for champagne.

I can't really get excited about either wine, as I find them both rather
commercial and bland for their type (I am not much of a fan of many
Grande Marque Champagnes, though, probably because I'm too much of a
cheapskate ;-)). For my money, I'd take Gruet or Roederer over Chandon
US and Jacquesson or Pierre Peters over White Star. (or even Taittinger
for a true Grande Marque wine)

>
> I have also compared Mumm to Mumm Napa. I think in my experience that
> Mumm does a better job with its California product especially in its
> upper end.

I'd agree. Mumm's Champagne I find rather crude, whereas Mumm Cuvée
Napa makes very decent New World sparklers, especially their Blanc de Noirs.

Mark Lipton



--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

DaleW wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:17:21 -0800 (PST):

D> On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton"
D> > wrote:
??>> �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
??>>
�DtM>>> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
�DtM>>> going on.
??>>
�DtM>>> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take
�DtM>>> is that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to
�DtM>>> want to protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling
�DtM>>> and all that.
??>>
??>> True enough in that there is certainly commercial
??>> advantage for the makers of "Champagne" and I can
??>> understand their motives. ??>> I have not had the
opportunity to make enough comparisons
??>> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented
??>> sparkling wine made by Chandon in France much better than
??>> that made by Domaine Chandon in California?

D> But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested
D> that Gallo can't make and sell Andre. The problem is
D> labelling it "Champagne", when it is made many thousands of
D> miles away from Champagne. To me it's immaterial whether you
D> prefer Andre or Krug, I just think stealing another's
D> reputation is tacky.

Would you consider that Domaine Chandon would be "stealing
another's reputation" if they labeled their own California wine
as "California Champagne"? IMHO, the California wine is pretty
good!

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Jan 14, 2:30Â*pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> Â*DaleW Â*wrote Â*on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:17:21 -0800 (PST):
>
> Â*D> On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton"Â*D> > wrote:
>
> Â*??>> �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
> Â*??>>
> Â*�DtM>>> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> Â*�DtM>>> going on.
> Â*??>>
> Â*�DtM>>> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take
> Â*�DtM>>> is that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to
> Â*�DtM>>> want to protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling
> Â*�DtM>>> and all that.
> Â*??>>
> Â*??>> True enough in that there is certainly commercial
> Â*??>> advantage for the makers of "Champagne" and I can
> Â*??>> understand their motives. Â*??>> I have not had the
> opportunity to make enough comparisons
> Â*??>> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented
> Â*??>> sparkling wine made by Chandon in France much better than
> Â*??>> that made by Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> Â*D> But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested
> Â*D> that Gallo can't make and sell Andre. The problem is
> Â*D> labelling it "Champagne", when it is made many thousands of
> Â*D> miles away from Champagne. To me it's immaterial whether you
> Â*D> prefer Andre or Krug, I just think stealing another's
> Â*D> reputation is tacky.
>
> Would you consider that Domaine Chandon would be "stealing
> another's reputation" if they labeled their own California wine
> as "California Champagne"? Â*IMHO, the California wine is pretty
> good!
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Yes, I would. Who produces it doesn't suddenly change 5000+ miles of
distance. Banfi can't start growing red grapes near their LI
headquarters and call it Brunello di Montalcino just because they own
a wine in Tuscany.

Unlike Mark, I actually did think the Domaine Chandon sparkler
(regular Brut NV) was pretty good for the price the last time I tried
it.

James, see how the state of California would act in France sent boatloads of
Oranges from Martinique to California Labeled, California Oranges from
Martinique.


"James Silverton" > wrote in message
newsLOij.4258$Y63.197@trnddc03...
> DaleW wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:17:21 -0800 (PST):
>
> D> On Jan 14, 1:26?pm, "James Silverton"
> D> > wrote:
> ??>> ?Dan ?wrote ?on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
> ??>>
> ?DtM>>> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> ?DtM>>> going on.
> ??>>
> ?DtM>>> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take
> ?DtM>>> is that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to
> ?DtM>>> want to protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling
> ?DtM>>> and all that.
> ??>>
> ??>> True enough in that there is certainly commercial
> ??>> advantage for the makers of "Champagne" and I can
> ??>> understand their motives. ??>> I have not had the opportunity to
> make enough comparisons
> ??>> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented
> ??>> sparkling wine made by Chandon in France much better than
> ??>> that made by Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> D> But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested
> D> that Gallo can't make and sell Andre. The problem is
> D> labelling it "Champagne", when it is made many thousands of
> D> miles away from Champagne. To me it's immaterial whether you
> D> prefer Andre or Krug, I just think stealing another's
> D> reputation is tacky.
>
> Would you consider that Domaine Chandon would be "stealing another's
> reputation" if they labeled their own California wine as "California
> Champagne"? IMHO, the California wine is pretty good!
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"Richard Neidich" > wrote in message
...
> James, see how the state of California would act in France
> sent boatloads of Oranges from Martinique to California
> Labeled, California Oranges from Martinique.


An interesting speculation and I'm sure the indignation in
California would be monumental! However, speaking in
generalities, who, apart possibly from the growers, would
necessarily be harmed?



--
Jim Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

DaleW wrote:

> Unlike Mark, I actually did think the Domaine Chandon sparkler
> (regular Brut NV) was pretty good for the price the last time I tried
> it.

Dale, have you tried the most recent edition? I had the most recent
Chandon Brut and was seriously underwhelmed by it. I've liked it in the
past, but this one just seemed flat and uninteresting to me.

Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

On Jan 14, 2:17Â*pm, DaleW > wrote:
> On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
>
> > �DtM> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> > �DtM> going on.
>
> > �DtM> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is
> > �DtM> that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to
> > �DtM> protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling and all
> > �DtM> that.
>
> > True enough in that there is certainly commercial advantage for
> > the makers of "Champagne" and I can understand their motives.
> > However, as I think Ed Rasimus implied, limiting competition
> > makes life easier for them especially if they are allowed to
> > adjust appellation boundaries �for their own convenience.
>
> > I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> > (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> > wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> > Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> > Competition on quality can lead to improvement and it is
> > interesting to see transatlantic competition. Something that
> > might excite Belgian nationalists a little is that wheat beer
> > imported from Belgium, like Hoegarden (spelling?), does not seem
> > any better to me than Blue Moon, made in Texas at one time and
> > now Canada, I believe.
>
> > James Silverton
> > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> > not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
>
> But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested that Gallo
> can't make and sell Andre. The problem is labelling it "Champagne",
> when it is made many thousands of miles away from Champagne. To me
> it's immaterial whether you prefer Andre or Krug, I just think
> stealing another's reputation is
> tacky.
>
> I've loved local proscuittos- just don't call it Proscuitto di Parma.
> Smithfield hams are from VA/NC. Fiji water is from Fiji (vile stuff
> imo). Tomme de Savioe is from the Savoie. Florida oranges are from
> Florida. Make or grow Â*the best damn ham, water, cheese, or fruit you
> can, just don't market it using someone else's reputation. Build your
> own- that's competition.
>
> The Champagne expansion proposal is apparently to include properties
> that historically produced Champagne Â*in the 19th century, until the
> codification after WWI. All the areas are within the Champagne
> administrative district. In any case, if they expand and it hurts the
> quality, it is their decision, as opposed to others deciding what to
> market as "Champagne."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I understand your point Dale but I honestly don't believe that anyone
with a brain in their head would confuse $4.00 Andre with real
champagne and if they don't have a brain in their head it wouldn't
matter anyway. My guess is that Andre has been around for more than
40 years now and most likely uses the "Champagne" label as a
discriptor of the style (sparkling) than anything else. I have a hard
time imagining someone looking for Champagne and buying Andre at $4.00
versus $40.00 for real Champagne wouldn't know the difference in
quality or for that matter care. Is a Honda made in Marysville, Ohio
an American car or a Japanese car? On the other hand is a Ford made
in Canada with Mexican parts an American car or a Canadian car or a
Mexican car? I think that the marketing would lead you to believe
that the Honda is Japanese and the Ford is American when in reality
neither is what it appears to be but the buying public really doesn't
care.

On Jan 14, 2:52�pm, Mark Lipton > wrote:
> DaleW wrote:
> > Unlike Mark, I actually did think the Domaine Chandon sparkler
> > (regular Brut NV) was pretty good for the price the last time I tried
> > it.
>
> Dale, have you tried the most recent edition? �I had the most recent
> Chandon Brut and was seriously underwhelmed by it. �I've liked it in the
> past, but this one just seemed flat and uninteresting to me.
>
> Mark Lipton
>
> --
> alt.food.wine FAQ: �http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

No, it has been at least 3-4 years since I've tried.

On Jan 14, 2:55Â*pm, "Bi!!" > wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2:17Â*pm, DaleW > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton" >
> > wrote:
>
> > > �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
>
> > > �DtM> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> > > �DtM> going on.
>
> > > �DtM> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is
> > > �DtM> that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to
> > > �DtM> protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling and all
> > > �DtM> that.
>
> > > True enough in that there is certainly commercial advantage for
> > > the makers of "Champagne" and I can understand their motives.
> > > However, as I think Ed Rasimus implied, limiting competition
> > > makes life easier for them especially if they are allowed to
> > > adjust appellation boundaries �for their own convenience.
>
> > > I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> > > (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> > > wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> > > Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> > > Competition on quality can lead to improvement and it is
> > > interesting to see transatlantic competition. Something that
> > > might excite Belgian nationalists a little is that wheat beer
> > > imported from Belgium, like Hoegarden (spelling?), does not seem
> > > any better to me than Blue Moon, made in Texas at one time and
> > > now Canada, I believe.
>
> > > James Silverton
> > > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > > E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> > > not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
>
> > But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested that Gallo
> > can't make and sell Andre. The problem is labelling it "Champagne",
> > when it is made many thousands of miles away from Champagne. To me
> > it's immaterial whether you prefer Andre or Krug, I just think
> > stealing another's reputation is
> > tacky.
>
> > I've loved local proscuittos- just don't call it Proscuitto di Parma.
> > Smithfield hams are from VA/NC. Fiji water is from Fiji (vile stuff
> > imo). Tomme de Savioe is from the Savoie. Florida oranges are from
> > Florida. Make or grow Â*the best damn ham, water, cheese, or fruit you
> > can, just don't market it using someone else's reputation. Build your
> > own- that's competition.
>
> > The Champagne expansion proposal is apparently to include properties
> > that historically produced Champagne Â*in the 19th century, until the
> > codification after WWI. All the areas are within the Champagne
> > administrative district. In any case, if they expand and it hurts the
> > quality, it is their decision, as opposed to others deciding what to
> > market as "Champagne."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I understand your point Dale but I honestly don't believe that anyone
> with a brain in their head would confuse $4.00 Andre with real
> champagne and if they don't have a brain in their head it wouldn't
> matter anyway. Â*My guess is that Andre has been around for more than
> 40 years now and most likely uses the "Champagne" label as a
> discriptor of the style (sparkling) than anything else. Â*I have a hard
> time imagining someone looking for Champagne and buying Andre at $4.00
> versus $40.00 for real Champagne wouldn't know the difference in
> quality or for that matter care. Is a Honda made in Marysville, Ohio
> an American car or a Japanese car? Â*On the other hand is a Ford made
> in Canada with Mexican parts an American car or a Canadian car or a
> Mexican car? Â*I think that the marketing would lead you to believe
> that the Honda is Japanese and the Ford is American when in reality
> neither is what it appears to be but the buying public really doesn't
> care.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm not arguing that in the short run Andre is taking away sales from
Champagne, nor am I viewing it mainly as a consumer protection issue,
The damage is to the reputation over long term, as people associate it
with cheap dreck. On a related note (did I already post this here?),
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.

On Jan 14, 2:55�pm, "Bi!!" > wrote:
>
> . �I have a hard
> time imagining someone looking for Champagne and buying Andre at $4.00
> versus $40.00 for real Champagne wouldn't know the difference in
> quality or for that matter care.


Continuing that thought, if someone starting marketing a $4 Central
Valley PN called "Serene" I don't think anyone would really get
confused with Domaine Serene at $40. Domaine Serene would not lose any
sales. But I'd bet a WHOLE lot of money they wouldn't just say "no big
deal."

On Jan 14, 3:06Â*pm, DaleW > wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2:55Â*pm, "Bi!!" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 14, 2:17Â*pm, DaleW > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton" >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
>
> > > > �DtM> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> > > > �DtM> going on.
>
> > > > �DtM> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is
> > > > �DtM> that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to
> > > > �DtM> protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling and all
> > > > �DtM> that.
>
> > > > True enough in that there is certainly commercial advantage for
> > > > the makers of "Champagne" and I can understand their motives.
> > > > However, as I think Ed Rasimus implied, limiting competition
> > > > makes life easier for them especially if they are allowed to
> > > > adjust appellation boundaries �for their own convenience.
>
> > > > I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> > > > (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> > > > wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> > > > Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> > > > Competition on quality can lead to improvement and it is
> > > > interesting to see transatlantic competition. Something that
> > > > might excite Belgian nationalists a little is that wheat beer
> > > > imported from Belgium, like Hoegarden (spelling?), does not seem
> > > > any better to me than Blue Moon, made in Texas at one time and
> > > > now Canada, I believe.
>
> > > > James Silverton
> > > > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > > > E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> > > > not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
>
> > > But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested that Gallo
> > > can't make and sell Andre. The problem is labelling it "Champagne",
> > > when it is made many thousands of miles away from Champagne. To me
> > > it's immaterial whether you prefer Andre or Krug, I just think
> > > stealing another's reputation is
> > > tacky.
>
> > > I've loved local proscuittos- just don't call it Proscuitto di Parma.
> > > Smithfield hams are from VA/NC. Fiji water is from Fiji (vile stuff
> > > imo). Tomme de Savioe is from the Savoie. Florida oranges are from
> > > Florida. Make or grow Â*the best damn ham, water, cheese, or fruit you
> > > can, just don't market it using someone else's reputation. Build your
> > > own- that's competition.
>
> > > The Champagne expansion proposal is apparently to include properties
> > > that historically produced Champagne Â*in the 19th century, until the
> > > codification after WWI. All the areas are within the Champagne
> > > administrative district. In any case, if they expand and it hurts the
> > > quality, it is their decision, as opposed to others deciding what to
> > > market as "Champagne."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I understand your point Dale but I honestly don't believe that anyone
> > with a brain in their head would confuse $4.00 Andre with real
> > champagne and if they don't have a brain in their head it wouldn't
> > matter anyway. Â*My guess is that Andre has been around for more than
> > 40 years now and most likely uses the "Champagne" label as a
> > discriptor of the style (sparkling) than anything else. Â*I have a hard
> > time imagining someone looking for Champagne and buying Andre at $4.00
> > versus $40.00 for real Champagne wouldn't know the difference in
> > quality or for that matter care. Is a Honda made in Marysville, Ohio
> > an American car or a Japanese car? Â*On the other hand is a Ford made
> > in Canada with Mexican parts an American car or a Canadian car or a
> > Mexican car? Â*I think that the marketing would lead you to believe
> > that the Honda is Japanese and the Ford is American when in reality
> > neither is what it appears to be but the buying public really doesn't
> > care.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I'm not arguing that in the short run Andre is taking away sales from
> Champagne, nor am I viewing it mainly as a consumer protection issue,
> The damage is to the reputation over long term, as people associate it
> with cheap dreck. On a related note (did I already post this here?),
> 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You may well have a valid point. I did a little research and found
this interesting article which gives credence to your position and I
remain as always your humble servant! :-)
http://www.chablis.net/bivb/usurpang.html

On Jan 14, 2:23�pm, Mark Lipton > wrote:
> Joseph Coulter wrote:
> > "James Silverton" > wrote in
> >news:bPNij.5574$KU.719@trnddc01:
>
> >> I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> >> (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> >> wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> >> Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> > You should have stopped by at the Publix store in my neighborhood just
> > before New Year's! Tasted both Chandon and Moet White Star. White Star
> > was much more interesting while the Brut from Chandon hit with bigger
> > fizz and little substance. The White Star was a tad less dry than the
> > brut, but had more in the way of nuance. More fruit with complexity.
> > Chandon was nice for the money (16US vs. 30US for the Moet) but for a
> > once a year purchase I would go the extra for champagne.
>
> I can't really get excited about either wine, as I find them both rather
> commercial and bland for their type (I am not much of a fan of many
> Grande Marque Champagnes, though, probably because I'm too much of a
> cheapskate ;-)). �For my money, I'd take Gruet or Roederer over Chandon
> US and Jacquesson or Pierre Peters over White Star. (or even Taittinger
> for a true Grande Marque wine)
>
>
>
> > I have also compared Mumm to Mumm Napa. I think in my experience that
> > Mumm does a better job with its California product especially in its
> > upper end.
>
> I'd agree. �Mumm's Champagne I find rather crude, whereas Mumm Cuv�e
> Napa makes very decent New World sparklers, especially their Blanc de Noirs.
>
> Mark Lipton
>
> --
> alt.food.wine FAQ: �http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

couple more thoughts:

I am a big fan of Pierre Peters, and often Jacquesson. But after a
period where I always thought grower Champagnes were better, I've
begun to reconsider. Sure, some Grand Marque NVs are often pretty
awful (Veuve-Cliquot, Ayala, Lanson, etc). But then there is Billecart-
Salmon, Laurent-Perrier, Pol Roger. All of whom I like. And on the top
end wines like Taittinger Comtes, Billecart "Cuvee Elizabeth" rose,
Salon are pretty damn special. For years I said Dom couldn't be that
great, because it is made in such big quantities. But have to admit a
recent 1985 was one of the best bubblies I ever had.

And some grower Champagnes are lame.

I personally think there is no inherent reason that a New World winery
couldn't make a wine as good or better than any Champagne. I just
think they should concentrate on the quality, and build their
reputation.

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:30:28 GMT, "James Silverton"
> wrote:

> DaleW wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:17:21 -0800 (PST):

> Would you consider that Domaine Chandon would be "stealing
> another's reputation" if they labeled their own California wine
> as "California Champagne"? IMHO, the California wine is pretty
> good!


I'm not Dale, but I would consider it that.

I agree that their California wine is pretty good, but I think that's
beside the point. It's *not* champagne, and using the champagne name
confuses the unsophisticated customer, and can lead him to believe
that it's the same product, just made somewhere else. If he can get
champagne from either France or California, and the California stuff
is cheaper, why not take advantage of the savings and buy the stuff
from California, since it's the same thing? That's inherently
dishonest, whenever you use a place name to describe a product that
wasn't made there, whether it's wine, cheese, or anything else.

--
Ken Blake
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

On Jan 14, 3:21Â*pm, "Bi!!" > wrote:
> On Jan 14, 3:06Â*pm, DaleW > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 14, 2:55Â*pm, "Bi!!" > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 14, 2:17Â*pm, DaleW > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 14, 1:26�pm, "James Silverton" >
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > �Dan �wrote �on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:36:16 -0800 (PST):
>
> > > > > �DtM> I was also "offline" while all of this excitement was
> > > > > �DtM> going on.
>
> > > > > �DtM> Having just read the whole "Belgium..." thread, my take is
> > > > > �DtM> that it is fair for the "real" Champagne folks to want to
> > > > > �DtM> protect their region's name. Truth-in-labeling and all
> > > > > �DtM> that.
>
> > > > > True enough in that there is certainly commercial advantage for
> > > > > the makers of "Champagne" and I can understand their motives.
> > > > > However, as I think Ed Rasimus implied, limiting competition
> > > > > makes life easier for them especially if they are allowed to
> > > > > adjust appellation boundaries �for their own convenience.
>
> > > > > I have not had the opportunity to make enough comparisons
> > > > > (truth: too expensive!) but is the bottle-fermented sparkling
> > > > > wine made by Chandon in France much better than that made by
> > > > > Domaine Chandon in California?
>
> > > > > Competition on quality can lead to improvement and it is
> > > > > interesting to see transatlantic competition. Something that
> > > > > might excite Belgian nationalists a little is that wheat beer
> > > > > imported from Belgium, like Hoegarden (spelling?), does not seem
> > > > > any better to me than Blue Moon, made in Texas at one time and
> > > > > now Canada, I believe.
>
> > > > > James Silverton
> > > > > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > > > > E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> > > > > not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
>
> > > > But who has tried to stop competition? No one has suggested that Gallo
> > > > can't make and sell Andre. The problem is labelling it "Champagne",
> > > > when it is made many thousands of miles away from Champagne. To me
> > > > it's immaterial whether you prefer Andre or Krug, I just think
> > > > stealing another's reputation is
> > > > tacky.
>
> > > > I've loved local proscuittos- just don't call it Proscuitto di Parma..
> > > > Smithfield hams are from VA/NC. Fiji water is from Fiji (vile stuff
> > > > imo). Tomme de Savioe is from the Savoie. Florida oranges are from
> > > > Florida. Make or grow Â*the best damn ham, water, cheese, or fruit you
> > > > can, just don't market it using someone else's reputation. Build your
> > > > own- that's competition.
>
> > > > The Champagne expansion proposal is apparently to include properties
> > > > that historically produced Champagne Â*in the 19th century, until the
> > > > codification after WWI. All the areas are within the Champagne
> > > > administrative district. In any case, if they expand and it hurts the
> > > > quality, it is their decision, as opposed to others deciding what to
> > > > market as "Champagne."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > I understand your point Dale but I honestly don't believe that anyone
> > > with a brain in their head would confuse $4.00 Andre with real
> > > champagne and if they don't have a brain in their head it wouldn't
> > > matter anyway. Â*My guess is that Andre has been around for more than
> > > 40 years now and most likely uses the "Champagne" label as a
> > > discriptor of the style (sparkling) than anything else. Â*I have a hard
> > > time imagining someone looking for Champagne and buying Andre at $4.00
> > > versus $40.00 for real Champagne wouldn't know the difference in
> > > quality or for that matter care. Is a Honda made in Marysville, Ohio
> > > an American car or a Japanese car? Â*On the other hand is a Ford made
> > > in Canada with Mexican parts an American car or a Canadian car or a
> > > Mexican car? Â*I think that the marketing would lead you to believe
> > > that the Honda is Japanese and the Ford is American when in reality
> > > neither is what it appears to be but the buying public really doesn't
> > > care.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I'm not arguing that in the short run Andre is taking away sales from
> > Champagne, nor am I viewing it mainly as a consumer protection issue,
> > The damage is to the reputation over long term, as people associate it
> > with cheap dreck. On a related note (did I already post this here?),
> > 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> You may well have a valid point. Â*I did a little research and found
> this interesting article which gives credence to your position and I
> remain as always your humble servant! :-)http://www.chablis.net/bivb/usurpang.html- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I was scared at first (MBA-speak!), but for Ernst and Young that was
fairly comprehensible. '
What is wrong with this sentence:
"The grape varieties employed in its production have a low qualitative
potential (Thomas seedless, hybrids, Chenin Blanc, Ugni Blanc)"

> Would you consider that Domaine Chandon would be "stealing another's reputation" if they labeled their own California wine as "California Champagne"?

Well, sorta. They are stealing a word (which is used pretty much like a trademark would be) and making it mean something else, to the detriment of champagne producers from Champagne.

Would you say the same about Upstart Toys marketing an "Upstart Yoyo"?

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

OK, in the USA we have trademark laws that the holder of the trademark has
to protect or they lose that trademark.

Here are examples of some that have been challanged because they started at
somepoint to appear to be Generic and not forced:

Kleenex is a brand of tissue but people would say, pass a Kleenex.
Kleenex has a responsibility to keep that trademark and keep their brand
from decling and becoming Generic.

Another big was Band-Aid vs Adhesive Bandage.

Companies have to defend their trademark brands or lose them if challange
during a time period usually just a few years.

The only reason that Champaigne was not an issue years ago, is we did not
sign a treaty cause we are in Prohibition so we can get away without it
legally and the were able to use Champaigne on the label for Domestic
product.

That being said, they deserve the respect of at least history trademark laws
for our domestic goods.

No one is saying they cannot make the product with the same method, its not
a patented process, but it is an non recognized International Trademark
naming.

I simply think this is a cultural issue since so much of Europe is
Geographically based for their naming.

Also, descriptive trademarks are the hardest to defend. ie, chocholate with
caramel and peanuts is a hard trademark to defend than say, Snickers Candy
Bar is.

End of story





"James Silverton" > wrote in message
news:n3Pij.4261$Y63.410@trnddc03...
> "Richard Neidich" > wrote in message
> ...
>> James, see how the state of California would act in France sent boatloads
>> of Oranges from Martinique to California Labeled, California Oranges from
>> Martinique.
>
>
> An interesting speculation and I'm sure the indignation in California
> would be monumental! However, speaking in generalities, who, apart
> possibly from the growers, would necessarily be harmed?
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland

Richard wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:08 -0500:

RN> Companies have to defend their trademark brands or lose
RN> them if challange during a time period usually just a few
RN> years.

Fine, I would acknowledge that "Domaine Chandon" is a trade
name but not "Champagne"! I like Cheddar cheese but high
quality varieties are made around the world!


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

I think you are missing my point. And I am not trying to argumentative.

Champaigne is in essence the trademark name. It defines something that did
not exist before it was created there.

But it is a geography.

Years ago I represented a brand of a beverage called Sunny Delight. It was
from Mt. Dora Florida. We trademarked Sunny Delight, we also trademarked
the name Florida Citrus Punch. The later is a descriptive trademark. For I
beleive 3 years we were an unknown brand but we did advertise it. We went
from a circle TM to a circle R with meant we are permanant and mostly beyond
contestability. Sunny Delight was not much of an issue because it was not
descriptive and that would have survived a challange in court had one
emerged. We even went further though. Stonger than a trademark was a
registered propietary bottle design. Well along came a brand that copied
our name of "Florida Citrus Punch" and they copied our bottle design to look
like us. It was Bordens "Florida Citrus Punch". We skipped asking for them
to please stop selling when we found their product and called for an
emergency hearing. They laughed but they were off the shelf within 24 hours
of our hearing in Orange County Florida. Plus there were financial
remunerations.

I do think that there are brand names but also geographical names that
should be protected. Country of origin labeling is becoming more and more
prevalent everywhere. In the USA there are only certain items that are
required to have it. But if you are selling a product in another country
you have to adhere to their labeling laws.

Like I said, selling Canada was a challange for us cause their labeling laws
are much different. And as was statated by someone else they would receive
the Andre but their laws support the Euro labeling that Champaigne is from
France. Andre probably just sent the wrong label there would be my guess.


Problem is that we (in USA) don't think of a trademark as a geographical
district but they do in Europe. The WTO supported the opposite in your
favor however which in my opinion was a bad ruling. But I guess as this
goes, Andre would have to go against the WTO to see if they can have their
money reimbursed. My guess is Andre will not go that far.


"James Silverton" > wrote in message
news:nhSij.6187$Zo3.485@trnddc02...
> Richard wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:08 -0500:
>
> RN> Companies have to defend their trademark brands or lose
> RN> them if challange during a time period usually just a few
> RN> years.
>
> Fine, I would acknowledge that "Domaine Chandon" is a trade name but not
> "Champagne"! I like Cheddar cheese but high quality varieties are made
> around the world!
>
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

In message <nhSij.6187$Zo3.485@trnddc02>
"James Silverton" > wrote:

> Richard wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:08 -0500:

> RN> Companies have to defend their trademark brands or lose
> RN> them if challange during a time period usually just a few
> RN> years.

> Fine, I would acknowledge that "Domaine Chandon" is a trade
> name but not "Champagne"! I like Cheddar cheese but high
> quality varieties are made around the world!


> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland

> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

ActuAlly if you have ever tasted the genuine thing — Keene or
Montgomery for example — you must see that what too often is described
as Cheddar bears almost no relationship to the real thing. But that
misses the point. Surely people are entitled to know that if they are
buying something described as Champagne it is made in that region,
according to the laws and customs there prevailing. They are then
free to choose whether to buy that or some other product which may or
may not be better, at least in their eyes, or more suitable for their
needs or purse.
If Champagne can be so called wherever it is made and that ”freedom•
is given generally what is to stop somebody describing a plonk red
wine from Algeria as Grand Cru Classe Saint-Emilion so those who do
not know the names of the 46 wines entitled to that description could
be fooled or applying a label that claims another red wine is a
Burgundy has been Tasteviné thus implying typicity.

” .. he that filches from me my good name, Robs me of that which not
enriches him, And makes me poor indeed• is always true — in these
instances the robbery is worse because the filching is clearly
designed to enrich the thief, else why would it be done?


Tim Hartley

Timothy wrote on Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:09:27 GMT:

TH> ActuAlly if you have ever tasted the genuine thing — Keene
TH> or Montgomery for example — you must see that what too
TH> often is described as Cheddar bears almost no relationship
TH> to the real thing.

Sure, there's incompetently-made stuff but not all Cheddar even
that made in the Cheddar region is good. I don't think the name
is a guarantee of quality.


TH> But that misses the point. Surely people are entitled to
TH> know that if they are buying something described as
TH> Champagne it is made in that region, according to the laws
TH> and customs there prevailing. They are then free to choose

I am not persuaded that is a fundamental right. On the other,
indicating the origin of the product is reasonable and might be
required if necessary, thus "California Champagne" or "New York
State Cheddar".


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

OK, another shot.

Kimberly Clark owns Kleenex brand Kleenex tissues and they have spend over
$3 Billion Dollar advertising and promoting the Kleenex brand name.

To avoid allowing Kleenex to be synonomous with tissue, therefore able to
lose their trademark for all practical reasons, then they have lost all they
have done after creating themselves in the 1920s. Shareholder value down the
drain. Money to invest in new concepts, gone.

I guess to some degree I think what you are saying is its already happened.
When people think of Champaigne here in USA then they don't think of France
they think of bubbles.

In my opinion not from a legal perspective I think its wrong to copy the
name. However the WTO was on your side cause that was how they did rule a
few years back..like in last 5 years.

I feel cheated when I see San Marsano tomatoes from Canada and Parma Ham
from Canada. They are good products but I do not buy them when I see them
anymore.

If I ever see California oranges from Martinique I will not buy either :-)
"James Silverton" > wrote in message
news:_h2jj.10050$na4.6565@trnddc05...
> Timothy wrote on Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:09:27 GMT:
>
> TH> ActuAlly if you have ever tasted the genuine thing - Keene
> TH> or Montgomery for example - you must see that what too
> TH> often is described as Cheddar bears almost no relationship
> TH> to the real thing.
>
> Sure, there's incompetently-made stuff but not all Cheddar even that made
> in the Cheddar region is good. I don't think the name is a guarantee of
> quality.
>
>
> TH> But that misses the point. Surely people are entitled to
> TH> know that if they are buying something described as
> TH> Champagne it is made in that region, according to the laws
> TH> and customs there prevailing. They are then free to choose
>
> I am not persuaded that is a fundamental right. On the other, indicating
> the origin of the product is reasonable and might be required if
> necessary, thus "California Champagne" or "New York State Cheddar".
>
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Richard Neidich wrote:

> If I ever see California oranges from Martinique I will not buy either :-)
> "James Silverton" > wrote in message

Yeah but you will buy Florida oranges and Florida orange juice from
Peru. The blight in the orange groves and the weather has been so
bad down here that a high percentage of our oranges are shipped in.
What, no one told you? They didn't label them as being from Peru?
I would certainly think that any juice you see in a super market
is from oranges shipped in. (no they are not shipping juice yet)

Yesterday I was listening to a discussion about the fact that
California, Arizona, Mexico and other Central American countries
have morphed into a regional labor market. The laborers and
employers see it that way but the rest of the country is having
problems with the concept.

Richard wrote on Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:34:14 -0500:

RN> Kimberly Clark owns Kleenex brand Kleenex tissues and they
RN> have spend over $3 Billion Dollar advertising and promoting
RN> the Kleenex brand name.

RN> To avoid allowing Kleenex to be synonomous with tissue,
RN> therefore able to lose their trademark for all practical
RN> reasons, then they have lost all they have done after
RN> creating themselves in the 1920s. Shareholder value down
RN> the drain. Money to invest in new concepts, gone.

RN> I guess to some degree I think what you are saying is its
RN> already happened. When people think of Champaigne here in
RN> USA then they don't think of France they think of bubbles.

RN> In my opinion not from a legal perspective I think its
RN> wrong to copy the name. However the WTO was on your side
RN> cause that was how they did rule a few years back..like in
RN> last 5 years.

RN> I feel cheated when I see San Marsano tomatoes from Canada
RN> and Parma Ham from Canada. They are good products but I do
RN> not buy them when I see them anymore.

RN> If I ever see California oranges from Martinique I will not
RN> buy either :-) "

I think we have reached an impasse, neither of us persuading the
other. I do not share your aversion to San Marsano tomatoes from
Canada tho' I certainly agree with you that specific trade
names like "Kleenex" or, my example, "Domaine Chandon" are
property.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

I have to agree with Richard's (or somebody's!) point that protecting
the name "Champagne" affords some protection to the consumer.
Hypothetically, let's say that future Champagne takes a major downturn
in quality. Before long, fans of Champagne will start to get
disillusioned; the name "Champagne" will become something to AVOID,
not SEEK OUT.
That being the case, the onus is on Champagne's producers to keep
their eye on the ball.

Dan-O