On 18 Jun 2006 18:19:21 -0700, wrote:

>Oh, did I mention that I don't smoke?

Not until you inserted this sentence. But that's not the relevant
question. Do you chew or dip? I assume you do neither, so post a reply
only if I assume incorrectly.

Cole

> You are right - most does not equal all; however those who insist in posting
> other than in English (UK, US, other!) will be reminded that courtesy
> dictates certain practices.

You have the temerity to remind us all of courtesy, after your previous
"*******ising" post (even if it was meant with humor)?

If you want to talk about courtesy, you should check your links before
posting them here -- like that malicious FAQ link about which you still
haven't replied. Apparently you couldn't even be bothered to post a
quick "sorry all" to everyone on this list who clicked on it. Courtesy?
Ha! Flamer and troll? More like it.



> However, Mr. Anderson, *you* are the one with an interest in the Oregon
> industry.

No, I'm the one with an interest in the *wine* industry. From recent
posts on this list, it seems as though I'm one of the *few* here who
shares in that interest. Your buggy FAQ link said anything related to
wine is fair game here. If you feel that tobacco corporations buying
out wineries is of little concern to you or other wine enthusiasts,
that is your rightful opinion. However, don't for a second try the
argument that everyone here shares in your indifference and apathy
towards this subject, because I know that simply isn't true.

All you and (some) others want to do is propagate some peruile ****ing
match over grammar, even though you can't be bothered to learn proper
use of apostrophe and other punctuation. Might I recommend you
subscribe to alt.usage.english and then rejoin this list when you've
learned a thing or two.

I'm done justifying your flame attempts with further commentary. I for
one want to draw this back to the original topic of wine.

David

> (( I am not after grammar correctly or punctuation discussions here, just
> wine))

Thank you Matt.

> But I still stand by my first comment and concern, only time will truly tell
> if this sell was a good thing or a bad thing for the Oregon wine industry as
> a whole.

Email me off-list about this, since AFW seems more preoccupied with
grumpy, alcoholic, do-nothing, ****-ant rhetoric -- no sense wasting
your insightful commentary here!

David

> Uh... I don't think it would be a "transgression". "Most" implies that
> occasional non-English is (or should be) easily tolerated.

Jose, it doesn't matter. St. Helier has taken up the role of "list
troll" -- let him be.

David

On 19 Jun 2006 22:15:23 -0700, "David Anderson"
> wrote:

>> (( I am not after grammar correctly or punctuation discussions here, just
>> wine))
>
>Thank you Matt.
>
>> But I still stand by my first comment and concern, only time will truly tell
>> if this sell was a good thing or a bad thing for the Oregon wine industry as
>> a whole.
>
>Email me off-list about this, since AFW seems more preoccupied with
>grumpy, alcoholic, do-nothing, ****-ant rhetoric -- no sense wasting
>your insightful commentary here!
>
>David

No, the two of you are solely to blame for the wrath you have incurred
here. David, you with your manufactured controversy and your
subsequent whining and pretended victimization by people who have
forgotten more about wine than the two of you combined will ever know.
And Matt, who I initially thought might have something useful to
contribute here and who offered some opinions about the Washington
wine industry that seemed to be worthwhile discussing. Then you
admitted that your total knowledge about that industry was derived
from visiting a few wineries around Leavenworth during a brief winter
vacation.

Go form your own two-person Mutual Admiration Society and let the rest
of us alone.

Cole

> No, the two of you are solely to blame for the wrath you have incurred
> here.

> Go form your own two-person Mutual Admiration Society and let the rest
> of us alone.

If you don't like what we're discussing, no one's forcing you to read
it.

If it irritates you so much to see two old members rejoin this group
and strike up a conversation, then be my guest and unsubscribe. Neither
you nor any other individual owns this list. So long as we're playing
by the rules, you have no grounds to stand on, and saying anything to
the contrary only serves to reinforce that you're arguing it on
subjective grounds alone.

I've taken a lot worse from a lot tougher people than you, and I never
back down in the face of opposition, especially on a list designed to
serve as a place to exchange ideas, because all that does is let the
other guy win. Guess what? You lose. I'm still here, and am not going
anywhere.

David

"David Anderson" wrote .........

> I'm still here, and am not going anywhere.

Oh really?

Welcome to my kill-file <plonk>

Cole, I am sorry if I led you to believe I am some Washington Wine
Expert, I am not. 90% of my knowledge of the Washington wine scene comes
from reading local reviews and articles and talking to people who know
more then I do about the WA wine scene. You are correct I have only made
two real trips, one to Leavenworth and one down the Washington side of
the Columbia River. I have not been to any of the larger more known wine
regions of Washington. It is not from a lack of interest more from a
lack of time and money at this time. I have tasted a lot of WA wines at
events here in Portland though and talked to the wineries reps at the
events.


I don't feel my lack of personal trips into WA should prevent me from
expressing opinions or ideas I have on the WA wine. Again, I was just
using what I thought was true about WA to express my concerns on the
Erath sale. If you read my post before this one, you will see I did find
out there are a few other Corps in Oregon controlling wineries and I
will say till I learned which wineries, I would have only been able to
pick out 2 of the 5.


Matt


Cole wrote:
> On 19 Jun 2006 22:15:23 -0700, "David Anderson"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>>(( I am not after grammar correctly or punctuation discussions here, just
>>>wine))
>>
>>Thank you Matt.
>>
>>
>>>But I still stand by my first comment and concern, only time will truly tell
>>>if this sell was a good thing or a bad thing for the Oregon wine industry as
>>>a whole.
>>
>>Email me off-list about this, since AFW seems more preoccupied with
>>grumpy, alcoholic, do-nothing, ****-ant rhetoric -- no sense wasting
>>your insightful commentary here!
>>
>>David
>
>
> No, the two of you are solely to blame for the wrath you have incurred
> here. David, you with your manufactured controversy and your
> subsequent whining and pretended victimization by people who have
> forgotten more about wine than the two of you combined will ever know.
> And Matt, who I initially thought might have something useful to
> contribute here and who offered some opinions about the Washington
> wine industry that seemed to be worthwhile discussing. Then you
> admitted that your total knowledge about that industry was derived
> from visiting a few wineries around Leavenworth during a brief winter
> vacation.
>
> Go form your own two-person Mutual Admiration Society and let the rest
> of us alone.
>
> Cole

Hi Ian,

> Well, when I emailed them well in advance of leaving for my trip, and failed
> to get an answer, I did a follow up. After two attempts, I had too many
> other visits to arrange with wineries ike Chehalem, Patricia Green, Domaine
> Drouhin, Cristom, Bergström and so on, to bother chasing more than twice.
> Most of the small wineries throughout the west coast (loosely) were very
> competent and positive. As was Ste Michelle.

I agree. I think the ones who responded first deserved your business.
It's too bad your initial inquiry didn't get a response. It's happened
to me and others before, and it goes to show that a first impression
can create a lasting impression.


> >off-topic, such as the link to your Web site present in your email
> >footer, I suppose that's a different matter, but it really doesn't
> >bother me in any case.
>
> No, it's the only way in which it is considered permissable to give a
> business web site.

The trick with that one is that all wineries are businesses. Does this
mean posting a link to a winery web site (forget Oregon ones - how
about Washington, California, Australian, etc.) within the body of a
message is not permissable? Just looking for clarification on this.

Cheers,

David

> You have achieved your marketing goals, now can we move on? How many
> moreposts on this?

What marketing goals? You must know something we don't - so please, do
share.

We'd love to move onto a new topic, but that largely depends on whether
others can stop flooding this thread with nitpickings on grammar and
cultural insults.

David

> Cole, I am sorry if I led you to believe I am some Washington Wine
> Expert

You don't have to explain your credentials to anyone. The only thing
that matters is you have an opinion and are wanting to share it with
others. That you're actively publishing your writings is a sign that
your work should speak for itself.

David

Salut/Hi David Anderson,

le/on 20 Jun 2006 14:00:06 -0700, tu disais/you said:-


>> No, it's the only way in which it is considered permissable to give a
>> business web site.
>
>The trick with that one is that all wineries are businesses. Does this
>mean posting a link to a winery web site (forget Oregon ones - how
>about Washington, California, Australian, etc.) within the body of a
>message is not permissable? Just looking for clarification on this.

The general principle in the Alt. hierarchy is that it is essentially non
commercial. We've been very tough on this here, and on the whole have
managed to keep the group pretty free of purely commercial posts .

==================
"For the last 60 years, our winery has been leading the field in innovative
demand led winemaking., so for fine xxxxxian wines, don't hesitate to
contact our sales staff at or visit our web site at
www.dreadfulplonk.eu
===================

On the other hand, it is obvious that if you were to ask me where you could
get some excellent unchaptalised botrytised wines, I'd not be in breach of
the charter by saying "contact the lovely Mireille Daret at
www.closbarrejat.com (unless I had some financial interest in the estate).


However, we have quite a number of people in the wine business here in this
newsgroup, it's part of what makes it what it is and IMO that's wholly
excellent that they should want to come here. Putting a link in the sig is
fair, both to them, and to us too, because it allows us to know that the
person concerned may NOT be 100% neutral.

If you had an financial interest in a winery, or a wine shop and frequently
posted a link there, then I, personally, would take the view that you were
seeking to use this newsgroup for mainly commercial ends and would complain
to your ISP. Others might not. On the other hand, if I were to ask you
directly, "hey David, aren't you with "Archery Summit"? Could you give me a
link to their website, and you did, no one could object.

So the sig is the way in which _I_ as proprietor of a B&B can let people
know what business I'm in. Mark Lipton on the other hand, who has no
financial interest in the place, could not be reproached for describing it
in any terms he saw fit.
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

The world according to Ian :-) or :-(

Just returned from Walla Walla area. Ian, you left quite an impression on
some of the people in the wineries there. Impression may or may not be
considered a positive experience for them. :-)

Note to David: I like your post on this subject here. After returning from
some very small totally non corporate wineries I reverse my position. It is
a BAD thing for these wineries to sell out. I just don't know how to stop
it in a capitalistic society. But perhaps we need to make some tax
concessions for the smaller companies so they have incentives not to sell
out. I was at wineries that were 3000-5000 cases of total production and the
wines superb. I would hate to see this become a future Coca Cola
acquisition.

Keep up the good posts!!!!



"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
...
> Salut/Hi David Anderson,
>
> le/on 20 Jun 2006 14:00:06 -0700, tu disais/you said:-
>
>
>>> No, it's the only way in which it is considered permissable to give a
>>> business web site.
>>
>>The trick with that one is that all wineries are businesses. Does this
>>mean posting a link to a winery web site (forget Oregon ones - how
>>about Washington, California, Australian, etc.) within the body of a
>>message is not permissable? Just looking for clarification on this.
>
> The general principle in the Alt. hierarchy is that it is essentially non
> commercial. We've been very tough on this here, and on the whole have
> managed to keep the group pretty free of purely commercial posts .
>
> ==================
> "For the last 60 years, our winery has been leading the field in
> innovative
> demand led winemaking., so for fine xxxxxian wines, don't hesitate to
> contact our sales staff at or visit our web site at
> www.dreadfulplonk.eu
> ===================
>
> On the other hand, it is obvious that if you were to ask me where you
> could
> get some excellent unchaptalised botrytised wines, I'd not be in breach of
> the charter by saying "contact the lovely Mireille Daret at
> www.closbarrejat.com (unless I had some financial interest in the
> estate).
>
>
> However, we have quite a number of people in the wine business here in
> this
> newsgroup, it's part of what makes it what it is and IMO that's wholly
> excellent that they should want to come here. Putting a link in the sig is
> fair, both to them, and to us too, because it allows us to know that the
> person concerned may NOT be 100% neutral.
>
> If you had an financial interest in a winery, or a wine shop and
> frequently
> posted a link there, then I, personally, would take the view that you were
> seeking to use this newsgroup for mainly commercial ends and would
> complain
> to your ISP. Others might not. On the other hand, if I were to ask you
> directly, "hey David, aren't you with "Archery Summit"? Could you give me
> a
> link to their website, and you did, no one could object.
>
> So the sig is the way in which _I_ as proprietor of a B&B can let people
> know what business I'm in. Mark Lipton on the other hand, who has no
> financial interest in the place, could not be reproached for describing it
> in any terms he saw fit.
> --
> All the Best
> Ian Hoare
> http://www.souvigne.com
> mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Hi Dick,

> Just returned from Walla Walla area. Ian, you left quite an impression on
> some of the people in the wineries there. Impression may or may not be
> considered a positive experience for them. :-)

I'm curious if they asked whether he paid a visit to taste wine or
offer English lessons!



> Note to David: I like your post on this subject here. After returning from
> some very small totally non corporate wineries I reverse my position. It is
> a BAD thing for these wineries to sell out. I just don't know how to stop
> it in a capitalistic society. But perhaps we need to make some tax
> concessions for the smaller companies so they have incentives not to sell
> out. I was at wineries that were 3000-5000 cases of total production and the
> wines superb. I would hate to see this become a future Coca Cola
> acquisition.

If I recall... isn't Coke and red wine a common cocktail in Germany?
Anything's possible these days.


> Keep up the good posts!!!!

Thanks. It's nice to see some constructive commentary on this.

I was surprised to find out how little feedback there was from people
who have knowledge of the long-term effects of wineries going
corporate. Aside from the general comments of "going corporate means
sacrificing quality to satisfy board members", etc., no one we spoke
with could add much. So, it will be interesting to see how this plays
out.

I did just read an article today in a local paper about the sale. Seems
the buyer will be moving operations, processing, and many aspects of
the winery off-site, but of course the vineyard will stay put (that's
one thing corporations haven't figured out how to remove yet!) and the
current owner's name will stay as well. So there you have it -
consolidation from a production aspect, but some things will stay the
same for branding/marketing reasons. I think that's a predictable
outcome.

In other news, we were contacted by a local winery here who read our
article and feels this isn't a good thing. While she was at first
cheering the notion of increased property values for her vineyard, then
she thought about what might happen if more outfits sell out as well.

Finally, I saw something of interest (also in local press). There seems
to be growing opposition to a "Napa-style wine hotel" which is planned
to be built in the middle of wine country here. Even though the current
location is an old quarry, many wineries (at least 25) have banded
together to try and stop it. Their reasons include negative impact on
local vineyards, over-commercializing the area, etc.

So it's interesting to see how sometimes, people are all for bringing
in big business, but other times, are fiercely opposed to it. From my
vantage, I'm having a hard time distinguishing how either of these two
situations is much different. The supposed end goal is to increase
awareness and business for the area. I guess, perhaps, it boils down to
a "not in my backyard!" matter. It's one thing for an out-of-state corp
to purchase a winery. It's another thing for a corp to plant a giant
hotel right in plain sight -- and blocking the pretty view -- from
neighboring vineyards.

Thanks,

David

http://www.OregonWines.com

On 26 Jun 2006 00:39:50 -0700, "David Anderson"
> wrote:

>
>I did just read an article today in a local paper about the sale. Seems
>the buyer will be moving operations, processing, and many aspects of
>the winery off-site, but of course the vineyard will stay put (that's
>one thing corporations haven't figured out how to remove yet!) and the
>current owner's name will stay as well. So there you have it -
>consolidation from a production aspect, but some things will stay the
>same for branding/marketing reasons. I think that's a predictable
>outcome.
>
I suspect that this is the article you are referring to:

http://www.oregonlive.com/search/ind...?ylvcmk&coll=7

Cole

Yup. Guess you can't accuse me of manufacturing that information
either.

Please, add me to your kill-file. I really don't care to have any
further exchanges with you.

David



> I suspect that this is the article you are referring to:
> http://www.oregonlive.com/search/ind...?ylvcmk&coll=7
>
> Cole

So when did you start marketing for Mireille?

X-No-Archive:

> There is enough noise on the NG these days.

Then stop posting commercial links for web sites with advertisements
for the person who built them. That has nothing to do with this thread,
which had been about a serious issue, corporate winery purchases in the
Pacific Northwest, before you and several others muddied it up.

On 27 Jun 2006 07:58:30 -0700, "David Anderson"
> wrote:

>Yup. Guess you can't accuse me of manufacturing that information
>either.
>
>Please, add me to your kill-file. I really don't care to have any
>further exchanges with you.
>
>David
>
>
>
>> I suspect that this is the article you are referring to:
>> http://www.oregonlive.com/search/ind...?ylvcmk&coll=7
>>
>> Cole

I never accused you of manufacturing information, just a controversy
that really doesn't exist. I posted the URL of the article you
referred to so others could see how selective you were in using the
information from it.

Unfortunately, the newsreaderI use doesn't have a killfile
capabiliity. Anyway, I enjoy pointing out inconsistencies in your
postings and the extent to which you are selective in the use of your
sources, as in the above example.

Cole

For someone who asked us to leave his cheery little group all to
himself, you seem to still be following this thread and now even
attempting to interact... I guess because you realized we're not going
away. So get over it.


> I never accused you of manufacturing information, just a controversy
> that really doesn't exist. I posted the URL of the article you
> referred to so others could see how selective you were in using the
> information from it.

Yes, I referred to the information in the article that was relevant to
this thread. You're manufacturing controversy again.

In any case, thanks for posting the link. I actually read the original
article in print, and hadn't had a chance to dig it up online -- not
that it would be of any interest to you, or other trolls on this list,
for its substantive value. You do know about printed newspapers, don't
you?


> Anyway, I enjoy pointing out inconsistencies in your
> postings and the extent to which you are selective in the use of your
> sources, as in the above example.

Meaning you have absolutely nothing better to be doing with your time.
Perhaps it's you that needs the support group?

David

On 27 Jun 2006 09:11:52 -0700, "David Anderson"
> wrote:

>For someone who asked us to leave his cheery little group all to
>himself, you seem to still be following this thread and now even
>attempting to interact... I guess because you realized we're not going
>away. So get over it.
>
You're the one who suggested to your buddy that the two of you go
offline when things weren't going like you had hoped in this NG. As I
recall, you had some very unkind things to say at the time about the
contributors to this NG.

>> I never accused you of manufacturing information, just a controversy
>> that really doesn't exist. I posted the URL of the article you
>> referred to so others could see how selective you were in using the
>> information from it.
>
>Yes, I referred to the information in the article that was relevant to
>this thread. You're manufacturing controversy again.
>
The article actually had some good things to say about the company
purchasing Erath and how the deal might be positive for Oregon wines
in general.

>In any case, thanks for posting the link. I actually read the original
>article in print, and hadn't had a chance to dig it up online -- not
>that it would be of any interest to you, or other trolls on this list,
>for its substantive value. You do know about printed newspapers, don't
>you?
>
No. Tell me about them. The two we have here in Seattle are pretty
lousy, which is why I subscribe to the print edition of The New York
Times and often go to The Oregonian online. FWIW, the article in
question was by Matt Kramer, well known to WS readers. I take no
position on him personally, but I'm a little skeptical about his
speculations as to SMWE's long-term plans.

>> Anyway, I enjoy pointing out inconsistencies in your
>> postings and the extent to which you are selective in the use of your
>> sources, as in the above example.
>
>Meaning you have absolutely nothing better to be doing with your time.
>Perhaps it's you that needs the support group?
>
David, don't you realize by now that you ARE my support group? I
discussed this with my therapist yesterday and she made me realize
that. Trying to get your goat is wonderful therapy. :-)

Cole

Hey David, looks like those that give crap don't like getting the same back
in return. Keep up the good posts!

Nice balance here. I appreciate the civility :-)

"David Anderson" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> X-No-Archive:
>
>> There is enough noise on the NG these days.
>
> Then stop posting commercial links for web sites with advertisements
> for the person who built them. That has nothing to do with this thread,
> which had been about a serious issue, corporate winery purchases in the
> Pacific Northwest, before you and several others muddied it up.
>

Salut/Hi Richard Neidich,

le/on Mon, 26 Jun 2006 03:08:28 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

>The world according to Ian :-) or :-(
>
>Just returned from Walla Walla area. Ian, you left quite an impression on
>some of the people in the wineries there.

I'm delighted.

Bye bye. ALT-K for you, sailor.
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Salut/Hi David Anderson,

le/on 26 Jun 2006 00:39:50 -0700, tu disais/you said:-


>I'm curious if they asked whether he paid a visit to taste wine or
>offer English lessons!

Taste wines of course. It's only egregious would be wine writers who need
lessons in English.
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Salut/Hi Mike Tommasi,

le/on Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:49:34 +0200, tu disais/you said:-

>> the charter by saying "contact the lovely Mireille Daret at
>> www.closbarrejat.com (unless I had some financial interest in the estate).
>
>Mireille is indeed a lovely person, her very well crafted site (done by
>fellow FRBV newsgrouper Remi Loisel) is:
>
>www.cru-barrejats.com

Thanks very much for the correct address. Talking of wine sites, do you have
any idea why so few of the better wineries in France have wine sites? It's
sometimes deeply frustrating, for example, when trying to find information
about some of the better Cahors producers to find that a Google.fr search
merely leads to reams of retailers and restaurants.

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Ian Hoare wrote:
> Salut/Hi Mike Tommasi,
>
> le/on Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:49:34 +0200, tu disais/you said:-
>
>>> the charter by saying "contact the lovely Mireille Daret at
>>> www.closbarrejat.com (unless I had some financial interest in the estate).
>> Mireille is indeed a lovely person, her very well crafted site (done by
>> fellow FRBV newsgrouper Remi Loisel) is:
>>
>> www.cru-barrejats.com
>
> Thanks very much for the correct address. Talking of wine sites, do you have
> any idea why so few of the better wineries in France have wine sites? It's
> sometimes deeply frustrating, for example, when trying to find information
> about some of the better Cahors producers to find that a Google.fr search
> merely leads to reams of retailers and restaurants.
>

And a very nice website this one is. The English translation is
actually readable. Did anyone I know have a hand in that? ;-) And I
agree about the deplorable lack of websites, in any language, for many
of my favorite French producers. It makes getting information about
them far more difficult than it should be.

Cheers!
Mark Lipton

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:07:33 -0400
Mark Lipton > wrote:

> Ian Hoare wrote:
> > Salut/Hi Mike Tommasi,
> >
> > le/on Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:49:34 +0200, tu disais/you said:-
> >
> >>> the charter by saying "contact the lovely Mireille Daret at
> >>> www.closbarrejat.com (unless I had some financial interest in the estate).
> >> Mireille is indeed a lovely person, her very well crafted site (done by
> >> fellow FRBV newsgrouper Remi Loisel) is:
> >>
> >> www.cru-barrejats.com
> >
> > Thanks very much for the correct address. Talking of wine sites, do you have
> > any idea why so few of the better wineries in France have wine sites? It's
> > sometimes deeply frustrating, for example, when trying to find information
> > about some of the better Cahors producers to find that a Google.fr search
> > merely leads to reams of retailers and restaurants.
> >
>
> And a very nice website this one is. The English translation is
> actually readable. Did anyone I know have a hand in that? ;-) And I
> agree about the deplorable lack of websites, in any language, for many
> of my favorite French producers. It makes getting information about
> them far more difficult than it should be.
>

I think in some ways the whole country is very behind, e-commerce-wise. It's
exactly the same for (plant) nurseries. Very little information. If Bill S wanted
to buy an addition to his rhododendron collection in France, he'd end up
buying it from the UK.

I sometimes get the impression that, since it isn't a traditional channel,
most winemakers just can't get with it.

So, how do we change this situation?

-E

--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies

Emery Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:07:33 -0400
> Mark Lipton > wrote:
>
>> Ian Hoare wrote:
>>> Salut/Hi Mike Tommasi,
>>>
>>> le/on Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:49:34 +0200, tu disais/you said:-
>>>
>>>>> the charter by saying "contact the lovely Mireille Daret at
>>>>> www.closbarrejat.com (unless I had some financial interest in the estate).
>>>> Mireille is indeed a lovely person, her very well crafted site (done by
>>>> fellow FRBV newsgrouper Remi Loisel) is:
>>>>
>>>> www.cru-barrejats.com
>>> Thanks very much for the correct address. Talking of wine sites, do you have
>>> any idea why so few of the better wineries in France have wine sites? It's
>>> sometimes deeply frustrating, for example, when trying to find information
>>> about some of the better Cahors producers to find that a Google.fr search
>>> merely leads to reams of retailers and restaurants.
>>>
>> And a very nice website this one is. The English translation is
>> actually readable. Did anyone I know have a hand in that? ;-) And I
>> agree about the deplorable lack of websites, in any language, for many
>> of my favorite French producers. It makes getting information about
>> them far more difficult than it should be.
>>
>
> I think in some ways the whole country is very behind, e-commerce-wise. It's
> exactly the same for (plant) nurseries. Very little information. If Bill S wanted
> to buy an addition to his rhododendron collection in France, he'd end up
> buying it from the UK.
>
> I sometimes get the impression that, since it isn't a traditional channel,
> most winemakers just can't get with it.
>
> So, how do we change this situation?

It seems to me, without any real knowledge of the situation, that this
is where the INAO (or whatever it's now called) could have a very
positive hand, by facilitating the construction of websites for smaller
growers who don't have the resources or the savvy to do it themselves.
In CA, there are a plethora of "Grower's Association" websites that link
to all of the wineries in their jurisdiction. Why not a Coteaux du
Layon growers' website that contains information about all the growers
in that AOC, or links to their websites when available?

Mark Lipton

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:44:29 -0400
Mark Lipton > wrote:

> Emery Davis wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:07:33 -0400
> > Mark Lipton > wrote:
> >
> >> Ian Hoare wrote:
> >>> Salut/Hi Mike Tommasi,
> >>>
[]
> >>> Thanks very much for the correct address. Talking of wine sites, do you have
> >>> any idea why so few of the better wineries in France have wine sites? It's
> >>> sometimes deeply frustrating, for example, when trying to find information
> >>> about some of the better Cahors producers to find that a Google.fr search
> >>> merely leads to reams of retailers and restaurants.
[]
> > I sometimes get the impression that, since it isn't a traditional channel,
> > most winemakers just can't get with it.
> >
> > So, how do we change this situation?
>
> It seems to me, without any real knowledge of the situation, that this
> is where the INAO (or whatever it's now called) could have a very
> positive hand, by facilitating the construction of websites for smaller
> growers who don't have the resources or the savvy to do it themselves.
> In CA, there are a plethora of "Grower's Association" websites that link
> to all of the wineries in their jurisdiction. Why not a Coteaux du
> Layon growers' website that contains information about all the growers
> in that AOC, or links to their websites when available?
>

There has been some effort in this direction from some regional syndicates.
But mostly what they end up is a list of member/producers (no doubt charging
for an "internet presence") and if there is a web site they'll include a link.
A pretty poor show, sadly.

How about if we get the gouvernement to throw some money at it? They're
pretty good at that! I know a congressman (his mistress is a friend, but
that's another story) but sadly he's not from a wine producing juristiction.

-E

--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies

Like I said....not necessarily a positive impression...you were most
memorable.

ALT-K is for overdose in potassium?


"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
...
> Salut/Hi Richard Neidich,
>
> le/on Mon, 26 Jun 2006 03:08:28 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
>
>>The world according to Ian :-) or :-(
>>
>>Just returned from Walla Walla area. Ian, you left quite an impression on
>>some of the people in the wineries there.
>
> I'm delighted.
>
> Bye bye. ALT-K for you, sailor.
> --
> All the Best
> Ian Hoare
> http://www.souvigne.com
> mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

"Mike Tommasi" (in all modesty wrote) ....

> Er, yes, I did the translation, I was rewarded "en liquide", if you know
> what I mean... ;-)
>

Oh yes, we get your drift !!!

Great job, Mike !

--

st.helier

We are trying to keep this a sex-porn free zone. This is about wine...not
body fluids.

Please, have you no decency :-)

"Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message
...
> Mark Lipton wrote:
>Ian Hoare wrote:
Er, yes, I did the translation, I was rewarded "en liquide", if you know
what I mean... ;-)

> Taste wines of course. It's only egregious would be wine writers who need
> lessons in English.

Now you're getting bitter. Too much potassium does that to people.

David

X-No-Archive:

> We are trying to keep this a sex-porn free zone. This is about wine...not
> body fluids.
>
> Please, have you no decency :-)

It's too late for them, Dick. Too much ALT-K in their diet I fear.

Besides, all the sex postings here of late have been a lot more
interesting to read than the "detritus cinerea" coming out of these old
windbags.

David

David, that's not bad however. That means I can talk about him, behind his
back...by his choice :-)

I would imagine his third grade school teacher probably said in a progress
report to his parents something like this. "Ian is a very smart little boy.
Far advanced vs. many others. But Ian has a tendency to have to demonstrate
he is vastly superior to others in his play group. When he does not get his
way, he simply takes his ball, and goes home so others cannot play either.
He does not play well with others." (This is a parody for those not
understanding such)

Not much appears to have changed.

If I recall you have spent a lot if time in France, and perhaps your wife's
family is French. So when they start their talking foreign around you, you
likely can stand your own anyway...but they don't know that. :-)

Keep up the good post...maybe Ian will come back with his ball and play
again at a later date. I never asked him to take it and go home. :-)




"David Anderson" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> >Just returned from Walla Walla area. Ian, you left quite an impression
>> >on
>> >some of the people in the wineries there.
>>
>> I'm delighted.
>>
>> Bye bye. ALT-K for you, sailor.
>
> Tsk tsk, another person who can't handle the truth?
>
> If you have proof to the contrary of what Dick is saying, then by all
> means, please share it with the group. We're waiting. If that comment
> this lands me in your "kill-file" as well, it's fine by me.
>
> Since use of language has become paramount to any exchanges with you, I
> thought I might try to bring you up to speed on 21st century Webspeak.
> "Kill-file" is so 20th Century. Most users today prefer the term
> "blacklisting", a more inclusive reference to the use of auto-filtering
> and prebuilt lists, and which can be employed at both the client end,
> or preconfigured/uploaded to the server hosting the domain's
> mailserver.
>
> In any case, all that blacklisting accomplishes is to exclude you from
> another person's conversations, not the other way round. Don't you see
> -- the person you're blacklisting will still see your posts to the
> group, especially if they use Google Groups to read the threads.
> Besides, that person probably doesn't care to take part in your
> exchanges anyway, since you obviously don't care to in theirs.
>
> Ultimately, blacklisting is merely a way for you to hide from
> discussions in this group. We'll still be here, talking about the
> things you're talking about. You'll just not necessarily have the means
> to say anything in response.
>
> David
>

Salut/Hi Emery Davis,

le/on Fri, 30 Jun 2006 20:13:41 +0200, tu disais/you said:-


>I think in some ways the whole country is very behind, e-commerce-wise. It's
>exactly the same for (plant) nurseries. Very little information. If Bill S wanted
>to buy an addition to his rhododendron collection in France, he'd end up
>buying it from the UK.
>
>I sometimes get the impression that, since it isn't a traditional channel,
>most winemakers just can't get with it.
>
>So, how do we change this situation?

A question that I've quite often asked myself. Actually, I think this is
partly because of France's late entry into the www. For years they had
Minitel, and it was hard for them to realise and accept that it wasn't going
to sweep the world. So although more and more people here now have broadband
(Pres Chirac has said that he wants 100% broadband availability by the end
of 2006 - or 2007, it's somewhat obscure), I don't think the country _as a
whole_ has yet woken up to the possibilities. I also think that many small
businessmen are reluctant to make the commitment of time needed to read
emails daily.

I also think that the there are a load of cowboys out there making bad web
sites for a lot of money, and that many small businessmen have been ripped
off, which makes others reluctant to risk it. Actually, if you look at most
large companies French websites as compared with their American or British
homologues, you'll find they're often remarkable poor in information. I
sometimes wonder what they think they're there for.

As to what could be done, I genuinely don't know. Maybe if more people were
to phone winemakers, asking for their website addresses, and feigning
astonishment when they don't have them (and comparing them unfavourably to
most other countries) that might get them to budge(t).

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

On 2 Jul 2006 12:40:55 -0700, "David Anderson"
> wrote:

>X-No-Archive:
>
>> We are trying to keep this a sex-porn free zone. This is about wine...not
>> body fluids.
>>
>> Please, have you no decency :-)
>
>It's too late for them, Dick. Too much ALT-K in their diet I fear.
>
>Besides, all the sex postings here of late have been a lot more
>interesting to read than the "detritus cinerea" coming out of these old
>windbags.
>
>David

If you really mean what you say (and you clearly indicate that, unlike
me, yon have actually downloaded and read some of these recent
postings), I'm sure that you can find another NG where such postings
appear in a much higher concentration than they do in AFW. In my
newsreader. i don't have a killfile, but I do have an "Ignore Thread"
capability which I use whenever there is an outbreak of such postings
as has recently occurred. Oops, I fear that you now may accuse me of
"blacklisting".

Also, my Latin is not all that great. Since this is a (primarily)
English NG, I would appreciate a translation of the term you quote. I
get the "detritus" part of it, but the meaning of the other word
escapes me. I suspect that it refers to some type of bodily excretion,
but siince these are pretty numerous, I'd just like to know which one.

And I suspect that Mike Tommasi's term "en liquide" refers to
something which is ingested rather than excreted.

Cole

> i don't have a killfile, but I do have an "Ignore Thread"
> capability which I use whenever there is an outbreak of such postings
> as has recently occurred. Oops, I fear that you now may accuse me of
> "blacklisting".

That's not called blacklisting, it's called "ignoring a thread", and I
won't accuse you of either (not that I'd care to anyway), as you're
apparently still posting here, instead of... "ignoring this thread"...



> Also, my Latin is not all that great. Since this is a (primarily)
> English NG, I would appreciate a translation of the term you quote. I
> get the "detritus" part of it, but the meaning of the other word
> escapes me. I suspect that it refers to some type of bodily excretion,
> but siince these are pretty numerous, I'd just like to know which one.

Cole, you disappoint me. For all the posturing of being one who knows
so much about wine -- and yet my simple play on words apparently
escaped you... just think about it... "botrytis cinerea"... "detritus
cinerea"... Thanks for finally sharing with us your qualifications.

David

On 2 Jul 2006 21:52:12 -0700, "David Anderson"
> wrote:

>> i don't have a killfile, but I do have an "Ignore Thread"
>> capability which I use whenever there is an outbreak of such postings
>> as has recently occurred. Oops, I fear that you now may accuse me of
>> "blacklisting".
>
>That's not called blacklisting, it's called "ignoring a thread", and I
>won't accuse you of either (not that I'd care to anyway), as you're
>apparently still posting here, instead of... "ignoring this thread"...
>
Oh, this is a thread that I wouldn't ignore for the world. My
therapist is very supportive of my participation here. I was referring
to those other threads that you seem to find so interesting. As I
suggested earlier, you might find some more suitable NG's. Just pull
up your ISP's list of groups and do a search on words like "erotica"
or "bigotry", just to name a couple. Happy hunting!

>
>
>> Also, my Latin is not all that great. Since this is a (primarily)
>> English NG, I would appreciate a translation of the term you quote. I
>> get the "detritus" part of it, but the meaning of the other word
>> escapes me. I suspect that it refers to some type of bodily excretion,
>> but siince these are pretty numerous, I'd just like to know which one.
>
>Cole, you disappoint me. For all the posturing of being one who knows
>so much about wine -- and yet my simple play on words apparently
>escaped you... just think about it... "botrytis cinerea"... "detritus
>cinerea"... Thanks for finally sharing with us your qualifications.
>
I guess what threw me was that the context seemed to suggest that the
term was something that was unmitigatingly bad. "Detritus" certainly
falls into that category. But BC can be either good or bad, depending
on where, when, and how it occurs. Sorry, your feeble attempt to
construct a play on words fell flat with me. Maybe some of the other
windbags (your term, not mine) in this group may have picked it up,
but it went right by me.

Cole

> David, that's not bad however. That means I can talk about him, behind his
> back...by his choice :-)

I certainly didn't mean to imply it was a bad thing... just find it
humorous whenever someone threatens to block, killfile, or the like...
I say go ahead, as that person is likely disrupting my thread anyway...



> Not much appears to have changed.

Unless you work to make it change.

Speaking of change, there are lot of new wineries here actively trying
to break down the cultural barriers and snobbishness traditionally
associated with wine. So far they're doing a great job. It just takes a
lot of work. Same goes for newsgroups... you simply have to get enough
new people interested in it to see any lasting changes. Otherwise, it
can sink back into a "good old boys club" that turns off so many
potential posters.

Scanning some of the posts here about pushing French wineries to get
their own Web sites, it all seems a bit... ignorant... to me, as if
these people don't really understand the business decisions behind
wineries when it comes to (improperly) promoting their business. Much
of the time, it simply boils down to the fact that some wineries are
poor marketers, and are much better at growing grapes than selling
them. It is a problem found throughout the global wine industry, and
was blindingly apparent to us years ago, and is in part why we built
our site to begin with.

However, it apprently is a fresh topic to some people on this
newsgroup, which makes me question whether this is really a "newsgroup"
at all, and not simply an "oldsgroup"... to change things, this list
needs more fresh blood. After all, if wineries can do it, so can
newgroups.


> If I recall you have spent a lot if time in France, and perhaps your wife's
> family is French. So when they start their talking foreign around you, you
> likely can stand your own anyway...but they don't know that. :-)

Yes, I can stand my own in French, especially after the third glass of
Syrah. Admittedly a bit rusty behind the keyboard. Wife and I are both
West Coasters, lived and studied in Europe... got engaged in Paris...
now have business partners throughout the EU... travel there often,
visit good French friends who own a lettuce farm in Almeria, Spain, etc
etc... if doing all that still makes me an ignorant Yank, so be it. I
for one welcome that kind of ignorance every day.

David

p.s. Keep up the humorous posts. I'm still waiting to hear more about
your WA trip (and not just about how the wineries shuddered when you
mentioned Ian!)