Why disconnect the dots?

It was important to me to choose a name that was reflective of my thoughts and not my industry. Similar to the approach that advocates of Web 2.0 praise new concepts that are "constructively disruptive to older models." The dilemma that I pose however, is: with a product such as wine, where taste is everything, how do you grow this up to a marketplace defined by analytics and numerical objectivity, while still giving respect to the inherently human efforts contained in the bottle?

So many people allow themselves to qualify wine based upon a 40 point scale that accounts for a handful of "expert" palates. From a web development perspective, it then becomes very easy to market wines based solely on their score. However from a real perspective, why should anyone be so distrustful in their own tastes to subject themselves to a demagogue? The point is this: If wine becomes a quantifiable commodity, the door is left wide open for wine to be homogenized. The film Mondovino does a disturbingly good service to the effect of scores/ globalization/ homogeneity on the wine industry at large.

The main motivation becomes, then, how we grow big and stay small (thanks, Howard Schultz) as an industry? Imagine, if you will, in twenty-five years if all wines labeled Cabernet Sauvignon tasted the same (basing the idea of a "good" wine on a handful of palates.) Now imagine if every cup of "good" coffee wore a Starbucks badge. Now imagine trying to discern a difference between a McDonalds cheeseburger, a Burger King cheeseburger, and a Wendy's cheeseburger. The latter are examples of homogenization.

"Constructive disruption of older models" is the only way to effectively combat the fusion of every unique and different product produced, into a grey, bland, homogenization of "acceptable" and "satisfactory."

Why distributors are dumbing down your palate.

In addition to identifying the regional characteristics that make every wine distinctive, should we also define the regional characteristics that make each buying region distinctive? In San Francisco, where wine is a greater part of the mass existence than the automobile, the knowledge and thus market is more discriminating. Whereas in Georgia, for instance, the wine market is defined by distribution companies that read metrics produced through the sale of wines at the local grocery store, by a standard of buyer that is recognizably and measurably less savvy. This being said, is either side of the latter “coin” incorrect? Does each decide how the market works? And, equipped with the same tools (i.e. the internet, Wine Spectator, etc.) why is the outcome ultimately different?

First observation, savvy, as it pertains to market allowances, is unfortunately relative. In a market that opens its doors to well-known and obscure wines alike, buyers are more apt to follow their own course. Using the example of Newspeak as was set forth by George Orwell in his masterpiece, 1984; we understand that by limiting the vocabulary, or in this case the selection, the “herd” or buying populous is essentially forced into a mold, created by those in power in order to keep the status quo of buyer/seller relationship in check. To offer greater selection is to risk losing your clientele to their individual powers of choice. The less fearful side of the equation is to offer a selection of wine that is based on a selection of choice products and to meet the challenges of the market with an invitation to explore, rather than acquiesce to the greatest common factor.

To understand how a regional savvy is affected, we must look at the potential factors influencing the market. In a savvy market, a buyer will possess a plethora of market resources, human and publication. If a buyer has the opportunity to consult a variety of sources prior to making a decision, the likely outcome is a purchase made in the absence of great fear of the unknown, ultimately a purchase of greater value. For example: Customer A is at a wine shop with a shelf tag describing each wine with 15 words and a score, 1-100. Customer B is at a wine store with hand written descriptions of each wine and a knowledgeable sales person to assist. To ask Customer A to qualify a wine based on a vague scale of 1-100 is to first ask the customer, “Do you know who wrote this recommendation?” And to follow with, “Why do you trust that person?” The dangerous part of that line of questioning is that the path of questions leads away from a very core issue: “Why do you not trust yourself to make a decision about the purchase you are about to make?”

To tie this back, it is in the best interest of the small-minded merchant, and the power-minded merchant to keep the buyer at all times with a sense of fear about the purchase that the buyer will soon make. It forces the buyer to choose from a limited selection, based upon limited information. However, if the buyer is not aware of the intention of the seller, or his agent(s), the buyer will not believe otherwise. Regional savvy is foremost and primarily affected by the constraints placed upon him, unwittingly, by the merchant.

To answer question two, taking into respect, the answer to question one; then the market may be effectively divided between two segments: the segment that is knowledgeable and dictates is own selection via buying power, and the market that has never seen the alternative to having its choices dictated to them via a distributor. The latter is equitable to asking a cowboy to describe surfing.

More later.