Wine marketers often ignore non-white customers
Mystic_Rebel (a returning MMW guest contributor!)
Lots of people drink wine. You see ads in magazines and TV commercials hawking wine and the festive times or intimate settings of wine drinkers. But you’d never know that whites are not the only ones who enjoy this drink. Although vintners with wine tasting rooms are for the most part hospitable to potential customers who visit them, they are not the same folks who *market* said wines.Wine marketers are out of touch with who enjoys wine; not wine coolers but regular wine! Check out this column about how wine lovers are perceived by the media!
IkoIko wrote:
Beer, liquor, and wine are different beasts that treat people of color differently, and treat them differently according to income, and differently depending upon the places they live. Wine market has always been the worst to market to everyone according to class, but has definitely shut out minorities in this country. Liquor and beer has been much better (some would argue *too* good, depending upon alcoholism rates by ethnicity and income)…
It starts with the label. Ponder, for example, one phrase: Malt Liquor
In the States, an inconsistently applied term applied to alcoholic beverages made from grain (barley, malt, hops) and water more potent than regular beer (if regular beer is 5% alcohol by volume, malt liquor goes from 6-12% alcohol by volume).
But in some states– especially out West– the more potent beers might just be called “ales” instead of “malt liquor” because it plays better in terms of style and branding. Other states might have strong “malt liquors”, but made from corn and sugar additives to boost the alcoholic kick, but in reality they’re just really “lagers” with less hops and bitterness and more punch to them.
Complicating footnote: Foreign imported premium “malt liquors” aren’t the same as crap American domestic “malt liquors”. So you have to serve the former in fancier establishments or higher end liquor stores or distribute and market them under a different name.
Malt liquor is *the* drink of choice for the homeless and unemployed, but gets marketed as an ethnic lifestyle product. Moreover, consumption of malt liquor by the African American population specifically is disproportionate to their percentage within the US population as a whole (28% consumption rate from a group that makes up only 13% of the population?).
Why? Because it’s (a) cheap as sin, and therefore (b) easy as sin to market to (c) low-income urban areas especially (d) ethnic groups that can’t afford to pay for higher priced name-brands.
What you, as a company, might do is build brand cache and association around ethnicity and a particular drink associated with class, income, race, and inherently inferior product with higher alcohol content, slap on a catchy name (say a handgun, faux urban patron saint, iron-carbon alloy, robust animal, etc.), find a washed up 60s or 70s urban movie/tv celebrity pitchperson, use large than normal packaging (bigger cans or bottles three times larger than a regular beer can serving), and generally try to make it as “non-white” as possible.
That way, you keep “undesirable” ethnic/low-income folks from touching the mid-range to higher-end beverage brands that you’d like to position with certain social groups and/or lifestyles– and everyone can get skanked off of their poison of choice. Clever no?
To be fair, the corollary holds true for the higher the income bracket for certain brands across income brackets and race, but it heavily depends upon geography if you’re going ever have a crack at those brands.
Footnote: I always make a point to do my business with a wine or liquor store that’s woman or minority-owned/operated/managed. If I don’t I simply take my business elsewhere until I find such place. It’s worth the hassle, because I’ve always been given recommendations on the companies and vineyards they’ve been treated well and not-so-well by, and translates into who deserves the money and who doesn’t for me.
Posted 16 Sep 2006 at 11:22 am ¶
Lyonside wrote:
Iko:
That’s a smart way to go about it (re: your footnote)…
Of course, I may be also jealous since I’m in PA, where not only does the State own all liquor/wine stores, but the beer is via seperate distributors where any customer has to buy by the case. It means that the snobbery is usually limited to the wineries themselves (do I notice that some liquor stores are named just “liquor stores” in the minority/poorer ‘hoods and in the rich areas, they’re named “Wine and Spirits shoppes? Ho yeah…).
Posted 17 Sep 2006 at 7:37 am ¶
IkoIko wrote:
Howdy Lyonside:
Keen observation on store labels– that’s exactly not an accident– next time you go into either one, look at the dominant products and their placement. Which one sounds more appealing to you?
Forgot to mention one other trend that might help increase your options, especially regarding women- and minority-owned wineries (and for others who want to connect to them in other states).
Thanks to a May 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, no state is supposed to allow its own wineries to ship directly to consumers if it prohibits out-of-state wineries from doing so. This was widely interpreted as a boon to help spur in-state shipping and ultimately increase online wine sales.
Since the ruling, the number of legal direct-shipping states rose from 25 to 33. More relevant for you, in November 2005, a Pennsylvania federal judge ordered the state to stop enforcing prohibitions on out-of-state wine shipments directly to Pennsylvanians.
Gov. Rendell, as a followup, offered a legislative proposal to allow PA residents to buy bottles from out-of-state wineries… but you’d have to pay an extra 18% tax for the privilege, “out of state” wineries would have to register for a special vendor license, and in-state limited production wineries could only 125,000 gallons of wine annually versus their current limit of 200,000 gallons.
On top of that, limited in-state wineries would be able to ship up to three cases per month to Pennsylvania consumers, and would lose their current right to ship directly to restaurants, which would, in turn, be allowed to sell two bottles of wine at a time for customers to take home.
It’s still quite a few months off, but it still might open up some more options. Folks should check with their states, stores, and favorite vineyard to see what’s doable at this point where you live…
Posted 17 Sep 2006 at 11:26 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
Iko:
I remember that ruling, but the news didn’t go into as much detail as to how it affects me, Jane Casual Consumer - thanks for the info!
I would definitely welcome the chance to immediately buy a wine that I ended up trying and loving in a restaurant. Seems more egalitarian - people of any group seem more likely to try a glass in a restaurant for under $10 bucks than to do a cross-state trip to an unknown winery.
Any idea if there is a network for minority/women-owned wineries, or would I most likely need to look up an individual winery and see who the owner/founder is?
Posted 18 Sep 2006 at 9:01 am ¶
IkoIko wrote:
Lyonside,
Sorry for the long post here, but I’m including a list of some great women and minority-owned winemakers and vineyards. Figure giving you the labels would be worth more than trying to identify networks and wine clubs and the like.
Many might be unfamiliar to you, some may cost a bit more, but are *definitely* worth the effort if you can find them. Before I share my picks for some great finds on the grapevine…
I’ll be upfront: Despite the Supreme Court ruling, it may still be quite some time before you’ll enjoy the fruit of the efforts from other states unfortunately. And even if you could today, it still wouldn’t come cheap, as long as you have to buy per case rather than per bottle.
But, played right, gifts can still be shipped and brought from other states. And your shop of choice can also order directly upon request even if you can’t. Worth the effort to ask your sales rep to scope out the scene next time they go to a convention or buying trip. See my other note at the end…
American winemaking generally gets priced too high compared with wine of equivalent quality Europe, South American, and Australia as it is too. So imagine how hard it is for smaller minority- and women-owned labels to make it in that market.
One major hurdle is that they have to produce in limited quantities and have to price higher than their in-state competitors. They can’t ship widely to the East Coast, not only because of the hurdles in place before the Supreme Court ruling, but because of major confusion with state and local laws around who can sell what and where, how each state determines whose wine reaches whose borders, and how much wine gets produced within each state as well.
Then you factor in the trouble with finding distributors (state ABC stores or otherwise) who will actually carry these and other wines. If you’re a small winemaker, you stand an uphill chance of getting anyone to notice your stuff compared to the larger producers anyway, but then you have to price your stuff higher, given your costs and yield.
So, if you can’t rely upon a distributor, direct sales are your only real option and that’s why the impact of the Supreme Court ruling was so important. The lag time for states in resolving it, though, is still such a burden because it hasn’t been discussed in terms of Internet and mail order shipping.
Definitely quite a few women and minority-owned vineyards, a number with some online shipping options. Amazing stuff these and other vineyards have been producing for years, most family owned and operated with some great young talent behind the scenes, and each with amazing history and back stories to them!
So, ok, my picks on some labels to DEMAND to be stocked in your state (or to watch for when you travel) (purposefully not segregating into categories here):
Alex Sotelo Cellars (Yountville, CA)
http://www.alexsotelocellars.com
Araujo Winery (Calistoga, CA)
http://www.araujoestate.com
Black Coyote Wines (Napa, CA)
http://www.blackcoyotewines.com
Brown Estate (Napa, CA)
http://www.brownestate.com
Ceja Vineyards (Napa, CA)
http://www.cejavineyards.com
Corison Winery (St. Helena, CA)
http://www.corison.com
Esterlina Vineyards (Philo, CA)
http://www.esterlinavineyards.com
Fiddlehead Cellars (Santa Barbara, CA)
http://www.fiddleheadcellars.com
Gustavo Thrace Winery (Napa, CA)
http://www.gustavothrace.com
Handley Cellars (Philo, CA)
http://www.handleycellars.com
Merus (Napa, CA)
http://www.meruswines.com
Patricia Green Cellars (Ribbon Ridge, OR)
http://www.patriciagreencellars.com
Pine Ridge Wine (Napa, CA)
http://www.pineridgewine.com
Rideau Vineyard (Santa Ynez Valley, CA)
http://www.rideauvineyard.com
Selene Wines (Napa, CA)
http://www.selenewines.com
Sharp Cellars (Sonoma, CA)
http://www.sharpcellars.com
Stone Garden Vineyard (Modesto, CA)
http://www.sgvineyards.com
Sugarleaf Vineyards (Charlottesville, VA)
http://www.sugarleafvineyards.com
Vision Cellars (Windsor, CA)
http://www.visioncellars.com
Other wineries worth noting:
Duval-Leroy (www.duval-leroy.com) the famous French champagne house has been run by a woman since 1991 when she took over the reigns of the company after the loss of her husband. Williams Selyem (www.williamsselyem.com), Shafer Vineyards (www.shafervineyards.com), Domaine Chandon (www.chandon.com) each have Latinos as the chief winemakers– the latter actually has one of the few Latinas employed in that role with a major industry player.
And here’s one that covers a whole bunch of basis: Draper & Esquin is the woman-owned minority partner in a Native American majority-owned company called Indigenous Wines. D&E produces the wines while other partners do the marketing. More info: http://de-wines.stores.yahoo.net/inwillc.html
There are also quite a few noteworthy people of color in key winemaking, management, and trendmaker positions in the industry at larger distributors, shops, publications, marketing and purchasing, and simply making a difference by consuming the grape as well.
So one thing to point out to friends, family, professional contacts, etc. and at your favorite local shops: year-round but especially during the major heritage months consider featuring wines from African American, Latino, Asian American, Native American, etc. and women owned vineyards. If the opportunity arises through a professional society gathering or dinner party, shell out the extra bucks for a case (assuming some can be shipped to your state). If you have friends heading off to CA wine country, ask them to purchase a bottle or case in-state of the overlooked brands for you.
An interesting note: there’s cultural cache in minority-produced brands too. Ironically, it seems for African American winemakers more than Latino produced labels, they’re producing casual drinking wines that have to be priced and marketed as fine wines simply because they lack the distribution and exposure that comparable or lower-quality, readily available larger quantity wines enjoy.
Latino wine production, however, seems to position higher priced premium wines not aiming for a market other than their own, as well as a growing younger affluent base that wants premium labels as well. This is due in no small part to the tradition wine enjoys in a number of countries outside of the US and in families. Stigma and consumption really play out in some interesting ways culturally…
Without exposure these and other quality labels remain “best-kept secrets”– almost as much as the 30,000+ people of color that have been involved in nearly every aspect of grape growing and winemaking for decades in the US fields…
Posted 18 Sep 2006 at 9:58 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
(thanks for the recent reminder…)
Thank you for the research and the links. I’ll definitely consider it when I can drink wine again (in, oh, 5 months or so)
I also need to check with some friends in Ohio, who regularly do the regional tour (Erie, Ohio, Western PA, New York) of wineries and occasionally play with making their own. I’m curious to see what they’ve found regarding the wineries they visit…
Posted 22 Sep 2006 at 11:40 am ¶