It was not my choice, but I was born in Montalcino.
There was born before me a good half of my progeny, and although its inhabitants often do not make great efforts to be nice, I must confess to being fond of this country, that even if the city would be, still remains the country.
Despite the fact the city of GDP, the country maintains its size and, especially, mentality: closed, autarkic, perched, as its location suggests.
Thank God, I might add, because if Montalcino has become what it is, it owes to Nature but also integralism and stubbornness of its people and its farmers.
Then it happens that the money arrives. Many, not really for everyone, but for many.
So many farmers become entrepreneurs, some entrepreneurs become speculators, multiply the pounds of Brunello, one begins to murmur, to investigate someone and someone else to negotiate.
Sangiovese loses its monopoly, the international grape varieties indigenous or imported, are taking hold and accommodate Doc in the sly "Sant'Antimo.
But you know, are times of crisis, the market does not draw much, the cellars are full and so instead of trying to make better products (you can), to better promote those who are, or heresy, to drive down prices what?
It dilutes the brand, allowing 15% of other varieties in the statute of Rosso di Montalcino.
Yes, because it has always been the insurmountable problem is that ... the Sangiovese Sangiovese know too, as history teaches us Chianti.
I'm not a winemaker nor a marketing expert, so I do not attempt to explain why, but it seems to me its a big shit, short-sighted idea that should not even touch a Montalcino. That's it.
I am unable to explain why, but I have the distinct feeling that it will be a big mistake you can undo by reversing only when the brand is already "disgraced."
0 comments:
Post a Comment