Michael Fridjhon: June 2008
You’ll be told that no cellar in the country makes as much selling a bottle of wine as the cheapest burger joint. The pent-up anger reflects the undisguised exploitation of wine, wine producers and wine drinkers. Almost everyone is aware of how little is done by most establishments to justify margins that are evident to any consumer with access to a cash-and-carry.
What is less well known – and should be a matter of some concern to the Competition Commission – is the extent to which wine wholesalerdistributors offer a turnkey service to restaurants in return for ownership of their winelists. The temptation comes in many disguises – an overriding kick-back in exchange for a monopoly, a formal “shelf-space” rental agreement for every listing, “staff-training” and of course, the ubiquitous “tailored winelist”.
As a result, a significant number of restaurateurs permit their suppliers to dictate the contents of their winelists. Do they let their butchers tell them what meat dishes to serve, or their fishmongers what fish to promote? If you are willing to tout the selection process of your stock in trade, what else is for sale?
Most of the time, the punters aren’t even aware of the rip-off. Some distributors carry wines from several cellars, so the winelists give an impression of choice. Very occasionally, the wholesaler is so proud of its efforts that it records its copyright in small print at the bottom of the page. I had a dinner recently at a pizza-pasta joint in Norwood. The formal winelist (from which – as will become evident – virtually nothing was still in stock) carried the copyright claim of Cellarmaster Wines – a distributor which bit the dust at least 10 years ago.
It’s only fair to acknowledge that wine drinkers in this country have brought this state of affairs on themselves. If you don’t vote with your wallet, you’ll empower incompetent licensees. But what is extraordinary is how easy the process has been, how no one has cried “foul!” and how the cynical exploitation of wine drinkers has become the norm.
Consider for a moment the sub-text
of a “tied” winelist. It means that the
proprietor doesn’t give a damn whether
or not you like the supplier he has chosen,
or the wines a third party has elected to make available on a monopolistic basis
in his restaurant. His only interest is
the revenue stream.
No wonder the
word “sommelier” is foreign to his
vocabulary, the glassware (often cited
as an explanation for the outrageous
mark-ups) inadequate, vintage information
absent and the average age of stock
on hand just under a month. Instead
of pride in performance or belief that
diners-out are entitled to get the most
out of the culinary experience, the
vast majority of restaurant proprietors
have sold out to Mammon.
What to do about it? Perhaps WINE should run a name-and-shame column as a monthly feature. It would carry the verified names of outlets whose winelists are managed on a turnkey basis by suppliers. There would be many surprises – but no doubt the most astonishing feature would be the number of so-called quality outlets implicated in this scam.
Michael Fridjhon is a leading wine writer
and consultant. He is chairman of the
Old Mutual Trophy Wine Show and has
extensive international judging experience.
