Milking it
Milking it
Merlot's good reputation is largely undeserved, but for how much longer?
Traders talk about "leads and lags", school-teachers about "giving a dog a bad name" and marketers about "brand equity".
Essentially they are detailing the same concept: the residual value attached to a name and therefore its propensity to generate income (or not), even when the judgement is no longer justified.
It works both ways: there are many estates whose wines are no longer worthy of their reputation: a change in winemaker, a decision to push for quantity at the expense of quality, tough trading conditions leading to prolonged underinvestment in the vineyards and cellar.
However, business continues as usual for many years before the fall from grace is widely acknowledged.
By the same token - and this seems to apply more to the bigger brands - it takes a great deal more momentum (and therefore demands a greater investment in effort and time) before a quality improvement is acknowledged by consumers.
No matter how many awards, medals and trophies Kleine Zalze wins, there is a real inertia in the marketplace which does not recognise these achievements.
The same is true of Nederburg where for years the brand owners milked historic reputation while under-delivering. Now that the present winemaking team is comfortably outperforming most of the smart boutique cellars, consumers have yet to buy into the current performance.
These leads and lags relate partly to the length of time it takes for the message to penetrate the consciousness of enough punters to make a difference. Here is where brand size is important. If you are only selling 10 000 cases a year, you probably don't need to get the message through to more than a few hundred people.
They'll tell their friends, and suddenly you're flavour of the month. If your sales run into millions of litres, you not only need more converts; they in turn need to be considered "influential" by those to whom they speak. It's also more difficult for a big brand to manage word-of-mouth - and regular advertising is never as persuasive as genuine editorial.
This same inertia factor works for - and against - grape varieties. That's why it has taken Pinotage so long to climb out of the trough into which winemaking incompetence and vinification difficulties thrust it many years ago. As a result, every stand-out wine is treated as a fluke, while every nasty and poorly made example simply corroborates the prejudice.
The weight of a premium image has worked in favour of Sauvignon Blanc. Most of the examples made in the Cape five to ten years ago were tart and vapid - and actually needed a little flavourant to give them some personality.
However, before the market realised how bad the average Sauvignon was - and therefore before the variety's reputation became irretrievably compromised - the wines began the dramatic improvement we see today.
This is where Merlot finds itself at present. Despite a significant number of wines which are not fun to drink, the punters are out there in force still buying Merlot. Only the wine judges and a few grumpy wine writers are complaining about the average quality of what's in the bottle.
Fortunately, a core group of producers has been focusing on quality-related issues. Led by Luca Bein of the eponymous Stellenbosch winery, they have taken to heart the more thoughtful comments about under-performing Merlots and are seeking solutions to make a difference - at least where clonal selection and choice of site are not overwhelming impediments.
If they get it right, Merlot will track Sauvignon Blanc and bounce back before it really dips. If not, it will be staring at the reputational black hole which has made life so tough for Pinotage.
