Fairfield-Echo.com

Make it a September to remember

By Uncorked | Friday, September 5, 2008, 06:09 AM

The wine tastings and events list you’re about to read is a minor miracle. No, make that a major miracle. First, that the region’s wine shops and restaurants lay out such a lavish spread week after week, all just for l’il ol’ us, and second, that a Dayton-based wine listserv painstakingly (and sometimes, painfully) compiles all of this information into a single email for its members. Go ahead, click on “continue reading.” You’ll be as awed as I am

And for wine-related events in the Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky area — including information about a wine dinner at a new seafood restaurant that opened in downtown Cincinnati just a couple of months ago — go to Michelle’s My Wine Education blog. We’ll call her list a mini-miracle.

Dayton rules. Enjoy the wine events!

Continue reading "Make it a September to remember"...

Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment

‘Wine-at-home’ company sues Ohio, succeeds in blocking law that would have stopped sales parties

By Uncorked | Thursday, September 4, 2008, 10:25 AM

Back in June, when I wrote an entry entitled “Governor vetoes ‘wine-at-home’ legislation”, suffice to say I did not anticipate the storm that followed.

Well, that storm has shifted venues — it’s now playing out in a federal courtroom. Here’s a story I’m writing for tomorrow’s editions of the Dayton Daily News:

COLUMBUS — A California company that arranges “wine-at-home” promotional parties in Ohio and several other states has filed a lawsuit against the Ohio Division of Liquor Control in federal court and has succeeded in blocking, at least temporarily, a law that would have banned the parties.

The company, Napa-based 1-800-WineShop.com, claims the law violates the company’s First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly and is therefore unconstitutional. U.S. District Judge Michael Watson agreed with the company’s argument in granting its request for a temporary restraining order prohibiting the state from enforcing the law that would have greatly restricted the wine-at-home parties as of Sept. 1.

The law, Watson wrote, is “so sweeping that it violates at least the First Amendment.”

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Columbus on Aug. 26. The restraining order was granted Aug. 29. It is scheduled to expire after 10 days, but can be extended while the case moves forward.

In 1-800-WineShop.com wine parties, a “wine consultant” comes to another person’s home and introduces invited guests to samples of five or six of the company’s wines, then gathers and forwards wine orders to the company in exchange for a sales commission. Gov. Ted Strickland used a line-item veto in late June to ensure that language restricting wine-at-home parties remained part of a large state budget bill. Strickland’s office issued a press release saying his action “is in the public interest” because the wine-at-home parties escape regulation and oversight by the state’s liquor-control department, taxation department and local law enforcement. He signaled a “willingness to work with affected companies” to make the changes in state law that would allow them to continue to operate.

But in its lawsuit, 1-800-WineShop.com noted that the law would essentially block its 250 “Independent Wine Consultants” in Ohio who earn commissions for promoting WineShop wines from doing business.

In his Aug. 29 order, Judge Watson agreed with the assertion by 1-800-WineShop.com that the new law is “far more extensive than necessary” and said that the state’s interests in regulating alcohol “either already are or could be protected by less drastic means.”

The judge also appeared to dismiss the state’s objections that the wine-at-home parties could lead to wine being shipped to underage drinkers, noting that WineShop’s existing state permit requires it to use shipping companies that verify the age of the recipient of the wine.

Here’s perhaps the key paragraph of the judge’s decision:

“The public interest generally is served by regulation of the sale of alcoholic beverages by the states. Nonetheless, in this instance, the State of Ohio has, at the urging of the regulated community, according to defendants’ counsel, enacted a statute so sweeping that it violates at least the First Amendment. The Court does not mean to suggest the State cannot regulate plaintiffs’ in-home wine-tasting events. Indeed, counsel for the defendants has alluded to the State’s ability to fashion a permit for such activities. But a complete ban on such events does not pass constitutional muster. In this case, the public interest is best served by upholding the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.”

Ohio Division of Liquor Control spokesman Matt Mullins referred questions to the Ohio Attorney General’s office, which represents the division in legal disputes. A spokeswoman for attorney general’s office said the state’s attorneys are “reviewing the decision and considering all of their options.”

Permalink | Comments (6) | Post your comment

New study shows red wine works magic with steak — in the mouth AND the stomach

By Uncorked | Thursday, September 4, 2008, 07:20 AM

Well well WELL, check out this Wine Spectator online piece entitled “Red Wine Aids Meat Digestion”.

Turns out a team of Israeli medical researchers have concluded through a study that “red wine helps the stomach remove potentially harmful substances found in red meats, which are released during digestion, before the chemicals can do the body harm.”

Yeah, but didn’t we carnivorous wine enthusiasts already sort of suspect that — you know, instinctively?

Pass the tempranillo. And I like mine medium rare.

Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment

Marketers run amok, chapter 573: the making of ‘legal weed’

By Uncorked | Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 09:27 AM

We do so like to poke fun on occasion at those who market wine, because …. because … well, just because.

But I can’t find anything to compete this morning with my colleague Alexis Larsen’s Lounge Lizards piece entitled Beer maker to market ‘Legal Weed’”. It’s based on this LA Times story that is, shall we say, sure to entertain.

Only in America.

Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment

Tasting will take a detour — to the Far East

By Uncorked | Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 07:14 AM

The following email from Chris Cochran, of Therapy Cafe, seemed worth sharing … not every day we have an opportunity like this!

“I would like to let you know about a special tasting at Therapy Cafe. On Sunday, September 7th from 5-8 p.m., as a special edition of our Sunday Wine Series, we will be holding a sake tasting. We will offer tastes of 7 Japanese sakes and 2 shochus, as well as a complimentary sushi sampling from Thai 9. The cost is $30. We are asking people to make reservations for this special event. They can RSVP to info@therapy-cafe.com or to 937-470-2089.”

Here’s a list of the sakes and shochus to be tasted:

1.Ozeki sake — junmai

2.Hakushika Kuromatsu Chokara

3.Ozeki Karatamba

4.Ozeki Osakaya Chobei

5.Ozeki Nigori (unfiltered)

6.Hakushika Snow Beauty (unfiltered)

7.Ginza No Suzume Shochu

8.Kapa No Sasoimizu Shochu

9.Hana Awaka — sparkling sake

Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment

THIS is why wine producers tear their hair out — and don’t ship to Ohio

By Uncorked | Saturday, August 30, 2008, 07:25 AM

Thinking of getting into the wine business? Read Ship Compliant’s entry entitled “New Requirements for S Permit Applications and Renewals in Ohio” and tell me if you still want to do it.

Is this the best Ohio legislators can do? And is it any wonder it’s so difficult to get wine shipped into the state? And again, when the politicians in Columbus sit down with lobbyists to craft these laws, who is at the table representing the interests of consumers?

Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment

Michael Mondavi releases ‘super-ultrapremium’ $200-a-bottle cab

By Uncorked | Friday, August 29, 2008, 04:38 PM

Check out this piece by Steve Heimoff in Wine Enthusiast Online about “the launch of the first super-ultrapremium wine” by Michael Mondavi, to be named “M by Michael Mondavi.”

I have just one question.

What does “super-ultrapremium” mean?

(Okay, Heimoff himself explains in a comment to this post that the term was coined by someone — not him — back in the 1990s to describe a price point that was beyond the then-top-tier “ultrapremium.” And in the piece on the release of the Mondavi wine, the word is Heimoff’s, not Mondavi’s.)

Still, what’s next — supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?

Oops, that’s two questions.

Sorry.

For a Q-and-A with Mondavi on his new wine and many other topics, see Steve Heimoff’s blog entry entitled “Michael Mondavi on his new wine, high alcohol, high prices and lessons learned”.

MY lesson learned was in how to spell “supercalifragilisticexpialidocious”….

Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment