It is a question I have wondered about for a while. I reckon “sherry” has more downsides than upsides. My reasons are set out in this post - What’s in a name | undertheflor.com
So far reaction has been about 80/20 in favour of ditching the brand, but it must be said the people I have asked are fellow enthusiasts of el Marco: I would be fascinated to know what you all think.
Vote early, vote often as they used to say!
I am afraid that the tide of history is against you, there. The number of drinkers who understand that Sherry/WoJaS/Jerez/“Andalusian Happy Juice” is a type of wine probably outweighs those who are clueless as to the base material (grapes).
At best, a change of moniker may obscure the product’s identity. I mean, it could be called “fortified wine” where appropriate, but then there’s this:
As the world of Sherry is changing, I believe that it is all the more important that the fundamental label, the worldwide recognition of the title, be upheld, even as the boundaries are tested further and further.
I hadn’t seen that post by Paula but I am all over those unfortified wines and that is precisely why I think it is worth considering the terms we use to describe the many, many, different kinds of wines that come from Jerez, Sanlucar and around. I can see your point though!
An interesting conundrum.
On one hand (as Drew says) there is massive product recognition which might be impossible to rebuild.
On the other, sherry has suffered an awfully bad reputation for decades, supposedly being the tipple of Grannies and Great Aunts at Christmas.
So should they rebrand?
I’d be cute about it and leave the high volume commodity product as simply ‘Sherry’ (with appropriately simplified sub-categories). However for the more specialist sherries I would:
The idea is not to throw away the mass market, but to enhance the specialist market.
Of course this is rather more difficult in Spanish speaking markets, where sherry is presumably not mentioned.
regards
Ian
True, Ian. Yet, don’t non-Spanish speaking drinkers struggle with the names of the Andalusian wines?
I took about five or six years worth of Spanish in HS and college. The dialects of different regions are enough to make your head spin. Perhaps that’s part of my difficulty in penetrating Burgundy’s villages and Crus! 
The big brands usually venture to apply colored text on various styles of Sherry wine, along with adjectives (blue script: “light, refreshing FINO”).
If I were lucky enough to find an Equipo Navazes bottle on the shelf of my friendly liquor shop, how am I to know just what I am getting?
So replace one word with many words? Bad idea. When I was younger, Chianti meant crappy wine in wicker. They changed perceptions.
Sherry will always be a hard sell. Renaming it won’t help.
No. The market will always remain about what it is for sherry. IMHO.
I would vote to keep it. It immediately recognises the product. Yes there is the cheap stuff. But there is the emerging exclusive stuff too. Those drinking that are very knowledgeable. One can add further descriptors to that product
Thanks a lot guys I really appreciate the feedback - I suspected I might be getting into one of those groupthink loops. Sherry is probably still useful as long as it doesn’t obscure the fact that these are wines - the way forward is education rather than rebranding. Will give it some further thought.
Cheers
I think the market needs to be retrained rather than the product re-branded.
Here in Australia, we’ve had the Sherry name phased out for our equivalent products here, along with others like Port and Tokay. Champagne was phased out a bit earlier and is the only one that has been successful for both the Champagne houses and the local sparkling styles, largely due to a lot of education and market presence.
The local fortifieds on the other hand, have been decimated by it. An ill advised work-shopping exercise came up with the names “Apera” to replace “Sherry” and “Topaque” to replace Tokay. Port was simpler as “Tawny” was still allowed and Vintage styles now get labeled as Vintage Fortified, or Fortified followed by the grape name. Half the producers hate the names so don’t use them, and it is all a bit of a dogs-breakfast where the products now have no clear branding or recognition.
So in my view, while Sherry may not be a perfect name, It does have recognition and I think it is easier to re-train the market on something they at least know a little about, than start from scratch. Indeed with Sherry, I think there is a lot more understanding, at least among the wine loving public, than there was, say 3 or 4 years ago so that process is well underway.
I’m trying to think of a single example of where a century old brand was given up for something new and anything good came of it.
Is there one?
Ordeal by fire?
To Paul’s point, I think the process is indeed underway.
The Aussies did themselves no favors by coming up with arbitrary names. I’ve never even heard of those. At least sherry owns it’s own name.
I think we Australians were forced to change the name by EU. And I believe that those there arguably the best names chosen by a panel from a long list of names that were put up for voting.
I agree Apera sucks as a name. Fortunately ‘Muscat’ being a grape name could still be used but Tokay had be to changed to Opaque.
If Spain wants to abandon the name ’ Sherry" I am sure Australians winemakers would love to buy that one for their use.
Chianti, Riesling, Sherry - all terms that have baggage. The first two have largely turned that around. No reason the third can’t do the same.
The Sherry brand has gotten itself into a fine mess, but I think I am in agreement with Greg and Paul that the worst is behind it and the corner is slowly being turned and the appropriate thing to do is redouble the efforts to both rehabilitate traditional Sherry’s image and to introduce non-fortified wines. While some of the latter may have great promise, I do not think they have achieved sufficient market presence to ditch the brand.
I do think the Sherry brand could help itself by providing better labeling and more resources to highlight diversity. Making producer websites more user-friendly and informative would help too. Just as an example, Osborne makes a splendid line-up of traditional rare old Sherries (putting aside the Domecq acquisitions and PX Viejo for the time being) including an Amontillado, a Palo Cortado, and two Olorosos, but when you go to their website and read the spec sheets it sounds like the same basic product with slightly different amounts of PX and slightly different average ages.
this
True, Sherry is a bit of a hard sell. I understand Andrew’s concern about the Sherry brand stifling the emergence of new wines that depart from the traditional stuff, but it seems the unfortified Douro wines have managed to make a name for themselves apart from Port. Perhaps that is a model to look at, with fortified wines working out the Sherry brand problem, and newer entries carving out their own identity free of any misconceptions or prejudices due to the Sherry name…
David, guys, many thanks for these responses. I am convninced and will stop being so precious about it - that last post nails it for me. Let the old school sherries fix their own brand problem, and the new wines find their own way. Just need to find a name for them: Blanco de Albariza?
Guys, wanted to give you a heads up that you have convinved me and I will write a revised piece accordingly. Want to make sure I give credit where it is due so let me know if you do not want me to reference you (I was thinking just names and a link to the thread). Cheers