Corked Bottles on CellarTracker: A winemaker’s perspective

[Marshall_Manning]

Just curious how you know they’re “just fine.” Do they taste returned bottles?

I worked in the distribution industry for almost 10 years, and would smell a lot of the wines that were returned just to see how many were actually noticeably flawed. Only about 10% of our returns were actually flawed. Most were just either mediocre wines that were always that way or wines that a customer didn’t like.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

Just curious how you know they’re “just fine.” Do they taste returned bottles?

I worked in the distribution industry for almost 10 years, and would smell a lot of the wines that were returned just to see how many were actually noticeably flawed. Only about 10% of our returns were actually flawed. Most were just either mediocre wines that were always that way or wines that a customer didn’t like.

Based on your experience, Marshall, about what percentage of purchased bottles were returned as (allegedly) defective?

[Andrew_Dodd]

I usually think of going back to where I bought the wine if there’s an issue with it, not necessarily back to the winery.

Which is interesting. I feel like the wineries are more protective of their reputation and generally happier to replace corked bottles.

I’ve had more retailers refuse to replace bottles (who have subsequently lost my business).
I’m looking at you Great Grapes of Cary, NC…

[Marshall_Manning]

Based on your experience, Marshall, about what percentage of purchased bottles were returned as (allegedly) defective?

It’s been 5 years (almost to the day, sadly) since I was in the industry, so I don’t remember exact numbers, but it is a very small amount, under 1% for sure. You always see numbers tossed around that 3-5% of all wines are infected with TCA, and if that’s accurate then the return rate is actually lower than you would expect. But that is assuming that the general public knows what a corked wine smells like and wants to take the effort of returning it as opposed to thinking they just don’t like that wine. I just always thought it was odd that a very high percentage of the returns weren’t really defective.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

Thanks, Marshall. “Under 1%” is what I would have guessed, too, if not “significantly under 1%.”

Assuming that to be true, it strikes me as a terrible business decision to deny returns of legitimately flawed bottles because a certain percentage of “TCA” returns aren’t flawed at all.

I don’t doubt you when you say “And you wouldn’t believe the number of “bad” bottles that get returned to distributors that are just fine but that have to be returned for credit if you want to do business with chains or get restaurant placements.”, but it seems to me if the rate of returns is as low as it is then this is an operating cost that could easily be absorbed someway, somehow.

[Marshall_Manning]

Thanks, Marshall. “Under 1%” is what I would have guessed, too, if not “significantly under 1%.”

Assuming that to be true, it strikes me as a terrible business decision to deny returns of legitimately flawed bottles because a certain percentage of “TCA” returns aren’t flawed at all.

I don’t doubt you when you say “And you wouldn’t believe the number of “bad” bottles that get returned to distributors that are just fine but that have to be returned for credit if you want to do business with chains or get restaurant placements.”, but it seems to me if the rate of returns is as low as it is then this is an operating cost that could easily be absorbed someway, somehow.

Oh, you’re right about that in terms of being a small percentage. And I believe that people should be able to return bottles that are defective. My only issue is that distributors (who didn’t choose the cork nor bottle the defective wine) end up getting stuck with the cost a lot of the time and that many importers and wineries just don’t care about it once the wine is sold.

[A_Mishaan]

Interesting discussion. For another data point, here’s my experience.

On CT I just mark off “flawed” when I consume for my own records. Rarely include a note and never a score.

In terms of “returning,” I’ve never actually returned a bottle to anyone. If it’s a bottle I bought directly from a producer, I send off an email and over the years I’ve gotten credit/replacement with no issue. This has been easy with Carlisle, Anthill, Saxum, Rivers-Marie, off the top of my head. Mike Officer recently responded within minutes. I don’t really ship wine, so I’m not sure I’d even know how to actually send it back legally. And for something bought at retail, I usually just don’t bother because I’m lazy, and I suspect it would be more hassle than it’s worth.

[Gabe_Berk]

Very gracious of the OP. Flawed closure accounts for 2%-5% of lost product. If the cost increase from cork to a screw cap or DIAM isn’t much, I’d go unconventional closure as a vineyard/winery owner. Just me…

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

Thanks, Marshall. “Under 1%” is what I would have guessed, too, if not “significantly under 1%.”

Assuming that to be true, it strikes me as a terrible business decision to deny returns of legitimately flawed bottles because a certain percentage of “TCA” returns aren’t flawed at all.

I don’t doubt you when you say “And you wouldn’t believe the number of “bad” bottles that get returned to distributors that are just fine but that have to be returned for credit if you want to do business with chains or get restaurant placements.”, but it seems to me if the rate of returns is as low as it is then this is an operating cost that could easily be absorbed someway, somehow.

Oh, you’re right about that in terms of being a small percentage. And I believe that people should be able to return bottles that are defective. My only issue is that distributors (who didn’t choose the cork nor bottle the defective wine) end up getting stuck with the cost a lot of the time and that many importers and wineries just don’t care about it once the wine is sold.

I hear ya. Seems to (ignorant) me the distributor could either (1). marginally increase their prices to cover this small expense or (2). not work with the offending importers/wineries or (3). just suck it up and deal with it. Distributors are in the chain of commerce, and they choose to traffic in goods known to have a certain fail rate, so I have very little sympathy for them (but more than zero!) — it’s just part of doing this business.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

Very gracious of the OP. Flawed closure accounts for 2%-5% of lost product. If the cost increase from cork to a screw cap or DIAM isn’t much, I’d go unconventional closure as a vineyard/winery owner. Just me…

Hi Gabe,

A couple questions:

1. did you mean flawed closures account for 2% - 5% of lost product, or 2% - 5% loss of product?
2. How do you know those figures? Are you ITB?

[Gabe_Berk]

Very gracious of the OP. Flawed closure accounts for 2%-5% of lost product. If the cost increase from cork to a screw cap or DIAM isn’t much, I’d go unconventional closure as a vineyard/winery owner. Just me…

Hi Gabe,

A couple questions:

1. did you mean flawed closures account for 2% - 5% of lost product, or 2% - 5% loss of product?
2. How do you know those figures? Are you ITB?

2% - 5% of wine is destroyed due to flawed closure (bad corks leading to undesirable/undrinkable taste). Just an average, some more, some less.

Been ITB before and my family is ITB.

If I farmed my vineyard, harvested, crushed, barreled and bottled my wine for as many thousands of dollars I paid to due so, I personally would use screw cap or DIAM as the closure. Especially if the overall bottle cost is within reason vs. cork closure. Luckily, I’m just a consumer, but can tell you its a bummer when the cork ruins all the hard work and time put inside the bottle when unconventional closure almost assuredly would prevent such situation.

[Marshall_Manning]

I hear ya. Seems to (ignorant) me the distributor could either (1). marginally increase their prices to cover this small expense or (2). not work with the offending importers/wineries or (3). just suck it up and deal with it. Distributors are in the chain of commerce, and they choose to traffic in goods known to have a certain fail rate, so I have very little sympathy for them (but more than zero!) — it’s just part of doing this business.

Oh, they often do a combination, but usually #3. It’s just a pain in the butt for them, that’s all, especially smaller distributors who don’t have the power of the big boys. And I’m sure policies differ greatly among them regarding returns and how long they will accept them, etc. But if people have issues with returning wines at retail (especially ones that are a few years old), it may be because the distributor won’t give the retailer credit and the retailer doesn’t want to eat the cost.

[PaulMills]

Michael,
I have had about 12 bottles of FB that had TCA, please ship me a replacement case ASAP.

Obviously just kidding, every bottle we have ever opened has been fabulous. We were so happy to hoist you and Ally for a tasting when you were getting started. As I pair down my cellar some and get rid of wines that do not suit my palate anymore, I hope to be able to buy more like yours.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

Very gracious of the OP. Flawed closure accounts for 2%-5% of lost product. If the cost increase from cork to a screw cap or DIAM isn’t much, I’d go unconventional closure as a vineyard/winery owner. Just me…

Hi Gabe,

A couple questions:

1. did you mean flawed closures account for 2% - 5% of lost product, or 2% - 5% loss of product?
2. How do you know those figures? Are you ITB?

2% - 5% of wine is destroyed due to flawed closure (bad corks leading to undesirable/undrinkable taste). Just an average, some more, some less.

Been ITB before and my family is ITB.

If I farmed my vineyard, harvested, crushed, barreled and bottled my wine for as many thousands of dollars I paid to due so, I personally would use screw cap or DIAM as the closure. Especially if the overall bottle cost is within reason vs. cork closure. Luckily, I’m just a consumer, but can tell you its a bummer when the cork ruins all the hard work and time put inside the bottle when unconventional closure almost assuredly would prevent such situation.

Thanks for the response, Gabe. And I understand where you’re coming from re: the frustrations of having a piece of tree bark ruin a bunch of hard work and time that you’ve put in to making wine.

[Michael_Sterling]

Michael,
I have had about 12 bottles of FB that had TCA, please ship me a replacement case ASAP.

Obviously just kidding, every bottle we have ever opened has been fabulous. We were so happy to hoist you and Ally for a tasting when you were getting started. As I pair down my cellar some and get rid of wines that do not suit my palate anymore, I hope to be able to buy more like yours.

The Paul Mills “In Home Tasting” tree is kind of impressive. You wouldn’t believe how many tastings I can trace back to you and Caroline. Kind of crazy

[Brian_Glas]

I still don’t get why wineries use a closure method that has such a high failure rate. There are alternatives.

[Charlie_Carnes]

Very well said Michael. I did have a corked bottle that you replaced, without asking. To me, I single corked bottle means nothing, I believe it is just a part drinking wine. I do think it is important, especially if the taster is sure of what he’s tasting, as I believe most here are, is to spot trends. That is where I think the winemaker/company should really work hard to respond and be glad of the info… as much as it probably hurts sometimes. But again, thanks for the OP and the good customer service.

[larry_schaffer]

I still don’t get why wineries use a closure method that has such a high failure rate. There are alternatives.

This . . .

And here’s the interesting thing - cork companies are spending tens of millions of dollars to develop systems to eradicate TCA which is ironic in a number of ways:

1. Most consumers could not detect a corked wine. Period

2. Many consumers, including many on here, choose not to do anything about a corked wine for various reasons - 1) the price is ‘too low’ to hassle with it; 2) it’s an older bottle so oh well or 3) they chalk it up to the variabilities of the closure

3. TCA is only one of the problems when it comes to natural corks, and often, its issues pale in comparison to random oxidation due to variable cell shapes in natural cork

Cheers.

[Rodrigo_B]

I still don’t get why wineries use a closure method that has such a high failure rate. There are alternatives.

This . . .

And here’s the interesting thing - cork companies are spending tens of millions of dollars to develop systems to eradicate TCA which is ironic in a number of ways:

1. Most consumers could not detect a corked wine. Period

2. Many consumers, including many on here, choose not to do anything about a corked wine for various reasons - 1) the price is ‘too low’ to hassle with it; 2) it’s an older bottle so oh well or 3) they chalk it up to the variabilities of the closure

3. TCA is only one of the problems when it comes to natural corks, and often, its issues pale in comparison to random oxidation due to variable cell shapes in natural cork

Cheers.

But then what Berserkers do with their $125 Durants and $300 Code38s?

[JBrochu]

Is it true that most consumers cannot detect a corked wine? Does that just mean they don’t know why it tastes bad? I find it hard to believe that they cannot tell that it tastes bad, regardless of if they know why.