What??
A dark stain
Data shows that predominantly younger consumers have been disappointed by Champagne’s lack of ecological commitments, and last year’s social scandals have also left a dark stain which proves difficult to erase.
People burn the electrical equivalent of 16 tons of coal whining about how Champagne contains CO2?
/s
I admit to having been priced out of finer Champagnes, but no sour grapes.
I am intrigued: better to make less than lower prices?
I call bullshit.
I don’t know what data they are referring to, but I find it exceptionally difficult to believe that sales of champagne have been impacted in any material way by any perceived lack of commitment to ecology. Over half of Americans can’t name all 3 branches of the government, but they know enough about champagne’s collective environmental record to be pissed off about it? I am claiming BS
Anyone tracking what this is about?
“…after Champagne houses engaged in post-Covid price gouging tactics, something Toubart was quick to point out in his own address.”
And the social scandals!
And look! A bird!
I think this has to be about Blake Lively.
the same people who drive gas Guzzling SUVs in the US are worried about Champagne’s ecological record? That is very funny.
Maybe the people who cannot sell their wines should try improving quality and cutting prices.
I for one have been happy to see a bunch of good deals on Champagne, much of it late releases directly from the houses at lower prices than the original releases.
Have you no ecological conscience? 