Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > Wine >
Feb 24, 2014 06:15 AM

Parker: Natural Wine will be Exposed as Fraud

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. I found this on his list too: "Coravin would “profoundly change” the way rare wine was drunk".

    Aren't there still a lot of questions about the impact of Argon and air seepage with Coravin for this to be really serious?

    Seems to me this board carried significant testimony regarding the impact of Argon for me to wonder. Personally I don't have the palate to be concerned about the argon thing, but I'm surprised that Parker doesn't either??

    4 Replies
    1. re: Midlife

      Coravin is pretty legit, as someone who works at a winery we use it frequently in our tasting room on very limited items that we want to last and only show to certain visitors. We have found that we can make a bottle last weeks with no discernible loss of integrity

      1. re: Winer

        Curious as to whether you've also tried a simple injection of food-grade Argon or Nitrogen..... and how it compared.

        1. re: Midlife

          It is the delivery system that comes into play. Coravin barely pierces the seal going in through the cork. In the past we always used Argon but you still had to displace the wine with air first. Coravin keeps it a closed circle

          1. re: Winer

            True. I just wonder if the entry of air (if only for a short time before purging) is really that perceptible by most people. Certainly better without the air in theory, but I'll have to take the word of people with better palates than mine.

    2. Parker does not make money out of small Natural Wine producers... go figure.

      15 Replies
      1. re: Maximilien

        Just out of curiosity, how does Parker make money from any winery?

        1. re: zin1953

          I have had the "Natural wine" discussion with many people and the general conscious I get is that it will remain a miniscule portion of the market. Beyond the inherent problems with actually consistently making wine there is the question of financial stability. Pretty much every winery tries to keep their place as clean as possible, some do better jobs than others and if you are making wines in a "natural" fashion and your winery isn't like a lab you are far more likely to get something going that you don't want and poof, you have no saleable wine. In my eyes it is sort of like the "raw food" movement, you've heard of it but don't know anyone who actually adheres to it

          1. re: Winer

            (Not sure how this answers my question, though.)

            1. re: zin1953

              Come on J. Posts get nested incorrectly all the time here. The bigger your thumb is, in proportion to your keyboard, the more likely it is to happen. Or ..... you just forget. If these board allowed you to delete or move your posts, people could self-correct. But, alas ........

              1. re: Midlife

                True, but I'm still curious as to how "Parker does not" (or does, whichever the case may be) "make money out of" (any, let alone) "small natural Wine producers."

                1. re: zin1953

                  It doesn't answer your question, as Midlife noted they get nested incorrectly. The answer to your question, which I am sure you know, is that Parker doesn't make money from any specific winery

                  1. re: Winer

                    Parker does make money from a winery. His brother in law manages Beaux Freres and Parker is a partner in the operation.
                    Beaux Freres was biodynamic a few years ago. Their web site is silent on the issue now.

                    Here's an article that talks about their biodynamic technique.

                    1. re: SteveTimko

                      Steve, see:

                      >>> “And I never talk about having a vineyard with my brother-in-law [Beaux Freres in Oregon’s Willamette Valley]. That vineyard in most vintages has sulfur levels that are sometimes so low we could have put no sulfur on the label. It is biodynamically farmed, which I am not in full agreement with, and I don’t allow him to put it on the label. We don’t fine or filter, and I think the wine is fairly delicate. Only two or three vintages have had alcohol over 15%. But I think the very best was the 1994, which came in at 15.5%." <<<

                      1. re: SteveTimko

                        A winery he never reviews so it is a stretch as the inference is does he make money from a winery that his reviews benefit

            2. re: zin1953

              the undefined scam called "wine criticism" will be exposed as a fraud (most serious wine writers take payoffs) #parkerized

              1. re: Robert Lauriston

                Oh, No!!! You're ruining my rose-colored view.

                1. re: Robert Lauriston

                  BULL$#|+, Robert. Having been doing this for rather a long time, I have to say, Robert, that I know of no "serious" wine writer in the United States that takes payoffs. Making innuendoes is one thing, Robert, but if you know of any -- NAME NAMES!

                  Fearful of being sued, email me privately and I promise your list of names will go no farther.

                  1. re: zin1953

                    I just changed a few words in Parker's tweet.

                  2. re: Robert Lauriston

                    Where's my flashlight? Searching for my protective headgear before things escalate. ;o)))

                2. re: Maximilien

                  Schildknecht would probably be the one who does most of the small, natural wine producer reviews with Neal Martin adding some.