Supermarket wine

Graham Mitchell a former director of "The El Vino" wine company has made some controversial remarks regarding supermarket wine costing 4 or 5 pounds. He claims that most of it is incredibly dull. I am inclined to agree with him. As he points out most of the cost of a 5 pound bottle of wine is taken up by tax, transportation, bottling, labelling, marketing and profit. When you buy a 5 pound bottle you end up getting less than a pound's worth of wine. All other things being equal when you buy a 10 pound bottle you are getting about 6 pounds of wine after deductions are made for tax etc.

Graham Mitchell therefore recommends that you pay around 10 pounds to get a decent bottle of wine. I agree with this sentiment. For a long time in these pages I have advocated spending a little more on your wine in the search for quality. The wine buyer should still beware though as there are still plenty of bottles wine being sold that are not worth ten pounds. There are also some very good wines at around 7 to 8 pounds a bottle. We should not deride wine at 5 pounds a bottle, as most of it is perfectly acceptable but it can hardly be expected to show regional character when it has been mass produced. In general, a reputable supermarket is not going to offer its customers poor wine at 5 or even 4 pounds a bottle.

When I was studying wine, six years ago, one of my lecturers was a former economist turned winemaker. He averred during one his lectures that no bottle of wine cost more than 6 pounds to produce and that included the top cru investment wines. Top investment wines are so expensive because of the "opportunity cost" which you would have to pay the grower and producer to buy their land and their brand name. So, making a little allowance for inflation, let us say that the cost of producing a top wine is now 8 pounds per bottle and if you add on 4 pounds for the tax, transportation etc. then a top wine should be priced at 12 pounds. It is at this price point where you should be getting something rather special for your money. After this price point you are starting to pay for the name and renown of the wine. My lecturer was not a Master of Wine but his views are imprinted in my mind. Wine like everything else should provide value for money.

I am reluctant to spend more than about 12 or 13 pounds for a bottle of wine and I expect to drink something exceptional when I do. One example of an exceptional wine is Château Larose Perganson, this is a fine example of a Medoc wine which really shows regional character. And which in my view is a top quality wine that rivals any others that I have drunk at much higher prices. You can still buy bottles of the 2002 vintage for around 23 pounds a bottle but, even so, at this price you are starting to pay for the good name of the producer.

Another favourite wine of mine is Torres Mas La Plana red from Catalonia; this wine is also one of the finest I have ever drunk and bottles of this wine are available for around 27 pounds. It is much cheaper in Spain. In my view red wine does not come finer than this and it is almost pointless to pay stratospheric prices to drink wine that is no better. Buy a few bottles and lay them down in a cool dark place and then enjoy them in ten to fifteen years time when you will have to pay more for the vintage.

Graham Mitchell has raised a really good point about wine. We have to be realistic and we have to have a down to earth view of both the marketing and the value for money of our wine. Most 5 pound bottles of wine are just every day drinking varieties which are not the exceptional wines that the label would have us believe.

Equally, at the other end of the scale a 250 pound bottle of wine is not worth the price difference when compared to a lesser known wine of equal quality. You are paying for the brand name and the rarity value. Much of this rarity value is created by investors. Luckily, top wines like Château Larose Perganson are still available at almost reasonable prices.