This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
News
Famous NZ winery faces backlash for using Australian grapes
One of New Zealand’s most famous wineries, Montana, is facing a backlash after it was revealed to be using Australian grapes in some of its entry-level wines as a cost-cutting measure in a bid to stay competitive.
The Marlborough winery, owned by Pernod Ricard, said the move to use Australian grapes in its ‘Classic’ and ‘Affinity’ series is a response to rising costs of local grapes and consumer demand for cheaper wines, reported The Guardian.
The wines in question are only being sold in New Zealand and all Brancott Estate labelled wines being sold in export markets continue to use New Zealand-grown fruit Pernod Ricard stressed in a statement to the drinks business, nor do the wines in the ‘Classic’ and ‘Affinity’ ranges state that the wines’ origins are New Zealand or any specific region such as Marlborough.
Kevin Mapson, managing director of Pernod Ricard New Zealand, was quoted in newspapers as saying: “It is increasingly challenging to produce New Zealand-sourced wine for the under NZ$10 category. By sourcing grapes from Australia, we can continue to make wines of the quality that Montana consumers expect at the same price point.”
Pernod Ricard’s statement elaborated further: “Following a successful trial of sourcing grapes from Australia for Montana Classic Pinot Gris and Montana Classic Sauvignon Blanc Pinot Gris, we have decided to source grapes from Australia for a wider range of Montana wines, commencing with Montana Classic Pinot Noir and Montana Classic Sauvignon Blanc.
“We are committed to delivering quality wines at good value for money in the under NZ$10 category, and feel this is best achieved by sourcing grapes from outside of New Zealand. We have worked hard to minimise the change in wine style and to ensure that the wines continue to deliver the quality our consumers expect.
“These wines will begin to be released in New Zealand from December 2017, subject to market and vintage conditions.”
The wines from the two series retail for less than NZ$10 a bottle, and the winery has been using Australian grapes since February 2017, but it was only made known after a New Zealand critic, Bob Campbell MW (who worked at Montana when it began in 1973), called out the practice as “deceptive packaging”.
“Now the bombshell announcement that Montana 2017 Sauvignon Blanc and all future vintages will be made from Australian grapes. Furthermore, the country of origin is on the back label. Perfectly legal but, in my opinion, deceptive,” Campbell wrote.
He added that the Montana brand was, “as Kiwi as Buzzy Bee, Jaffas and Fred Dagg”*.
By law, New Zealand wines have to state origin of the grapes used and wineries using grapes sourced outside of the country, have to state so on the label. Montana printed “Wine of Australia” in small-type on the back of the bottle next to the barcode, the report said.
“I guess I shouldn’t pre-judge a wine I have yet to taste, but it’s a fact that bulk Australian Sauvignon is cheaper than bulk Marlborough Sauvignon. There’s a reason for the price difference – Australian Sauvignon Blanc is, by and large, inferior,” Campell concluded.
However, the winery is not the only one using Australian grapes to make affordable wines within the country. Shingle Peak, Kim Crawford, Gunn Estate and Longridge all reportedly use Australian grapes in some of their wines as well.
Additional reporting by Rupert Millar
*A popular toy, confectionary and a television character portrayed by John Clarke respectively
New Zealand wineries have been doing this for years it is nothing new, 10% of grapes (from foreign sources) can be added to wines without having to be labelled. So to publish an article hitting Pernod Ricard because of its standing in New Zealand is in my opinion unfair, I can name some of New Zealand’s most popular wineries that do this but what does it accomplish? No matter your opinion on this matter wineries are complying with the law. So why not write an article to debate the law.
This is something of a beat up. This has been going on for years and not just by the wineries that you have listed late in your article. I am surprised that it has suddenly hit the headlines. This is not news. Frequently wineries have also sold blends of Chilean, or Australian or South African with NZ wine. There was even a reported case of wine that was said to have gone from South Africa to Spain to Australia picking up subsidies along the way. New Zealand law requires the such wines to meet our regulations. Just as we require other countries to have faith in the enforcement of our grape and wine production so we have to rely on the compliance with regulations in the country of origin and ultimately with our standards too. The labels have to declare the country of origin including any blends. The small type size required for such declarations is not unique to wine but all food products.
We are a high cost country with respect to wine input costs yet consumers are looking cheaper every day wines. If the wineries didn’t bring them in themselves we are likely to find others, such as liquor chains and supermarket chains, taking the opportunity themselves. C0nsumers have the opportunity to vote with their wallets. They don’t have to buy the wine if they don’t want to. Pernod Ricard have not shown themselves to be particularly adept at making decisions regarding their involvement in the NZ wine industry and if consumers don’t want this Australian wine that is their choice and Pernod’s loss. Then there is the aspect of if you can’t beat them join them for there is a quite a lot of very ordinary wine from other countries on our market at low p[rices.
Just let the buyer be aware of what is in the bottle.