Don’t drink the wine at charity benefits. I happen to attend quite a few of these events over the course of the year. The speeches can really drag on and it often seems the only recourse—short of heckling the speakers or hurling the centerpiece at the podium—is to drink copiously. Unfortunately the wine at these affairs is inevitably inexpensive—in the interest of keeping costs down and delivering more of the ticket price to the worthy cause in question—and almost inevitably lousy. Veterans of the benefit circuit are familiar with the particularly pernicious hangover that can result from swilling plonk for three and a half hours. For some reason the liquor is usually of a much higher caliber than the wine, so my new intention is to nurse a couple of vodka-and-sodas through the course of these evenings. Maybe three if the speeches are really long.

I’m not sure what kind of charity events Mr. McInerney attends, but I personally have never once donated nor served a lousy wine in over 15 years of working at and/or providing product to charitable events. Maybe that’s because I never worked for a company that marketed lousy wine; though, thinking about it, I don’t recall tasting too many lousy wines supplied by others at these events. So maybe my definition of what is “good” vs. “lousy” is much more forgiving than Mr. McInerney’s.

That’s the only way I can make this work in my head, because it makes little sense to donate lousy wine to a charity event. Think about it: who attends charity events? Who pays three- or four-figure prices for tickets to black tie events supporting one cause or another? Very generally speaking, it is people who have wealth — or at the very least, have a decent amount of disposable income. This exactly the target audience for fine wine companies — people who can afford to buy their wines, and particularly, their more expensive wines. So it behooves the company to donate a wine of at least decent, if not excellent, quality to a charitable event; the theory being that if any of these well-to-do folks like the wine, they may go out and buy it after the event.

Though, there’s another element at stake here, and that is the size of the audience. If a charity event is expected to attract, say, 150 attendees, a decent-sized wine company can probably financially justify giving away five cases of $15 wine to a worthy cause. (Please note I’m being very general here with the math, figuring on 2 glasses of wine per person and around $500 in wholesale cost of goods to the supplier.) And I think that $15 for a bottle of wine is fair insurance against it being “lousy”. Though, of course, it’s still subjective; one person’s “lousy” is another’s delightful. But my point is that most people — even the snobbiest of snobs — would likely agree that most wines costing at least fifteen bucks are expected to be of decent quality, regardless of how it tastes (does that make any sense?).

Now, again, that’s for a 150-person event. When the crowd gets larger, the donation of product needs to increase as well. McInerney opines “For some reason the liquor is usually of a much higher caliber than the wine…”. The answer is quite simple: even high-caliber booze is much less expensive to provide than medium-quality wine. First of all, liquor by volume is dirt cheap compared to wine — the profit that suppliers make from booze is astronomically higher than wine. Second, because of this profit, liquor companies usually have a much higher budget for things like marketing, PR, and donations. Third, much less liquor is needed per person than wine for an event. Do the math: one 750 ml bottle of wine contains about five glasses. In contrast, one 750 ml bottle of booze provides anywhere from 12 to 20 pours, depending on the strength of the drink. Not to mention, most drinks are mixed, so the bartender can go a little lighter on the pours and stretch the bottle out without most people noticing. Do you know how many people have said “fill it up” to me when I poured their wine glass only half-full? Can’t get away with light pours as easily with the wine. But I digress … the bottom line is that it’s more economically feasible for a company to donate spirits than wine.

Finally, there is the issue of brand exposure. We would like to believe that alcohol beverage companies donate their product for the sole purpose of helping humanity. In reality, most do it first for humanity, but for the secondary purpose of building brand identity — and establishing identity is much easier for a spirit than it is for a wine, for the simple fact that there are many more thousands of wine labels than there are spirits brands. And this is why and where the “lousy” wine may rear its ugly head. It goes like this: wine company is approached about making a donation, but doesn’t really have room in the budget. Still, they feel it’s a good cause and want to see what they can do. They look through inventory and there are 30 cases left of last year’s vintage of Merlot. Rather than let it rot away in the warehouse or destroy it, they donate it to the big event. They’re not worried about the wine making a bad impression because they’re fairly certain that the people there aren’t terribly concerned about the wine they’re drinking — they’re there for the cause and to get a buzz on. Chances are, if a handful of people liked the wine, they’d never remember the name nor the label after the event.

Personally, I only donate wines that I believe are good (i.e., “not lousy”), and I prefer that the event provides opportunities for brand exposure where possible. I don’t necessarily need to have an obnoxiously large banner hanging from the rafters but at the very least I want the opportunity to provide a little takeaway card depicting the wine’s label and name so that people can find it again if they enjoy it.

So maybe that’s the litmus test for wine drinking at a charity — if there’s a sign, and/or a takeaway card, chances are it’s going to be decent. On the other hand, if the wine’s identity is a mystery, maybe there’s a good reason.

What’s your experience? Have you had lousy wines at charities? Good wines? Wines you wanted to buy again?

Here are a few of my favorite sparklers, all at economical price points:

Champagne: Heidsieck & Co. Monopole Blue Top ($30)
This is “real” Champagne, from France, made in a dry style — so if you’re into the sweeter sparklers, stay away. Otherwise, dive right in. You will be excited with anticipation the moment the wine is poured into the glass, as it will become charged with an abundance of aggressive, tiny bubbles that develop an immediate, full foam (or mousse, as the geeks call it). Clean, citrusy, slightly toasted aroma that also has a hint of mineral. In the mouth, you get very similar flavors as were on the nose, along with a touch of honey and pear, all tightly wound by a stiffly acidic wrapper. It has excellent structure, yet remains elegant and has the perception of being lighter than it really is. You can read a previous post on Heidsieck Champagne here. At around $30, it’s one of best remaining bargains coming out of Champagne, France. Find Heidsieck et Monopole Blue Top Champagne NV at a local retailer via Wine-Searcher.

Cava: Juve y Camps Reserva de la Familia ($15)
If you can’t afford good Champagne, the next best thing is a bottle of Prosecco (a sparkling wine from Italy) or Cava, which is Spain’s version of bubbly. This example from Juve y Camps has lots of fizz, good acidity, is fruity yet dry, and finishes with a nice clean aftertaste. Strong scents of pear and spice in the nose. Good fruit, good acidity and good finish. Nice mousse (bubbles/froth). Not overly dry; hint of sweetness. Elegant. A super bargain. Find Juve y Camps Reserva de la Familia Cava at a local retailer via Wine-Searcher.

Brachetto d’Acqui: Rosa Regale ($21)
To me this is the ideal wine for the holidays because of its festive, bright red color and mild sweetness that makes it a crowd pleaser. It’s not dry by any means, but it has a racy acidity that tones down the sweetness and makes it marry well with food – particularly chocolate. Intense raspberry and strawberry flavors are carried with a soft fizz that is less bubbly than Champagne, but effervescent enough for celebrating. Disclaimer: I work for the company that imports Rosa Regale. Find Rosa Regale Brachetto d’Acqui at a local retailer via Wine-Searcher.

Prosecco: Maschio Prosecco Brut ($12)
In the past I have recommended and enjoyed Prosecco from Riondo, Zardetto, Nino Franco, and Zonin. This year I’m suggesting one that isn’t quite as widely known but is similarly delicious and affordable: Maschio dei Cavalieri. It has a citrusy nose with hints of honeysuckle and toasted Wonderbread that remind me of Champagne. In the mouth it has clean white fruit carried on coarse bubbles, along with a touch of mineral. There is enough acidity to match fairly well with food, particularly spicy Asian dishes, and also with shellfish, Greek cuisine, pasta salads. Disclaimer: like the Rosa Regale, I discovered this wine at my new job working for the importer. Find Maschio dei Cavalieri at a retailer near you via Wine-Searcher.

USA Sparkling Wine: Domaine Ste. Michelle Blanc de Noirs ($12)
Color is a pale orange — more like cooked salmon than pink. Soft, fruity nose of citrus and a hint of raspberry. Pretty good mousse, with persistent medium-sized bubbles. In the mouth it is mostly dry, with maybe a touch of sweetness that is due more to a fun and fruity ripeness than dosage. Finishes completely dry, with a good dose of acidity, which helps with structure and food matching. This runs about $9-12 for a bottle, and at that price it is a steal. Domaine Ste. Michelle is one of, if not the, most respected wineries in Oregon. Find Domaine Ste. Michelle Blanc de Noirs at a local retailer via Wine-Searcher

What cork will YOU be popping for New Year’s?

In the past I spent many hours in the weeks before Bird Day cooking turkey and various trimmings, and matching them with all types of wines in the hopes of finding magical pairings. After several years of this annual exercise, I’ve come to a startling conclusion:

It just doesn’t matter.

That’s right — go ahead and buy any wine you like for Thanksgiving, because chances are, with the wide assortment of dishes typically found on the table for the football day feast, it will match with something.

Wait, that’s not what you wanted to hear? You really want some guidance and specific suggestions? No problem, I can do that.

Considering the cornucopia of flavors on the table, my suggestion is to go with a “versatile” wine: one that can match with a variety of foods. Generally, this will be a wine with higher-than-average acidity, very little or no oak, and a flavor profile that is fresh and bright but not jammy nor overwhelming to the palate. As it turns out, wines like this also tend to go well with the typical main course of roast turkey. Now, what wines fit this broad description? I can suggest a few.

One of my favorite “go-to” wines for versatility (and for pleasing many palates) is Chianti. Choose one from any of the sub-zones — Classico, Rufina, Colli Fiorentini, etc. — as they all have the same basic qualities you need for matching multiple dishes. Chianti wines are made primarily from the Sangiovese grape, which provides pleasant food friendly characteristics such as cherry aromas and flavors, ample acidity, and medium tannins. Generally speaking, a “Riserva” will be more expensive and provide more complexity, but you would do just fine with a non-Riserva if it better fits your budget. Here’s the part where I shamelessly plug two wines that I represent as a PR flack: Cecchi Chianti Classico and Banfi Chianti Superiore. Yes I’m biased but I also have tasted these wines many times with food and can guarantee their food-friendliness and that they will be perfectly suitable for the holiday bird as well as many of the trimmings — and they are under $15.

Along the same lines, if you have the wherewithal and desire to spend $20 and above, you may want to go with Sangiovese-based wines from outside of the Chianti region: Rosso di Montalcino, Vino Nobile di Montepulciano, or Sangiovese di Romagna. All are appropriate and will provide a bit more structure and intensity in flavor. What brand you choose is up to personal preference; in regard to quality, you will get good value for your dollar if you stay in the $19-30 range.

Another great “go-to” wine for food is Beaujolais — preferably, a Beaujolais Cru. You may be familiar with Beaujolais Nouveau — and I encourage you to try it for fun, if you wish. But for more serious enjoyment (wait, should enjoyment be serious?) you are better off choosing Beaujolais Cru, which will have better structure, a longer finish, and higher levels of those all-important food-matching necessities: acidity and tanning. Many people would also agree that Beaujolais Cru tastes a heckuva lot better than Nouveau — but remember, taste is subjective. What exactly is a “Beaujolais Cru”? On the label, it will say “Beaujolais” somewhere, as well as one of these other words: Brouilly, Chenas, Chiroubles, Cote de Brouilly, Fleurie, Julienas, Morgon, Moulin-a-Vent, Regnie, or Saint-Amour. Here’s the best part: you should be able to find any of these for less than $20; the brand you’re likely to find most easily is also very reliable: Georges Duboeuf (my favorites are the Brouilly and Morgon Jean Descombes). Tip: try to get one from the 2009 vintage, which was outstanding; many experts feel that 2009 Beaujolais Cru is the best value in wine buying right now.

OK, there are two red suggestions, now how about white? Again, I’m going to Italy, where wines are made for food. Pinot Grigio, Soave, Vermentino, and white blends from Tuscany and Sicily are all good choices. Which ones? There are too many to mention, but as a general rule of thumb, you usually get what you pay for — and I suggest you spend a minimum of $12. Specific wines that I know well from the Banfi Vintners portfolio (*cough*, more shameless plugs) include Bolla Soave Classico (yes, Bolla, but make sure it’s 2010), Centine Bianco, and Banfi San Angelo Pinot Grigio (stunning, and the only Pinot Grigio made in Montalcino). Outside Banfi, I highly recommend Planeta La Segreta Bianco, Argiolas Costamolino Vermentino, and Dogajolo Bianco for the Bird Day feast.

Beyond Italy, for whites, you might want to go with a dry Riesling — preferably from Alsace, Germany, Washington state, or Long Island, New York — in that order. Next choice is Pinot Gris from Alsace or Oregon. Then, Viognier, ideally from the Rhone Valley. Viognier tends to have low acidity but its oily texture and perfumey aroma go nicely with the holiday bird and many stuffing variations. What? No Chardonnay or Sauvignon Blanc? I could recommend both, but those varietals can vary so wildly depending on the region and the producer that it’s hard to include them as a broad suggestion. If it helps, I find Geyser Peak, Wente, Francis Ford Coppola, Simi, Estancia, and Chateau Ste. Michelle to be reliable, easy to find, and reliable domestic producers of Chardonnay and Sauvignon Blanc. I also love anything from Groth, but their wines tend to be more expensive.

Finally, there is rose — which may be the best bet for a Thanksgiving meal. Personally, I like dry rose, and there still should be a few to choose from. Generally, you want to buy a rose that is as young and fresh as possible; in other words, you’ll want a 2010. The “you get what you pay for” rule works here too. The best come from southern France, but there are very good ones from all over the world — ask the store merchant for a recommendation.

Hey, what happened to Zinfandel? Doesn’t everyone suggest a Zin, since it is indigenous to the USA? In the past, I have, but these days I can’t, because most Zins I see on the retail shelves are hot (high in alcohol), fat (low in acidity), and have flavor profiles that tend toward jammy, artificially oaky, and slightly sweet. In short, not food friendly. If you like Zin, however, don’t let me stop you — because this is my personal, subjective opinion that means little to anyone but myself. Furthermore, as stated earlier: it doesn’t matter; likely, there’s something at the table that will taste great with a modern-day Zin.

I’ve made enough suggestions, so now let’s hear from you — what wines do you suggest for Thanksgiving, and why?

No, this is not a wine made by the mixed-martial arts fighter — though it is similarly intense and packs a punch.

“Celeste” Crianza is made by Miguel Torres the wine producer — a diverse family-owned company that makes wine in Spain, Chile, and California. This particular bottle comes from the Ribera del Duero region in Spain (the company also owns vineyards in Penedes, Jumilla, Priorat, Toro, Conca de Barbera, and Priorat). Torres has the largest winery in Spain and is its largest producer, exporting to 140 countries.

This wine is the family’s first foray into Ribera del Duero. The name “Celeste” is translated from Spanish as “celestial”, “heavenly”, or simply, “sky”, and refers to the fact that the vineyards are located 895 meters above sea level — in other words, way up in the sky and close to the heavens. To me this 100% Tempranillo wine is more like a modern Rioja than a Ribera del Duero, because it is clean, has upfront juicy red berry fruit, and has a distinctive vanilla oak element. But then again, I haven’t really been “into” Ribera del Duero in a while, so maybe that region is modernizing their wine as well.

The nose has an opulent floral fragrance with ripe red fruits and a hint of cassis. Rose petals, cherry, sweet blueberry, and boysenberry. In the mouth it is ripe and juicy with flavors of blueberry and boysenberry. The texture is creamy smooth. Tannins are mild as is the acidity; this is borderline “fat”. The finish is a bit hot, but that’s what you get with such a ripe flavor profile.

Due to the fatness and heat this is a little difficult to match with food. But, I like it as a “cocktail” wine or “fireside” wine; something to drink on its own.

Find Torres Celeste Crianza at a retailer near you using Wine-Searcher, Vinquire, or WineZap

Disclosure: I received this wine as a press sample

As it turned out, both wines mildly surprised me — they are easygoing and simple but enjoyable and have enough structure to match with a variety of foods. That’s the nice thing about having no expectations — it’s hard to be disappointed.

The name “Big House” came about because the winery is located “an ankle iron’s toss” from the Soledad State Correctional Facility in Soledad, California (Monterey County). It was founded by Randall Grahm — better known as the founder/winemaker at Bonny Doon — and the brand’s focus is to appeal to the “non-snob” by making wine less complicated and more fun and easy to enjoy (hey, just like this website!). I have to admit the branding is clever and appealing, if a bit corny. But, I’m corny myself and therefore have an appreciation for their efforts.

Big House White is a fruity summer sipper with a faint hint of sweetness that makes a good foil for spicy hot foods. I paired it successfully with Indian cuisine as well as buffalo wings and BBQ ribs. It’s also thoroughly enjoyable on its own, with a good chill. For those who care, it’s made from a “kitchen sink” blend of 22.7% Malvasia Bianca, 15.9% Gruner Veltliner, 15.7% Sauvignon Blanc, 9.2% Gewürztraminer, 7.9% Riesling, 7.3% Chenin Blanc, 6.1% Muscat Canelli, 5.2% Viognier,4.5% Verdelho, 4.4% Albarino, and 1.1% Pinot Gris. If nothing else, all those grapes in there make for a good conversation starter.

Big House Red was similarly friendly with food, but completely dry. It has an attractive, expressive nose full of black cherries and a hint of earth. On the palate there are similar flavors — cherry, red and black berry fruit, mild earth, touch of tobacco. There is plenty of acidity and very mild tannins. It finishes somewhat quickly and with tart, sour cherry. Overall it kind of reminds me a Beaujolais Villages, and is similarly easy to pair with just about anything — particularly lean meats (chicken, turkey, pork), vegetarian dishes, and pasta with red sauce. And yes, this one is made with myriad grape varieties as well: 27% Petite Sirah, 14.5% Syrah, 8.6% Montepulciano, 8.2% Barbera, 6.4% Nero d’Avola, 6.1% Tempranillo, 3.3% Malbec, 2.4% Aglianico, 2.4% Souzao, 2.3% Charbono, 2.2% Petit Verdot, 2.1% Cabernet Franc, 2% Tannat, and 12.5% Other Esoteric Reds. I’d love to know what those “other esoteric reds” might be, and why they’re not listed. Ah-ha! Another conversation starter!

At under $10 for a 750ml bottle, these wines are a steal — but it isn’t the kind of theft that will get you sent to the “big house”. And both wines also come in snazzy, convenient, party-friendly bag-in-box packaging as well.

Find Big House White at a retailer near you using Wine-Searcher, Vinquire, or WineZap

Find Big House Red at a retailer near you using Wine-Searcher, Vinquire, or WineZap

If you want to learn more about Big House and some of their other wines, visit my good friend Charles Scicolone’s site to read about the Big House “warden” Georgette Dune. You can also visit the Big House website and/or follow the brand on Twitter @BigHouseWines

Let me premise this by stating that I don’t like the idea of using the words “Prima Classe” “Rosato” and “Riserva” on a wine produced in the United States. I understand it is Tamas trying to be cute by emulating the terms that might be found on a bottle of Italian wine. However, that marketing ploy only further confuses an already confused wine-drinking public. To be clear: this wine is from the Livermore Valley of California.

That complaint aside, this pink wine delivers juicy strawberry and white cherry flavors on the nose and palate, mouthwatering acidity, and is overall a pleasant, refreshing, and enjoyable quaffer that fits most any budget. It’s nice alone, but better with food. I matched it successfully with roast chicken, BBQ ribs, mild cheese, crawfish cakes, and shrimp/scallop cakes. At under ten bucks, this is a good value. Pick up a bottle while the weather is hot and the wine is still fresh — it’s not something to lay down.

Learn more about the winery at the Tamas Estates website (though, I couldn’t find any info on this particular wine there).

Find this wine at a retailer near you using Wine-Searcher, Vinquire, or WineZap

This bottle was given to me by my friend and colleague Phil Ward, who is on the Board of Directors of the International Riesling Foundation and frequently travels the country as a judge at wine competitions. Needless to say, I trust his palate, especially when it comes to Riesling. So when Phil handed me this bottle, I had to try it.

As it turned out, I wasn’t disappointed.

Immediately from the nose, bright aromas of ripe apricot, candied peach, and bit of banana erupt from the glass, along with the slightest hint of petroleum (but in a good way). The palate flows with fresh fruit salad flavors: peach, pineapple, pear, apple, and grapes. Texture is smooth, the finish is clean. It’s not completely dry — there is some residual sugar here — but it’s not overbearing nor cloying. It was a good match for smoked ham, and even better with spicy boneless chicken wings.

Enjoyable on its own as a refreshing quaffer, I highly recommend it as a match for spicy hot and sweet and spicy dishes — such as might find on an Asian or Indian menu. At around $12-13, this is a good value.

Find Glenora Riesling at a retailer near you using Wine-Searcher, Vinquire, or WineZap

Instead of spending much more time letting the HobNob website make me feel old and un-hip, I moved on to the actual wines. I tried very hard to like them — I really did — but they just weren’t my style.

That doesn’t mean you won’t like them, of course, because wine is subjective and everyone has different tastes. And thank goodness for that, or we’d all be fighting over the same bottles of wine.

There was a distinct theme running across all four red wines: chocolatey, vanilla oak. Everyone likes chocolate and vanilla, so I understand why HobNob found a way to get that flavor profile into their wines. But for me it was a little too much, robbing the varietal character of the wines. In other words, if the wines were given to me “blind”, I probably would not have guessed which was Pinot, which was Cab, etc. — they all tasted more or less the same. There was a strong oaky vanilla and chocolate flavor in all of them, with the bare hint of the varietal somewhere in the background. Additionally, the structure was out of balance — the wines were on the fat side (meaning, they lacked acidity) and had soft tannins. These attributes are fine for a “cocktail wine” — i.e., a wine to drink during cocktail hour at a bar or party, and without food. And for that purpose, these wines are perfectly suitable, particularly for people who are newbies and moving their palates from thick microbrews to the wine scene. But once food is introduced … well, I’d have to switch to something else.

That’s not to say that Hob Nob wines should be avoided. There is no doubt in my mind that there is a significant portion of the population that will appreciate these wines. The price is right (under ten bucks). And again, I think they are a great bridge from the chocolate stouts and mocha porters. Wines like this are excellent introductions for people who think wine is “sour”, “bitter”, or “sharp”.

Does that make me a snob?

Let me know in the comments … and also, please share your opinion of Hob Nob wines.

Oh and by the way, these wines are from France — Languedoc, specifically. I never would have guessed that based on the packaging and marketing. They seem to be trying very hard to be un-French.

The Hob Nob website

Use the links below to find Hob Nob wines at a retailer near you:

Hob Nob Cabernet Sauvignon
Hob Nob Merlot
Hob Nob Pinot Noir
Hob Nob Shiraz

Why the sudden Carmenere kick? Well, because I was the beneficiary of a selection of Carmenere blends as a result of being included in a “twitter tasting” hosted by the Wines of Chile a few months ago. Yes, I’m sometimes (often?) slow in getting my reviews published to the blog. But hey, better late than never, right? Anyway, on to the wine.

It’s kind of funny that the label explains the wine as a “Limited Selection” — I mean, if it’s so limited how could it sell for under 15 bucks? But as a person in the business of marketing wine I understand the power of such words, ergo the reasoning behind the nonsense. Heck, I’m guilty of promoting similar types of “fantasy” hype on labels, and California wines have been doing it for decades. But I digress …

Beyond the fancy language on the label, we have a very nice wine here — which doesn’t surprise me, as I’ve enjoyed nearly every bottle I’ve Montes I’ve ever tried; they are a “reliable producer” in my book. Bright, open, and expressive red and black berry fruit aromas jump into the nose, with a slight touch of earth and bell pepper. The palate does not disappoint, offering similarly forward fruit that is ripe with red berries, sweet black fruits, and hints of earth, spice, and mild tobacco. Tannins and acidity are both soft, but there’s enough structure to keep the wine from being described as “fat” or out of balance. The finish is kind of quick but that’s hardly a complaint, considering all the juicy delicious fruit at the front end.

I matched this successfully with a smattering of dishes, including chicken pot pie, cheese and potato pierogies, and stuffed cabbage (yes, I had take-out from the Polish restaurant). It’s enjoyable on its own but also completely versatile with a variety of victuals. At around or about $15, it’s a good value.

Find Montes Cabernet-Carmenere Apalta Vineyard Limited Selection at a retailer near you using Wine-Searcher, Vinquire, or WineZap