Interesting development and one that will be fought by the wine industry. Will the Wine Spectator side with the consumer and push for the widespread use of this product? A challenge to the editors.

http://dat.erobertparker.com/b...wthread.php?t=212045

eProvenance.com

This message has been edited. Last edited by: NYCWINECONSUMER,

Sleepyhaus & Vinole,

You're both close, but to be correct, the eProvenance program uses an RFID tag that attaches the case and records ambient temperatures.

It does not attach to, nor record, individual bottle temperatures.

They have a mathematical formula they use to define when a wine has most likely been damaged by excessive heat.

According to eProvenance founder E. Vogt, "Most robust red wines do not suffer noticeable damage until they have been above 86 degrees F for at least 18 hours." (this from is post in aforementioned Squires' BB thread).

Not sure why it will be "fought by the wine industry".

Shippers pay for insulated or refrigerated containers all the time. Moreover, if you ship from Europe to the US or vice versa, you can avoid a lot of damage by simply shipping during cooler months only, unless you're shipping to somewhere like Key West.

If you ship to or from the Southern Hemisphere, you always have an issue unless you ship only during the spring/fall, because winter in either will be summer at the other end. So people use insulated or refrigerated containers. The problem isn't the container - it's more often the truck that delivers to your local store.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCWINECONSUMER:
Interesting development and one that will be fought by the wine industry. Will the Wine Spectator side with the consumer and push for the widespread use of this product? A challenge to the editors.

http://dat.erobertparker.com/b...wthread.php?t=212045

eProvenance.com

An interesting development, yes. But this post appeared on eBob last Tuesday. Any particular reason for waiting until Saturday to make an aggressive challenge to WS?

quote:

Originally posted by GregT:
Not sure why it will be "fought by the wine industry".

Shippers pay for insulated or refrigerated containers all the time. Moreover, if you ship from Europe to the US or vice versa, you can avoid a lot of damage by simply shipping during cooler months only, unless you're shipping to somewhere like Key West.

If you ship to or from the Southern Hemisphere, you always have an issue unless you ship only during the spring/fall, because winter in either will be summer at the other end. So people use insulated or refrigerated containers. The problem isn't the container - it's more often the truck that delivers to your local store.

//////////////////////////////////
This is true. As a retailer I want a practical
sollution not a card that informs me of the problem. When I ship in off months (cool or hot)
we use effective packaging. These work great.
http://www.newvinelogistics.co...ces_wineassure.shtml

http://www.kernfrio.com/insulated-shipping-boxes/

and yes the cost is moved to the consumer.

quote:

Originally posted by GreenDrazi:

quote:

Originally posted by NYCWINECONSUMER:
Interesting development and one that will be fought by the wine industry. Will the Wine Spectator side with the consumer and push for the widespread use of this product? A challenge to the editors.

http://dat.erobertparker.com/b...wthread.php?t=212045

eProvenance.com

Did you actually search the WS article database before posting this or do you rely soley on Squires for your information?
Additionally, how much research have you done with other means/products for protecting/insuring wine before annointing this one product?

Wine Spectator ran an article on this product, as well as other methods, last year..

I am thrilled to hear that. Heat damage is epidemic in the wine industry at all steps, however. The Wine Spectator is in the unique position of being able to pressure the industry to pull their heads out of the sand, look at the problem they regularly ignore or pay lip service to, and pressure use of products like this that could force importers, wholesalers, and retailers to all behave like the product they sell is perishable, which it is. An article is nice, but its not sufficient use of their bully pulpit.

Drew,

Why do you always come over here and post stuff like this? Do you try to take to task like this Wine Advocate, Decanter, International Wine Cellar, etc...?

Funny how a number of folks here, undoubtedly with other agendas, try to deflect the issue with rhetoric. Now I see why nothing gets done in congress.

Truth is an RFID tag costs pennies (at most) and as a technology has been used for decades (think of your local grocery swipe). They could easily be attached to the bottom of every bottle, not just every case. And a simple reader could tell you the highest temp if you wanted it to. The capsule costs more than the RFID card. I am sure if there really was a consumer "movement" to embrace this technology, wineries would be only to happy to oblige. They want their product offered at its best just as much as we want to by it that way.

As long as it does not benefit retailers or wholesalers (which I think will be forever) we will not see this technology - or any other technology - employed. Pity. Buyer be ware.

quote:

Originally posted by winemuser:
Funny how a number of folks here, undoubtedly with other agendas, try to deflect the issue with rhetoric. Now I see why nothing gets done in congress.

sorry you are confused Keeno. I was confused about people asking about intentions of the initial poster (as if there was something nefarious about the post), why he/she hadn't searched the database and postings about retailers using shippers...seemed non like non sequitor posts to me. Still confused?

These RFID devices can tell you the maximum temperature a case (when attached to the box) or the bottle (if attached to each inside the case) was exposed to. It doesn't tell you if the has been damaged. That assessment still requires a corkscrew and glass.

Maybe I've had extraordinary good luck, but I've never bought a wine that was cooked. I've had corked wines, for sure. I even had my wines shipped from Chicago to Honolulu when I moved here about 3 yrs ago, and not a single problem.

I assume that distributors and importers, in order to cover their asses, will have to make doubly sure that the entire distribution stream is absolutely 100% unexposed to anything that might even remotely raise a concern on the part of a retailer or consumer. That will be a cost that, like the technology, is passed along to me. Because I've never bought a cooked wine, I'm not particularly interested in paying for this.

LOL! Which message? The one pointing out an interesting development or the one emphatically stating that the industry will fight it and Wine Spectator is pro-industry rather than pro-consumer if they don't push for widespread use of this product (the aforementioned "interesting development)?

The first message I'm all for discussing. But the second message comprised the majority of your post and I found it to be distasteful pot stirring. And it's not all that compelling of a topic. The side topic of how to actually prevent heat damage (and whether it's worth the extra cost) is far more interesting that how to measure its occurrence.

I don't care if WS advocates for a process that ensures the highest likelihood that wines reach the consumer in the best possible condition.

However, until some studies are done on this RFID technology to show how well it ACTUALLY correlates temperature readings to ACTUAL cooked wines, then I'm not interested.

And, the fact, that a pretty fair cross-section of consumers on this site are not all jumping up and down demanding action by WS, the industry, or whomever, suggests to me that (a) this technology is not ready for prime time and (b) many of us have not had enough (if any) bad experiences to cause a consumer revolt.

quote:

Originally posted by winemuser:
sorry you are confused Keeno. I was confused about people asking about intentions of the initial poster (as if there was something nefarious about the post), why he/she hadn't searched the database and postings about retailers using shippers...seemed non like non sequitor posts to me. Still confused?

The tone of the OP was very off-putting and this is not the first time the OP has jumped on WS for no discernable reason. There is no need to jump down their throat - particularly when they had addressed the issue that he raised.

RFID is an open standard, if someone wanted to fake it, it's quite easy to.

Buying wines has always been caveat emptor, which is why alot of us stick with favorite local wine stores that we trust and will stand behind our purchase.

This might be nice, and WS did cover it over a year ago. Is there an iPhone app that reads RFIDs btw? In my case, I can only see my local wine store care more about this development then me as they'll happily take back any bottle I deem damaged.

I find it interesting that we haven't heard from the OP in over 6 months. Must have been released from the psych ward recently.

I found the website lacking in specification (accuracy, duration of recording, etc.) of the product and in detailed information in it's practice. However, after reading Eric Voight's posts on eBob I realized what he is trying to do, which is take RFID technology and limit the access to the temperature history information so that it can be sold down the line to wineries, shippers, distributors and retailers. In addition, there is an insurance component consisting of Lloyd's of London so that users can recoup the loss if the wine has been proven to be damaged.

Since there is no money to be made selling RFID's, and very little in the hardware (readers and data collectors), his business model is selling information with a side of insurance.

Most consumers are not educated in what they eat or drink, or how it arrives to their table. Wine is no different. There will be little to no consumer demand for this product or information.

tanglenet, there you go making sense again. Cut that out!

Thanks Joe. Our company actually manufacturers similar devices, but not based on RFID. We do not sell to consumers (too expensive) but mostly to regulated (FDA) companies or those with strict QC requirements (Semi-conductor, Chemical, etc). As a result, I'm familiar with what he is trying to do. IMO the industry that he's chosen to sell to is an uphill slog due to it's fragmentation and complexity of distribution. There are other companies doing the same thing in the meat, poultry and pharmaceutical industries. The push there for temperature documentation, is from government regulation, not from the consumer or producer.

Anyone know how WS sources their bottles for tasting ? I wonder how many wineries send temperature protected bottles to be tasted and than use bulk transport for general sales.

I would definitely like to see more coverage of this issue by the Wine Spectator, Parker, etc.

How many posts were deleted in this thread?

quote:

Originally posted by haggis:
These RFID devices can tell you the maximum temperature a case (when attached to the box) or the bottle (if attached to each inside the case) was exposed to. It doesn't tell you if the has been damaged. That assessment still requires a corkscrew and glass.

Haggis- you've become very high class since leaving the mainland. In the old Chicago days all you would have needed was a corkscrew!

quote:

Originally posted by grossie:

quote:

Originally posted by haggis:
These RFID devices can tell you the maximum temperature a case (when attached to the box) or the bottle (if attached to each inside the case) was exposed to. It doesn't tell you if the has been damaged. That assessment still requires a corkscrew and glass.

Haggis- you've become very high class since leaving the mainland. In the old Chicago days all you would have needed was a corkscrew!

...and a straw

Come on out here and check up on the Haggises.