I recall being told that South American investors suggested that Brotherhood, America’s Oldest Winery, should plant a vineyard on the property. The vineyard will give them credibility.  Recently a LinkedIn discussion asked the question: Why don’t vineyardists also make wine? Is there a perception out there that if you have a winery that you should have a vineyard and if you have a vineyard you need to make wine?

Perhaps a vineyard and winery together is more of a romantic notion than the perception of the American public. In touring wineries and tasting rooms in the Seattle area of Washington, we observed tasting rooms that did not have vineyards. That did not appear to stop consumers from visiting to taste and purchase wines. The wineries point out where the fruit is sourced, often indicating the vineyard name on the label. We didn’t observe that consumers were at all concerned that there wasn’t a vineyard on the property. It seems that most consumers are more interested in whether they like a particular wine, which is the way it should be. Some consumers may be interested in terroir and want to know about a particular vineyard where the grapes were sourced. However this is a small group and so far the Washington wineries visited do a good job of discussing the vineyards where they acquire their fruit.

I don’t believe a winery needs a vineyard on the property to be credible. On the other hand there isn’t anything wrong with a romantic scene, which can also be very photo friendly.

Cheers,
Terry