Wódka vodka, the inexpensive import trying to become the next Svedka, stepped on it’s you-know-what again with an outdoor message it obviously (but mistakenly) thought was cute and clever.

Back in December they ran a billboard in New York City with this sophomoric content – “Christmas Quality, Chanukah Pricing.” That ran into a firestorm of criticism and they had to literally pull the ads down.

You’d think they would have learned and moved forward in a number of new ways to get their message across. Get a new creative team, hire a new agency, and/or get internal marketing and advertising folks who know what they are doing. There are dozens of ways to get the quality-low price message across in a fun, even shocking way without being offensive.

Listen Wódka, you may think that putting a lampshade on your head is funny but trust me, after the 5^th grade it loses some of its appeal.

This time they have run a billboard with “Escort Quality, Hooker Pricing.” The best I can say for it is that it’s lame. But to compound matters they chose to run the ad on the Bruckner Expressway (trying to reach Westchester commuters) in the Hunts Point section of the Bronx. According to the Daily News, “When I saw it I almost fell out of my seat, said Rafael Salamanca Jr., district manager for CB 2 (local Community Board). That’s an inappropriate billboard given what the Hunts Point community has gone through in the past.”

Some advice for the managing partner for Wódka’s marketing company, MMG. Outdoor advertising and alcohol have always been on tenuous grounds and this is not a good thing for your brand or for the industry. The childishness of the ad is not worth the effort.

The genius who loves this campaign is probably saying something about how even negative publicity is good publicity. Well, that’s not always the case. Especially when there are competitive brands with more positive messages than buy me I’m cheap.

So far as the outdoor company is concerned – shame on you for allowing this to go up. That company used to have high standards and community sensitivity. I guess an ad about hookers fits their current business practices.

Ad Age, Buffalo Trace Newsletter, Wine and Spirits Daily, Shanken News Daily and others have all had stories about Cider and its potential as the next “craft” brew.

At first I thought – no way. Cider (Hard Cider that is) has been around for centuries and never caught on. Most people I know who have come here from the UK, sooner or later miss Cider and wonder why Americans don’t drink it. I don’t know why that is – no acquired taste for it; perceptions that it’s too sweet; dislike of apple juice; confusion about what it is; just because it’s not in consumers’ frame of reference. There are lots of reasons.

If you look at the numbers, related to beer (including craft), Cider is comparable to a fly on an elephant’s ass. Yet, it grew at around 4% (on average) over the last five years compared to beer, which was slightly down over the same period. An Ad Age article back in Nov 2011 reported that sales climbed 25% last year. Here is an excerpt:

Cider is still a tiny fraction of the alcohol category and is not about to threaten beer, wine or spirits for booze dominance. But while mainstream beer brands are declining, cider is growing at a furious pace, drawing premium prices, coveted women drinkers and even more male fans attracted to bold flavors.

Hmm.

Then this week I read that MillerCoors has bought the Crispin Cider Co, a brand that grew over 200% last year. A-B has decided to jump in and is planning to launch Michelob Ultra Light Cider. Although, in the A-B case, I would guess they thought, “What the hell, the Michelob brand isn’t going anywhere, might as well make it a Cider.” Between the two, my money is on Crispin.

So I bought a pack and tasted Crispin Natural Hard Apple Cider. Not bad… it’s crisp, refreshing and at 5% alcohol, pretty much equivalent to a beer. Packaging is premium and this product can appeal to both men and women.

I haven’t done product reviews in this blog but I intend to in the future, so stay tuned.

For now, I’m leaning toward continued sales growth and acceptance by consumers. It will appeal to those looking to discover new drinks and new tastes. That will build awareness and trial, particularly among sophisticated craft beer drinkers. I also believe that Cider can take a chunk of share from Ready-To-Drink (RTD) products, particularly the Smirnoff stuff. (Are they still making that from malt?)

I think the allure of Cider will be based on its naturalness, unique non-clawing taste and imagery that appeals to a wide demographic base in terms of age and gender.

So yeah, Cider could be the next big thing.

Buffalo Trace newsletter reported the results of a study by the Wine Marketing Council on the state of the wine industry in the US. The findings indicate that the consumer base is expanding with consumption at 291 million cases in 2011, which is up from 278 million in 2010.

Nevertheless, a spokesman for the Wine Council was quoted as saying, “Wine remains an enigma, a mystery, and we have to solve the mystery if we want to expand the consumer base.”

I think I have the answer. Borrow a page from the vodka folks and use strange flavors (cake, whipped cream, marshmallow, bacon, etc.) to expand the market.

Or, better yet, I came across a blog posting that would fit the de-mystifying of wine and broaden its appeal. Wine fermented from strange ingredients.

Robert Lehrman is a DC lawyer whose firm concentrates on the federal regulation and approvals of alcohol beverages (beer, wine and spirits). Robert is a really good guy (despite his chosen profession). He also publishes a blog about alcohol products and labels approved by the TTB. Here is the link.

It turns out that Robert is keeping track of approvals of wines made from assorted foodstuffs other than grapes. As of this week he has listed 42 such approvals and predicts the list will keep growing to perhaps 70.

The list obviously includes the gamut of fruits such as apple, peach, banana, figs, pears, pineapple, various berries and melons. Vegetables abound on the list as well, including tomato, onion, pepper and avocado. There are also flower wines (Jasmine, Hibiscus, Linden, Elder, etc.) and a load of exotic stuff including Mangosteen and Lychee.

But my favorite is Garlic wine. Don’t laugh; it happens to be good for cooking and for keeping vampires away from your cellar. Not so good on a first date.

I can hardly wait for the reviews and ratings.

Too many choices.

Research in Motion (RIM), the makers of BlackBerrys, is having some problems. Their stock is down, the new line of products has been delayed for a year and there are rumors of corporate sharks looking to take a bite out of them.

In the view of most observers, the problem stems from too many choices. Since 2007, they have introduced 37 models including BlackBerrys that flip, slide, with touch screens, touch screens and keyboards, high and low end products. The product line is too complicated. In a recent NY Times article, a market research firm estimated that their market share slipped from almost half in 2009 to roughly 10 percent in the US.

Compare that to Apple’s iPhone. There have only been four since 2008 and all were the same but differed only in storage or capabilities from earlier models. Apple made it simple and less is more.

A marketing professor at the London Business School was quoted in the Times article as saying, “Too many options can be frightening and overwhelming.” In fact, other studies on the subject have indicated that, while people claim to like abundant choices,  too many leads to confusion, increased concern about risk (making the wrong choice) and ultimately dissatisfaction.

Let’s turn to the alcohol industry.

Budweiser has lost the #2 position in beer to Coors and is now the third largest brand. There are lots of issues at play here but the overwhelming packaging choices consumers face at the store exacerbates the situation. At my last visit to a large beer retailer, I was assaulted with a dizzying array of cans, bottles and package sizes in 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30 packs. I bought a 6 pack of a craft beer.

How about rum? Captain Morgan came in Original Spiced, Silver Spiced (for those who didn’t like amber rum), Private Stock (an upmarket extension) and Parrott Bay, a brand extension and Malibu competitor. Each product in the line up had a strategic reason for being.

At a recent visit to the CM website, I counted 15 products in the line. Seven were for the base CM brand including Tattoo, Lime Bite, 100°, and Long Island Iced Tea. Eight were line extensions in the Parrott Bay brand extension category. Talk about confusing.

Compare that to Sailor Jerry. One brand, one message and one position. The brand is growing rapidly with a compound 5-year annual growth rate of close to 50%. Captain Morgan’s growth has been sluggish over the same time frame despite the massive number of SKUs. (For those of you in the business, it sounds to me like – good for shipments not so good for depletions.)

In a recent interview with Wine and Spirits Daily, Diageo USA President, Larry Schwartz, had this to say about Captain Morgan:

“I think we got a little sophomoric at some point, and I think now we’ve brought it back. We were operating too much in the beer space…”

Larry, it’s all about consumer choices and confusion. You might want to think about Crown Royal as well.

There has been a good deal of press and buzz about marshmallow and whipped cream flavored vodkas from Smirnoff. Today’s Buffalo Trace Newsletter has a story from the Chicago Tribune that suggests, or at least predicts, the success of these products.

The newspaper also has a story about a burglar and an interesting new twist to an old excuse.

Charged with felony burglary (among other related offenses), the gentleman in question broke into a home, stole some property and a foot race with police ensued. When he thought he had escaped, he broke into another home but this time lay down on the couch, took his shoes off and went to sleep. The homeowner found him the next morning and promptly called the police.

He told the police that he didn’t know how he got there and the last thing he remembers was drinking marshmallow-flavored vodka.

They should throw the book at him – mainly for his bad taste in booze.

I came across an article in USA Today indicating that US alcohol consumption hit a 25-yeat high. Americans drank the most wine on record (2.3 gallons per person). Spirits grew by 18% to 1.5 gallons. But, beer dropped 7 percent to 20.7 gallons according to the Beer Institute.

The report brought to mind an article in Wine & Spirits Daily back in October. Speaking to the National Beer Wholesalers Association, Tom Long of MillerCoors, indicated that the beer industry could learn a thing or two from spirits marketing.

To further illustrate the problem, according to Ad Age, AB InBev spent $555 million in measured media last year and still managed to lose a full share point. MillerCoors spent just under $400 million and lost half a share point. How does that work? Together they spent nearly a billion and lost market share. Is it the creative? Is it the media? Is it that consumer alcohol tastes are shifting to craft beers and spirits/wine? Probably all of the above.

Therefore, as a public service, I scoured the Internet to see if there is anything out there that I had not yet covered that might help the beer people.

First I thought about innovation.

What about new flavors? Look at the growth in flavored vodkas. First fruit then vegetables then exotic fruit, now all kinds of stuff. How about Whipped Cream, Marshmallow, Cupcake, Peanut butter? Probably too froufrou for the macho beer drinker.

How about new venues? I just read where White Castle is thinking about joining other fast food spots in testing the sale of wine and beer. On second thought, White Castle is where you go after drinking, if at all.

So, I came to the conclusion that the answer lies in celebrity tie-ins. There have been a slew of them in 2011, some as celebrity ownership and some as endorsements. All are in the spirits or wine business and none in beer, until recently. Here’s a blurb from the LA Times about the Hanson brothers: “Hanson burrowed into our heads with their hit 1997 song “MMMBop.” Now they want space in our gullets with their soon-to-be-released beer MMMHop IPA (Indian Pale Ale). They may want to consider co-packing the beer with other Hanson logo products – toothbrushes or lunch boxes.

How about signing a deal with Sean Diddy Combs? After making a ton with Ciroc vodka, I’ve read that he is looking at tequila. Either Diageo didn’t sign him to spirits exclusivity or they want to do a tequila tie-in or he just wants to move on. Perhaps a beer company can get this booze pied piper to pimp their beer.

Here are some other celeb efforts:

Sammy Hagar, after selling off the majority of Cabo Wabo Tequila, now has a new spirits brand called Sammy’s Beach Bar Rum. I guess he thinks that lightning will strike twice. If it does, maybe he’ll do a beer.

Perhaps the beer folks should look at celebrity tie-ins with those who have recently entered the wine business. Like retired basketball player Yao Ming selling his Yao Family Wines exclusively in China. Or, AC/DC distributing wines in Australia called Drops of Jupiter Petite Syrah and Calling All Angel’s Chardonnay.

What about celebrities from the reality shows? Bethenny Frankel may be available now that her Skinnygirl brand has been acquired. The beer people could use her for light beers. A real natural would be “The Situation” who is supposedly hawking protein vodka.

So the beer people have lots to choose from. But my favorite is country music star Toby Keith who launched his Wild Shot mezcal. I love what he had to say about it the Bloomberg BusinessWeek,

“All the whiskey’s already been spoken for…and everyone’s got a vodka, and one of my buddies does tequila…But, there was no one doing mezcal.”

Talk about insightful marketing analysis. He’d be great for a beer brand.

Buffalo Trace Newsletter had a reprinted story today from an Australian newspaper (Perth Now) that really is one for the books.

Here’s the headline:

THREE WA (Western Australia) men suffered horrific burns after branding themselves with novelty branding irons given away as part of a Jack Daniel’s promotion.

Apparently these geniuses branded their backsides with the words “Old No. 7 Brand” which was part of a barbeque promotion. Not surprisingly they ended up in the hospital for surgery and emergency skin grafts.

Also not surprisingly, The Royal Perth Hospital surgeon called the promotion “an irresponsible cocktail for disaster.” The event also engendered a series of calls for legislation to “halt irresponsible alcohol promotions.” I suppose that they think that before launching the promotion, the Brown Forman Australia folks sat around saying, “I wonder how many idiots we can get to burn themselves with the branding irons.”

It reminds me of the case in Texas where someone drank a 750 ML of Jack Daniel’s in one sitting and then died of alcohol toxicity. The family sued. The courts said something like, if you are dumb enough to drink so much alcohol in so short a period of time, no warning label will stop you.

In Australia, a government official said, “…At the end of the day, how can we legislate against that level of stupidity.”

The branding iron has a warning sticker that says – this can cause serious skin burns; do not touch metal parts with fingers, skin or any flammable material; branding iron will remain hot long after being heated.

They forgot one important warning:

ONLY A BLOODY IDIOT WOULD BRAND THEIR ARSE, SO BE CAREFUL

The culprit

I’ve been “off the air” because I am in Ulaanbaatar (or Ulan Bator) the capital and principle city of Mongolia. I’m here to lecture and consult with an alcohol beverage company with some very interesting products.

Please stay tuned…

I was meeting with my favorite, most knowledgeable wine and spirits guy the other day and we got to talking about the state of the whisk(e)y market. We decided that the world is changing for brown spirits except for the products from Scotland.

According to the Scotch Whisky Association, scotch grew in value and volume in the first half of 2011. But if you look closely at the data provided by Shanken News Daily, of the top brands, only Johnnie Walker and The Glenlivet showed growth.

When I look at other whiskies, I see real sustained growth. Jameson in particular, and the Irish whiskey category, in general, is on fire. I think it’s based on the imagery of the brand, the absence of the smoke/peat taste of blended scotch and, of course, its use in cocktails and as a shot.

Looking at American whiskies, the emergence of flavored products speaks to new users and new usage occasions. I think it will attract a new generation of consumers and contribute to growth in the long run.

To be fair, Scotch distillers have tried to innovate their products by increased aging and changes in barrel storage. While this may be of appeal to the current market, it is probably not likely to bring in a new cohort of drinkers. Although, what I like about Last Drop Distillers is that they have taken the age route to the ultimate with over-age products. Not just aged scotch and cognac but products that reflect category heritage.

If you go to an event or tasting involving scotch, you always see some distillers dressed in kilts. It’s like a metaphor for being trapped in a time warp and reluctance to contemporize the category.

However, two recent news reports show that there are people out there looking to take new approaches to scotch. Wine and Spirits Daily reported last week a company “will start selling single grain and blended Scotch whisky aged 3 years, in a can.” I’m not sure if it is aged in the can or aged then packaged in a can. But don’t worry; the can will be recyclable aluminum. That will attract new scotch users who are environmentally conscience.

Or how about this one: According to the Daily Mail via the Buffalo Trace Newsletter, a company has developed the world’s first “halal whisky” made without alcohol designed to appeal to non-alcohol drinking consumers. The SWA is, not surprisingly, upset. The taste of scotch without the alcohol sounds to me like all pain, no benefit.

Scotch in a can and halal whisky do not fit my notion of innovativeness and contemporizing the category. Better off sticking to kilts.

By the way, that reminds me of something I heard while in Ireland at a distillery some time ago. One of the plant managers, over a few drinks, told me the following:

“You know, the Irish taught the Scots three things – how to make whiskey, how to play bagpipes and the wearing of kilts. But… we forgot to tell them that the last one was a joke.”

An interesting aspect of publishing a blog is using Google Analytics to get to know where your readers are from. According to Google, readers of this blog are from all 50 states. The State of Washington is # 15 in number of readers; ten times as many come from CA and TX and 15 times as many from NY.

Okay, so there aren’t that many of you from Washington. Too bad. I wish I could stop you from making a big mistake by voting in favor of a Costco initiative that will change the way you buy liquor and wine.

According to Wine and Spirits Daily, “It looks like Costco’s Initiative 1183 is gaining traction in Washington after all, according to the most recent Elway Research poll. Fifty-three percent of the 407 voters surveyed say they support the measure, compared to 46% in September and 50% in August.”

If you scroll down to the October 4^th posting you’ll see why I think voting for I-1183 is wrong. Here are some other reasons.

Costco has spent $22 million to support this initiative. According to the Seattle Times that’s a record for the state. Last time, they spent $4.8 million and saw the initiative fail so they’ve upped the ante. Come on people, when a box store shells out $22 million, it isn’t based on civic or community concern.

The Governor of Washington is opposed to the initiative. Wonder what she knows that the 53% in the poll don’t know.

Here’s what will happen if the initiative passes. Prices will not go down and may even rise – if Costco buys products for less, do you expect them to pass on the savings? Remember, they have a $22 million investment in 1183. Your liquor and wine choices will be reduced and subject to the vagaries of the Costco buyers. Small businesses will be hurt because of the 10,000 square foot minimum for stores selling liquor. Above all, the small craft and artisanal producers will have a tougher time making a go of it.

So go ahead Washington, don’t listen to me… Costco knows best about what’s good for your state.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Both Diageo and Brown Forman have been in the news lately with some minor battles with local officials and citizens about taxation.

Let’s start with Brown Forman. Government officials in Moore County Tennessee, made famous by BF and their Lynchburg distillery, want to tax the company for each barrel of whiskey they produce. According to what I read in Wine and Spirits Daily and elsewhere, Lynchburg gets 250,000 visitors a year and still Moore County wants to tax BF $10 per barrel.

As one of my readers put it, “Talk about killing the goose that lays the golden egg…there’s many other ways to fix their budget problem by taxing visitors…They have problems with roads in and out of Lynchburg? Let them put in toll roads.”

The tax would amount to around $4 million, not a great deal in the scheme of things but there are some factors the county officials are overlooking. According to a BF spokesperson, they already pay high property taxes and have a dominant role in the area’s economy including the creation of jobs.

In case you didn’t know, Moore County Tennessee, home of the world famous Jack Daniel’s distillery, is dry.

Some 840 miles to the east in the state of Connecticut, my friends at Diageo are under attack from a group called Connecticut Working Families. This is a coalition of community organizations, labor unions and activists who are protesting “corporate giveaways” to companies like Diageo.

According to their press release:

“Diageo has been a major beneficiary of public subsidies. The company received a $40 million tax break on the promise it would create 300 new jobs in Connecticut. Today, however, according to the latest data from the Department of Economic and Community Development, the company has 29 fewer jobs in Norwalk than when it got the tax break in 2004.

“Diageo, based in the United Kingdom, earned $3.7 billion in global pre-tax profits in 2010. According to Reuters, Diageo CEO Paul Walsh was compensated $4.8 million.”

So let me see if I got this straight. Brown Forman has created jobs in Moore County and attracted 250,000 visitors a year to a small town no one would otherwise drive through, much less visit, and the folks who run the government want to pinch $4 million out of them. Diageo gets a $40 million tax break that was meant for job creation but has cut jobs instead. How does that work?

Maybe Brown Forman should move its Jack Daniel’s production to Connecticut.

If you’ve been a Booze Business follower, you know that I like to keep close tabs on Diageo and follow the good, the bad and the “close but no cigars” assessment of their actions.

This past week or so provided lots of press worth commenting upon.

India

As part of their global strategy, Diageo seems to be concentrating on gaining a presence in emerging markets. To do that, they have developed relationships in various countries, focusing on local spirits, at least initially. They have ventures or are selling such locally made products as Raki in Turkey, Baiju in China and local vodka in Vietnam.

This week brought the news that they are launching a local Indian whisky aimed at the country’s middle-income drinkers. Considering the fact that the spirits market in India is 234 million 9-liter cases (2^nd only to china and Russia in volume) and growing at a compounded rate of 20% the last five years – I’d say it’s a good move.

But it won’t be easy, given the tough advertising rules for liquor. According to my friend and publisher Bishan Kumar (I write a monthly column for his magazine in India called Spiritz), the pathway to promotion of liquor is centered on point of sale and event sponsorship.

Diageo will also have to confront other past issues. It had a local product (Gilbey’s Green Label) but sold it in 2002 to concentrate on global brands. Now it wants to go back to concentrating on local brands. I suppose time and management changes allow for course adjustments.

Also, in July the US SEC charged the company with violating the Corrupt Practices Act in part for illicit payments made to Indian officials between 2003 and 2009. I read that Diageo agreed to pay more than $16 million to settle the charges. I guess they figured point of sale and event promotions are more effective brand building tools.

ESPN

In another recent move, Diageo signed a deal to become “presenting sponsor” on two shows and – get this – on both the English and Spanish versions of the broadcasts. It’s a smart move to reach different types of audiences with a consistent message.

On the other hand, their initial choice of brands includes Captain Morgan. That made me smile. Some time ago in doing some research on brand potential among Latino consumers, a focus group moderator asked a group of consumers with a Caribbean background how they felt about the brand. One respondent said something like, “Captain Morgan… wasn’t he the dude that sailed all over the Caribbean burning and pillaging? You want me to buy his rum? For all I know he destroyed my great-great-great grandfather’s village.”

Talk about dumb

Diageo announced last week that they are moving production of the US supply of Red Stripe beer from Jamaica to the US.

One of my readers sent me an email on the subject that just about sums it up. “They’ve got to be kidding! They’re not just moving bottling, but production itself. Do they think that consumers are stupid?”

I wrote back and told him not to get too excited. They thought it would be okay since the new facility will also be in Jamaica… Queens.

Besides, if you’re going to take a chance on moving the production of Captain Morgan from one place to another when the brand faces stiff competition, changing Red Stripe production is a trifling matter.

I have a new slogan for them – At Diageo, Our Accountants Rule.

My favorite event of the week

I don’t know how much Diageo’s deal with P Diddy is worth – some give the number in 8 digits or even 9 digit millions – but he sure has done good things for the brand.

Last week, however, he lost it in a club in Atlanta and had to spend much of his time apologizing for what some have referred to as a “foul-mouthed vodka rant.”

Apparently he saw some guy drinking Grey Goose rather than Ciroc and decided to defend his brand by 1) throwing ice at him 2) calling him the “N” word and 3) maligning the guy’s sexual persuasion.

An online blog called Hollywood Gossip quoted him as tweeting, “I’m sorry for the ignorant way I represented myself … I have backslid and regressed. Forgive me for my ignorance. Pray for me pls.”

Don’t apologize Mr. Diddy, Diageo could care less. Your contract is safe. As for me, I just want you to know that you’re my kind of brand ambassador.

The initiative in the state of Washington, called I-1183, seeks to “get state government out of the liquor business.”

I find the Control State situation a tough one to deal with in developing a point of view. Opponents say that it’s an anachronism reflecting prohibition-based values; government doesn’t belong in private enterprise; the world has changed in the 75 years since prohibition and there are ample other regulatory means to control the sale of alcohol; and on and on.

I feel differently about Washington.

First, I-1183 gets the state out of the liquor business and opens it up to stores measuring at least 10,000 square feet. The exceptions would be underserved areas and existing state run stores. But small boutique/specialty liquor stores will not exist.

Second, the initiative would make Washington the only state to allow retailers to buy directly from the distillers. In effect, the wholesaler role in the mandatory 3-tier system would change if not end. Guess who is pushing I-1183 and spending millions to promote it? Costco. (Their headquarters are in the state of Washington.)

That’s what bothers me. Don’t get me wrong, we love to shop at Costco and get all those juicy bargains. And, who knows, maybe one day in this decade we’ll finally use up the paper products that live in our spare bedroom. But Costco in the booze business isn’t all good.

Sure, the prices are terrific, so long as you buy what they want to sell in 1.75 liters (half gallon sizes). You don’t go to Costco for selection. Often, you don’t get the same brand twice. It depends on how badly they beat up the distiller in that time period. When I was at Seagram, we didn’t mind the abuse by Costco’s buyers, we got to move a lot of volume and even a few closeouts.

If Costco dominates the state’s liquor business what happens to the smaller brands? The northwest is the spiritual home of artisanal alcohol products. Small distillers in Washington are growing and their local liquor stores have a great selection of spirits. I would expect that to end if Costco starts running the show in the state.

Ironically, the initiative in Washington replaces the monopoly of state run stores with the oligopoly of the large distillers and the power and clout of Costco. I don’t think that’s a good thing.

Quite a bit of press about social media in general and Facebook in particular this week. All of which, of course, relates to the booze business.

First, in the US, DISCUS (Distilled Spirits Council of the United States) has rolled out new guidelines for marketing on social media sites and digital platforms. According to what I read in Wine and Spirits Daily, the European Forum for Responsible Drinking has joined DISCUS in that initiative. Among other things, the DISCUS code requires that 71.6% of the audience be of legal drinking age.

Guess what? Nielsen data shows that Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have legal drinking age audiences in excess of 80%. Nevertheless, the DISCUS guidelines (code of responsible practices) are clear and push hard in favor of responsibility. Those of us in the industry understand a basic principle in such matters – the appearance of impropriety is as bad as the impropriety itself. There are steps including “age gating,” monitoring of content and other restrictions. Good for you, DISCUS.

Next, we learned this week that Diageo and Facebook have worked out a multimillion-dollar deal to work together and share skills and resources for mutual benefit. The Guardian quotes a Diageo spokesperson as saying the deal will “drive unprecedented levels of integration and joint business planning and experimentation between the two companies.”

Translation – this is still a new medium and we can learn a lot from each other.

(This is one of those rare moments when I tip my hat to Diageo and applaud their initiative. Although, there was one item in the press that caught my eye and made me laugh. It was something like Diageo wants to tap Facebook’s large audience in markets like Brazil, where the two companies occupy the same office building in Sao Paolo. Oh, and if they were in a different part of town, no deal?)

In any event, in the UK, this new relationship did not go over well. From what I read online, the negative reaction ranged from “serious concerns” from the British Medical Association to “torches and pitchfork” rants from the anti-alcohol forces.

Come on people, Facebook and Diageo can target legal drinking age consumers and put up safe guards to keep young people out. You can’t do that with billboards or newspapers. Perhaps manufacturers should hand out blindfolds in front of every billboard in the UK where a young person is likely to walk past.

Finally, Facebook announced new features this week that include sharing more than just informing. They hope to become a “taste maker” and influencer of products and services. The reaction has been mixed with pundits and bloggers weighing in on both sides. An unscientific poll among Mashable readers indicates as much as 75% hate the news feed changes.

Time will tell whether the relationship between Facebook and Diageo is a smart move for both, or, Facebook will become the next social media darling to wane in its appeal. But with well over 300 million users worldwide, I continue to think that Diageo’s move was right on the money – despite how much it pains me to say that.

In my constant search for interesting/entertaining news about the business of alcohol, I came across a posting titled World’s Weirdest Spirits at The Daily meal. You can find it here.

The list includes a mishmash of strange booze where “logic” caused the creation of a bottled concoction. For example, people love bacon so there is Bakon Vodka; how about smoked salmon flavored vodka? The logic applies to a Yogurt liqueur as well, called Yogurito.

What would a viable spirits brand be without a story, a legend or an “inspiration?” There is Copil Licor de Tuna – no, not fish tasting, that’s the salmon vodka. This one is distilled from cactus pears and has something to do with an Aztec legend about blood and the creation of the cactus. (I couldn’t make that up, folks.)

There is also a spirit called Root that includes botanicals, birch bark, wintergreen and a bunch of other stuff. The story is that the recipe was Native American, passed down to colonial settlers and was served to Pennsylvania coal miners. Might have to take this one seriously – it’s gotten some hype and seems to have a potential following.

Now we come to my two favorites… drumroll please… Products I like to call “purposive” – spirits with a purpose and that help to “make things happen.”

One of them is Mamajuana, apparently also known as Dominican Viagra. It’s made from herbs, sticks, wood, honey, wine, rum and who-knows-what else. All the ingredients are steeped together for a few weeks. Don’t ask me how you drink it but I suspect it comes with tweezers to remove the splinters. But hey, it’s an aphrodisiac.

The other is a product called Kierewiet Liqueur – billed as a digestif, it has a green color, a bold marijuana leaf on the label and is said to be a Cannabis Liqueur. I’m told it’s served in many places in Amsterdam, of course. This was bound to have happened but I would have suggested a bit more subtlety in packaging execution.

Well, there you have it. In an industry where such products as dessert and cake vodkas, spiked chocolate milk, chocolate and cabernet products are on the ascendancy – these may well be the trends of the future.

(I’m kind of hoping the cannabis one makes it – I have a concept and marketing plan already laid out.)

A winery on Long Island, Lieb Family Cellars, has introduced a 9/11 Wine. The wine sells for $19.11 and “benefits the National 9/11 Memorial and Museum.” Apparently the foundation has approved it and a paltry amount of the sales (10%) will go to the foundation if you buy direct from the winery.

Outrageous. But I can’t decide who the moronic villain is… who gets the award for stupidity combined with greed? The winery and the fool who came up with the idea? The person on the foundation who said yes? The restaurant or retailer who stocks it? The person who buys it?

If you are shameless enough to do this why not at least give all the net proceeds to the foundation?

The answer is, no matter what lipstick they try to put on this pig of an idea, it’s still a pig.

This piece from salon.com just says it all:

On Sunday, Anthony Bourdain summed up his response on Twitter, noting, “What kind of piece of shit would create such a product?” And speaking to the New York Daily News, Ben Glascoe, whose firefighter son died on 9/11, called the effort “distasteful.”

The Gallup folks conduct an annual survey on drinking alcohol and have measured the top choices (wine, beer, liquor) since 1992.

Bottom-line: Nearly as many US drinkers name wine (35%) as beer (36%) as their most often choice in alcohol. Liquor is third at 23% and close to its highest level.

The choice of beer as America’s favorite drink has declined over the past two decades and it was accelerated this year with a five-point drop in mentions of beer, down from 41% to 36%. Among young adults, the preference for beer fell from 51% in 2010 to 39% this year.

I no sooner finished reading the Gallup poll when I noticed another ominous sign on the horizon for beer.

A number of media sources have reported a growth in wine on tap. In some of the restaurants and bars dispensing red, white and rosé, the taps have a sign saying “Warning: Wine Not Beer.” Uh – oh…is there a trend in the making?

Looks like Augie Busch got out just in time.

Here we go again.

The press about initiatives concerning the privatization of alcohol sales has started to heat up once more. Looks like the Washington initiative will be back on the ballot; Ohio is pushing across the board privatization, not just alcohol; and Pennsylvania lawmakers are expected to file legislation that would auction off the state’s wine and spirits wholesale operations and liquor stores to private vendors.

But wait a minute… Didn’t I just read that the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board  (PLCB) just reported record sales and contributions to the state treasury?

In fact, the control board hit $1.9 billion in sales (up 4%) and claims to be the largest buyer of wine and spirits in the US. The sales volume generated some $500 million in sales tax and profit transfers.

It seems to me that, in addition to being a monopoly, they have tried to use marketing efforts more like a private enterprise than government. They run ads (print, billboards and even radio); lots of price promotions; and have initiatives like an online store and supermarket wine and spirits kiosks.

But it’s a government enterprise and, as such, I’m not sure they speak marketing. Their ads are okay but hardly comparable to those run by large private enterprise retailers. Despite the blasé nature of their communication, the PLCB still gets criticized for running ads. Imagine how much louder the criticism would be if the ads were compelling.

Their retail initiatives are worth applauding even if Wegmans ultimately rejected the kiosk idea because of customer complaints.  According to Bloomberg Business Week, “customers who use the kiosks insert their identification, and a state worker at a remote location verifies it. The wine buyer must then use a breath machine to prove their blood-alcohol level is below 0.02.”

Where I come from all of this is referred to as “close, but no cigars.”

I don’t mean to be harsh, but government running a private enterprise – no matter how well intentioned and creative the employees are – just doesn’t measure up. The obstacles are too numerous and strong.

I read an article today that the wineries in New York have appealed to Sen. Schumer because the federal government is hurting business by taking too long to approve new labels for wine bottles. Schumer said, “Often, when wineries finally do receive feedback, it is with a rejected label and the necessary corrections. And, at that point, labels must be resubmitted and the process must begin again.” He went on to point out that delayed label approval means delayed sales that in turn means less tax dollars.

Maybe the folks in Pennsylvania should work for the federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB).

The news that fast-food chains are selling alcohol sent me scurrying to the Internet to gauge the reaction among the public and pundits. After all, “demon rum” could be polluting the American haute cuisine realm and worse, is Ronald McDonald going to turn into a boozer? Will people fear that a McBeer will replace a shake? Do you typically pair your Whopper with a nice lager or with a zinfandel?

According to USA Today (and reprinted by Mark Brown’s newsletter), Burger King and Sonic will join Pizza Hut and Starbuck’s in offering alcoholic beverages along with fast food. Clearly, the move into alcohol is designed to compete with casual dining chains and to increase the cash register ring.

So, my Internet journey revealed mainly neutral to favorable reactions plus some interesting insights.

A number of blog postings (Chowhound, for example) referenced the differences between American and European attitudes toward alcohol, such as:

“There is a simple cultural difference between the US and the far more relaxed attitude many Europeans have towards beer. We seem to think that we need to regulate alcohol wherever we can, Europeans seem to think that adults are generally capable of making the right decision without the state telling them what to do.”

The gourmets also waded (or is it weighted) in:

“I would very much like a glass of Sangiovese with a Baracoa plate at Chipotle, or a Gewurtz with some good Tacos Al Pastor.”

I found this interesting item about Louisiana:

“…Not only drive-thru daiquiris, but doughnut shops with liquor licenses, too. Video poker is legal in Louisiana, but to get a gaming license, the operator has to have a liquor license (logically, if you check IDs for alcohol, you’ll check them for video poker). So damn near every corner cafe, sandwich shop, po’boy joint, doughnut and coffee place, serves alcohol and has video poker.”

Finally, the doom and gloom, anti-alcohol folks had their say: “Fast food plus fast alcohol equals fast drunks.” That’s obviously from someone who has never experienced the therapeutic benefit of a burger and fries at the end of the night or the day after.

Looks like the last posting on “What’s in a name – Bartender vs. Mixologist?” got some folks annoyed. Most of the people I heard from were anti-mixologist terminology in sentiment.

(By the way, see the word ‘comment’ at the top of the post, beneath the headline? That’s so you can put something up directly without sending an email. Anyway, happy to hear from you.)

Here is a sample of the comments:

Ray Foley, publisher of Bartender Magazine, wanted me to know that in a recent survey he took of his readers, more than two-thirds described themselves as a bartender. As Ray put it, it depends on the questions and the sample of those who participate. But I love this line he used in the email, “I never heard anyone at a bar say ‘Hey Mixologist’ can I have a drink?”

Kyle Branche, a professional/private bartender from LA who has a blog at www.LABartender.wordpress.com, feels that “there are…individuals saying they’re a so-called or self-titled ‘Mixologist’ just so they can take advantage of a wave…as a cocktail personality…without any actual experience behind a live bar.”

And, this one from a good friend who knows very little about the alcohol industry and, other than an occasional libation, could care less – “I’ve never heard or saw the term mixologist before… And I actually think that it is one of the dumber things I’ve ever heard.”

Any mixologists out there who care to step in?

Some folks I know are planning a multi-client research service to measure and understand the views of the key players in the alcohol industry – bartenders, wait staff, sommeliers, servers and on premise management.

The project will be run by Kevin Moran from MSS, Multi-Sponsored Studies LLC with extensive experience in the spirits and wine industry and Paul Braun owner of Braun Research Inc. a leading data collection company with a broad panel of people “behind the bar.” Together they are launching a syndicated extension to their powerful on premise multi-sponsored research and solutions service.

To start the ball rolling they polled the bartender database on a number of key and timely issues. The first one I wanted to share was the question of whether the term mixologist is taking hold.

Moran and Braun surveyed 500 bartenders from a national sample that reflected gender, geography, type of establishment and so on. They asked two questions related to bartender vs. mixologist – how do on premise people describe themselves and whether the term mixologist is here to stay or a fad.

Nearly half (48%) of the bartenders surveyed described themselves as a bartender. But, a third (33%) referred to themselves as a mixologist. Interestingly, the rest – 20% — saw themselves as bartenders who want to become mixologists. So while the self-descriptions split 50/50, it seems that the term mixologist has taken hold. For many, it’s becoming an aspiration.

If you have any doubts, here are the results of “Is the term mixologist a fad that will go away in the future or a real change in what bartenders do and will grow in importance?”

Nearly 2 out of 3 (64%) of those surveyed felt that the term mixologist is here to stay and reflects their changing role. By the way, those who live and work in the western States supported the permanence of the term at the 72% level.

My takeaway from this finding is that too often manufacturers think in terms of the “star” factor and feel that the creation of drinks and cocktails can only reside among a few. Guess what, more and more bartenders seem to be embracing the idea of creating a drink in addition to just serving it.

Maybe its just nomenclature, but I detect from these results and personal experience that bartending as a “way station” or day job while waiting to be discovered is giving way to a broader view of the profession. The idea of quickly making and serving drinks does not preclude the ability to create — quantity and quality of effort are not mutually exclusive.

I think suppliers might want to reexamine their notion of the power behind the bar.

Next: Views about the 3-tier system.

Call it Pig Swig.

Ad Age reported last week that the Piggly Wiggly supermarket chain is launching a line of store brand beers under the umbrella name of Pig Swig. The line up consists of “craft style” beers – Pig Tail Ale and Pig Pen Pilsner. I suppose if your company is called Piggly Wiggly you might as well go “whole hog” (sorry about that) and name your store brands accordingly.

But I must say that charging $6.99 for a 6-pack is more than a bit piggish. (Okay I’ll stop.)

A number of retailers have launched private labels/store brands but managed to name the products intelligently if not creatively. Supervalu has Buck Range Light selling at Albertson’s and other stores in the chain; Walgreen sells Big Flats; and 7-Eleven sells Game Day beer. Costco uses the Kirkland name as it does on spirits and Kroger calls its beers Tap Room No 21 and Port Republic.

The Ad Age article also reports (via Nielsen) that private label beers account for only $23.6 million out of the total beer category of $27.4 billion. But, store brand sales are up 41% the past year versus 2.3% drop in branded sales.

That must be the inspiration for Piggly Wiggly to come up with ads and slogans telling consumers to “get your swig on,” “put some pink in your cheeks” and my favorite – “toast of the trough.”

I don’t know if it’s still around but there was a Malt Scotch Whisky called Sheep Dip. Think of the name applied to the Pig Swig line. I even have the slogan – “come wallow in our beer.”

I knew that sooner or later, I’d get to post something about Bernie Madoff and the booze business.

Morrell and Company held an online auction of his wine and spirits collection. For a swindler who lived the rich life having stolen $65 billion, his wine collection seems to me to be paltry and uninspired. But, buyers gladly overpaid for the boasting rights of owning the charlatan’s wine and spirits.

As the auction house put it, “Some of the bottles are better viewed as conversation pieces rather than valued for their contents.”

The wines went for well beyond their value. A case of 1996 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild was valued at $3,200 to $3,800 and sold for $6,800. A bottle of Chateau Lynch-Bages from 1990 went for $2,200 despite a value appraised at no more than $1,600.

But, my favorite over valued auctioned items was on the spirits side.

Four minis consisting of Bombay, Grand Marnier and Smirnoff valued at $10 to $20 went for $300. Minis?

Nine bottles that included Jack Daniel’s, Jose Cuervo and Drambuie sold for $500 versus an estimated value of around $200. (The value must have taken into account the prices billionaires have to pay for booze in midtown Manhattan or in The Hamptons.)

Included in the nine bottle lot was – drumroll please – a bottle of Seagram’s VO with the original Canadian tax stamp dated 1981. All those years trying to figure out how to make VO grow – who knew it was a collector’s item!

A personal note to Madoff:

Dear Bernie,

Happy you are rotting in prison and hope you are not doing well. While many are laughing about your choice of alcohol libations, I for one am pleased that you obviously were not “from the drinkers.” I’m also pleased that the industry did not benefit from your ill-gotten gains.

But I am curious about something. I can understand ripping off minis from an airplane or hotel room bar. But Smirnoff and Cuervo?

Well anyway, at least the victims’ fund got some money — $41,530 to be exact. I suppose it’s a rounding error in the scheme of things but I also got a posting out of it, didn’t I?

Just when you think you’ve heard of everything, every gimmick, and every ploy to sell a drink – along comes a new one.

There is a bar and club in NYC where the bartender and a “beauty vendor” have teamed up to create cocktails whose mixer ingredients are supposed to smooth skin, plump it up or otherwise enhance the appearance.

Among the cocktails is a Watermelon Kiss which mixes tequila with watermelon, “to even out skin tone,” according to a newspaper article on the club. Another drink uses kumquats and special vitamins and minerals to reduce oiliness.

You get the picture.

Call me old school but alcohol with or without a mixer can be a social lubricant, a calming influence, a road to mood change and, of course, relaxing. If I’ve had a drink or two, you probably can convince me that some products enhance the romantic moment. But, a cocktail for skin improvement? No way.

I think this is how it works – you have 3 or 4 cocktails, go to the restroom and look in the mirror. You’ll love what you see.

In any event, hats off to the owners for a novel way to sell booze. Shows that the PT Barnum adage is still alive and well.

Just thought I would take a moment to alert readers – consumers as well as those in the industry – about upcoming events of interest related to the booze industry.

First and foremost, from May 13 to 17 is the Manhattan Cocktail Classic all over NYC. It starts with a Gala at the New York Public Library and there are events all over town. Anyone who has been to previous events recommends it highly. Here’s the link www.manhattancocktailclassic.com – got to warn you, most events are sold out.

In June (28 and 29), the Javits center in NYC has the Bar and Wine Show for the on premise trade. www.newyorkbarshow.com

Finally, and not directly related to spirits and wine – there is a charity event called The Lone Star Chili Cookoff on May 21. What does this have to do with the booze business? Not much except when I think of the business I often think about Texas. You know, 6^th St. in Austin, Crown Royal and great times with the Southern region. Here’s the link. www.lonestarchilicookoff.org/about.php?club=NYAMC

Who says this blog doesn’t provide a public service?