These things, I remarked to Madam as she reached the front door at the same time I finished opening it just now, are sent to try us.
And, I added, they invariably succeed.
There's a back story to the main part of this blog entry, and it's going to be difficult to make sense of it without the back story, so judicious use of the scroll bar might be indicated if the reader's browser allows it.
I don't have much interaction with wine drinkers outside the house and the wine blogs I follow, which is understandable since I tend to buy directly from the winery, we don't have either a Dan Murphy's ouitlet or a reasonable independent wine merchant within an hour's drive, and the Bowen pub and restaurant scene tends to have lists favouring the obvious suspects or something that's been put together by a hired consultant representing a selected portfolio of brands, which is also one of the reasons we don't eat out too often.
One regular source of wine related discussion is, believe it or not, the morning walk, and if I set out within the five minute window that closes around ten past six I can usually expect to encounter Jimbo somewhere between the Grandview and the Front Beach, When I do vinous matters are almost invariably likely to raise their heads.
However, over the four weeks or so between the time we headed off to catch Randy Newman in concert and this morning I've only managed to catch him two or three times. Various factors account for that, and they're irrelevant here, but much of that pre-RN departure encounter was devoted to the advisability of renewing the subscription to the on-line James Halliday's Australian Wine Companion and there have been few opportunities to follow up on the discussion between that meeting and this morning's mosey past the Skate Bowl, out to the Yacht Club and back through the main street.
We were on the return leg from the Yacht Club when Jimbo ventured the opinion that he was less than impressed by the new and improved Halliday, and the remark came just after I'd pointed out that a full mailbox had bounced my email with the August edition of Hughesy's newsletter attached.
The August edition had, predictably, contained some not entirely favourable comments about the 2012 Halliday, and most of the rest of the walk was dedicated to a detailed analysis of the perceived shortcomings thereof.
Now, since I don't believe in being unnecessarily negative and ending up in flame wars I'd confined my remarks to the newsletter and am in the process of polishing a draft of an email to the recipients of the newsletter that'll be going out shortly after this is posted on the blog site.
The newsletter piece started off with I would love to be proved wrong, and hope that I am, and having gone back to the Halliday site to look at what attracted the adverse commentary it seems that some of the matters I was griping about have been addressed, though one is still inclined to wonder why they happened in the first place.
Given the nature of these things I'm inclined to think there's only room for one encyclopedic reference tome about Australian wine and there isn't anyone who's going to be able to set up a rival site to Mr Halliday's without doing an awful lot of work to duplicate an existing resource and should anyone try there'd be the issue of distinguishing between the competitors.
There's room for any number of annual buyers' guides and guides to different regions, styles or price points, but if you're looking at a one stop reference point covering the whole of the continent with tasting notes that go back a number of years anyone who's looking to duplicate, match or improve on the Halliday source has their work cut out.
That's not to suggest that it couldn't be done, but if you want to produce something that's comprehensive, authoritative and goes back a number of years in the tasting notes you're going to be pushing it…
However, if you're talking comprehensive, authoritative or, dare I suggest, magisterial, the early version of the 2012 Halliday had definite shortcomings, and when I went back earlier today to check that the anomalies were still there it seemed that most of the ones I'd noticed had been fixed but you're still inclined to ask why they were there in the first place, which is where much of the rest of this commentary is headed.
We're talking reference material, so when you bring it down to tin tacks it's down to the ease with which the information you're looking for can be retrieved.
While the on-line version offers possibilities that aren't available in a hard copy, you are still, presumably, looking at a listing of wineries with individual entries that combine information about the winery and tasting notes. You can add bells, whistles and search engines along the way, but it's the summary about the winery and the tasting notes that are the important content.
There's room for entries about Wineries of the year and Best of lists, but, seriously, I'd question how often the average user is going to be consulting that content.
A glance at the Table of Contents in the 2009 edition (my most recent hard copy) has that sort of content taking up the first fifty pages, followed by just under seven hundred pages of Australian wineries and wines.
I wasn't impressed when I flicked through a copy of the 2012 Companion in Dymocks in downtown Brisbane and noted what looked like a significant diminution in tasting note content. In a way, that's understandable. There are a growing number of wineries and a definite limit to the amount of space in a hard copy, so something's got to give.
Actually, that's a good argument for shelling out for the on-line version, isn't it? No page limit constraints, and you can justify the expense by having access to the whole archive of tasting notes dating back to way back when.
Unfortunately, however, you have to find the content, and this is where a few anomalies kick in.
I don't see any reason why the 2012 version needs to look or feel substantially different to the 2011, or, indeed why the online version can't be continually updated as new tasting notes go into the mix.
For that reason, I wasn't impressed when I went looking for information to help me put together an order from Cullen and found, when I looked at the 2010 Margaret River White, a rating of 89 and a note stating:
A full (and longer than usual) tasting note for this wine will be included in an upcoming book by James Halliday titled 1001 Wines Under $20, and will appear on the day of the release of the book, scheduled for 1 November 2011.
There's a similar note under the Bloodwood 2010 Big Men In Tights and, presumably, under the other 999 wines that get a guernsey in the forthcoming volume.
Now, I realize we're talking slightly upmarket everyday drinking wines, but, seriously, having shelled out $55 for a two-year subscription in July last year, you're telling me I have to wait till November to access information to guide purchases in August, September and October this year?
Some time in that period I'll probably be placing an order with Pfeiffers, and that order will undoubtedly include some of the current release Gamay, but go to the Companion and there's that note again. The Pfeiffer website still has the '10 Gamay on offer, and there are still three bottles sitting in my wine rack, so I'm probably going to be looking at the '11 when the order goes in, but still….
Seriously, if you shell out the bucks, and particularly if you've done so more than twelve months in advance, surely you're entitled to get access to everything that's going to be there over the rest of your subscription.
In an operation like this one would have thought that the idea was to build the subscriber base and work on offering a product that'll be good enough to have them re-subbing when the current subscription expires.
I'd hesitate to start talking about cash cows, but you probably get my drift.
If the product is good enough to start with there's no need to do exhaustive redesigns of what's on offer. There isn't too much room for variation, but changing the look, feel and avenues to access the data isn't likely to encourage people who're approaching the end of their current subscription to sign up again.
I'd offer the top level of my current website as proof that I've done a bit of this sort of thing, and while I'm not suggesting that I'd be capable of looking after something like the Halliday site, and that task would require something considerably more advanced that iWeb or RapidWeaver, the fact that I've put together, maintained and started to look at the alternatives I can use when MobileMe goes belly up on 30 June next year suggests I'm not a complete novice when it comes to these things.
Helpful thoughts and constructive observations are, of course, most welcome.
No comments:
Post a Comment