01438 741177         thewinesociety.com

The Society's Community

Issues regarding English Fizz


#43

A shame that the original poster has not returned to this thread with a response.


#44

I’d retitle this thread ‘gripes with champers’! I’ve tried several English fizzes and all of them were exceptional and at that price point fab value

  • nyetimber standard, premier and BdB cuvee
  • hambledon standard and premier cuvee
  • leventhorpe pink fizz (processed by chapeldown)

I never once thought any less of ESW for that price and i have tasted it side by side with champagnes which tasted like water after a delicious punch of Hambledon!!

With the economics and manufacturing of champagne you would have thought it’d be cheaper if you ignored the branding and market positioning aspect.

Here’s to more blind tastings with the UK vs. France showing up champagne!! Surely @Freddy is destined as host for ‘The judgement of Bognor’! :joy:


#45

#46

Hopefully it’ll be “merde Bognor!” after ESW scoops first prize! :wink:


#47

I thought they had replied to one of my posts… but nothing when I looked after your comment :thinking:


#48

just a thought… but with the current progress ref ‘Bx’ -and the vague possibiity of not being in E. Court Justice jurisdiction… perhaps we can call it English Chapagne again!

light blue touch paper / retire


#49

Oh, the freedom! It’s worth it just for that.


#50
  1. why would any respectable English wine maker want to pass off their fizz as something else?

  2. It wasn’t membership of the EEC/EU that stopped other fizz being called Champagne. That happened a long time before as the result of a court case in London about a company ‘passing off’ Spanish fizz as Champagne.


#51

I’m guessing @lapin_rouge is fortunate to be too young to remember the case almost 60 years ago…

Unfortunately I’m not.

A quick Google has found this Drinks Business article on the 50th anniversary of the case
https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2010/12/50th-anniversary-of-champagne-case/

and the law report is here


#52

It seems to me that comments like this forget that the protected food names scheme works both ways. Have you asked the makers of, for example, Stilton or whisky what they think of your idea?


#53

But that was a judgement according to English law, and that can be changed when we “get back control”. Not that I am suggesting we should!


#54


#55

No. There are WTO protections as well.


#56

Can you give a reference for that? I’d be interested in seeing exactly how PDOs impact on WTO-rules trade.

Meanwhile I note that Brazil only recently stopped using “Champagne” for locally produced fizz, but that seemed to be something negotiated between France and Brazil.


#57

https://www.champagne.fr/en/terroir-appellation/protection-of-champagne-appellation/protection-where-do-we-stand-today

WTO rules can cover many types of intellectual property, but the regime for wines and spirits is particularly strong.


#58

But that says “Under pressure from the Comité Champagne and INAO, also with strong support from the EU, numerous agreements for the reciprocal protection of names between countries are already in place. The challenge today is to negotiate multilateral protection agreements between all the Member States of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).”

In other words, it is subject to negotiation between Member States of the WTO. It is not an obligation on Members through their membership.

LATER EDIT …
Ah, hang on. Apologies @SPmember. I have just realised you gave two links, and I only looked at the first one. (The way the forum software converted only one into a box confused me.) So it is the TRIPS agreement - apparently signed up to by all members - that would prevent us. Thank you for the information!


#59

We were ‘in control’ when our courts made the law ruling, and there was no appetite for the Commons to change the law before joining the EEC/EU.

Anything could be changed in the same way that the EU parliament could decide that any EU country could label their fizz as champagne, but I see that as remote as the UK parliament changing the law. :grinning:


#60

I hope you are right. Further comments I have in mind would be too political for a wine forum :wink:


#61

Well, there’s also the fact that it would be a very ill-advised road to go down. English sparklers are expensive wines to make, and they need to carve out their own niche at the premium end of the market. Selling yourself as a knock-off of something else is a recipe for a race to the bottom.


#62

Exactly… if you make an inferior quality product, sure, hang onto the fame of some well known reference.
But if you produce better quality, then you should aim to make a name for yourself…