Coca-Cola Lessons for a Weary Wine World
As Wine's Dealcoholized Sister Still Gets Misunderstood - We Can Learn from the Soda Pop King for a Brighter Future
In May of 1886, Dr. John Pemberton, a pharmacist in Atlanta, Georgia created a syrup which he would eventually walk down the street and share with a local pharmacy. The syrup would be mixed with soda water - beginning what would become known as Coca-Cola. The original recipe of the syrup was coca leaf extract, kola nut (caffeine), sugar, water, lime juice, vanilla and caramel - the other ingredients, called natural flavors were thought to be cinnamon, nutmeg, coriander, orange oil, lemon oil and neroli oil. But much like Vermouth and Chartreuse - full recipes of beloved beverages are kept under lock and key.
Pemberton created Coca-Cola as a patent medicine, calling it a ‘brain tonic and intellectual beverage’ - claiming to cure headaches, upset stomach and fatigue. In an evolved world, knowing what some of the listed ingredients can invoke in humans - his cure claims make sense, as anyone suffering from a caffeine headache can attest to after having their first cup of coffee in the morning.
One the ingredients in Coca-Cola, and part of its name - the coca leaf has long brought up debate about whether or not the original recipe included the drug that we know today as cocaine. In a 1988 New York Times article, it was confirmed that the original recipe did in fact contain trace amounts of potent cocaine, but the narcotic element was removed somewhere between 1902 and 1906. At the turn of the century and now, the coca leaf is decocainized (yep, a real word and thing) - which allows for Coca-Cola to keep the original recipe intact, minus the white collar crime drug that receives a lesser sentencing penalty than its crack counterpart (despite them being pharmacologically identical) - but that’s a conversation for another day.
In 1980, Coca-Cola made another change to the recipe - this time, to much fanfare with the invention of diet Coke. Yet, the king of soda pop didn’t launch the product for another two years for multiple reasons. First, they didn’t want to deplete any aspect of the Coca-Cola brand; and second it already had a diet soda winner on the market with Tab - which was introduced in 1962. So, what changed? The consumer - and particularly diet culture of the 80s.
Diet culture has been around for at least as long as we can research back into advertising, and in the 80s it blew up with step aerobics, celebrity workout videos and the undeniable fitness fashion of legwarmers. Yes, Tab held a place for Coca-Cola in the market, yet it was kind of “mom’s diet soda” - an absolute consolation prize for those growing up on the sweet nectar of Classic Coke, and still wanting that experience minus the calories.
As the cultural messages of the early 80s were telling us we could have it all - especially women, Coca-Cola saw opportunity with an already built in market of consumers that loved the original. So, Coca-Cola took the best of both worlds - Classic Coke branding, while building on the recipe for Tab and created a diet soda pop that still continues to dominate the category today.
What’s in a Name?
Coca-Cola debated over whether to use the word ‘diet’ in its naming of the new soda; in the early 80s Nielsen had only recently created the category and two of Coca-Cola’s competitors already used the prefix on their versions of low-calorie soda pop. So why did a company firmly rooted in their brand, while holding top sales spots in regular and low-calorie soda decide to go with diet Coke? According to Coca-Cola:
Diet Coke was the most straightforward articulation of the promise of the brand. “It just seemed like the logical answer,” said John Farrell. “The equity of the Coca‑Cola name promised the delivery of taste, and ‘diet’ told you it didn’t have sugar or calories.”
Coca-Cola was, and still is, obsessive about their brand, going to great lengths to preserve it1 - yet, in watching and understanding the market, as well as their consumers they didn’t let ego get in the way of adding an adjective to the original and well loved name brand. The example can easily be applied to the world of dealcoholized wine, and why we as an industry need to call it such when the base, original juice begins as wine with alcohol.
Persnickety Perspectives
For many folks, especially Gen Xers who have centered wine for a large part of our careers - Mr. Wark, needs little introduction. But for those readers that didn’t come up in the industry with their noses in Wine Encyclopedias, while getting tested on our beverage knowledge, along with the ability to work restaurant floors, run profitable programs - all while knowing every dish’s ingredients and helping run the front door, I’ll give you an introduction. Wark is a self described Muckracker of the wine industry, with his career focused on marketing, public and media relations - as well as trade association management2. He’s also written a blog, turned newsletter since 2004; winning accolades and praise across the wine industry. Over my career I’ve always respected Tom’s work, even when I didn’t agree with some of it - because his writing is typically well researched and has over the years poked holes in institutions, often to the betterment of the U.S. wine trade.
In his piece Without the Alcohol It’s Just Not Wine So Let’s Not Pretend, Wark kicks things off with a lasagna analogy - and while the tasty casserole with bechamel or ricotta both sound delicious, the reasoning that lasagna isn’t such without noodles being comparable to wine not being such without alcohol - is a reach, and a far one. But, I understand throwing fear, uncertainty and doubt towards anything that could undermine a beverage, which has defined a large part of his career - because ten years ago, I felt them same way.
In 2015, I added my first spirit free section to a beverage program and quickly after, reps began knocking on the door wanting to add dealcoholized wine to our tastings. While today I can easily say the quality, selections and availability weren’t at a level for me to consider adding them to the list - looking back, I also know my hard and quick no to dealcoholized wine at the time - subconscious or not, was because my worth and career were very much tied up in the business of alcohol. So much so, I built a corner, wine bar around it. Yet now, with distance from my career being completely immersed in alcohol and over four years of tasting, studying, educating and pairing its dealcoholized sister - there are two simple facts: de-alc wine is wine, because it begins with all the same nuts and bolts - growing of grapes (Chardonnay, Pinot Noir Tempranillo etc), harvest, crushing and pressing of grapes, and fermentation, with the added step of dealcoholizing the juice - similar to how Coca-Cola took the potent narcotic out of the original recipe in the early 1900s.
A recent piece from Dave Baxter over at ‘Wine and …’ covers the point of de-alc wine going through fermentation well. A recommended read.
The other reason calling the alcohol removed juice anything but dealcoholized wine, is because wine is also a brand - that is deeply struggling for market share in the beverage world. Much like Coca-Cola called it’s low-calorie soda diet Coke, even though the recipe was based off of Tab, the big red machine out of Georgia knew they needed the original branding for it to thrive. And while dealcoholized wine is starting to find its footing in quality, or as Wark says is “having a moment and suspects we will hear a great deal more about it this year and even in coming years” - you know what sector isn’t debating the semantics of names and absolutely crushing the non-alcoholic sector: beer. No one in the beer industry is really saying non-alc beer isn’t beer, because it’s fermented and has hops and has malt - the difference being the alcohol is removed. Keeping the words beer and wine attached to their non-alc and de-alc adjectives, takes a page from diet Coke - delivering on taste (which is of course always subjective) without, in this case the alcohol. Which brings us to the consideration of essence.
Wine Philosophy
In his newsletter, Wark continues to argue against using the de-alc adjective with reference to a favorite object of philosophy: “The ‘Chair’ is a thing that allows us to sit above the ground. Without the character of fixing our butts above the ground, it is something else.” I deeply agree that language matters in order for us to communicate and connect, as well as convey essence - which is why Wark’s reference took me back to some of my favorite college philosophy classes and the grand tales told around the essence of a chair:
Professor walks into the final exam, picks up his chair - puts it on the desk and says ‘given everything we’ve learned this semester, prove that this chair does not exist”. While students filled blue books trying to refute the existence of the chair - it took one student less than a minute to complete the exam, and that student was the only one to receive an A. The answer to proving the chair didn’t exist, was by simply asking ‘What chair?”.
Alcohol doesn’t make wine, wine - if it did then we wouldn’t have our very different favorite selections from around the world, from different hardworking farmers and talented winemakers. If alcohol was the deciding factor in making wine, wine - we’d all drink the same sparkling, white, rosé and red. And if essence is really about alcohol, then I fully expect more people to be drinking fortified wine. The essence of wine starts with the grapes: how they are grown and vinified - both of which are highly subjective to how growers handle place, terroir and what to do with the grapes once they’ve been picked. Choosing to dealcoholize is simply another step some winemakers and wineries choose to do. But it doesn’t take away the essence of the place where it started, and the winemakers still dedicating their lives to a beverage that absolutely deserves to be celebrated - whether it has alcohol or not.
In October, I wrote a piece about Two Ways to Wine, as this doesn’t have to be an either/or - because it’s an and situation. Taking lessons from Coca-Cola and the world of beer - dealcoholized wine offers folks an option, who love the original3 and simply want a lighter version for whatever reason. Yet, if we don’t call it wine, besides the disservice we’re presenting the consumer in understanding this evolution - we’re also losing the opportunity to claim the numbers - like both soda pop companies and beer do, with their diet and non-alc portfolio options.
NielsenIQ, Silicon Valley Bank and The Direct-to-Consumer Shipping Report - all came out with their annual reports recently on how the wine and beverage industries fared last year and look to land in the year ahead. Non-alcoholic options aren’t slowing down and the biggest category with opportunity to gain in a sector many are already calling noisy - is wine. Only a few great wineries and winemakers have taken the leap into de-alc, and while they continue to figure out quality and cost, their numbers are looking very different than those griping their alcoholic bottles so tightly there is very little profit left to squeeze.
The Pepsi Challenge
In 1975, Pepsi set up single blind taste tests that took place in malls and other public locations. A table with two, unidentifiable white cups contained Pepsi and Coca-Cola. Passersby were asked if they’d like to take the challenge to see which one they preferred - after the blind selection the two bottles would be revealed to the taster. The results leaned towards a consensus that those taste testing preferred Pepsi over Coca-Cola.
In his book Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, author Malcolm Gladwell presents evidence that suggests Pepsi's edge over Coca-Cola in the Pepsi Challenge is a result of the flawed nature of the "sip test" method. His research shows that tasters will generally prefer the sweeter of two beverages based on a single sip, even if they prefer a less sweet beverage over the course of an entire can. The other flaw in Pepsi’s taste testing, it didn’t and still doesn’t result in sales. Because of bias. People don’t like to be wrong, especially about their long held beliefs on taste. Even more so if it’s tied to their emotional worth, identity and means to make a living. Much like the Pepsi Challenge, well respected folks in wine and wine writing are falling into a deep chasm of bias when it comes to de-alc wine, which again I understand as it once blinded me as well. And while we know bias is based in fear, there exists an opportunity to quell it by getting more curious - even when we’re judging4.
In Wark’s piece, to further make the point around the disparaging language of de-alc wine he references Esther Mobley - the rightfully respected San Francisco Wine Editor on her recent judging experience at the San Francisco Wine Competition …
Mobley didn’t elaborate further on the difficulty of judging - but Wark notes, she said they were all uniformly bad. Maybe they were, however there are multiple things to consider when we’re talking about dealcoholized wine being judged at a competition alongside its alcohol counterparts:
Judging De-alc is Different: Mobley hits on something I’ve recently been discussing in correspondence with beverage folks across both zero proof and alc sectors: the importance of having judges with experience in both alcohol and de-alc beverages. If you are a beverage professional that only has experience with alcoholic beverages, nuance and differences of non-alc get lost in translation for two reasons. First, it’s still a very new category where markers of quality and evaluation are still being identified. Second, most de-alc judging comes under the comparison to alc wine, with corresponding typicity expectations - that’s like judging diet Coke against criteria that it’s not Coke.
Competition Submissions: I’ve had the immense fortune of both judging and working wine competitions, and let me say this: holy crazy amounts of wine Batman! Wine competitions get an enormous amount entries. Judges get called in as regional experts, based on areas of study, experience, travel, and continued access to wines - which brings incredible validity to scores and awards. But dealcoholized wines aren’t getting the same treatment, which isn’t a knock on the competitions - again because the category is so new it’s tough to identify expertise. Unfortunately, that likely means these wines are getting judged by folks who haven’t had a ton of exposure to the category, often done with bias against the category - again speaking from my own, past experience.
Tasting Fatigue: Folks often think judging in a wine competition is easy, let me break that myth and say it’s a lot of taxing mental and sensory work. Assessing, tasting, and working with a panel of other wine professionals is an undertaking - as we are never short on opinions about regionality correctness, expressions of terroir and again typicity. Paired with the amount of wines a single judge typically tastes, palate fatigue is a natural occurrence.5 No matter where de-alc might fit into the line up at a competition, it deserves the same judging expertise for the wines to be judged with the validation of their alc counterparts - with fresh and experienced palates in the category.
Youngins: I may have mentioned it about a million times BUT … the de-alc wine category is sooooooo new, which isn’t an excuse; at the same time the Oregon wine industry and quality of wines coming out of the region in 1975 and even before looked a lot different than current day. Those in the dealcoholized wine game are starting to figure some things out, and with time many are only going to shine like the gleaming star that diet Coke became in the Coca-Cola empire. We absolutely need to have standards upon which to assess de-alc wine, while also understanding the criteria to do so is evolving as much as the category.
Free Our Minds
Let me be clear, much as I mentioned in Two Ways to Wine - this isn’t me calling out anyone in wine taking a rigid stance against de-alc options. There is already too much divineness throughout the wine world - another point that hurts the brand. Rather, it’s a calling in - to change and adaptability; to free our minds and let cups runneth over, in this diet Coke moment, for a weary wine world.
Even if Coca-Cola is now associated with kissing the ring of a fascist, and reporting its workers to ICE. Remember to vote with your dollars, y’all.
For folks who see pictures of your favorite wine friends in regions across the U.S. and Europe with hashtags, about said region - highlighting the wines of those regions, the trade associations pay for their plane tickets, lodging, meals and likely - eventual favor on buyer’s wine lists and retail shelves.
Much like Coca-Cola looked to appeal to the younger generation with diet Coke, it’s understandable why reports and marketers focus on Gen Z and younger millennials when it comes to drinking choices - they often determine trends and with those go the dollars. Couple that in the wine world, with portfolios losing their Boomer dollars - and the focus scrambles towards getting in with new tastes. Except it excludes the tastes that already love wine, and simply - for whatever reason, no longer dig the alcohol, which are a lot of Gen X and Y folks. The wineries that have dealcoholized wine in their portfolios or new companies that solely focus on de-alc wine are WINNING these demographics right now - and very few reports or marketers are talking about it.
Even when we do our best to be curious, food and beverage folks are champions at judging for sport.
On brand for the reference point: soda pop, particularly Coke and diet Coke were a go to way to wake up the palate and mind after a day of wine tasting. Maybe Dr. Pemberton was right on his brain tonic claims.
Great piece, Liz! I love the analogy here with Coke. Why are so many wine-lifers bullish about non-alc not being "real wine?" What you wrote is true, it's not the alcohol that makes wine, wine. Its personality has nothing to do with the booze (much like me I've learned!) so it gets confusing as to what these folks are defending.