Issue link: http://winesandvines.uberflip.com/i/708909
30 WINES&VINES August 2016 E leven years of "cork wars" combat experi- ence (I was founder and president of Neo- cork, a synthetic cork pioneer) gave me insight about closure decisions. It failed to give me wealth, just insight. I am rich with insight. Some might say that having "a synthetic cork guy" write this story is like letting Elon Musk write an objective compari- son of electric vs. gas vs. diesel cars. It's been more than 10 years since I've worked for or had a financial stake in any closure company. I'd like to think that time has mellowed rather than "tainted" me (pun apology No. 1.). When I started with alternative closures 22 years ago, one-piece natural corks were the standard, with twin-disk corks used for value-priced wines. Cork quality attributes were primarily cosmetic: A pretty cork was a good cork. A gorgeous cork was a great cork and cost more. Screwcaps were used on jug wines only. There were no acceptable synthetic corks that worked, plus they had a huge image problem. Winery owners and marketing directors were certain that the moment they sealed a wine with something other than tree bark, their wines would be immediately removed from every wine list and store shelf in the coun- try—and worst of all, they'd personally be found guilty of the scandalous crime of breaking with the industry's traditions of "how we do things." What I've learned over the years (and what Jane Firstenfeld's article on page 36 confirms) is that no one closure type is the undisputed "winner," nor are any of them fundamentally unacceptable. Around the world in the next 24 hours, several million screwcap-sealed bottles will be opened and enjoyed, as will several million bottles sealed under synthetic cork. Focus on the consumer Wine is a consumer product, so their preference is what ultimately matters. Does your consumer care greatly about your choice of closure, not at all or somewhere in between? Will closure se- lection materially affect purchase or repurchase? The choice of closure needs to fit the brand. For yours, it may be that any closure type is acceptable, or that certain ones are preferable. While I agree that enological factors such as oxygen transmission rates, TCA detection thresh- olds, cap liner materials, etc., are important, they are only one part of closure choice criteria. In making your closure decision, be sure to consider these questions as well: Does your brand appeal to a younger or older demographic? Traditions change generationally. For example, my father bought really nice leather shoes and had them resoled by a cobbler when the heels wore out. I have never had my shoes resoled, and my son doesn't even know that resoling is possible. Many years ago, fancy shoemakers and cobblers probably had articulate arguments something along the lines of "real shoes have real soles" (or something like that), but ultimately the market changed—look down at the shoes you are wearing right now. Younger wine drinkers tend to prefer convenience, and they may view pulling corks (synthetic or natural) as some- thing fussy that mom and dad do. They are convenience- oriented, time-strapped and just want to enjoy wine without extra steps. They don't cook much, and they order a lot of take-out food. Before you dismiss all of this, consider that 40% of millennials recently surveyed said cold cereal was an inconvenient breakfast choice because they had to clean up after eating it. Cleaning up consists of a quick wipe with a soapy sponge on a bowl and a spoon! Will the wine be purchased on-premise, off-premise or direct to consumer? Who will see the bottle prior to purchase or con- sumption? For off-premise it's the purchasers themselves. Are they buying for per- sonal use or for a gift? Will the closure being used make a mate- rial difference in their decision making? If you use a synthetic closure, the consumer won't know until they pull the cork. Will that affect repur- n ANDY STARR Closure Decisions Are More Than Technical Winemaking