Deceptive and Misleading Advertising at Its Worst! (31 August)

Thanks to the wine glut, there is a plethora of inexpensive wine available to wine lovers and some are real bargains; absolutely no doubt about it, but lets face it, not all wine is great; not all of it is even particularly good, and some of it only has the right to be called wine because it is basically just, very plain, alcoholic, fermented grape juice.  In short, most of the truly good wine that represents value sells through even in today's congested market place, and whilst there are more really great deals to be found thanks to the over-supply, not all of the offerings are all they may be cracked up to be.

Rubbish is still rubbish, and just because an item is inexpensive, that does not make it cheap. This is particularly so when it comes to auctions. Everyone has heard the old adage "caveat emptor" or buyer beware. If you purchase goods from a retailer, there are strong safeguards in place to protect the consumer; for example the goods must be fit for the purpose for which they were sold. Many of those consumer law protections do not apply to purchases made via auction, so auctions can be a crap shoot.

That does not mean that all auctions should be avoided. Indeed there are many very reputable wine auction houses that have built fine reputations by being very professional and standing behind their claims, promises and service. There are big ones like Langtons, and even small ones like Wickman's but unfortunately not all of them are the pinnacle of morality and propriety.

GraysOnline auctions everything from agricultural equipment to woodworking products, and everything in-between, including wine. Some of their advertising is not only misleading, its downright deceptive and dishonest. A quick trawl through their website shows a few obvious examples.

How about the Cathcart Ridge Estate 2004 Reserve Shiraz which states "BEST SHIRAZ` AWARD & `BEST WINE` TROPHY, WINESTATE AUS/NZ CHALLENGE 2004. TOP GOLD, GREAT AUSTRALIAN WINE CHALLENGE 2005."

The Winestate Award was for the 2000 Shiraz, not the 2004 being sold! Either Grays knows nothing about wine or their false claims are intentional.  Anyone with any wine knowledge what-so-ever would know that a top quality 2004 Grampians red wine would be picked in autumn and then spend a year in barrel, and possibly longer.  So how could a wine that is not complete win this award? It cant!

The claim for the 2004 to have won a Top Gold at the 2005 Great Australian Wine Challenge is also false and misleading. The contest is actually known as

"The Great Australian Shiraz Challenge" not "Wine Challenge" but that is not the point. According to the results table, the wine that won the gold medal from Cathcart, was once again the 2000, not the 2004.

How about this one! "2002 Barossa Ridge `Old Creek Shiraz Barossa Valley, SA. ORP $28 Per bottle. 90 Pts Winefront Monthly. Tar licorice blackberry and sawdust, with earthy developed characters just starting to emerge . Juicy and succulent. Beautifully proportioned and integrated, with gamey overtones developing after a spell in a decanter. Drink now or cellar to 2011. From the best vintage of the centaury... So far. (80640-6)"

There are only (sic) two problems associated with this tasting note. The original tasting note written by Campbell Mattinson stated .... "with gamey, horsey overtones ushering forward with air."  The word "horsey" (after gamey) has been judiciously excluded in the Grays description and the ending changed.  The result of those changes are important; most educated wine lovers will know from the original description the wine is likely to have a Brett problem, but that would not be the case with the Grays description. Even worse, and I have it from the horses mouth so to speak; Campbell Mattinson of Winefront told me that he has not tasted the 2002 vintage of this label, and that the tasting note quoted for the 2002 is actually for the 2001 vintage of the wine.   

Brian Handreck (Red Bigot) emailed Grays about another case similar to these and received no response!

Under the agreement people have to accept prior to bidding, it states:- 

"Description of Goods
(a) In relation to the items sold in an online auction, we will endeavour to:
      (i) provide accurate descriptions to fairly reflect each item;......

(b) Subject to any rights you may have under the Trade Practises Act and similar laws) we do not make any promises that:
      (i) the items are fit for a particular purpose;

Are Grays living up to their side of the deal when it comes to wine? In some cases, it doesn't look like it to me. 

Grays do offer a 30 day money back guarantee, and it states:-

"Special Notes - Wine
The majority of wine auctioned through GraysOnline is sourced directly from wine companies, wineries, distributors and retailers. In these auctions GraysOnline guarantees all wine for a period of 30 days after receipt if the wine if found to be corked or faulty."

Unfortunately if you are buying wine to cellar, a 30 day guarantee is useless. The big question here is, "what is faulty"? If you don't like a wine because it has Brett, is it a fault, or a character of the wine? Ask the winery and in many cases they will probably say its a character of the wine, but some professionals and wine lovers regard it as a fault. What happens if the wine is just crap and not faulty? Yep, a wine deal may seem cheap but it may turn out to be expensive if you don't like what you buy. So, caveat emptor - especially when it comes to buying wine at auctions from auction companies that are not afraid to play fast and loose with the facts. 

Feel free to submit your comments!

Copyright © Ric Einstein 2006