Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Cider Digest #1399
Subject: Cider Digest #1399, 26 July 2007
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #1399 26 July 2007
Forum for Discussion of Cider Issues
Dick Dunn, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Why I call myself an artisan cidermaker ("McGonegal, Charles P")
RE: fruit ciders ("McGonegal, Charles P")
RE: cider economics ("McGonegal, Charles P")
suggestions for improvement ("Timothy")
cider vs. wine & honey (Josh Klatt)
Nursery question (Bradley Hunter)
oops - mis quoted ("Mike Beck")
Malolactic fermentation (Andrew Lea)
Priming with Juice (Larry Gianakis)
RE: nursery question/grafting ("chris horn")
When will it end? Not yet! ("Gary Awdey")
understanding your business (Dick Dunn)
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
When subscribing, please include your name and a good address in the
message body unless you're sure your mailer generates them.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Why I call myself an artisan cidermaker
From: "McGonegal, Charles P" <Charles.McGonegal@uop.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:02:20 -0500
I walk through the orchard, watching the cycle of the seasons, watching
the fruit develop and ripen, tasting and comparing the different
cultivars I have chosen.
* Though I do not own the land, the trees, nor do I actually manage the
orchard.
I select the pommage, the ensemble of apples, and have pressed the sweet
juice from them.
* Though I do not own the mill, nor run it, personally, on a routine
basis
I set the process in motion, decide the limits of adjustments, adjuncts,
types and timing of operations, and I carefully monitor the unfolding of
each new batch.
* Though I sometimes yield to consumer demand and make products less
'pure' than my heart might wish.
I lay my hands on every case, if not every bottle.
* Though I depend on family and friends to carry my small business
forward - and many people in my cidery are indispensible.
I sell the majority of my cider myself, pouring samples to customers
visiting my tasting room, educating them to the fine history and
diversity of apples and cider.
* Though I bill my business as a winery and have much marketing and
cooperation with other wineries, which makes many viti-philes roll their
eyes in exasperation.
Which part of the above is core to the spirit of 'artisan'? Which can
be abandoned? In each, where is the division, the line in the earth,
the compromise to pragmatism, beyond which those you called your peers
turn their backs and scoff - 'macro-cider'?
Charles McGonegal
AEppelTreow Winery
------------------------------
Subject: RE: fruit ciders
From: "McGonegal, Charles P" <Charles.McGonegal@uop.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:20:20 -0500
Benjamin Watson reflects upon fruit cider...
>>
Here's something that will probably strike Digesters as obvious or dumb,
but I'm trying to sort out in my own mind the distinction between fruit
ciders and ciders flavored with fruit.
<<
And
>>
To me, fruit added at the beginning seems acceptable in making a craft
(albeit specialty) cider. But I have a bigger problem with refined
products like sugar, honey, etc. What do others think, though? Is this a
distinction without a difference?
>>
Ben, in my (admittedly limited) BJCP-related competition experience, if
the flavor of the adjunct comes through to the final product - whether
it is added pre- or post- fermentation, than it would be a 'specialty
cider' - fruit or otherwise. Even 'neutral' refined sugar, which mostly
raises alcohol and plays with aroma solubilty a bit (IMHO), makes a
'specialty: applewine' if the result (alcohol) is noticably different
from a 'standard' cider. About the only exception would be apple
juice/concentrate or refined sugar used _only_ for backsweetening. And
about the only controversy would be the use of strongly flavored
cooperage. And the big caveat is 'noticable' by whom - expert cider
judge? Moderately experienced enthusiast? Jane Consumer?
I don't think that the 'specialty' designation, as a way to sort ciders
into flights appropriate for judging or comparison, says _anything_
about the 'craft' vs. 'macro' nature of the product. I think some
people, but not all, might say that 'standard' = 'real'. I am not
among
them - but do especially admire good, minimalist-processing standard
ciders.
Another way to look at the point you bring up is US wine regulation -
which applies if the result is over 7%ABV (commercially). If you blend
types of fruit pre-fermentation, it's a standard wine. If you blend
types of fruit post-fermentation, it's a formula wine and takes more
paperwork.
Charles McGonegal
AEppelTreow Winery
------------------------------
Subject: RE: cider economics
From: "McGonegal, Charles P" <Charles.McGonegal@uop.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:58:48 -0500
Dick Dunn writes in part:
>>
> ...Anybody that
> wants to see the hard cider industry, sweet and dry, develop needs to
> be embracing the whole industry, not creating division within it.
The past decade or more should have shown us that this is wrong:
Keeping the glucose-wine six-pack ciders in the fold damages quality
cider. It interferes with getting cider high enough in the market to be
able to get a reasonable price for quality full-juice ciders. It keeps
cider as a marginal competitor to wine coolers (which aren't even wine)
and other get-drunk-quick concoctions like hard ***ade.
<<
This is one bit I both really _get_ - and yet am torn about.
Cider with a beer price-point (probably chinese concentrate, if not
outright glucose augmented) has bigger marketing buck than I've got.
I'm happy to see it out there carving out _some_ kind of mindspace in
the consuming public. --At least with regards to my tasting room
sales.-- Visiting consumers come in, and say, 'oh, is this like <insert
big brand here>?', and I say 'it's the locally grown, elegant,
sophisticated version - that's why it's not in 6-packs of legacy
ambers'. Works great.
BUT...
I can't compete in the wholesale market for tap lines in bars. That low
pricepoint crowds me out. If I sell Direct-to-Trade, I can _just_ make
needed margin AND expected pricepoint on kegs (but not bottles). But I
have a heck of a time getting lines - the retailers feel obligated to
the wholesalers who helped them set up the lines. (Which is why giving
things to retailers is illegal - but it's a fact of business - no use
crying about it.) I can't go through the wholesaler tier and make
enough margin. And the wholesalers in my state are attacking my ability
to sell Direct-to-Trade (self distribute) this year in the legislature.
Draft cider to taverns is not a big part of my portfolio - but it _IS_ a
growth opportunity that I wish I could make use of.
So I see big marketing budget national brand beer pricepoint ciders as a
blessing AND a curse.
Charles
AEppelTreow
------------------------------
Subject: suggestions for improvement
From: "Timothy" <tboger111@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:14:59 -0400
Yes, perhaps I was vague on the specifics to request a suggestion for
improvement. Here is what I did to obtain 30 gallons:
I went to a local orchard here in NE Ohio for apples, October 15, 2007,
I told them I wanted a balance of sweet, bitter and sour varieties, so I
cant be sure on the specifics, and being new, had to trust their
selection. The next day I had them pressed into 5 gallon buckets. I
added ingredients as per the chart below.
I transferred (racked?) two weeks later when the foam stopped using a
siphon to 5 gallon plastic water jugs with air locks. Two months later I
bottled each jug, one at a time. In spring, I bought 5 gallon steel
cornellis kegs and compressed CO2, transferred most into steel kegs in
order to try and carbonate, which I was successful. No Sulfites were
used. I wasn't sure how to use them.
Batch 1, I messed up because I didn't recognize that it was done
fermenting, and opened and added sugars and added more yeast in hopes of
getting it going. Batch 5, I added some liquid sugar well after the
fermentation stopped thinking it would carbonate in bottles.
I think my major problems could be oxygen contamination and collecting
some of the powders (bitters?) on the bottom. I didn't try and kill the
wild yeasts..just added packaged yeast to each batch in hopes of
overwhelming them.
The final product isnt bad in my opinion. Its strong (10-12%) seems
acidic, but I drink it and enjoy it. No one else seems to like it
though.
My plan for this fall at this point, will be collect and press the
apples same as last year, fill in the 5 gallon plastic jugs instead of
buckets. Add 5 lbs. white sugar per 5 gallons, a bunch of raisons, and a
package of Lalvin EC1118 Champagne Yeast, maybe some cinnamon sticks,
cap these bottles with hoses to a water bucket to act a airlock and
release excess foam, and transfer to the steel corny kegs at
fermentation completion or just before, maybe 7 weeks after initial
pressing. Chill and carbonate.
With all that said, assuming you can follow what I did. Are there any
suggestions for improvement that you can share?
Tim
BATCH 1
Started October 7, 2006 OPENED EARLY
5 gallons pressed cider
4 pounds brown sugar
Red Star Pasteur Champagne Yeast
Starting Specific Gravity: 1.080
Ending Specific Gravity: ??
Potential Alcohol content projection: 10.5%
Calculated Alcohol:
Bottled:
BATCH 2
Started October 7, 2006
5 gallons pressed cider
2 pounds brown sugar
24 ounce Honey
Red Star Pasteur Champagne Yeast
Starting Specific Gravity: 1.070
Ending Specific Gravity: 0.994
Potential Alcohol content projection: 9.3%
Calculated Alcohol: 10.1%
Bottled: January 6, 2007
BATCH 3
Started October 7, 2006
5 gallons pressed cider
4 pounds brown sugar
4-6 ounce honey
Lalvin EC1118 Champagne Yeast
9 ounces Raisins
Starting Specific Gravity: 1.080
Ending Specific Gravity: 0.990
Potential Alcohol content projection: 10.5%
Calculated Alcohol: 11.8%
Bottled: December 21, 2006
BATCH 4
Started October 28, 2006
5 gallons pressed cider
6 pounds brown sugar
Lalvin EC1118 Champagne Yeast
9 ounces Raisins
Starting Specific Gravity: 1.085
Ending Specific Gravity: 0.992
Potential Alcohol content projection: 11.3 %
Calculated Alcohol: 12.4 %
Kegged: March 14, 2007
BATCH 5
Started October 28, 2006
5 gallons pressed cider
2 pounds brown sugar
72 ounce honey
Lalvin EC1118 Champagne Yeast
9 ounces Raisins
Starting Specific Gravity: 1.075
Ending Specific Gravity: 0.994
Potential Alcohol content projection: 9.9%
Calculated Alcohol: 10.8%
Bottled: January 31, 2007 added liquid sugar (Forbis' Original corn
sugar primer 4 oz.) for carbonization
Kegged: March 14, 2007 from bottles
BATCH 6
Started October 28, 2006
5 gallons pressed cider
5 pounds white sugar
Red Star Pasteur Champagne Yeast
9 ounces Raisins
Starting Specific Gravity: 1.090
Ending Specific Gravity: 0.990
Potential Alcohol content projection: 11.8%
Calculated Alcohol: 13.1%
Kegged: March 14, 2007
------------------------------
Subject: cider vs. wine & honey
From: Josh Klatt <josh@klattcider.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:18:02 -0400
Isn't cider really just wine made from apples? The purist, non-
interventionist winemakers make wine the same way we make cider, with
no additives and minimal (if any) manipulation and just a sprinkle of
sulphite at the end. Is there a distinction among, for example, 1.
pear cider / 2. pear wine / 3. perry? I had an amazing bottle of
"big apple wine" from Wolffer Estates (http://www.wolffer.com/store/
index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=16) and it is
something I would call cider--- you?
From Ben Watson's post re: fruit ciders:
> To me, fruit added at the beginning seems acceptable in making a craft
> (albeit specialty) cider. But I have a bigger problem with refined
> products like sugar, honey, etc. What do others think, though? Is this
> a distinction without a difference?
Does honey have to be refined? Can you use the "raw" unfiltered,
unprocessed stuff? I've never tried to add any type of honey, but
especially if it were perfectly natural and unprocessed, I'd not look
down my nose at it...
Josh
------------------------------
Subject: Nursery question
From: Bradley Hunter <hunter@midcoast.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:53:52 -0400
In reply to Ben Watson's nursery question, I've had a somewhat similar
experience.
Like Ben, I'm also in New England ( midcoast Maine ) with all the
weather variations he has dealt with.
Most of my scion wood comes via a wonderful source in Unity , Maine
where, every spring , thanks to our beloved Maine Organic Farmers and
Gardeners Assoc., a seed and scion swap is held. No money changes hands
and people bring to trade whatever they have an abundance of . Because
of all the different sources the condition and quality of the wood may
vary a bit but usually the majority looks first rate.
At the same swap our local Fedco Tree people sell a range of
appropriate high quality rootstocks and I traditionally buy the tough
Antanovka standard rootstock.
Rather than putting the grafted trees into a traditional nursery bed ,
I've had excellent luck potting the new trees into tall black plastic
pots with standard potting soil mix. I then arrange my pots on a
flatbed trailer parked along the edge of the driveway so I walk past
them every day and this allows me to monitor soil conditions, pest
problems , general health and progress of the grafts.
Through dumb luck and quality raw materials , I usually have about 90% success.
This season. like Ben, I thought I had a higher incidence of bad grafts
because more had just not leafed out. Upon inspection of the graft
under the tape it appeared that the grafts were, in fact taking, and
the buds seemed healthy but were just not sending out leaves ( yet ). I
gave the reluctant ones a bit more time and slowly some are finally
responding.
If I had to suggest a pattern here , I might say that it appears the
Russet families were the majority of the late guys. Since I graft every
Russet I can get my hands on , some scion was collected by me, some
custom cut for me by an orchardist friend from his organic trees and
some came from the swap , so the sources are all over the map but the
pattern was somewhat consistent.
In an effort to now blow holes in this theory, I also had Major and a
North West Greening do the same thing?
Any other New Englanders in the same boat?
Brad
------------------------------
Subject: oops - mis quoted
From: "Mike Beck" <mjbeck@ujcidermill.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:01:56 -0400
Many thousands of apologies to Mr. Shawn Carney to which I misquoted in
digest #1398. I humbly ask for forgiveness if any offense was taken. As
Dick Noted that was Tim Bray's Quote.
Some grumble about reading "competition" rantings. I think it is
appropriate material and sure does give us lots of material to read in the
CD. Plus, we need to flush out all of the stuff we don't like about them to
make them (competitions) more acceptable. Once again, very sorry for the
misquote.
Mike Beck
Uncle John's Fruit House Winery & Distillery
------------------------------
Subject: Malolactic fermentation
From: Andrew Lea <andrew_lea@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:29:28 +0100
Josh Klatt wrote:
>
> Anybody observe or induce malolactic fermentation? It seems to be
> key for winemakers but I've never heard mention of it in cider
> circles... Are we missing out on something?
Any serious cidermaking text covers the subject and it has been
discussed here on CD quite a bit in the past. Spontaneous MLF is common,
even the norm, in traditional English and French bittersweet ciders.
The renewed production of gas in spring while the trees were flowering
gave rise to the notion that there was empathy between the tree and its
product. If cider is matured in old oak vats it's even more likely,
since the bacteria live in the pores of the wood and are re-invigorated
by each new charge of cider. Problem is that if it goes to completion
you can lose fully half the acid, since nearly all the acid in apple is
malic. In grape only a small proportion of acid is malic (most is
tartaric) so the percentage loss of acid is only fractional.
Typically in mainstream commercial cidermaking the MLF is regarded as a
nuisance and is not encouraged. So those ciders are sulphited during
storage and racked off the lees to prevent growth factors redissolving
into the cider. Apart from acid loss and flavour change, ML bacteria may
also clog modern membrane filters due to excretion of gel-like
polysaccharides (cf yoghurt). And some wild ML bacteria do have some
unwanted flavour attributes too (eg mousiness)
Due to Murphy's Law, low acid cider in which MLF is unwanted will more
likely undergo it spontaneously than high acid ciders where it might do
some good. This is because most wild MLF bacteria do not operate well at
pH < 3.8. However, the tables have been turned in recent years due to
the availability of reliable MLF cultures for the wine industry. These
can work down to pH 3.2. I have tried them and so have others on the
Digest. They are good and clean and do just what they claim, but my
perception is that they are just too damned efficient! They take out
all the malic acid and the induced flavour changes (eg loss of
fruitiness and generation of 'buttery' notes) are a bit one-dimensional.
They don't seem to induce the desirable 'spiciness' of wild ML bacteria.
But if I were making cider commercially from high acid dessert fruit I
would certainly look seriously at commercial cultures to help me drop
the acid (without the addition of glucose syrup and water!).
My own ciders go ML spontaneously during the (UK!) summer. (Received
wisdom is that they don't do this below 18C). It takes from about April
to July for it to complete. Nineteenth-century UK ciders were captured
by bottling at the beginning of this process in order to trap the CO2 in
bottle and provide a light carbonation.
I think it is fair to say that few craft cidermakers understand or
manipulate MLF as much as they might. In a couple of recent talks I've
given I've emphasised this as a point of difference (USP) between craft
and mainstream ciders which IMHO would repay some attention. See
http://cider.org.uk/craft_cider_technical_aspects.pdf
Andrew Lea
- --
Wittenham Hill Cider Page
http://www.cider.org.uk
------------------------------
Subject: Priming with Juice
From: Larry Gianakis <lgianakis@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:23:44 -0700 (PDT)
I recently bottled a batch of cider, the cider was completely clear.
I had reserved about a quart of the original cider in the freezer and
then boiled it (to sanitize) for 15 minutes. Each bottle now has a white
gelatinous sediment in the bottom. My thought was the pectins in the juice
have something to do with it. ??Has anyone else had this happen and
if so howcan I prevent this from happening next year???-Larry??? ___=
------------------------------
Subject: RE: nursery question/grafting
From: "chris horn" <agent_strangelove@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:52:23 -0700
Well I don't know that I'm any real expert on the subject but a few things
that I do with my grafts.... First of all, I seem to get a slightly better
survival rate with a whip and tongue method. I will use cleft if I have
scion wood that is significantly different in size than the rootstock. I
use grafting rubbers for structural support and then wrap from below the
rubber to the tip (covering the whole thing) with Para-film for moisture
retention. I am not real fast at grafting this way but I don't have to
split off electrical tape or worry about the flagging letting the scion dry
out (I have seen grafts done with both of those...). I normally leave the
roots of the grafts in moist saw dust for a few weeks. Normally this is in
garbage bags in my well house where the temp doesn't swing much. I then
plant them out into a bed. This is normally about the last frost. I've got
pretty good flood plain soil (but now is 30' above river level and drains
well) that has been sheep pasture but I rip the sod off and run the
rototiller back and forth a few times. I may dump in some year old compost
(mixture of lawn cuttings, leaves and solids from the cider press). I
religiously remove all growth from below the graft. In the spring I go
though my graft bed every few days and take off all shoots below the graft.
If you catch them when they are only a few days along, you can just roll
them off with your fingers, or a finger nail. It makes since to try to
force as much growth into the scion wood. By this point in the summer, all
mine have either put out a shoot or are clearly dead. I normally get about
95% success rate. This year I grafted mostly perry pears onto OHxF 513 and
most have about 10-15" of growth on them at this point. I did graft a few
onto Bartlett seeding (I just had it floating about so I figured I would put
it do use...) and those have more growth on average as would be expected.
Some of those (seedling) I grafted up pretty high (like 20" off the ground)
so I could use whip and tongue. I keep stripping off all growth below the
graft and at this point in the summer, they seem to be getting the message
as to where I would like to get them to put on growth. We will see where
they try to put on new growth next spring.
I hope this helps...
Chris Horn
Scappoose Oregon USA
"History will see advertising as one of the real evil things of our time. It
is stimulating people constantly to want things, want this, want that."
- Malcolm Muggeridge
------------------------------
Subject: When will it end? Not yet!
From: "Gary Awdey" <gawdey@att.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:26:34 -0400
[Warning: The following long-winded posting contains reference to cider
competitions and may not be suitable for all readers. Reader discretion is
advised.]
In Cider Digest #1397 (21 July 2007) Bruce Nissen quotes and responds to
Shawn Carney's earlier anti-cider-competition posting:
> "I do not enter competitions and probably never will"
>
> A saying that come to mind is that those who can do, those who can't
> critique. If you do not believe in the concept than why does it worry
> you so? To me it's like democracy; if you chose not to participate,
> your voice rings hollow.
I had the pleasure of tasting Shawn's perry on July 4th, alongside the perry
with which Jeff Carlson took the gold medal in the Standard Cider & Perry
category of
the 2005 AHA National Homebrew Competition. Normally this sort of
comparison highlights the weaknesses of one or the other. In this case
all present agreed that both were excellent and the split between which
one was favored was about even. I'm confident that Shawn is capable of
doing well in competition if he should decide it is worthwhile to enter
one of the more credible ones. An example of a competition that works
hard to turn criticsm into opportunity for improvement and earn its
credibility is GLOWS. I'll also save Bruce the trouble of having to
mention again that Foxbarrel has done well in this competition by
cutting and pasting from Foxbarrel's press release about the 2007
competition: Their Pear Cider received gold and the Black Currant
received silver, both in the Fruit Cider category. Their Apple Cider
took bronze in the Common Cider category.
Funny that the alternatives make it necessary to specify apple for cider
though.
More from Shawn on the subject of the San Diego County Fair Craft
Brewers Competition:
> "From Chad's email It seems like he contacted juice (sweet cider) mills?
>
> Didn't he know the difference between juice and cider? When you take
> on the responsibility to run an event you take on the responsibility of
doing
> a good job."
>
I am in agreement with Tim, Shawn and Dick on this and find
this part of Chad's email (printed in CD#1395) unconvincing as evidence
that he knew how to reach cidermakers or had any clue about what it
would take to make them take the competition seriously. I deliberately
withheld my own view on this and let Chad's
words speak for themselves to see what others thought. I thought it
would goad others into voicing opinions. How well it worked!
I do not think the awards for Wyders and Foxbarrel in the San Diego
competition reflect poorly on either producer, nor do they reflect
particularly well. The only cider entry made by a different producer
(Bulmer's Strongbow) failed to take a medal. That's just about one step
away from printing up your own medal and declaring yourself an award
winner. Any producer who chooses to use this sort of award for
marketing purposes ought to be prepared for more than a little biting
sarcasm.
It's understandable that Bruce should come to the defense of his own
product. I'm sure I'd do the same if in his shoes. However, if I
understand Chad's email correctly (Chad was the
organizer of the San Diego competition) the ciders were not entered by
the producers but rather by a distributor. This is a practice typically
frowned upon (and in some cases explicitly forbidden) by commercial
competitions. We now see one reason why. If a producer relies on
distributors as the lifeline to customers (as the mass-produced ones
are) and the distributor does something appalling like this (hey, we all
do things that don't turn out exactly as hoped) what choice does the
producer have but to grit teeth into a smile and praise the
distributor's efforts to get the word out to customers?
Does this competition live up to the general standards of the BJCP? It
doesn't appear that it does but I'm not really in a position to know.
Hopefully others will weigh
in on this. In trying to learn more about the competition here's
something I found in the San Diego Union-Tribune (full text may be found at
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/rowe/20070606-9999-lz1f06rowe.html):
<Start quote>
"Judges sometimes wonder, 'Am I up to the task?' That's ridiculous,"
insisted Stevens, the visionary behind San Diego County Fair's first
craft brewers' competition. "All of you have the palate to judge."
Judging beer is easy. Just use Stevens' three-point technique:
"Is this a beer that I would want to buy?
"Is this a beer that I would like to drink?
"Does this thing rock?"
<End Quote>
If this is how BJCP-registered commercial competitions are run it is a
tremendous departure from the process used for homebrew competitions.
It seems to say
nothing more and nothing less than this: Some people in San Diego on a
certain day tried these ciders and liked them.
More from Bruce Nissen:
> On a much smaller and simpler scale, I liken the current cider market
> in the US to the wine market in the late 1970's. Then came Sutter Homes and
>other companies who made sweet Chardonnay's and White Zinfandels. It
> created a whole new set of wine enthusiasts who fueled the resurgence
> of the wine industry in the US that is still going strong today.
> Nearly all new consumers used these lighter style products as an entry
> point into the world of wine. Some stayed with them, while many moved to
> more complex wines.
> Regardless of your opinion of lighter styled wines, the industry as a whole
> owes them a debt of gratitude for bringing new consumers through the
> front door.
I basically agree with this but do see limits in the argument. These
"entry level" wines may be sweeter but are nevertheless wines made from
V. vinifera grapes grown specifically for the purpose of making wine,
not from Thompson Seedless or Concord grapes. Before the wines Bruce
mentioned were marketed someone planted and grew wine cultivars in lieu
of those used for table fruit or jelly. There is a growing minority
that has taken the trouble to do the same with apples (and even fewer
have done this with pears) so there are some significant differences in
the comparison.
For a slightly more balanced comparison consider the case of MD 20/20
(aka "Mad Dog 20/20"--see http://en/wikipedia.org/wiki/MD_20/20). The
Mad Dog 20/20 of the late 1970's was a cloyingly sweet wine obviously
made from Concord-type grapes (which were primarily grown for production
of juice and jelly). It had a share of the market in Michigan because it
enjoyed effective distribution. For anyone who has tasted Mad Dog, it
is quite understandable that producers of wine made from V. vinifera
grapes would be quick to disassociate themselves from it and its
brethren.
I do not believe that this extreme example is even closely analogous to
Foxbarrel (which is far more pleasant than Mad Dog). However it does
suggest that not all "entry level" ciders are necessarily of equal
merit. There are others that fall into what might be called the paint
thinner class of ciders. By and large these are produced by people who
haven't troubled themselves with any education on cidermaking and whose
tastes appear to have developed around some hideous concoctions,
sometimes as part of a longstanding family tradition. These ciders bring to
mind the old Chinese proverb that all men love the smell of thier own
flatulence. They are likely to be much more harmful to the cause of
promoting cider than anything currently being mass marketed as cider, at
least within bounds of their geographical reach. They will do this by
convincing people that they positively do NOT like cider or have any
interest in trying another one. Mass marketed ciders receive a greater
share of criticism mainly by virtue of the success with which they extend
their geographical reach.
Also, unless I'm mistaken the producers of Sutter Homes and other wines
did not market their wine in six packs that would result in consumer
confusion about their place among beer, wine coolers and malternative
beverages. There's nothing inherently bad about selling cider in beer
bottles except that it's a good way to lower margin and drive yourself
out of business by competing with beverages that are cheaper to produce.
To stay in business you have to expand production massively to make up
the difference and/or look for ways to cut production costs.
Unfortunately there are limited ways in which to cut production costs
for cider. Greater efficiency (eg larger batches or continous high-brix
fermentation like the largest producers use if you can muster the
capital for equipment), lower labor costs (which can only go so low
before you have to consider outsourcing your plant to China), or cut
input costs (Ingredients: Filtered water, sugar, apple juice
concentrate, malic acid, natural flavoring).
Different producers of cider have different philosophies about how
important it is to use cider cultivars. This is a an area of common
confusion so to be clear, when I refer to cider fruit here I mean
varieties grown for no other purpose than for fermenting into cider plus
a handful of multiple-use varieties that have distinguished themselves
in cider (eg traditional American cider apples such as Roxbury Russet,
Golden Russet, Northern Spy, and Baldwin). It does not mean that only
cider apples make good cider. Some cider producers, like Susan and
Richard Anderson of Westcott Bay Cider and Alan Foster of White Oak
Cider, started by growing the European varieties. Steve Wood (Farnum
Hill Cider) deserves special recognition as one of the first in the US
to realize the commercial value of European cider cultivars and start
growing them. Others started making cider with a judicious selection of
traditional American varieties of apple and later evolved to include use
of European cider varieties. Examples of such producers include Terry
and Judith Maloney (West County Cider) and Bill and Cheryl Barton
(Bellwether Cider). Mike Beck makes terrific cider with a blend of dessert
fruit. He has also planted some rows of English cider fruit that he may or
may not opt to use in his cider some day. All of these set excellent
examples of commitment to high quality. Keep in mind, however, that not
all will define quality in exactly the same terms. They respectfully
acknowledge their differences.
Now consider Wyders, Woodchuck, Hornsbys and the other mass-marketed
ciders. Do any of them have plans to evolve into ciders that include a
wider breadth of cider fruit? Or will it be more a matter of which
additives to use to create specialty ciders that will seem progressively
less and less like cider? The decision for some of
them seems to lie in the corporate boardroom, not in the hands of the
cidermakers. All will mouth a commitment to quality (whatever that
happens to mean to them) but the real goal is to develop a market,
achieve wider distribution and market share, and make money. With
resources leveraged into achieving those goals or meeting investors'
short-term expectations for earnings there may be little left for
support of development of local sources of cider fruit. This is sad.
Shawn has strong views on what cider ought to be. No one, least of all
Shawn, would deny that sometimes those passionate views are expressed
hastily. Whether or not one happens to agree with them, or chooses to be
offended by them, Shawn works hard to live up to his own standards. When
corporate decisions about cider are being made comfortably by suits in
boardrooms, Shawn is more likely to be on his tractor doing battle with
grasshoppers, working on his potato elevator (converted to apple
elevator for his mill), or driving 4500 miles round trip to pick up a
trailer load of bittersweets. If Shawn seems harsh on Foxbarrel you
should hear how harsh he is on his own efforts and the strength in his
resolve to do better.
Regarding Steve Wood's comments, I am also nearly entirely in agreement.
One point on which we may differ slightly is in his reference to "silly,
premature competition rules," and that's less a matter of disagreement
than of acknowledging that different people will have different
perspectives. Shawn also stated earlier that nothing was gained
in combining cider in with BJCP competitions. The standards WILL appear
silly and premature to some, particularly those who do not fully
understand their intended use. Style categories do not seek to create
a few quintessential archetypes that producers must slavishly try to
copy (like breeding dogs or cats to achieve an ideal conformity to
standard) so they may be regarded as serious cidermakers. Rather they
are intended to group whatever happens to be produced in ways that will
make comparison somewhat more reasonable and meaningful. The most recent
revision in the cider style guidelines sought to
reduce the gap between home and commercial producers. Imperfect as it
is, the 2004 revision of the BJCP cider style guidelines did at least
two important things. First, it separated cider into two categories,
standard and specialty. Standard cider and perry is what Steve referred
to when he contrasted it to fruit punch. Specialty cider and perry is
the stuff with everything else (the sugar, molasses, other fruits,
spices, etc.).
The second thing the style guidelines did was help incorporate
awareness of what was going on elsewhere in the world. Home producers
are discovering that there is more to cider than Cousin Fred's sour
swill or grampa's
rocket fuel. By way of example, hopefully one that will be repeated
elsewhere, one of the most encouraging outcomes was demonstrated by
Michigan home producer Eric Fouch. Eric didn't start his own orchard to
conform to BJCP guidelines and compete in those categories per se.
However he did start growing his own so he could make authentic European
ciders that he learned about in the style guidelines.
Gary Awdey
Eden, New York
------------------------------
Subject: understanding your business
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:20:01 -0600
Dennis Nicholson <dennisnicholson@mac.com> wrote in the last digest:
...
> We need to hear more about the economics of cider making. More about
> the marketing strategies of cider and perry products from people that
> have been successful. The old rancor about what is cider and what is
> cool-aid makes no sense if our customers want cool-aid.
OK, here's some business sense for you. Even allowing for the hyperbole
in your statement...
If your customers want "cool-aid" either you don't know who your customers
are or you don't know what business you're in (flip sides of the same
problem).
A common, usually fatal, mistake for a starting business is continually
chasing what "customers want". Instead, first make up your mind what
product you're going to make, then do it the best you can, and sell THAT
product. Do NOT go out and let your customers tell you "We want THIS"...
"No, we want THAT"...because if you do, you'll spend the waning days of
your company's existence chasing ephemera. And above all, never sell the
product that you might make next, because it will only drop the sales of
your current product to zero.
It is only AFTER you are well established that you can (carefully!) shift
your product slowly to follow customer trends.
This is equally true whether you're a cidermaker, a backhoe service, a
software consultant, or a farmer selling hay. You must understand that
there are people who think they are your customers, who must be dissuaded
because what they want is not actually what you make or do. It is hard
to say "no" to somebody with money in his outstretched hand, but you've
got to learn to do it. Your potential-customers only know what they
want; they don't know your business plan or constraints.
On top of all that, trying to dumb-down or cheapen your product at the
start is the wrong way to go. Establish your quality criteria early on
and stick to them. You can always relax the criteria a bit after a while
if you find they're costing too much and doing more than the market wants.
But it's very hard to improve your quality above what people have come to
expect, and convince them they should pay an increased price. Reducing
price is easy; increasing is very hard.
Plus, if you aim to dumb-down your product to reduce the price, it's hard
to stop the spiral it puts you into. Look at what happened to Bulmer.
And finally this leads to the conclusion that quality standards for cider
are very important. If you're going to compete on more than price, if
you're going to get out of the swamp of hard whatever-ade, malternatives,
and alco-pops, you've got to do it on clear quality criteria. One of
the most obvious for cider is "we make it with apple juice" (full stop).
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #1399
*************************
