Miami RedHawks football
OSU vs. OU
Von Maur prepares for opening
Home > Blogs > Uncorked > Archives > 2006 > July > 24 > Entry
Wine Spectator restaurant ‘awards’ have little meaning; Marvin Shanken begs to differ
Note: Usually, I write an entry and readers respond to it. In this case, I shared an entry I’d written with Wine Spectator Publisher Marvin Shanken prior to posting it, and he responded. So here’s what I wrote — and what Mr. Shanken had to say in response.
Well, at least Wine Spectator magazine has become a little more transparent about what its restaurant wine list awards mean — or rather, what they don’t.
The most important paragraph in the magazine’s 2006 Dining Guide issue that just hit my mailbox can be found on page 119, under a subhead that should read, “Why this guide has little meaning,” but instead says “Cuisine Type and Menu Prices”:
It’s important to note that our awards evaluate wine lists, not restaurants as a whole. While we assume that the level of food and service will be commensurate with the wine lists entered by award winners, this unfortunately is not always true.
Allow me to translate: “We know our dining guide means little, but we’re laughing all the way to the bank.”
Now, again, the Spectator:
We cannot visit every award-winning restaurant (although all Grand Award winners and many others are inspected by Wine Spectator editors), so we encourage our readers to alert us to discrepancies and disappointments.
Allow me, again, to translate:
“You do our jobs for us, but we’ll keep the $250 entry fee that every restaurant must pay just to be considered for a restaurant award. Deal?”
The magazine says it receives more than 4,000 applications. Let’s see, 4,000 times $250 … wait, there’s smoke pouring out of my calculator … Can’t see the screen … oh, there it is: a million bucks. $1 million.
And for the majority of restaurants that apply, the magazine does little or no independent evaluation of any kind, other than to review the submitted cover letter, menu and wine list to check for misspellings and other perceived shortcomings.
The magazine boasts, however, that of this year’s 847 entries from restaurants that had never applied before, 234 did not win an award — the second-highest failure rate in the last six years. The rejected lists were uninspiring or simply listed several bottlings from only a handful of producers, the Spectator said.
Do you think any of those restaurants got their $250 entry fee back? Nah, me either.
Again, though, at least the Spectator owns up to the guide’s shortcomings, and is transparent about it. For that, we raise a glass and give credit where credit is due.
Cheers! Mark Fisher
Now here is Shanken’s response, via email: (please click on “continue reading)
I won’t belabor the fact that 26(?) years ago we started the awards program to both encourage and recognize those restaurateurs that were willing to make wine an important, in fact integral part of the total dining experience. NO ONE ELSE WAS DOING THIS!!!!!!!!!!! We underwrote all the costs for the first 20 years at considerable expense to us. The program became so successful, with thousands of entries, that we were going under water with it. Staffing, processing, travel, etc. One of our editors suggested that it was quite legitimate to charge for the service as the restaurant was getting the benefit — and attracting many more patrons. So we started charging and the rest is history. It keeps growing because it continues to be a great service to the dining and wine worlds. To personally inspect the 4,000 entries from around the world would cost an additional $40 million. We talked about it, then decided it was just a little more then we wanted to spend this year. Maybe next year though. Have a good summer, Marvin P.S: Our editors have traveled around the world many times to inspect candidates for the Grand Award. Half the time they don’t pass the inspection. Should I send the bills to the Dayton Daily News? Please advise.
So there you have Marvin Shanken’s point of view.
I’m still waiting to hear from the Dayton Daily News accountants about those restaurant reimbursements.
What do YOU think of the Spectator’s dining-guide awards? Do you use them? How? And did you know that Carvers Steaks & Chops in Dayton received an award for the first time this year, joining Jay’s, l’Auberge and the Pine Club as Wine Spectator award winners?
And if the Wine Spectator doesn’t evaulate dining, why does the magazine call it a “dining guide,” anyway?
Questions, questions. But my thanks to Marvin Shanken for shedding some light into the Spectator’s wine awards.
Cheers!
Mark Fisher
Comments
By Alex
August 5, 2006 1:14 PM | Link to this
Nice article. Glad someone shares some of our long standing opinions. Having been restaurant owners in the past. And having applied for and received an “Award of Excellence” from WS. We felt that years ago it actually had some merit. Once WS started charging, we stopped submitting. Just like their wine reveiws where advertising dollars talk. We felt any future award program would be worthless. As for Mr. Shanken’s comment about having covered the cost for 20 years, isn’t that what magazines do? Isn’t that how they develop their stories? Isn’t that what “sells” their magazines? Isn’t that why subscribers “pay” for their subscribtions? WS makes money from both ends. Doesn’t seem quite kosher.By Fredric Koeppel
August 3, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
I’ve been in enough restaurants that boast of their WS award wine lists and seen those lists be nothing but rosters of standard choices, standard Big Names (or BIG NAMES!!!), stratospheric pricing, thoughtlessness and general organized mediocrity that I have to assume that the whole deal is cooked. How else would there be so many wine lists with those awards?By Ben Bicais
July 27, 2006 8:15 PM | Link to this
While I have read WS for years, they certainly blur the line between criticism and paid promotion. It seems very difficult to do both and retain much credibility on either side. I realize that WS has a bottom line to worry about, but it is clearly problematic to take any amount of money from someone before you “objectively” critique their product of service. This is not to say that the Dining Guide is not informative, but it should be seen for what it is.By DINO
July 27, 2006 3:33 PM | Link to this
Bottom line is the WS Dining Guide has become an advertising section. The $250 entry fee is to pay for the ad in the Dining Guide. The change from a “free listing” in days of yore, which would place the Guide on the editorial side of the WS to a “for a fee” listing was not particularly transparent. I am not surprised that it would cost the WS editorial staff $10K to visit a restaurant. After all the WS has been at the forefront of promoting the “Up Scale Life-style’ as being the Civilized Life. Flying to the restaurant in your private jet isn’t cheap.By Lenn
July 26, 2006 8:55 PM | Link to this
Mark…you are a freakin’ rock star. As you and I have discussed in the past when I’ve had “exchanges” with Mr. Matthews from WS…isn’t it amazing how defensive this “big bad glossy” gets when a few li’l bloggers criticize? As for the awards. Not only do I not pay attention to whether or not a restaurant has that li’l sign hanging or not…I think it’s largely meaningless. Give almost anyone enough budget and they’ll put together an “award-winning” list. Anyone have any idea how involved this “inspection” is? For them to claim they were getting “under water” by doing this is ludicrous..or even if we give them a little slack there, $250? I think my main man Chuck D said it best…fight the power.By Alfonso Cevola
July 26, 2006 8:39 AM | Link to this
In the end, wine and food is an experience that must be actively pursued. Magazines like the Wine Spectator or Zagat or Gambero Rosso can focus on their likes and dislikes and we all can use those selections for guidance, but this is an experiential-based deal. My day job has me doing the same thng, attempting to influence people to make more informed decisions. A friend from outside the industry said it like this, “If you know nothing about wine or restaurants and want to narrow the field, these magazines are a good culling process.” I agree. In my work I have challenged Italian restaurants to go for an award ( http://www.domainesandestates.com/filesTX/ItalianWineList.pdf ) in order to get them involved in the process of refinement. I understand these awards are not the last word. But put yourself in the shoes of that busy person in a supermarket who hasn’t taken the time to determine which Pinot Noir is the one for tonight and who might rely on a Matt Kramer or a Pierre Rovani note on a shelf talker, that’s a common situation for much of the wine-buying public. Not a justification, just another view. Isn’t the goal for people to pick up a bottle and open it and enjoy it and keep coming back for another experience? If the big influencers can help ferry some of them over the river, we can take ‘em to the mountaintop. Allonso Cevola On the Wine Trail in Italy http://acevola.blogspot.com/By mauss
July 26, 2006 3:02 AM | Link to this
We should be very naive to think that WS may do something without thinking first how to make money out of it ? And then, who is making his choice according an Award that is linked to $ ?By Trish
July 26, 2006 1:08 AM | Link to this
I will say this for Mr. Shaken, he’s responsive. You’ve got to respect a man who so vehemently defends his publication. He really believes in what they’re doing over there, which makes me cut him a little slack. Not enough to buy the mag or find relevance in those awards, though. :)By Chaad
July 25, 2006 10:05 PM | Link to this
Wow. Tough crowd. While I, too, see the shortcomings of the WS awards program, I also understand Shanken’s position. It’s true that entering the awards was free for years, and in any case, I don’t begrudge anyone the right to turn a profit by providing a service. Perhaps the service isn’t exhaustive restaurant review, but the magazine is Wine Spectator after all, so I appreciate them retaining their focus. I read the awards program as a guide for wine lovers to finding a restaurant with a decent wine selection, something that many are apparently taking for granted nowadays. I’d bet, though, if they looked around their own towns, they’d find plenty of places that offer only poor wine selections. While many of the criticisms here are valid, I’d urge folks to remember that it is generally impossible to be all things to all people, and so to look to WS for what they do best, namely wine criticism.By Jeff Lefevere
July 25, 2006 9:12 PM | Link to this
Good stuff, Mark. This might be your coup de grace post —besting the Trader Joe’s work. I agree with Mackie, though, I want to roll on their expense account where it costs $10K in travel expenses to visit a restaurant. Humor — maybe, but it might not be too far from the truth. JeffBy MikeZ
July 25, 2006 7:18 PM | Link to this
Dear Mark, How refreshing to hear of people who have seen the light! Having been a winemaker and high-end restaurant diner for over 25 years it is glaringly obvious that everything is bottom line driven and Wine Spectator is no exception. I am still reeling at the cost of $10,000US each for reviewing the 4,000 nominees! That’s some cost base! RegardsBy Mike
July 25, 2006 6:53 PM | Link to this
I once visited a Charlotte, NC restaurant that The Wine Spectator had hyped pretty heavily. Their claim to fame was “225 wines by the glass”. It was a Wednesday evening; I counted 22 patrons eating in the dining room and no one at the bar. The waiter was all excited about the 225 offerings. I asked to see the wine buyer and asked him “You have 22 customers in your establishment, why on earth do you have 225 bottles of wine opened?” He looked at me like I was from Mars and gasped, with a “what do you mean” look on his face. I can only drink one glass at a time and am more impressed with a few well-chosen selections then “40 million” the sole purpose of which is only to impress me with the sheer idiocy of the numbers. Most restaurants offering 200 wines by the glass are selling 190 stale, tired wines.By Doug
July 25, 2006 6:49 PM | Link to this
The Speculator has been going downhill for over five years. Now they charge for anything they can (wine ratings) and for some reason don’t have the money to check out these establishments? Shanken and his cronies take their selves way to seriously!By Gary
July 25, 2006 5:32 PM | Link to this
Dear Mr. Shanken, Please accept my application to personally visit every restaurant that submits their wine list for consideration to Wine Spectator Magazine. Not only will I be very thourough in my research into these dining establishments…but I will save you $15 Million, by preforming this fuction for only $25 Million.By Mark Fisher
July 25, 2006 3:39 PM | Link to this
Wow, let me jump in here and respond to a couple of the comments: I did not interpret Marvin’s “DDN picking up the tab” remark as arrogant, but rather, as humorous. And I thought his reference to $40 million was exaggeration, also intended for humor. I DID have, like Rob, a very poor experience in both food and wine at a Spectator award-winning restaurant in the Carolinas about 15 years ago that prompted me ever since to rely on other criteria for picking restaurants when I’m traveling. And I’ve had many fine experiences at the Pine Club since I first started going with my parents 40 years ago — although wine was not involved in those early visits! Thanks for the feedback, and keep it coming! MarkBy cathy
July 25, 2006 2:45 PM | Link to this
Heh. Marvin begins by saying he “won’t belabor” his point, then goes on for 75+ words making his point, which isn’t very convincing after all. He comes across as pompous and childish, complete with his “!!!!!!!!!!” and his snide remarks about the DDN picking up his tab. Ick! (Or should I say, “ICK!!!!!!!!!!!”)By mackie
July 25, 2006 1:54 PM | Link to this
Shanken says it would cost $40 million to visit 4,000 restaurants? That’s $10,000 per. I’ve always known that WS doesn’t have a clue about wine, now it emerges that they don’t have a clue about $ either — at least if it’s not going INTO their pockets.By Rob
July 25, 2006 1:28 PM | Link to this
A couple of years ago my brother and I took my mom to a restaurant in Southern California that has consistently won the Wine Spectator “Grand Award” since 1983 for their 25,000 bottle wine cellar. The wine list indeed was impressive, the food was great, the knowledge of the gentlemen handling our wine order however seemed very ordinary. It was a weekday that we visited , so it is possible this guy was just a fill-in, but I would expect more from a “Grand Award” winner. My brother and I both have a thorough knowledge of wine and he basically described exactly what we were looking for, to me, it was obvious for the gentleman to recommend a chateauneuf du pape or similar from the description he was given. I believe my brother even used the words “a blend, maybe French”, what did the so called wine expert come up with? An Oregon Pinot Noir. My brother gave him a great discription of what he wanted, practically saying “dig down into that 25,000 bottle cellar for something that I haven’t had before” and got an answer that a typical waiter from Black Angus probably could have suggested. When a wine list gets a Grand Award for 20 yrs, I would expect the service of the wine to be up to par with the list itself. After all, who is going to read through a list like that before dinner?By Peg
July 25, 2006 1:10 PM | Link to this
I’ve used the Spectator’s Restaurant Guide on several occasions when visiting a new city. Normally, I’ve been pleased with the results, but one of the restaurants I chose based on the “Grand Award” designation (highest level) disappointed me terribly from both the food and wine perspectives. I find Mr. Shanken’s comment about sending the bills for restaurant inspection to DDN especially arrogant in light of my experience. I also agree with Linda’s observation that the Pine Club’s wine list ain’t nothin’ to write home about.By Greg
July 25, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
The guide is fun to scan but of little use. It is interesting to see how large of a collection etc. a restaurant has, but I know who has what locally and rely on friends and other, more independent sources, when travelling. By the way Mark, while I agree with Jamie that you are sarcastic, ‘intelligent’ maybe, but you haven’t quite reached the ‘god’ status yet. But there is still hopeBy Paul
July 25, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
I long ago ended my subscription to Wine Spectator after I realized I was paying for them to send me a magazine full of nothing but advertisements each month. On the brighter side, think of all the money that could be saved by the NFL, NBA, Major League Baseball, NASCAR, World Cup Soccer, and even the Olympics. Submit your menu and wine list — er, roster and vital statistics, along with a nice juicy processing fee, and we’ll give most of the entrants an award. Sounds good to me! [no caps, only one !] Say, isn’t that essentially how Super Bowl and Olympic sites are already chosen? Perhaps it’s not such a stretch to extend the concept to determine game winners. :-)By Pete Lacoste
July 25, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Keep in mind, too, that the Wine Spectator accepts sample bottles of wines for evaluation. This allows wine producers to send samples which may not be the same wine they actually sell. Call it “Wine Writer’s Cuvee,” if you like. As a publication which likes to compare itself to Consumer Reports, the Shanken journal also accepts advertising from the wineries whose wines it is, supposedly, objectively critiquing. If you had a shop or cellar full of the wines which often get touted, you’d have a bunch of big brand, high profile, mass-produced, much-advertised wines for your dinner table. The Spectator restaurant “award” is akin to membership in the local Chamber of Commerce. Big deal.By Linda
July 25, 2006 11:24 AM | Link to this
In the past I have dined at several of the restaurants that received awards from Wine Spectator. Most of them have lived up to their rating. I have a hard time with the Pine Club since I think there is nothing extraordinary about their menu and the wines are not that exceptional. They make a great steak but I have had better. Obviously Wine Spectator did not visit the establishment especially with the lights on. They would have run like !!!.By Jamie Gabrini
July 25, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
Mark, if I haven’t already mentioned this, you’re my new god. You’re sarcastic AND skeptical enough to be from New York City, yet you write intelligent pieces. Don’t know how you do what you do, but keep it up… especially if it involves sticking it to The Man.By Supplier Representative
July 25, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this
My first reaction to Mr. Shanken’s response was this: What grown man, publisher of a prestigious wine periodical writes this sentence? NO ONE ELSE WAS DOING THIS!!!!!!!!!!! Even my grade school daughter knows better than to use all CAPS, not to mention ELEVEN!!!!!!!!!!! exclamation marks. Are you sure that he didn’t add a smiley face to the end of his email?