Going regional, part II: the difficult bit.

Segmenting generic wine initiatives is harder than it looks. Here are the key challenges

 

People may agree with me that in principle taking a regional approach to wine promotion makes a lot of sense for a number of producing countries. However, taking the plunge is far from straightforward.

This was obvious from the response I got to my recent post ‘Going regional: why the New World should bother’. There are, I would suggest, three key challenges.

Firstly, any regional entity must have a clear consumer proposition and not simply one that satisfies the producers or the trade. Secondly, in countries with a number of potential regions, each must have a clearly differentiated raison d’etre.

And thirdly, ideally not all regions should be launched at the same time. This implies countries need a grand plan, which in turn implies a long-term vision which has buy-in from the overwhelming majority of producers.

So taking these points in turn:

 

1 Establishing a consumer proposition

At the risk of oversimplifying a rather complex issue, broadly speaking there are two models which can be followed. These I shall label the Exclusive and the Inclusive. Both have the same ultimate objective: to add long-term value to the efforts of individual producers by creating a framework that facilitates the marketing of premium wines.

The Exclusive model can be seen at work in Sancerre, Rioja, Chianti, Chablis, Champagne and Prosecco. These are examples of regions which are associated by target consumers with a particular style of wine. In the best cases, such regions not only have a strong consumer franchise, and command a premium price, but the style of wine is often perceived to be unique even if, as say in the case of Chablis, the varietal involved is actually quite commonplace

The consumer may well not understand, or indeed care, about the nuances of terroir or the regulatory framework. But both are important to some degree. They facilitate the exclusivity and provide the cues for establishing trade credibility.

This model ideally would include a classification based on quality differences to encourage trading up, and help develop the overall status of the region. (The caveat being that the quality differences should be detectable by the target consumer, not simply the opinion formers or the trade.)

Yet the Exclusive model is unlikely to be a viable option for many New World regions, given the diversity of their wine offering. The most realistic option in such cases would therefore be to celebrate this diversity. This is where the Inclusive approach is relevant.

This approach was exemplified, for me, in an inspirational presentation in Australia by Sam Holmes, CEO of the Barossa Grape & Wine Association (www.barossa.com). A major strength of the Barossa’s strategy is that the consumer proposition does not simply rely on wine – there’s food, music and even beer in the mix. Any product is acceptable which has links to the Barossa culture, as defined in the region’s thoughtfully constructed vision.

Within this broad remit the producer is encouraged to produce and promote wines of appropriate quality, which is critical to avoid potential devaluation of the brand. But there are no constraints on style, other than those naturally imposed by the terroir and microclimates.

The major obstacle, as I see it, with such Inclusive initiatives comes with the difficulty of communicating the complexity of the proposition to the trade and consumer. This is less difficult in the region’s home country, given it is quite possible for target consumers to visit the region and so get the full experience.

International marketing, however, provides more of a challenge and a good deal of thought will be required- backed up by appropriate resource- in terms of securing the appropriate level of understanding and cut through.

2 Each region must have its own identity

Unfortunately for any individual region, getting one’s own proposition right is just the start. Clearly account has to be taken of what competing regions are up to in one’s own country. And if the perception is that the propositions of too many of the regions are interchangeable, then the overall objective will be compromised.

3 Please form an orderly queue

This challenge will assuredly be all the greater if, say, in Australia a good proportion of the 60-70 defined regions decided to go full steam ahead at the same time. The result from a market perspective would be chaos. There needs to be a consensus that some regions must get priority for the ultimate benefit of all, while some of the smaller regions need perhaps to be encouraged to band together to create stronger and relevant propositions.

Back in the 70s, as a young marketer, I was invited to attend a brainstorm on how Italy should go forward generically. When I made the suggestion that a pecking order of regions be created, the look on people’s faces reminded me of one of those Bateman cartoons. It was, I realised very quickly, an astonishingly naive proposal given Italy is profoundly and essentially regional. But even in Australia, Chile and South Africa regional rivalry – as well as rivalry within regions – should not be underestimated.

Warning of blizzards

So what’s my conclusion? Well as a starting point there needs to be an overwhelming consensus that segmentation is necessary; there needs to be the equivalent of the “export or die” mentality of the late 80s in Australia.

Only then, in my view, is there a chance of establishing an overarching industry vision which facilitates clearly differentiated regional initiatives and which builds in an appropriate timescale.

The alternative is for individual regions in each country to push ahead in isolation – as many are currently. From the point of view of the domestic market this may not be an issue, and even internationally some of these may well achieve their goals, notably the early adopters.

The risk is, however, that, as others are encouraged to follow suit, the international markets will be inundated by a blizzard of regional initiatives which will serve only to bewilder the trade and the consumer with a further level of complexity.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Going regional, part II: the difficult bit.

  1. I like to think of this from a brand framework perspective. A premium wine brand has a few core brand values which is what their brand is all about. The first brand value in the premium segment is ‘High Quality’. It is substantiated by region, taste profile, awards, bottle, label etc. And it what is your two regional blog posts are about. So the regional marketing organisation’s job is to help the wine brand remain in the premium category. Note however the brand can also look to other factors to be seen as High Quality with taste profile and awards being the least controversial ways.

    The second core brand value relates to the customer segment. That mysterious creature that is steadfastly ignored and yet there is some great research about (e.g. google ‘project genome wine research’). I think winemaker owners would be happy with something like ‘craft’ or ‘artisan’ if they were targeting ‘Luxury Wine Enthusiasts’. Others including arty or inspirational for other segments.

    And now the third core brand segment. The differentiating core brand segment… all of your regional competitors … are targeting ‘Luxury Wine Enthusiasts’. How are you different, what is authentic yet unique and compelling, what’s that interesting story that will make your brand stand out? With wine writers, social media, tasting room / event elevator speeches.

    Now that’s the hard yards of wine marketing. Regional marketing is the first step but differentiation is where the most gains are to be had.

    • I agree with this Bruce. A brand must have at its essence a clear point of difference. A well marketed regional framework can create a ‘halo effect’ which adds value to the efforts of individual producers.In some cases this value is substantial. However there are many examples of producers who appear to be using their regional identity as a crutch.This is a dangerous game to play. Ultimately producers must take control of their own destiny.

      A win win of course is where you have a producer with a strong and clearly differentiated brand who is integrally linked to a region with the same strengths.

      • Hear, hear, no more region Prozac, stand on your own feet. A differentiated brand, high quality (hopefully helped by the region brand quality perception) … and targeted to a customer segment.

Make a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s