Consumers like to see scores for wines. They just do.

Wine people really hate to boil it all down to a single number (well, most of them hate it) but there is just no getting around it.

Recently the good folks over at Domaine547.com started a great conversation. It stemmed from an article in the LA Times on the an in-house wine critic at BevMo, Wilfred Wong.

The premise of the blog entry was that wine retailers that have their own internal critic are crossing some sort of ethical line, because their wine reviews are not impartial since they are trying to sell wine. As a good example they site Gary Vaynerchuk’s videos as crossing a line, as he only rates wines that are for sale at his wine shop. The post raises an interesting point - is this really a conflict of interest in disguise? Did Gary really compare himself to Robert Parker, Jay Miller, Steve Tanzer, and James Suckling in one recent episode? We didn’t hear it that way, but we do think his shtick is getting a bit over-the-top.

The comments on the article are quite interesting - you should go read them.

My own take on the debate - which is in the comments on Domaine547 - is that I don’t really understand the hubbub. How is a retailer providing wine reviews and suggestions any different than a bookstore having a section of books their employees have enjoyed? Wine consumers need the help, and frequently ask for the help. When I am buying something that I don’t understand, I prefer stores that provide some help in making my choice. It is what I look for in a store - good customer service.

And, hey, if the store critic has a palate that agrees with your palate, why not take advantage of it? Of course, we think you get the best recommendations by matching your PalatePrint^TM to that of other wine drinkers. People with similar histories of what they like and dislike are just more probable to enjoy similar wines in the future.