Coca-Cola's Full Court Press

Its Taylor wine ads raise rivals' tempers

The commercial opens on a room full of people reflectively sipping wine in what is described as a blind taste test. Somebody calls out that a Taylor California wine has been "judged best," and the announcer purrs: "Taylor California Cellars. Judged better than C.K. Mondavi. Better than Almaden. Better than Inglenook. But when you cost a little more you better be better." And when you come on with such head-to-head comparison promotions in the usually decorous world of wine selling you had better be prepared for lots of flack, not only from competitors but also from the Government. That is what Coca-Cola Co. is discovering.

Last year, Coke elbowed into the fast-growing industry by acquiring Taylor Wine Co. of Hammondsport, N.Y., a firm with lackluster earnings and an indifferent product line. To give Taylor a quality image and hype sales, Coke bought the respected Monterey Vineyards, south of San Francisco, to supply some of the grapes for the new Taylor California Cellars line. The bulk of the crushes for the California brand comes from the hot interior area, once known for producing low-grade grapes that were largely used in cheap jug wines. The company then prepared a $1.5 million ad campaign to introduce the California wines with a splash. The promotions show Taylor's rose, Rhine and burgundy being taste-tested and found superior to similar popularly priced ($1.90 to $2.99 a bottle) wines. Many of the 27 judges in the tests were not professionals but merely wine buffs who are members of the San Francisco Vintners Club, which meets for weekly wine tastings.

Coke and Taylor immediately ran into trouble with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), which must pass on all wine ads and frowns on most comparative advertising (advertis ing of beer and wine, but not liquor, is permitted on TV). BATF did not bar Taylor's promotions, but said that the winery ran them at its own risk. If the ads were found to be misleading, Taylor could face penalties ranging from a letter of admonishment to a suspension of its permit to sell wine interstate. Early this month, Coca-Cola officials decided to risk the consequences: the Taylor commercials hit the tube and newspapers in the East and Southern California.

The ads caused top California wine-men to pop their corks. BATF has already received three complaints from other winemakers and says it will act on them as quickly as possible. Officials at Sebastiani, one of the brands the ads show losing, say they are prepared to bring suit against Coke. Peter Mondavi, chief of Charles Krug Winery, questions the honesty of the ads. Says he: "It's deceiving the public to compare their premium wines with our table wines." Even some members of San Francisco's Vintners Club expressed surprise. Club Chairman Jerome C. Draper said, "We're very upset. We had a written agreement that our name would not be used in the ad." Wine merchants' reactions are mixed; though some wine merchants believe Taylor's claims for its California wines are overblown, quite a few are increasing their orders because the ads are boosting demand.

Carlton Curtis, spokesman for the Coca-Cola Co., defends the aggressive ads as normal competitive tactics. He contends that the judges used in the ads averaged "a dozen years of experience." Far from being cowed by the industry's outrage, Coke, relying on its vast distribution experience, is planning to expand production of Taylor California wines from half a million cases this year to 2 million in 1979.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.