I don’t really understand all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the existence of “Two Buck Chuck.”

Not for a long while has the introduction of a wine into the market generated the kind of press—within as well as without the trade—as the appearance of Charles Shaw Chardonnay and Cabernet Sauvignon at the previously unheard of price of $2.00.

Ironic that for only two bucks the entire wine world seems to have been knocked akimbo.

To judge by the vast verbiage that has been published—the wine press articles, the popular press reviews, the letters to the editors, and the truly amazing amount of Internet chatting—you would think that a major wine revolution has been wrought.

Hardly. It’s more the case that some wine trade sensibilities have been riled, some feathers ruffled. Two Buck Chuck is nothing more significant than that.

Perhaps you’ve bought a bottle—out of curiosity, of course—or perhaps you’ve even gleefully carted a case home (at $24 a dozen, what could it hurt?). Or perhaps (more likely, if you’re reading this) you’ve sneered at the bottles in the store, barely deigning to acknowledge their existence.

Nearly Something For Nothing

Consumers all over are snapping up the wine, agog at the novel experience of being able to buy a varietal wine (well, at least 75% of the named varietal) for the price of a candy bar.

For generations the wine industry has courted an image of sophistication. Wine has been positioned as a tasteful (in both senses) indulgence for those times in life when you want to “live a little.” Even the less expensive wines usually sport tweedy names that vaguely call up gentry images (Woodbridge, Turning Leaf, Grand Cru ), or tony names that evoke faux romance (Chateau-this and Domaine-that),

Consumers accustomed to this image have suddenly been confronted with a wine that seems to be like those others . . . but for only two dollars. The appeal of price, especially in these tougher economic times, is simply irresistible to a market that has come to believe wine by definition is expensive. Two Buck Chuck may not be exactly something for nothing, but for many, it’s pretty darn close!

Does this mean that suddenly three-dollar-and-up wines are unsellable? Of course not.

Experienced wine drinkers know—they just know—that Two Buck Chuck can’t be any good, and they marvel at its popularity. Inexperienced wine drinkers hope—it just might be true—that you can get a good wine for two bucks, and they wonder suspiciously why they couldn’t buy it before.

The wine industry says that it is simply not economically possible to make a quality wine that sells for two dollars . . . at retail! . . . and still make any money. That is probably true.

The fear that will not be spoken out loud is that Two Buck Chuck will convince the general consumer that they can, from now on, expect to get a quality wine for $2.00. Heaven help the wine industry if that comes to pass! How will they ever sell their $45 Cabernets, or the $28 Chardonnays?

This is the real cause of the upset—the idea that Two Buck Chuck is the future of the wine industry.

How Good a Wine Can Two Bucks Deliver?

This fear can only be valid, if Two Buck Chuck turns out to be able to hold its own against Twelve Buck Charles, or Twenty-eight Buck Estate-Grown Barrel Fermented Chardonnay. If the cut-rate chard is anywhere near the flavor quality of the medium-priced model, then the winemakers may well have something to worry about.

So is it?

My wife bought a bottle home one night and told me “You’ve got to put it in your chardonnay tasting.”

Yeah, right, I thought, here’s a real lose-lose situation! If I taste it blind and like it, I’m a tasteless philistine and my entire wine writing credibility is shot. If I taste it blind and don’t like it, then so what? As a wine writer I’m not supposed to like it. Ho-hum.

Well, I don’t know whether I am a “super taster” or not—I haven’t swabbed my tongue. I rather doubt that I am, but I’ve never claimed that I was and so I don’t much care. Perhaps a super taster would know better than me, but to my average palate, the Charles Shaw Chardonnay is a good value . . . to me the wine is worth it’s price—about two bucks.

Does that make it a good buy? Not to my taste. Does that mean it’s a threat to the wine industry. Not in my judgment.

Sure, I like to save some money on a bottle of wine. . . I’m always in favor of that . . . but in the case (pun intended) of Two Buck Chuck, what I end up getting is just that: a lot of really cheap wine that tastes like a lot of really cheap wine.

The word “bargain” to me means getting a certain level of value at a cost less then I expected. Charles Shaw Chardonnay is not a bargain in my book.

When I open a Charles Shaw Chardonnay I get two dollars worth of flavor and nothing else. I don’t count this as a bargain. I want more character than two dollars can buy. If I am hungry I can eat Spam for a couple of bucks or I can eat Toscano salami for a couple bucks more. Does that make Spam a bargain? Which choice delivers the most value for my dollar?

The Real Danger of Two Buck Chuck

In fact, the real danger of Two Buck Chuck is not that people will come to expect all other wines to be priced at a similar level. No, the much deeper danger is that people will expect all other wines to taste like Two Buck Chuck.

That would be a disaster!

For the most part, you get what you pay for in the wine world. With Charles Shaw chardonnay you get what you paid for it.

If you are happy with Spam-like Chardonnay, you only have to spend two dollars to get it. Bravo for you! But if you want a richer experience, perhaps some complexity of flavors, a nuance of texture, maybe a hint of a finish, you will simply have to pay a bit more than two dollars.

The expense of making a wine is proportional to the quality of the wine made. What was the expense of making Charles Shaw Chardonnay? It could not have been much if they can actually sell it profitably for two dollars. What is the quality of the wine that results?

The gauntlet thrown down to the industry by Two Buck Chuck is that they will have to start delivering more quality for less price in order to attract new consumers—and to prove to consumers that inexpensive wine doesn’t have to taste like Charles Shaw.

The challenge cast up to consumers by Two Buck Chuck is that they need to demand more quality in the wines they buy at inexpensive prices.

Winemakers shouldn’t castigate consumers who seek out the best value for their dollar, and consumers shouldn’t settle for Spam when they can have an inexpensive steak for only a few bucks more.

So let’s all stop clucking about Two Buck Chuck and start demanding (on the consumer side) better wine at lower prices and delivering (on the winemaking side) better wine at lower prices!