Did Robert Parker Just Fumble On The Goal Line? (The Wine Advocate Possibly Sold To Investors In Singapore)
While we can usually count on the wine world for providing news that can best be classified as odd-but-quickly-forgettable (Exhibit A: anybody remember the wine snob ghost??), the recent coverage of changes coming to Robert Parker’s The Wine Advocate reads like an elaborate April Fool’s (except it’s coming in December, 2012).
According to The Wall Street Journal, uber-critic Parker – who has quite recently vehemently and publicly stated his desire not to retire – is in the process of selling his wine newsletter to a group of investors in Singapore.
Felix Salmon has an interesting and well-written take on the news, and he sums up the collective “what the hell?!??” reaction of the fine wine world to the possibility of TWA moving in a direction that seems the polar opposite of what most wine insiders believed would be the future of TWA (and that includes insiders I know personally, who have direct access to Parker – so include me firmly in the “what the hell?!??” camp).
It’s long been believed that Robert Parker, whenever he decided to retire, would hand-off TWA as-is (given that he grew it literally from nothing using his own impressive hustle), grooming heir apparent Antonio Galloni to eventually take control of TWA (and speculated that Galloni, once given the full reigns, might shake up the editorial staff).
But the news coming from the WSJ suggests a very different path for TWA than what was brewing in the collective fine wine hive mind. Here are some of the highlights, as reported by Salmon:
- TWA will be sold to a group of Singapore-based investors (described by Parker as “visionaries”), who according to Salmon have “no experience either in wine or in publishing”
- Parker will retain the title of Chairman, but will be turning over editorial control not to Galloni, but to TWA’s Singapore-based correspondent, Master of Wine Lisa Perrotti-Brown
The print version of TWA newsletter will be retired (despite the fact that it’s profitable), and[see comments - RMP has corrected this via his twitter feed] there will be a specific Southeast Asian edition added, “aimed at corporate clients like airlines and luxury hotels”- A new China-based corespondent will be hired, specifically to report on the nascent industry of wines produced in Asia
- Advertising – long shunned by Parker and often used by him as criticism against the intentions of other wine review publications – will be accepted at the electronic edition of TWA.
“What the hell?!??”
While one could certainly forgive Parker for wanting to bow out of the game (especially given the recent negative press levied against former TWA critic Jay Miller), this move to sell TWA doesn’t really pass the surface-level glance common-sense test when compared to how staunchly Parker publicized, adhered to, and defended the aspects and policies he felt made TWA stand apart from other critical wine publications.
Certainly no one is losing a ton betting on the wine frenzy happening in Asia right now, but other than financially the move just doesn’t seem to add up. Salmon sums it up best, I think, when he states that “none of this seems like the action of a man who wants to preserve his legacy” – certainly it doesn’t seem like the kind of consistent move you’d have expected from the man, particularly after his recent induction into the Vintners Hall of Fame in Napa, at a time when his favorable legacy in the wine world seemed all but a lock.
“What the hell?!??”
Will this move tarnish the legacy? Has Parker fumbled the ball at the goal line?
Assuming the deal actually goes through, then only time will tell…
Cheers!
Posted in: Blog
Leave a Comment (9) ↓
Every one has the right to call it quits on their own terms. We can’t all live forever. Honestly we think Robert Parker did the right thing in terms of moving on…ultimately its up to the new owners to keep the legacy.
Thanks Bob, we appreciate what you did for wine!
RMP, has just commented on all of this via his twitter feed at https://twitter.com/RobertMParkerJr
In summary: he’s saying that this move is to bring on additional investors, the headquarters of TWA will remain in MD, and that the print edition of TWA will not be eliminated, and it will not take on ads. See the feed at http://twitpic.com/bku83t
RMP is also saying that he “never thought it I would have this much attention” which I find a bit difficult to believe given the wine world’s reaction to anything remotely involving him
.
Cheers!
Joe, ultimately the investors in Singapore will decide where TWA goes, how its business will be run. There is a price to pay when you accept investor $$$. They typically run the show from that point on. But great post.
Yeah, understood. I guess the collective question in the wine biz is this: will this move allow RMP to secure a favorable legacy? If not, then that ball got fumbled!
It may be a fumble, but more toward the middle of the field. Until a good deal more is done to advance the usability of the ratings/scoring systems, the goal line isn’t in sight.
A bit more on this from Wine Searcher: http://www.wine-searcher.com/m/2012/12/parker-steps-down-at-wine-advocate
It seems that, from what I can discern, RMP will be handing over the reigns to Perrotti-Brown in all but name, and that the print version of TWA will indeed be phased out.
I see the move as a good one – unexpected, for sure, but overall I’d rather see an MW calling the shots at a major wine review publication than what we’ve seen over the last several years, which is people without any formal training ruling the critical roost. I might be biased, though, having gone through the WSET program, etc.
Joe,
The Wine Advocate is not being completely “sold” to Singapore investors. According to the original WSJ article: “Mr. Parker said he is selling a “substantial interest” in the Wine Advocate to a trio of Singapore-based investors who will take over its day-to-day financial operations.”
There is no clarification on what constitutes a “substantial interest.” I think it is most likely that Parker will retain at least 51% of the WA so he can maintain control over the WA if he ever feels it is necessary. He is essentially taking on investors, and allowing them to do more of the mundane financial work for the magazine.
Richard – it’s been interesting to see the reactions and speculation this week, I suppose a lot hinges on the details as you rightly point out. I think the x-factor here is that part of his legacy now rests on how those new investors will steer WA from here…