Sparkling Wines Future

The current study analyses the growth potential of four different sparkling wines (California sparkling, Cava, Champagne and Prosecco) in the US market based on the views and judgment of a large sample of 843 trade actors. Findings of an online survey suggest that sparkling wines coming from Italy (Prosecco), Spain (Cava) and California have higher growth potentials than wines produced in the Champagne region of France. This is in line with the fact that Champagne wines are sold at very high prices internationally for historical reasons (monopoly power, first-mover advantage, well-established large brands). Furthermore, results suggest that a good price/quality ratio, positive wine critics, the fact that new consumers are choosing this wine are associated with higher estimated growth potentials by traders. Managerial implications for small and medium businesses are presented and critically discussed. We also analyse our results in the light of the new legislation on US imports that was adopted in October 2019 and that will hit Cava wines only.

Wine consumption involves repeated purchases, as it usually happens with routine food products and beverages. The dynamics of purchases have been investigated as an exploratory behavior (Meixner and Knoll, Reference Meixner and Knoll2012), which explains why consumers buy the same brand or product or change them (variety) in repeated purchases (Barharrell and Denison, Reference Barharrell and Denison1995). Accordingly, a consumer's state of dependence occurs when purchases depend on past consumption history (Thomadsen and Seetharaman, Reference Thomadsen, Seetharaman and Verplanken2018). A positive state of dependence is detected as habits (automatic purchase process), inertial purchases (high probability of making the same purchase), loyalty (repurchase of the same brand), or as a positive effect of the last purchase on the current one. Conversely, a negative state of dependence reduces the probability of repurchasing the same product on the next occasion. This approach is named variety-seeking behavior (VSB). The positive or negative state of dependence is usually linked to specific attributes, such as brand, flavor, size, and quality, rather than the product itself, while heterogeneity is found among consumers’ state of dependence (Thomadsen and Seetharaman, Reference Thomadsen, Seetharaman and Verplanken2018).

Intensive cropping systems today represent a paramount issue in terms of environmental impacts, since agricultural pollutants can constitute a potential threat to surface water, non-target organisms and aquatic ecosystems. Levels of pesticide concentrations in surface waters are indeed unquestionably correlated to crop and soil management practices at field-scale. Due to the numerous applications of pesticides required, orchards and vineyards can represent relevant non-point sources for pesticide contamination of water bodies, mainly prompted by soil erosion, surface runoff and spray drift. To reduce risks of pesticide contamination of surface water, the Directive 2009/128/CET imposed the local implementation of agricultural good practices and mitigation actions such as the use of vegetative buffer filter strips and hedgerows along river and pond banks. However, implementation of mitigation actions is often difficult, especially in extremely fragmented agricultural landscapes characterized by a complex territorial matrix set up on urban sprawling, frequent surface water bodies, important geomorphological processes and protected natural areas.

More recently, the VSB has been detected in consumers who prefer to taste different wines and therefore move across market segments because they know one or more wine attributes such as grape variety, origin, brand (Ellis and Caruana, Reference Ellis and Caruana2018) or, conversely, because they are not well informed about wines (Ellis and Thompson, Reference Ellis and Thompson2018). Moreover, a vast wine assortment encourages consumers to look for variety while eroding their loyalty to brands, especially in products such a wine having a strong hedonic component (Inman, Reference Inman2001; Ellis and Thompson, Reference Ellis and Thompson2018). So far, the literature on VSB for wine has not paid attention to wine types. Specifically, the consumption of sparkling wines is affected by motivations that differ with respect to still wines. Charters et al. (Reference Charters, Velikova, Ritchie, Thach, Dodd, Fish, Herbst and Terblanche2011) thoroughly analyzed Champagne consumption, which carries symbolic motivations as these wines are often consumed on special occasions like celebrations, holidays, and in specific moments of the day, depending on the cultural context.

Taking an average of the sugar content in 250ml of Freeway Original tonic water (8.9g) Sainsbury's Indian Tonic Water (19g), and Schweppes Indian Tonic Water (13g) added to the zero grams in gin, a glass of gin and tonic contains roughly 18 grams of sugar; or four teaspoons. Vodka's sugar content is pretty much zero. But taking an average of 250mls of Tesco Cranberry Juice Drink (18.3g), Sainsbury's Cranberry Juice Drink (23.8g) and Ocean Spray Chilled Original Cranberry Juice Drink (30g) and you're looking at roughly 30 grams of sugar in each drink. Normal rum is again, minimal sugar but cola's a different story. The sweeter the wine, higher the levels of sugar. The sugar content of white wine depends on how sweet it is. According the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture), there are 1.4 grams in 147ml which means that for a small glass of wine (125ml) you're looking at around 1.25 grams a glass.