Or it was, before At First Glass and its custom domain name vanished.
Here lies a Washington state riesling, sweet and delicious if not as bracingly acidic as a German one I have also been enjoying lately. Why then did Red Mark not sell? Possibly the $14 price tag was too much to ask for an unknown wine and a riesling at that, a variety that people are still dubious about. I gather that in the market rieslings are classified as an "alternative white," along with moscato, which seems strange given moscato's huge popularity.
Or, it may have been Red Mark's marketing. The old 1930s-era photo, on the case, of laborer Nicola shouldering his spade, and then the smear of red across the black label, may have caused people to ask "what am I supposed to be tasting?" Or it may have put them off for other reasons. Is Red Mark meant to be a Commie-pinko wine, a wine -- and one or two others are marketed this way -- "for the people" or "for the rest of us"? But who else drinks wine besides people -- giraffes? Memo to a hippy-dippy industry: please be aware that not every customer bows before the religion of personal superiority and badge-wearing, only-we-understand-labor-work-and-injustice hauteur. ... I am thinking of the man I saw emerge from his car in the parking lot yesterday, a small metal sign saying "peace" swinging and glinting from his rearview mirror in the morning sunlight. How very wonderful of him, to want peace like that.
Come to think of it he probably would have considered buying Red Mark But it rests hauteur-ly on the closeout rack for 9.99. Still no takers.