Earthquake wine. No, seriously.

For the nerd-loving science type, there's an interesting shift in the Milky Way that is occurring today, right this second, that may impact what type of wine you drink 10 years from now.

What is it?

For the past sequential few years, the earth's rotational speed has slowed.  According to scientists who analyzed every earthquake above 7.0 magnitude since 1900, when our planet decelerates rotational spin, it leads to an increased number of earthquakes.

How, you ask, does this cyclical link translate for impacting the wine industry?

Stick with me.

In 2014, I was woken in my apartment in SF by the sound of my running metals slamming together on the wall above my head.  I was in the middle of an earthquake, so like any Californian, I waited for it to stop, and then went back to sleep.  Just few miles North of my apartment was the epicenter for a 6.0 earthquake, in Napa.  It resulted in $1 billion of damage, and the region is still recovering today.

The San Andreas Fault, which many speculate will create an earthquake known as "The Big One," runs directly through the Bay Area.  Some speculate that the West Napa Fault, the cause of the 2014 South Napa earthquake, is attached to the San Andreas fault line.

If scientists are correct about increased earthquakes resulting from slowed rotational spin, which we are experiencing today, then chances are the wine we will be drinking years from now will either be from a different region due to earthquake damage, or it will be a well-shaken varietal.

The Emperor's New Clothes

I really enjoyed listening to Jessica Kogan tell her story about how she and her husband founded Cameron Hughes. I found it interesting to learn about their business model and the secondary market for wine, where people can come buy ready-made wine and re-bottle it under another name. One thing that really stuck out to me was the idea of key-man risk in this business. According to Jessica, the eponymous brand would not exist were it not for Cameron’s special palate, which allowed them to identify incredible wines and develop a brand that people associate with quality. What happens when Cameron dies? Is he still so critical to the business today, or do the existing relationships with wineries maintain the brand’s high quality into the future? My gut tells me that with good business relationships, Cameron Hughes (the brand) could find someone with a good enough palate to keep the business going strong. But where is the line between good enough and great?

                In an even more explicit point than Cameron Hughes, the idea of key-man risk keeps bringing me back to Robert Parker, the arbiter of taste. I remember reading a book on wine several years ago, where the author’s thesis was this: just because Robert Parker prefers his wines a certain way does not mean that everyone should like them a certain way.  Why then does the industry continue to depend upon his rating to determine the grade of a wine? There’s a certain “emperor has new clothes” aspect to this dynamic that gives me pause. Is he really wearing clothes, or are people just not telling him that he is wrong?

It is hard for me to think of other industries where so much power rests in the hands of single individuals. In fashion, there are a lot of prolific designers, but they seem to share power in a way that Robert Parker shares with no one else. In business – for the most part – even the most powerful managers share responsibility to those below them. Why has the wine industry developed in such a way that the rest of us yield our taste preferences to people with a biologically different palate than we have? As for me, I’ll continue to drink what tastes good to me, thank you very much.