The conversation quickly turned to our wine lists and that the editor considered our list to be small. His comment was less criticism than consideration and I pushed him to elaborate upon what their editorial perspective, and him personally, looks for in a fine dining restaurant list. Moreover, we are in the midst of planning a moderate overhaul of our food and beverage offerings at Lawry's and I wanted to glean any advice possible from an industry insider. He cursorily commented that wine lists need to consistently convey the theme and ethos of a restaurant which was nothing too divined. But when I dug into his comment that our list was small, he cautiously expressed a frustration with the size of some lists in higher end fine dining establishments. In fact, he went as far as to say that he found some lists to be almost unethical in that these bibles of wine functionally mothball delicious products that should be enjoyed. Obviously, this is not the case in most restaurants but his comments and the fact that this publication gives awards based in part on the number of items on the list surprised me.
As a restaurant owner/operator, I am baffled by the working capital that some fine dining restaurants have sunk into their wine programs no matter what their wine sales are in the end. Let me be clear, I enjoy a well curated wine list that provides choice, engages the curiosity of an eager oenophile and allows a sommelier to express her craft but how many offering is too many? And how unique and/or redundant do lists needs to be keep them at the forefront of the industry. How many 4 or even 5 figure price tags are necessary on a list and how often do they actually sell? Considering this publication is regarded as a standard bearer for the industry, perhaps it's time to reset those very standards.
