Escapology, Target and Salt + Lime's Valley real estate deals
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
30 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
The dilemma behind every California winery sale
When a California winery or vineyard changes hands, the new owner must confront a crucial question: to rename or not to rename? The prospect of renaming often entices. If the existing moniker is someone else's family name, you might want to replace it with your own. The recently purchased William Harrison in Napa Valley will soon become William Perry. The Carmel Valley vineyard originally known as Durney became Heller and then Massa; though the identity of its latest owner has not been publicly revealed, I'd bet it will get a new name yet. But renaming also comes with risks, principally the uncertain outcome of building a new brand from scratch. It can feel like a shame — and could alienate some fans — to erase a name that has some history behind it. Santa Cruz Mountain Vineyard winemaker Jeff Emery said that one local vineyard has changed names five times in the decades he's been buying its fruit. He disapproves: 'That's why you don't name a vineyard after yourself,' Emery said. 'No legacy.' At Healdsburg's Michel-Schlumberger Wine Estate, the subject of a story I published Wednesday, a new team is attempting to have it both ways. They'll retain the Michel-Schlumberger label, which has been around since the early '90s, while also introducing both a lower-end tier (Jean Jacques) and a higher-end one (name not yet disclosed). It's a delicate feat to try to pull off. The Michel-Schlumberger name has some recognition — and 46 years behind it — but isn't as strong as it once was, after the previous owner abandoned an estate-grown model. The team doesn't want to leave behind Michel-Schlumberger entirely, which I suspect will prove prudent, giving it the sense of having some roots. At the same time, a new, upscale label will be free of any historical baggage (but good luck finding a name that isn't taken already). This won't be the first name change at the Dry Creek Valley winery. Originally it was Domaine Michel, until subsequent owner Jacques Schlumberger bought tacked on his own name to his predecessor's. For a while, the winery also sold a higher-priced Cabernet Sauvignon label called Deux Terres, later discontinued. Arguably the most resonant rebrand in California wine's contemporary files is the change from Araujo Estate Wines to Eisele Vineyard in 2016. Maybe it worked so well because it wasn't really a rebrand at all: The Calistoga property had been known as the Eisele Vineyard since 1969, and the Araujo family had established an eponymous winery there in 1990. After French billionaire François-Henri Pinault acquired it, he extended the Eisele name not only to the vineyard but to the winery too. Given the sterling reputation that the Araujo wines had garnered, it might have looked tempting to keep that name on the labels. But to anyone who knew even the most cursory background on the site — and the fact that the Eisele name predated the Araujo name — Eisele made perfect sense. Sometimes, a rename doesn't stick. When Napa Valley's Clif Lede Vineyards bought Anderson Valley's Breggo Cellars, it rechristened it as Fel Wines; last year, the Breggo founder bought back the brand and revived the name. (Disclosure: My best friend worked for Fel.) The most famous example of a naming reversal, however, would have to be Inglenook. In the '70s, you would have been a fool to want to rebrand Inglenook, one of Napa Valley's earliest, most important and most famous wineries. But Francis Ford Coppola's purchase of part of the historic Rutherford estate in 1975 did not come with the Inglenook trademark. While the mark got traded around among several corporate entities including Constellation and the Wine Group, Coppola dubbed it Niebaum-Coppola, combining his own name with the original founder's. He later renamed it Rubicon Estate. Finally, in 2011, he purchased the trademark and restored it as Inglenook once again. Coppola did not apply the same reverence for historical nomenclature, however, when he bought the historic Chateau Souverain in Geyserville in 2005. He renamed that one Francis Ford Coppola Winery.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Mexican fast-food chain Guzman Y Gomez's annual profit beats estimates
(Reuters) -Mexican fast-food chain Guzman Y Gomez reported a better-than-expected annual net profit and declared its first-ever dividend on Friday, as its restaurant pipeline continued to strengthen in key markets including Australia. The firm reported net profit after tax of A$14.5 million ($9.31 million), compared to A$5.7 million last year and above the Visible Alpha consensus estimate of A$13.5 million. GYG announced a payout of 12.6 Australian cents per share. ($1 = 1.5569 Australian dollars) Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Alcohol industry shares disappointment on US-EU trade ‘framework agreement'
Alcohol-industry trade bodies on both sides of the Atlantic today (21 August) expressed disappointment that the "framework agreement" on trade between the US and the EU sees European products facing a 15% tariff. Speaking to journalists at a press briefing earlier today (21 August), European commissioner for trade Maroš Šefčovič confirmed the bloc did not manage to secure a deal for tariffs on wine, beer and spirits in the final 'Framework on an Agreement on Reciprocal, Fair, and Balanced Trade'. "The tariffs on the wine, spirits and beer was one of very important offensive interests of the European Union," Šefčovič said. "Unfortunately here we didn't succeed to get this sector and this category among the sectors which would continue to be on the MFN [Most Favoured Nation] level." Ignacio Sánchez-Recarte, the secretary general of wine industry body Comité Européen des Entreprises Vins (CEEV), said: "The 15% tariff is damaging a lot our business and many companies are having problems with maintaining their exports at that level of tariffs, and it will be a lot of investments that will be stopped in the US." It was a response echoed by Chris Swonger, the president and CEO of the US trade association Distilled Council of the United States. 'While we greatly appreciate President Trump's efforts to protect American manufacturing jobs, we are disappointed that this joint statement did not include permanent tariff-free trade for distilled spirits on both sides of the Atlantic," he said in a statement today. 'We commend the administration for safeguarding US spirits from tariffs in the short term but without a permanent return to zero-for-zero tariffs on spirits, American distillers do not have the certainty to plan for future export and job growth without the fear of retaliatory tariffs returning." Another European association, SpiritsEurope, also expressed its dissatisfaction 'This was a critical moment to reaffirm and reinvigorate our shared commitment to fair and reciprocal trade and give the transatlantic spirits sector the boost it needs to get back on a stronger growth path,' said Hervé Dumesny, director general of spiritsEurope. 'While we appreciate the progress made in de-escalating broader trade tensions, every month of delay in restoring the zero-for-zero tariff agreement for spirits holds back growth, investment and consumer choice on both sides of the Atlantic.' French wine and spirits representative body FEVS, meanwhile, described the framework as "a source of disappointment to all stakeholders in the wine and spirits industry". In today's press conference, Šefčovič stressed the lack of an agreement now did not mean the situation could not change in the future. "I would just like to add one very important word and this is 'yet'. Because, our US colleagues, they know that this is our offensive interest, something which is very important for us," he said. A joint statement from the European Commission and the White House noted both economies "agree to consider other sectors and products that are important for their economies and value chains for inclusion in the list of products for which only the MFN tariffs would apply". Despite the present disappointment, CEEV's Sanchez-Recarte said the association "maintains a little hope" with the knowledge that EU and US negotiators have been trying to get wine and spirits exempted from the 15% duty. "It's not part of this first declaration but there is still a small hope to have them included in the second package, so in the fall," he said. FEVS also noted in its statement that: "In the medium term, today's decision does not mark the end of the story." "Alcohol industry shares disappointment on US-EU trade 'framework agreement'" was originally created and published by Just Drinks, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
