Search results

Examines the changing trends in world Cognac sales, and the potential of emergent markets — particularly China — as trade and tariff restrictions change and world politics make these alternatives more receptive to the West.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the possibility that individual differences in consumer choice of cognac are at least partially influenced by parental cultural capital. Also examined are ten value orientations factors (e.g. hedonism and self-direction) and attitudes toward France, cognac’s country-of-origin that may affect the degree of this intergenerational influence.

The survey research measures parents’ cultural capital, value orientations and attitude toward France and purchase intention using recognized scales. Data were collected from the faculty and students of a major university located in the southeast of the USA. The sample size was 234.

The results confirm that parental cultural capital, consumer value orientations and attitudes toward France have significant impacts on the consumer’s willingness to purchase cognac. Adult children of high cultural capital parents are more likely to buy cognac.

The findings of this paper provide meaningful insights into intergenerational influences on consumer purchase intention of cognac and socialization theory. The paper provides several managerial implications for segmentation, targeting and positioning of cognac in the US market.

As the first of its kind, this paper introduces the parents’ cultural capital into the consumer research regarding cognac. The longer-term effects that parents can have on grown children’s consumer behavior are confirmed, suggesting that parental influence persists well into adulthood and has impact on their brand preference.

At a recent inquest upon the body of a woman who was alleged to have died as the result of taking certain drugs for an improper purpose, one of the witnesses described himself as “an analyst and manufacturing chemist,” but when asked by the coroner what qualifications he had, he replied : “I have no qualifications whatever. What I know I learned from my father, who was a well‐known ‘F.C.S.’” Comment on the “F.C.S.” is needless.

It is a matter of common knowledge that beer, in its several varieties, is by no means the same thing to‐day as it was a generation or less ago; the progress of chemical and biological knowledge on the one hand, and the keenness of competition on the other, have led to great alterations both in the materials used in its production and the methods by which it is produced. Exact or reliable knowledge about this, however, is far from being common; vehement assertions are made that all or almost all the changes are for the better, and also that beer is now a manufactured chemical product of deleterious nature, in which little or nothing of genuine material is used. Such statements are rendered unacceptable by the existence of self‐interest on one side and prejudice on the other. A short account of some of the facts concerned may, therefore, be of service.

In a Report, issued on July 9, 1896, the Select Committee on Food Products Adulteration recommended the establishment of a central government scientific authority, who should act as a court of reference upon scientific questions arising under the Adulteration Acts, and who should be empowered, at their discretion, to prescribe standards and limits as to the quality and purity of food. It was rightly held by the Select Committee that the constitution of such an authority is an absolute necessity in order that the all‐important question of food standards may be duly considered and dealt with, and that all matters affecting the administration of the Acts and involving scientific considerations may be placed on a more satisfactory footing. The Committee also expressed the opinion that the formation of such an authority would result in the removal of many practical difficulties met with in the administration of the Acts, and would largely obviate the costly litigation in which public bodies, traders, and others are constantly liable to be involved under existing conditions. Nothing whatever has been done to give effect to the recommendation of the Committee in spite of the fact that the necessity for some such course of action as that indicated has been demonstrated beyond possibility of question, and that further evidence proving the wisdom of the Committee's suggestion is constantly afforded. The Islington brandy case provides the latest illustration of the extremely unsatisfactory conditions under which public bodies are required to administer the Acts and under which traders have to answer charges made against them. A local grocer was summoned by the Islington Borough Council for selling, as brandy, a liquid which was certified by the Public Analyst to contain 60 per cent. of spirit not derived from the grape, and which was therefore not of the nature, substance and quality of the article demanded. The vendor naturally referred the matter to the firm who had supplied him. The case was taken up by a traders' association, and, after five lengthy hearings, in the course of which much expert evidence was given on both sides, resulted in a conviction and the infliction of a penalty of £5 and £50 costs—an amount which probably represents only a fraction of the expense involved. For the present we do not propose to review the scientific evidence which was put forward by the prosecution and by the defence. There is no doubt that Mr. FORDHAM, the magistrate who heard the case, was perfectly right in taking the view that the term “brandy,” when unqualified, means a spirit distilled from wine or from fermented products of the grape. It is also perfectly plain that when a person asks for brandy and is supplied with coloured grain spirit, or with a mixture of grain spirit and true brandy, he is prejudiced, and that the vendor commits an offence under the Acts. The fact that the term “brandy” has been commonly applied to “silent spirit” coloured and flavoured to imitate true brandy, or to mixtures of brandy and alcohol derived from other sources than the produce of the grape, is not a legitimate excuse for the sale of such factitious articles as “brandy.” The great difficulty lies in differentiating by analytical means between the genuine article and the imitation. The vast majority of people, being utterly ignorant even of the elements of chemistry, labour under the impression that all that need be done in a matter of this kind is to tell the Public Analyst to “analyse,” and that full, exact, and absolutely definite information which nobody can call in question, will be forthcoming as a matter of course. The evidence given in the case under consideration is quite enough in itself to show the absurdity of this assumption. On the one hand the Public Analyst stated that he was satisfied, from the results of his general investigations in regard to brandy and from the results of his analysis of the sample submitted to him, that this sample contained 60 per cent. of spirit other than that derived from the produce of the grape. On the other hand, a number of analytical experts called for the defence asserted that in the present state of analytical knowledge it was perfectly impossible for any Public Analyst to arrive at the conclusion mentioned in regard to the sample in question, and that, as a fact, the analytical evidence adduced did not justify the statement made in the certificate on which the proceedings were founded. The defence do not appear to have denied that the Public Analyst might be right. In reality it appears only to have been contended that his analytical evidence was not, sufficient to prove that he was so. At any rate the experts called for the defence certainly did not prove by scientific evidence that he was wrong.

In this era of rapid changes consumers have become less brand loyal and are always looking for the new “in” product As the result of these changing preferences chances for new products are steadily rising. The range of aperitifs has remained unchanged for at least twenty years, sales of products like Sherry and Vermouth are steadily in decline. This article investigates the chances of a hitherto little known product in the UK, namely Pineau des Charentes. It also reports on research carried out amongst producers in the Pineau producing area into factors that could influence the success of Pineau.

The purpose of this paper is to put forward the hypothesis that the demand for wine can be partly explained by social phenomena.

A general framework considers social phenomena. A literature review in the domain of wine shows that these aspects may constitute an interesting line of study in order to explain the demand for wine. This paper proposes an original model taking into account phenomena of imitation or phenomena of opposition between different social groups, in order to explain changes in the demand for wine. The paper shows the existence or the absence of stable equilibriums

The proposed model is applied here to three different products conveying a strong social dimension (in the domain of Wine) but it could surely be applied to other goods (luxury goods, fashion, cars, etc). Amplifying this work will consist in characterizing the conditions for the existence of stable points in the model according to the social and idiosyncratic parameters of the system.

This original approach of the demand for wine has important managerial implications. The paper suggests, in fact, a price strategy based on the rate of buyers observed in different social groups.

A case study is given of International Distillers & Vintners (UK) Limited (IDV (UK)) and an assessment made of the viability of translating theory into practice in the real world – the importance of having a strategy, of strategic planning, and having a success factor as a key component of an organisation′s competitive advantage. Following the appointment of a new managing director at IDV (UK) in 1982, three goals were established: (1) to more than double profits within five years; (2) to increase return on capital employed by almost 50 per cent within five years; and (3) to be the outstanding wine and spirit company in the UK. A sound strategy was required to achieve these goals. The historic background of the organisation is given and the strategic position of IDV (UK) in relation to its competitors and market share is described. A review of the state of the market is given and possible areas for expansion discussed. The quality and pedigree of certain brands and the quality and strength of leadership are proposed as the success factors upon which IDV (UK) could build. Details are given of how the organisation built upon these factors to achieve strategic success; the lessons learned; and the level of achievement and success in the marketplace.

It is apparently becoming the fashion among certain types of self‐sufficient persons in this country to endeavour to bring discredit upon the scientific expert, and—whenever the practice can be indulged in with impunity—to snub and to insult him as far as possible. While this course of procedure is particularly to be observed when the expert is called upon to give evidence in a Court of Law, or to explain technical points before some highly inexpert body, it is not only in these circumstances that he is subjected to misrepresentation, discourtesy, and downright insult. Whenever a case occurs which appears to afford pabulum capable of being twisted into shape for the purpose, certain newspapers— generally, we are glad to say, of the lower class—are invariably ready to publish cheap sneers at science and scientific men, frequently accompanied by insulting suggestions. Other journals of a better class do not indulge in abuse and insulting suggestions, but confine themselves to lecturing the expert or experts with all that assurance which is characteristic of blatant ignorance. Accusations of incompetence and of culpable negligence are common in the gutter Press and in some so‐called Courts of Justice. Even suggestions of bad faith and of failure to honourably discharge duties undertaken are sometimes to be met with. It cannot be supposed that the reason for all this is to be found in the conduct of some very few persons who, in the eyes of all right‐thinking people, have brought discredit on themselves by appearing as “ advocate‐witnesses ” to defend the indefensible. At any rate, the conduct of such individuals affords no justification for tarring everybody with the same brush. The hostile, acidly‐cantankerous, and frequently grossly insolent attitude adopted by certain persons and in certain quarters towards those experts whose duties are of a public character and connected with legal or semi‐legal proceedings, is due to a reason which is not far to seek. It is due, in the first place, to the disgraceful ignorance in regard to scientific matters, even of the most elementary kind, which unhappily pervades all classes of the community;' and, secondly, to that form of jealousy peculiar to the small and mean mind which detests and kicks at anything and everything beyond its power of comprehension. When apparently contradictory evidence is given by scientific witnesses—appearing on opposite sides in a case—it is obviously far more easy and satisfactory to shriek about the “ differing of doctors ” than to admit that one's own miserable ignorance prevents one from seeing the points and from ascertaining whether there is any real contradiction or not. It is far more convenient to suggest that the public analyst, for instance, does not know what he is about, has made some absurd mistake, or has been guilty of scandalous negligence, than to admit that one does not understand his certificate owing to one's own defective education or inferior intellectual capacity.

Even since this book went to press it has acquired a savage irony the author had not foreseen due to the collision between the DC9 and a Coronado near Cognac and the subsequent in‐fighting between French air control and the Spanish airline.