Analysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell - 1029 Words

The novel 1984, written by George Orwell, depicts a horrendous future in which the citizens of the tyrannous state of Oceania live under unceasing surveillance. The mysterious character of Big Brother serves as the leader of this dystopian society while members of the Party work for total power over the general public. Telescreens are installed in every room for constant investigation, language is continuously modified, and extreme actions are made in order to achieve the end goal of absolute control over a mindless public. Orwell uses this novel to show that this way of living could become a reality within the near future. The degradation of language, methods of physical control, continuous surveillance of innocent people, and manipulation of history are all actions used in the novel which are being implemented in our culture today, showing the possibility of America soon becoming a place like Oceania. The right to free speech is a pressing issue in both 1984 as well as in real life . In the fictional state of Oceania, the everyday language is called Newspeak. Instead of trying to expand people’s vocabulary, â€Å"the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought† (Orwell 52). The government seeks to limit the amount of words people can use, thus limiting people’s knowledge, making it harder for one to express their feelings. Similar to 1984, â€Å"a majority of colleges have rules in place severely restricting free speech on campus† (Kingkade). This issue was made evidentShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell1362 Words   |  6 PagesKathie Tejada Professor Antonio Tomà ¡s Guerrero Dà ­az COLI 214B 1984 This novel, 1984, is a dystopia and takes place in Oceania where people live in a totalitarian society. The author, George Orwell, wrote this as if he was looking into the future and what it was going to turn in to. This group of people, called The Party, have control over everything and everyone, and they have a leader, known as Big Brother, who is everywhere throughout the novel and the people look up to him. They invented a languageRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell1084 Words   |  5 Pages1984 was written by British author George Orwell. The main character is an average man by the name of Winston Smith. Winston does not agree with the ideals of the party; this gets him arrested by the thought police. 1984 proclaims what could happen if people just let the government do all their thinking for them. 1.In the world of 1984, what is considered orthodox is not the same as the actual world. In the book in order to be considered orthodox one must never question the party or have any individualRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell1493 Words   |  6 Pagessteadily bringing us closer to the world of Big Brother because the government has the ability to collect information from devices that are constantly being in use such as cell phones, televisions, and computers without our consent. In the book entitled 1984, George Orwell reveals how Oceania was a world where no one could be trusted; an action as simple as thinking was considered a violation of the law and you could be arrested for it. Individuals were living in a society where their own thoughts, evenRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell1288 Words   |  6 PagesControlled freedom Present day society is very much like society in the book 1984. Although, some of the procedures have diminished slightly, they still do exist, and are still current in today’s society. it’s a shame that most people fail to see that our â€Å"free† nation is actually still controlled. we are being manipulated in such a manner that we do not see by propaganda, media, lies, and yes even torture. Many citizens can say that here in America we are free nation or have freedom, but do weRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell1088 Words   |  5 Pages1984 The book that I chose for my first book report was 1984 by George Orwell. The story begins by introducing a man named, Winston Smith, a simple man from the country known as Oceania. He lives in a small flat within London, on the Island known as Airstrip One. Winston is a part of the outer party, which is a part of the ruling party within Oceania, and is a low ranking member who works for the Ministry of Truth as a propaganda officer. The people of the ruling party are constantly being watchedRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell968 Words   |  4 PagesThe book, 1984 by George Orwell, is about the external and internal conflicts that take place between the two main characters, Winston and Big Brother and how the two government ideas of Democracy and totalitarianism take place within the novel. Orwell wrote the novel around the idea of communism/totalitarianism and how society would be like if it were to take place. In Orwell’s mind democracy and communism cre ated two main characters, Winston and Big Brother. Big Brother represents the idea ofRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell1253 Words   |  6 Pagesno point of trying to live a regular life. In the book 1984 by George Orwell nearly everyone in the book is brainwashed and given a lot of false information. Winston and other characters only provide a little bit of hope. With a little bit of hope in the brainwashed world there is still absolutely no chance for any recovery unless the upper management screws up. This hope provides nearly no chance of humanity going back to normal. In the book, 1984, Big Brother is watching over everyone at all timesRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell2321 Words   |  10 Pagespossible crime, thoughtcrime. In the novel â€Å"1984†, by George Orwell, Winston Smith rebelles passively against the idea of living in a complete uniform world under Big Brother’s dreadful surveillance. Thought crime’s impact on the novel’s population is devastating, so much so that it is somewhat hard to picture today’s society in its place. The sad reality is that thoughtcrime does impact the lives of the people in today’s society to some extent as it does in the book. The level of punishment for such a crimeRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell1092 Words   |  5 Pages and opinions of its citizens; therefore removing the difference between state and society. The goal of a totalitarian government is to replace the existing society with a perfect one. In the novel â€Å"1984† by George Orwell, Big Brother is a dominant figure in the ways which he controls Oceania. Orwell portrays a society with a government that oversees and influences each facet of human life to the point that even having an unfaithful thought that is in disagreement with the law is forbidden. Big BrotherRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book 1984 By George Orwell930 Words   |  4 Pages The book 1984 was filled with constant rebellion from one individual known as Winston Smith who does not believe in the â€Å"Party† and would much rather join the â€Å"Brotherhood† where he can oppose the Party. While in Divergent, Beatrice Prior is loyal and compliant with her government until she learns that she is a rare type of human known as a divergent and poses a threat to her government. These two stories while incredibly different have many similarities as well. Both stories are about people trying

Culture Plays an Important Role for the Success of Negotiation Free Essay Example, 1750 words

Generally, culture is an important factor that influences the way an individual perceives, communicates as well as behaves with others in an organisation. Cultural differences between employees of an organisation are more likely to create a barrier that has a negative impact on the negotiation process. This difference in culture makes it difficult for the negotiators to solve the dispute despite sufficient experience and skills. The parties to negotiation may possess different cultures as a result of which they may view the objective of negotiation differently (Wani 104-111). Some parties may consider negotiation as a way to build strong relations among themselves, while the other party may believe it to be a business deal. For example, the main aim of the American negotiators is to solve the dispute in the first phase of conflict resolution. On the other hand, the people of Asia are more interested in developing relationships, which is the core of improving good business among orga nizations. Therefore, it is essential to understand the culture to distinguish the negotiation goal as perceived by the dispute parties. The difference in culture influences the negotiating attitude of the parties. We will write a custom essay sample on Culture Plays an Important Role for the Success of Negotiation or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page An individual with informal feature is likely to develop strong bonding with other people easily as they are friendlier in dealing with others as compared to the persons with formal nature (Wani 104-111). Moreover, the way of communication is also diverse among different cultures that influence the conflict resolution process considerably.

American Concepts of Property and State Development Free Essays

string(147) " concerned with the power of any strong central government, because these governments had greed for land and power, and used one to get the other\." The development of the American state has been heavily influenced by different understandings of property over time. What the founding fathers felt about property is not how all leaders have always thought about it, and their opinions regarding private property significantly influenced the choices they made in developing the country and its systems. This is reflected in their early writings. We will write a custom essay sample on American Concepts of Property and State Development or any similar topic only for you Order Now At the beginning, property was considered public for all. Some still feel this way. Today, however, and for the founding fathers, property became privately owned. Early notes show that there was some confusion in who could own property or if, in fact, anyone could own property at all. Most of the writers in the time of the founding fathers believed in God and felt that all of the world was given to man, in general, and so owning any property individually was a difficult idea to grasp. However, they conceded that man did own some things, such as anything he had worked on himself. A man who farmed land owned what he produced, and could, to some degree, also own the land that it came from because the land was tied to the production itself. Locke covers this idea in chapter 5 of his writing. Initially, all land did belong to all men, who were, in fact, created equally. This idea was featured prominently in the Declaration of Independence. â€Å"All men were created equal,† states the Declaration. If, then, the founding fathers were thinking like Locke, owning property would be a difficult concept to grasp. It may not have been easy in America, either, where all of the land was new and free to the colonists. There was so much land for the taking, since Native Americans did not concern the colonists at all. Westward expansion allowed for all men to have property which they could farm and live on without needing to officially own it. They â€Å"owned† the property via natural law, that if they took care of the land and produced from it, that it would become theirs. Locke has this to say about the natural rights of property: â€Å"Though the water running in the fountain be every one’s, yet who can doubt, but that in the pitcher is his only who drew it out? His labour hath taken it out of the hands of nature, where it was common, and belonged equally to all her children, and hath thereby appropriated it to himself. † That is, anything that comes from nature or is a part of nature belongs to anyone and everyone, but when someone reaps from the land, or draws some small bit of it for himself, it belongs only to him. Locke is convinced that property is a general concept, whereby everything that doesn’t belong to someone personally (and then only because he possesses it) belongs to everyone. However, should someone gather food or drink for himself, to which is naturally entitled, he then owns what he has gathered. This leads to the idea that property is allowed when a man works the land. If he works it, and he can use what he produces, then he owns it. In America’s beginnings, nearly all men would have had to work land to some extent in order to survive. They would also need land on which to house their families. So, the view of property originally grew out of sheer need. The small government expected that men would need to work land to survive. This was especially true when the immigrants were few and there was no nearby central government to care for them. At first there were barely even real civilizations, so very little division of labor could take place. A man’s life was defined by working his land and supporting his family that way, and so he would come to own the property he occupied. This definition of property owning would persist well into America’s history in certain circumstances. For example, during Westward expansion, all a man had to do to own the land was to live on it and work it for several consecutive months, and then he owned it. In addition to this natural law of who could own property, there were certain considerations. A man should not take more than he can reasonably use, because it would deny another man land that he could use. Instead, the first man should take only what he needs, so that all men could have a chance to have their needs met through the use of property. This was, of course, more of an ideal than an actual law at this time, but considered a necessary courtesy. It was also a reaction to the tyranny of the king of England. In the development of the owning of property in the new United States, the founding fathers were reacting very strongly to the tyranny of the king. The king, many writers felt (including Thomas Paine, who saw government as a necessary evil and nothing better), had taken what was naturally available and made it his own when he should not have. The king was abusing his power, Paine wrote, and although God had given him some power, He had not given him as much as he had taken. Because this feeling about the power was prevalent, the new government did not want to take away these natural laws that held that men were equal and were entitled to land they worked. The government strongly opposed intervention and a major central government. Paine in particular was so opposed to strong government that he wrote this: â€Å"Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, for which a curse in reserve is denounced against them. † Monarchy especially was seen as wrong, because it destroyed the very nature of men as equal in the eyes of God. Of course, Paine, and other writers of the time, were heavily concerned with the power of any strong central government, because these governments had greed for land and power, and used one to get the other. You read "American Concepts of Property and State Development" in category "Papers" Otis was especially concerned with this connection. Another concern for the founding fathers was the nature and necessity of property in a government. Some seemed to feel that property was a necessary part of the government. That is, in order to really exist, the government had to own and deal with property. But in â€Å"Otis Rights,† the author claims that that isn’t true. He writes, â€Å"†¦therefore government is not founded on property or its security alone, but at lest on something else in conjunction. † That is, the government might have a need to deal with property, but owning property does not define a government. He goes on to say that a government need not be based on property, which is likely also a reaction to the British rule. The British â€Å"owned† the land for what became the United States, and therefore they had a right to govern it. This author does not agree with that philosophy. British rule used the fact that they â€Å"owned† the land in their own country, and the land in this â€Å"new world† to their advantage, politically. Their empire had expanded, and they saw fit to treat the colonies in any way that would grant them more power. Many of the ways they treated the colonies – soldiers constantly occupying their territory, for one – were to maintain their dominance and keep hold of their territory. Otis and others were very concerned about this misuse of power and property. With the Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers were declaring that, in fact, England did not own them, and could no longer do the things that they were unhappy with, including high taxes; governance without representation; occupation during peace times; forcing citizens to quarter soldiers, and more. England did not have rights to their property or anything in this country, and so would have to relinquish the control they had. In this way, citizens were declaring their own right to have property because of the natural rights that existed, and that God had given them as equal men. The political consequences of this move were obviously huge. The Declaration itself brought about the American Revolution, in which the newly formed United States fought for these rights against the British. Additionally, not all men within the colonies would have agreed, which is why the Declaration itself went through so many versions before it was finalized. Having so many different definitions of property was tough on the new Americans. Britain told them they did not own their land, while Americans felt that they did, since they lived on it and worked it. This of course led to a huge power struggle and ultimately the war between England and the colonies. It also led to struggles between colonists who supported the war and those who remained loyal to England. Some in the colonies certainly felt that they were not entitled to own the property; that because they had left England to help England expand its empire, they owed what they had to the country. After the war was over, the government was left in pieces in America. The rulers were still determined to have no strong central government, to avoid the tyranny that they had just escaped from. Instead, states and individuals were given power. The focus was on the natural rights of man rather than any major leading body. This gave the American states a large amount of power in and of themselves. As they were developing, boundary lines began to be drawn, which essentially designated certain land as the individual states’ property. The states then took it upon themselves to create other arbitrary rules that citizens, and other states, would have to follow. They created their own money, and certain tariffs on trade between the states. Effectively, the states became drunk with their own power. It is interesting that in trying to limit the power of large, overbearing system that the government created many small systems of power that made life even more difficult for some. There is, however, another major problem with the original idea of property. Locke is absolutely certain that whoever works the land and makes use of what it produces is the owner of the land. He is also certain that whoever does this should be praised for his efforts, because developed land cares for many and yields nourishment for citizens. God, he says, intended man to use what He had given them. However, in the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson originally intended to put in a section that showed he abhorred slavery and it would not be tolerated. All men were not only equal, he wrote, but also â€Å"independent. † In deference to a couple of southern states, namely North Carolina and Georgia, this part was removed from the Declaration. It was not the only concession made, but it was an important one. Slaves were not considered to be men who were equal under the law, and they had no rights. However, they worked the land and they produced, so by Locke’s argument, they should own the land on which they worked. Of course, they did not. Slaves themselves were owned as property, and could not own property themselves. This meant that their land owners should not own the land because they did not work it themselves, but they came to own both the land and the slaves. This was a point of contention in the original Congress, but as the Declaration could not be finished and signed until the delegates all agreed on something, the issue of slavery (despite its obvious contradictions) was left alone for the time being. Despite its general evils, writers believed that some form of government was necessary. In â€Å"Otis Rights,† the author states â€Å"†¦I affirm that government is founded on the necessity of our natures; and that an original supreme Sovereign absolute, and uncontroulable, earthly power must exist in and preside over every society†¦. † This view of government did fly in the face of many others, including Paine, who still believed that the government was a barely necessary evil, and should not have much control over what went on. As Otis points out, though, due to the nature of man, some kind of government was necessary. Without a strong, but fair government, the country would find itself in trouble again. Of course, within only a few years, the country realized (despite their initial thoughts on the matter) that a complete lack of a central government was really no better than an overly strong central government. States squabbled amongst themselves over money, property rights, and more. The government had to step in and do something about it. The states were finding themselves doing what the British government had: owning property for the sake of owning it, rather than using it as a natural right that God had given them, and to be used for the protection and enhancement of all men. In this time, there were a lot of logical fallacies that would have great political consequences in the future, such as in the late 1700s when the central government realized that it did need to take a firmer role in running the country. Later on, the Civil War would result. Overall, the development of the American state took time, but boundary lines were drawn, and property was divided up for those states. This in itself was an interesting problem, as drawing boundary lines violated what many writers felt at the time. The states did not and could not really â€Å"own† the land by the arguments the writers gave, yet they did own the land. Within those states, men owned individual parts of the land, and that agreed with the natural laws as stated. In general, the American views on property took awhile to develop, and were very much in reaction to the British stronghold in the beginning. Differences in ideas necessitated the beginning of the Continental Congress, the drafting of the Declaration, and the war itself. However, it also led to the development of the American states, regardless of any problems that they had initially. Reacting solely to Britain’s tyranny was not the best way to make decisions about a new government. Rather, the writers needed to take into consideration what their people currently needed, the way that Otis did in his writings. The nature of man is such that a government needs to watch over the people so that bad things do not happen to them, even if the government is a potential evil to them. Once the colonists realized this, things ended up fine for them, and the states developed a healthier relationship with one another and with other sources. Politically it was a fascinating time, no more so than any other in history, but one that shows the growth of a new country out of small, humble beginnings, belonging to another country entirely. Americans pushed for growth, freedom, and independence for all, even if the final version of the Declaration did not explicitly say so. This thirst for what was right, for restoring man’s natural rights of property and of equality led the Americans to the political juncture they faced with England, and it led them to freedom as independent states. America would never be the same once the Declaration was written, not with all of the strong rebels that lived in the country. They persevered, and the result is the great country that we all now live in, a country where every person has the right to own property, and every state has some of its own rights. The early days factored heavily into today’s current perception, and it is good that it did. America is a country of freedom. Sources Jefferson, Thomas (1776). â€Å"The Declaration of Independence. † Locke, John (1776). â€Å"Second Treatise on Civil Government. † Accessed December 2, 2007. Website: http://www. constitution. org/jl/2ndtreat. htm. Otis, James (1776). â€Å"The Rights of the British Colonists Asserted and Proved. † Paine, Thomas (1776). â€Å"Common Sense. † Accessed December 2, 2007. Website: http://www. constitution. org/civ/comsense. htm. How to cite American Concepts of Property and State Development, Papers

Chilean Wine Essay Example For Students

Chilean Wine Essay 9-503-044 REV: NOVEMBER 17, 2005 DAVID ARNOLD HOWARD STEVENSON ALEXANDRA DE ROYERE MontGras Export Strategy for a Chilean Winery In November 2001, Patricio Middleton, CEO of Vina MontGras, a $7 million Chilean winery, was driving through the Colchagua Valley to meet American journalists from Wine Enthusiast magazine. Looking at the endless vines that surrounded him, he wondered how those newly planted grapes would find a market. Chile, the world’s 10th-largest wine producer, had enjoyed an export boom in the 1990s and had grown to become the fourth-largest wine exporter, its wines positioned mainly in the lower end of the fine-wines price range. (See Exhibit 1 for world wine production and exports, and Exhibit 2 for price ranges. ) MontGras, an early 1990s winery born into this boom, tackled its business entirely from the perspective of export growth. However, the international context looked gloomy—there was projected worldwide and domestic overproduction, intensifying global competition, and ongoing consolidation in the distribution channels. Middleton had been charged with presenting to the next board meeting a five-year export strategy, consistent with the overall marketing strategy of positioning MontGras as a producer of high-quality fine wines (see Exhibit 3 for the MontGras portfolio). The winery had already achieved significant market share in Ireland and the United Kingdom, but it was focused on the United States as the key market to achieving the sales growth required by the increases in production planned by 2005. After two disappointing experiences with U. S. istributors, Middleton had little time left to close a new distribution agreement for 2002. He had initiated conversations with two potential distributors that had diverging views regarding the positioning of MontGras, and this raised fundamental strategic dilemmas. Should they focus on volume and stick to the â€Å"value for money† proposition that had underpinned the success of Chilean wines abroad, or should they advocate a margin strategy, based on the fact that MontGras was producing high-quality wine? The picture was complicated by an unanticipated offer to participate in a U. K. supermarket promotion that would certainly boost volumes, but at reduced margins. In addition, he had the opportunity to invest in a joint-marketing effort undertaken by the whole Chilean wine industry designed to upgrade the image of the country and its wines abroad. What would MontGras gain from such a campaign? How would it impact the marketing strategy and budget? Those were some of the questions that had to be answered before the company formulated the export strategy. ____________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ Professors David Arnold and Howard Stevenson and Latin American Research Center Senior Researcher Alexandra de Royere prepared this case with the assistance of Professors Matko Koljatic and Andres Ibanez of Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile. HBS cases are developed solely as the basis for class discussion. Certain data have been disguised. Cases are not intended to serve as endorsements, sourc es of primary data, or illustrations of effective or ineffective management. Copyright  © 2002 President and Fellows of Harvard College. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call 1-800-545-7685, write Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA 02163, or go to http://www. hbsp. harvard. edu. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without the permission of Harvard Business School. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-7860. 503-044 MontGras The Global Wine Industry The global wine industry had been transformed in the 1980s by the entry of new producers from outside Europe. A number of large â€Å"New World† producers had challenged traditional European practices in both production and marketing and had enjoyed considerable success. Nevertheless, the industry remained fragmented, with the largest player, Californian EJ Gallo, accounting for 1. 5% worldwide market share. 1 The industry was also in transition at the consumer and distribution levels. Old World versus New World The Old World wine industry, centered on France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Germany, was characterized by long-standing traditions of wine production, industry fragmentation, high levels of regulation from production to labeling and marketing, and strong domestic markets. Most Old World wines were made from a blend of different grapes and were named after the growing regions themselves, such as Bordeaux, Chianti, or Rioja, which resulted in considerable complexity of designation—for example, the French regulatory system included 450 different apellations d’origine controlees (AOCs, or registered origin names). The Old World philosophy of wine production was based on the importance of terroir (terrain), which assumed that every vineyard was unique because of differences including soil, microclimate, topography, and the skill and practices of the winemaker. The New World wine industry, dominated by Australia, the United States, South Africa, Chile, and Argentina, was more concentrated and more focused on exports. In addition, the lack of stringent regulation in the New World had spurred innovation in production processes and a more scientific approach to operations. Compared to the European wine regions, these producers were located in hotter and less variable climates and so enjoyed more regular harvests that produced more consistent vintages. New World wines were usually single grape rather than blends and so were often designated by grape variety (â€Å"varietals,† such as cabernet sauvignon or merlot) rather than by place of origin. The New World wine industry also differed in its approach to marketing, with several large players supporting varietals with substantial promotional budgets to create international brands. We’ve converted from being a cottage industry into a competitive consumer luxury goods industry,† commented Californian R. Michael Mondavi, chairman of Robert Mondavi Corp. , the world’s ninth-largest winemaker with more than $500 million in annual sales. 2 Drink Less, Drink Better At the consumer level, consumption of table wine (below $5 retail price) was in decline, while consumption of fine wine ( above $5) was increasing. There was also a relative shift in world wine consumption from traditional wine-producing countries to import-dependent countries, driven by both declining per capita consumption in traditional producer countries such as France, Italy, and Argentina and increasing per capita consumption in markets such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Scandinavia, and emerging wine markets such as Japan (see Exhibit 4 for main consumers and 1 Private presentation from Vina Santa Rita on the wine industry, slide number 9, 2001 ( information in table provided by Rabobank International). William Echikson in Bordeaux, with Frederik Balfour in Sydney, Kerry Capell in London, Linda Himelstein in San Mateo, and Gerry Khermouch in New York, â€Å"Wine war. Savvy New World Marketers are devastating the French wine industry,† BusinessWeek Online, p. 2, http://www. businessweek. com/magazine/content/01_36/b3747001. htm, October 22, 2002. 2 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [ema ilprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-7860. MontGras 503-044 Exhibit 5 for main importers). In addition, the publicity accorded the â€Å"French Paradox†3 spurred a change in consumer preference toward red wine (70% of worldwide consumption in 2000). The world wine business was valued at $150 billion in consumer value and at $60 billion in wholesale value. 4 International wine trade had grown at a 4. 3% compound annual rate between 1995 and 1999. However, during the same period, trade volume growth from the New World countries reached an 18. 3% compounded annual rate,5 as the spread of fine-wine drinking beyond the upper class created a market for American, Australian, and Chilean wines mainly focused on light, fruity flavors of low-price fine wine. World Market Scenario in 2001 The wine industry was entering a period of grape oversupply. The World Wine Report projected a yearly increase of consumption of less than 1% up to 2006. 6 Despite a reduction in planted areas in the Old World, increases in the New World countries would generate an estimated worldwide overproduction of 2,080 million gallons7 by 2006. 8 David Combe, a former Australian trade commissioner and wine industry executive, predicted that the wine industry would be marked by fierce competition, leading to a drop in overall prices. Combe also quoted a winemaker at NeibaumCoppola, one of California’s prestige wineries, as saying, †Guys who used to sell wine easily for $50 a bottle will find things going sour. . . . Before long, I am certain that you’ll see wine that used to sell for $40 going for $30. †9 Another trend was the growing concentration in distribution. According to the Wine Institute (the Californian wine trade organization), the number of wine wholesalers in the United States had shrunk by close to 75% between 1963 and 2000,10 and about one-third of all wines were sold through just five of them. 1 Distribution concentration was even greater in the United Kingdom, where most wines were no longer bought in specialty liquor stores but in supermarkets, which now accounted for 60% of wine volume. Supermarket purchasing executives favored suppliers that could provide large volumes and contribute to marketing budgets, and they preferred to deal with a small number of 3 â€Å"The French Paradox† refers to the coincidence in France of lower-than-average mortality rates from cardiovascular disease and higher-than-average consumption of saturated fats, such as butter and cheese. In 1991, before 35 million American TV viewers, Doctors Curt Ellison and Serge Renaud presented research findings that attributed this to the beneficial effects of the higher-than-average consumption of red wine. Red wine sales jumped dramatically after the airing. 4 â€Å"Wine Business. Drivers are reshaping the industry,† Food and Agricultural Review, Rabobank International, October 2002, p. 3. 5 Private presentation from Vina Santa Rita on the wine industry, slide number 9, 2001 (information in table provided by Office International de la Vigne et du Vin, 2001). 6 â€Å"Strategic Vision of the Chilean Viticulture Industry and Strategic Plan for Vines of Chile 2002–2006,† Interbrand, October 2001, p. 10. 7 1 gallon = 3. 85 liters = 5 bottles of 750 ml = 0. 43 cases ( of 12 bottles of 750 ml). 8 â€Å"Strategic Vision of the Chilean Viticulture Industry and Strategic Plan for Vines of Chile 2002–2006,† Interbrand, October 2001, p. 10. 9 John Schreiner, â€Å"The Barbarians are at the gates,† http://www. newssgurus. com/index. cfm? do=display_articles stories=4722, article number 5043, October 10, 2001. 10Matt Kramer, â€Å"Wines Changing Landscape,† http://www. winespectator. om/Wine/Main/Feature_Basic_Template/ 0,1197,1078,99. html, November 1, 2001. 11 Barry Bedwell, â€Å"Wines Vines: Grapes Supply Trends Has the Tide Turned? † http://www. findarticles. com/cf_dls/ m3488/3-81/60904325/p1/article, October 23, 2002. 3 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-78 60. 503-044 MontGras wholesalers offering a comprehensive selection of wines from around the world. The consequent difficulty experienced by small and medium-sized wineries in accessing distribution had resulted in a number of alliances with larger players. There were, however, different opinions on where these trends would lead. The Australian wine industry, in a document called â€Å"Strategy 2025,† forecast: Global product branding with multi-variety and multi-country sourcing will develop, but on a micro-scale there will be a paradoxical interest in premium wines with a specific regional and sub-regional identity. Globalization also will see the widespread extension of wine company alliances and joint ventures across national boundaries. . . The expectation is that while the volume of wine sales will drop (by 2025), the value of the world wine market will rise as consumers demonstrate a willingness to pay more for consistently higher quality wines. 12 The Australian wine industry was often cited within the trade as the role model for transforming an agricultural commodity into a quality, branded-image product. In order to secure a growing share of the international wine market, the Australian wine industry, which enjoyed cons iderable government support in its export drive, undertook a five-year strategic-planning process. Its latest report concluded that the Australian industry’s future lay in branded wine products, reflecting the distinctiveness of variety, region, and producer and aimed at maximizing the advantages of wine in capturing complementary business growth in tourism, food, and lifestyle products. Chile Government and Economy Stretching 2,666 miles north to south between the Pacific coast of South America and the Andes Mountains, Chile was colonized by the Spanish in 1536 and formed its first independent government in 1810. In the mid-1970s, the military regime of Augusto Pinochet pioneered trade liberalization in Latin America, eliminating nontariff barriers and simplifying Chile’s tariff structure to a single import tariff rate. Successive democratic governments, restored in 1990 after 16 years of military dictatorship, maintained these liberal economic policies in view of their success in promoting economic growth. In 2000, goods and services exports accounted for 32% of gross domestic product (GDP). The largest copper, fruit, and farmed-salmon exporter in the world and a growing player in the international wine trade, Chile was negotiating with the United States and the European Union free-trade agreements that it hoped to conclude by 2002–2003. The population of Chile in 2001 was approximately 15 million (see Exhibit 6 for country macroeconomic data). The Chilean Wine Industry Chile was the oldest wine producer in the New World. Through four centuries its optimal natural conditions for grapevine production had attracted many migrant European winemakers. Because of the natural barriers surrounding the country (the Pacific Ocean to the west, the Atacama Desert to the north, the Andes to the east, and Antarctica to the south), Chile had been the only country not to 12 Wine Titles Web page, http://www. winetitles. com. au/strategy2025/2025-6. html, November 8, 2001, p. 1. 4 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-7860. MontGras 503-044 suffer from the phylloxera epidemic that swept the vineyards of the world in the mid-1800s. 3 The three main wine-growing regions of Chile, shown in Exhibit 7, enjoyed a temperate Mediterranean climate of warm days, cold nights, and well-defined seasons. For most of the twentieth century, Chile had produced low-quality wines of blended grapes, with the planting of new vines and the building of new wineries inhibited by protectionist laws. Deregulation in the mid-1970s soon led to new plantings and to a technical upgrading led by the Spanish entrepreneur Miguel Torres. Soon, many other vintners followed him, improving planting and irrigation and incorporating stainless steel tanks and French oak barrels. Production volumes soared until the crisis year of 1983, when overproduction and a significant reduction in domestic consumption produced a sharp decline in prices. 14 Middleton recalled: The crisis led to industry consolidation. Prior to the crisis, there were 60 to 80 wineries. Most of the small players used to sell bulk wine to larger wineries that bottled it, branded it, and distributed it under their own labels. The number of wineries fell to 15 in 1990, as the large players bought the smaller ones and others went bankrupt. This also led to crop replacement and a drop in vine acreage. The Export Boom of the 1990s By the mid-1980s, Chilean wineries, many now under foreign ownership or management, started to produce higher-quality varietal wines for export. Middleton explained: At that time, focusing on exports was a matter of survival because of domestic overproduction. Selling wine in Chile was not profitable anymore—the price of a liter of water was higher than the price of a liter of bulk wine. Compared with the local consumer, who was mainly buying inexpensive low-quality wine, the foreign consumer was more sophisticated and had greater buying power and was therefore consuming finer wine. . . It took around five years for the industry to upgrade its production process, adapt its style of wines, and improve marketing techniques such as labeling, by which time it could compete in the export market. In 1996 to 1997, when many wineries were ready, there was a shortage of wine in California and in Australia,15 so American and Australian wine producers came to Chile to buy in bulk to make up their volumes. The price of grapes went up 400% between 1992 and 1998. This drove people to continue planting in Chile. Matias Elton, general manager of San Pedro, the second-largest Chilean winery, recalled that other markets also became attractive export destinations for Chilean wineries: In 1998, Chile benefited from the boom of the Japanese market, where consumers were ready to pay high prices for good wine. Some Chilean wineries stopped supplying some of their existing customers in order to take advantage of this opportunity. But then the Japanese market contracted significantly, and those wineries had difficulties restarting their previous commercial relationships, since the trust had been lost. 3 A type of small insect of the genus phylloxera that spoiled grapevines. Winemakers lived in fear of phylloxera, which could quickly decimate whole wine regions, as it had done in Europe in the 1850s. 14 The two main reasons for the decline in local consumption were a domestic recession and a significant shift from wine to beer and soft drinks. 15 The Californian shortage was due to a phylloxera outbrea k. In Australia, the change in consumer trends toward red wines had left wineries with a surplus of white chardonnay and a shortage of red wines. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-7860. 503-044 MontGras Elton estimated that the Chilean wine industry as a whole generated operational margins of around 15% and a return on capital employed of around 7% (see Exhibit 8 for estimates of total investments in the Chilean wine industry). Chile was a low-cost producer, mainly because of land prices: the price of the land could vary from $2,000 to $20,000 per acre (unplanted), some six to 60 times cheaper than in California’s Napa Valley. Middleton added: â€Å"Chile’s production cost will be really unbeatable once the cost of dry goods drops to the level of other competing countries. †16 Chilean wine had achieved a â€Å"value for money† reputation across all price points, and although it was usually positioned at the low end of the fine-wine range, most commentators agreed that the quality of Chilean wines had improved constantly through the 1990s. This had partly resulted from increasing investment by French, Spanish, and Californian wineries in joint ventures with Chilean vintners, which not only increased quality but also opened new marketing channels (see Exhibit 9 for a list of foreign investments and joint ventures). By 2000, Chile exported almost $600 million of wine (up from $51. 5 million in 1990) to 90 countries on five continents (see Exhibit 10 for the breakdown of Chilean wine exports and Exhibit 11 for export destinations). The number of export vintners had grown to more than 80 in 2000, and the planted acreage of fine wine had nearly tripled since 1990 (see Exhibit 12 for the evolution and breakdown of planted area by main grape varieties). In 2000, the four top industry players accounted for 45% of exports. 17 Smaller â€Å"boutique† wineries, such as MontGras, focused on exports of higherquality wines. The boutique wineries were represented by Chilevid, an industry association founded by six firms in 1992 with the sole objective of developing export promotions. Chilevid, of which Middleton was chairman in 2001, had 35 members, representing 10% of total Chilean wine exports. The association invested around $1 million annually in international fairs (e. g. , The London Wine Fair Trade, Vinexpo in Bordeaux), wine-tasting events, and contests. Elton, besides being general manager of Vina San Pedro, was the marketing director of Vinas de Chile, the larger and older industry association with 39 wineries representing 90% of bottled wine exports and around 90% of the domestic market. Vinas de Chile also strived to promote sales abroad, investing $1. 3 million a year in similar efforts. My hobby EssayIt’s all down to relationships and being in the system. If we developed a close relationship with Tesbury, we could expect to be featured in two promotions a year and to be at or near the top of their list of Chilean suppliers. Middleton also reported that the U. K. distributor expressed mixed feelings about these promotions. Although MontGras would ship direct to Tesbury, the distributor would still receive a drop-shipment commission of 10% on the promotion volumes. While this offered a windfall in the short term, he expressed concerns about the damaging effect on the rest of the U. K. business, and Middleton also sensed a worry that deals made directly between MontGras and Tesbury would threaten the distributor’s position over the long run. Middleton summarized: This is tempting, but risky business. The extra volumes would transform our business in the United Kingdom, and thus our export volumes this year. The promotions would also raise our awareness, because of the press ads and in-store merchandising, and would help us competitively, since we would become one of the best-known Chilean wines. But all this would come at the expense of undermining our positioning strategy, because of the lower price points and the strong price message it gives to the market. The U. K. distributor was simultaneously developing a marketing plan for the first vintage of the flagship Ninquen wines, which would be available in the U. K. in early 2002. He proposed a ? 20,000 contract with a public relations firm to generate coverage of the new wine and was aiming at 5,000 cases in the first year, 80% of which would be in the on-trade segment. Tesbury had also agreed to take 50 cases with a retail price of ? 5. 99. This was expected to spearhead a drive into specialty stores, such as delicatessens and gift shops—DeGras had recently been stocked in Harrods’, the London department store with strong tourist traffic, at a ? 12. 99 shelf price. The U. S. Market Unlike the U. K. , the U. S. market was still fragmented at the retail level, mostly because of regulatory restrictions that stip ulated a three-tier distribution system: the producer had to sell to a state-licensed wholesaler, who had to sell to a state-licensed retailer, who was the only one allowed to sell directly to the consumer. Companies could vertically integrate from production to distribution over no more than two layers. In the case of imported wine, it had to be sold to an importer who would in turn sell it to a state-licensed wholesaler. In some states, liquor store chains were prohibited, and in some cases supermarkets and other food stores were not allowed to carry alcoholic drinks. Middleton explained: Imported wines rely on 10 markets: Florida, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Georgia, Texas, California, Illinois, and Oregon. There are 50 to 60 wholesalers in total. However, you would have to spend two years speaking to 200 people to have a fair view of the U. S. market, since there are no big retail chains, whereas you would only need to talk to five supermarket wine buyers to understand the U. K. market. A large wholesaler can handle a portfolio of approximately 2,000 brands and have a sales force of 100 people. With such a broad portfolio, the sales force are mostly just order takers, so the importer’s salesperson has to visit the retailer to motivate them to place orders with the wholesaler. See Exhibit 19 on the economics of exports to the U. S. 12 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-7860. MontGras 503-044 Previous distribution agreements in the United States MontGras had already experienced two unsuccessful partnerships in its attempts to penetrate the U. S. market. In 1996, MontGras entered a distribution agreement with a Napa Valley winery after the owner visited Chile and proposed itself as an importer. MontGras was enthusiastic, believing that the two family-owned wineries would work well together, both in distribution and in exchanging winemaking expertise. In addition, MontGras was not big enough yet to appeal to a large importer with a nationwide sales force. This Californian winery had a small national distribution operation focused on wines above $15 retail price and was already acting as an importer for wines from Australia, Argentina, and South Africa. Although the long-term focus for MontGras was in the $10–$15 range, production was still primarily at lower value points, and so the entry strategy was built around varietals in the $6. 99– $7. 99 range. Sales grew rapidly, and by 1998 MontGras was the distributor’s largest brand by volume, justifying an invitation to the entire sales force of 12 to visit Chile to learn more about MontGras. However, in June 1998, after more than two years of collaboration, the distributor changed strategy and terminated the contract abruptly. MontGras was never informed of the reason for this change, but Middleton speculated that the U. S. winery had decided to enter these lower price points with its own wines and terminated MontGras to avoid conflict of interest in sales and distribution. In 1999, after talking to several importers, Middleton set up a distribution agreement with the fine-wine division of one of the largest distributors in the United States. This distributor handled a portfolio of high-volume spirits and wines through a sales organization of 100 people, with a separate sales force of 16 focused on selling fine wines. A short while after the agreement took force, the distributor unexpectedly merged the two separate divisions, as a result of which the fine-wine sales force was converted into wine consultants to the other division. Middleton realized quickly that the sales were not moving and that the sales force did not even know that MontGras was in their portfolio. MontGras then decided to end the relationship by the end of 2000. Selecting a new U. S. partner In 2001, Middleton hired a consultant to help the winery in the selection of an importer for the U. S. market. This was a tougher challenge than in 1995, since the number of Chilean wineries exporting to the United States had increased from 25 to 65 in that period, while the number of national importers remained at about 15. In 2000, imported Chilean wines accounted for 11% of U. S. wine shipments by volume, but only 6% of dollar sales. Middleton believed that MontGras’s focus on the over $10 segment would appeal to an importer, although it would mean having to compete with Californian wines. The consultant spent three full days at the winery, understanding the brand and developing potential strategies, and then together with Middleton drew up a list of criteria for selecting a partner that included the quality of its brand portfolio, the quality and size of its sales force, its commitment and ability to build the brand, and above all shared common objectives with the winery. By November, MontGras was in negotiation with two importers that showed genuine interest in the project. The first, World Wine Importers, was already representing a Chilean winery in the varietal segment but was interested in working with MontGras, especially in the reserva line. It ranked among the fastest-growing sources of premium imported wine and spirits, selling 200 different brands from seven different countries; had a 60-strong sales force; and expected 2001 revenues of around $200 million. It proposed a â€Å"value for money† positioning to compete against Californian wines, recommended retail pricing at $7. 9–$10. 99, and on this basis forecast volumes of 40,000 cases in the first year rising to 120,000 cases by the third year, with a forecast mix of 70% varietals and 30% reservas. The other importer, Cabo Imports, had been founded in 1978 as the importer of a single Italian wine and by 2001 had grown to a portfolio of 50 brands, with 70% of its sales still co ming from Italian imports. It sold 500,000 cases annually of its largest brand, an Italian import, and 5,000 cases of its 13 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] arvard. edu or 617-783-7860. 503-044 MontGras smallest brand. The firm had a sales force of 35 and expected 2001 revenues of $112 million. It also already carried a lower-end Chilean brand, aiming at the $5. 99–$6. 99 retail price point. Cabo had a different view of MontGras’s potential in the United States, arguing that it was possible to raise the perception on MontGras’s quality and therefore raise the price in order to maximize the return for all parties. To that end, Cabo proposed that MontGras create the position of a â€Å"brand champion,† a full-time MontGras employee based in the United States who would be the face of the brand for retailers and customers and would organize tastings in wine shops and promotions and incentives for the sales force. This idea was described by Middleton as â€Å"creative and appealing,† and he estimated that such an initiative would cost some $120,000 annually. Cabo recommended a range of retail price points from $7. 99 to $14. 99 and on this basis forecast sales of 25,000 cases in the first year increasing to 60,000 cases by year three, with an expected mix of 60% reservas and 40% varietals. In addition, Cabo was interested in Ninquen as a flagship for the line, targeting a $24. 99 retail price, at which it forecast sales of 1,500 cases by year two. MontGras had earlier in 2001 exported some sample wines for review by U. S. wine journalists, and the results had just been published. In the Wine Spectator, which used a proprietary pointsscoring system out of 100, MontGras wines had been rated between 85 and 87 and received favorable written reviews. These ratings placed them well among the higher ranks of Chilean wines and justified prices of up to $15 at retail. Marketing Challenges The export strategy had to be formulated in the context of the broader marketing objectives of MontGras. Critical to this was the establishment of Ninquen as a flagship for the brand, with the clear objective of raising the perception of quality, and thus the price, of the whole portfolio. Middleton explained: Most consumers know little about wine; to them, price serves as an indicator of quality. I think that Chilean wines that are sold for $10 a bottle at retail are much better than Californian wines sold at $15 to $25, and blind-tasting results always put us on a level with wines priced quite a bit higher. Why is the consumer ready to buy a Californian wine for $15 to $25 rather than a Chilean wine for only $10? My only answer is image, the better perception they have of the Californian wines in general. They know them better than Chilean wines. We know that for most consumers the sequence of criteria for selecting a wine is red versus white, then country, then price, then grape variety, and only then brand. And then he added: There are two ways to promote your wine: either you spend millions of dollars, like EJ Gallo, to build your brand, or you make your brand known through wine journalists and opinion leaders. Wine should be promoted like cars—you promote your ultra-premium wine, and it has a halo effect on the whole range. That is why we are focusing right now on Ninquen. To be perceived as an ultra-premium wine, it has to be priced above $20 and has to be strong in the on-premise channel. If we are able to make Ninquen an exceptional wine that we will retail for $25 and get it known that it is as good as many bottles selling for $50, buyers and journalists will get excited. In this business, if you get good word of mouth and recommendations by wine writers, volumes can increase quickly—consumers are looking for guidance. We are investing lots of money to invite journalists and buyers to Chile. We invite them through Chilevid, the Vinas de Colchagua winery association, or a selected group of wineries that agreed on a specific program. 14 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-7860. MontGras 503-044 Pricing strategy was the critical element of positioning, and there were concerns that the value positioning of all Chilean wines was undermining MontGras’s value proposition. While Ninquen was a vehicle for achieving higher prices, Middleton was mindful that the international and local oversupply of grapes would put pressure on prices, especially at the lower end of the fine-wine segment. In addition, within the icon and ultra-premium segment, the recession that started in 2001 in the United States could drive consumers to trade down to less expensive wines. That could be an opportunity for the labels and the MontGras reserva lines if they were priced aggressively. Middleton had already conducted a price elasticity test in the United Kingdom. The price of one carmenere reserva wine had been increased from ? 5. 99 to ? 7. 49 per bottle in a chain store over four months, and no impact on volume was recorded. Based on this, Middleton estimated that MontGras could achieve an average price of $35 free on board (FOB) per case in five years. However, he was still analyzing whether he could reach a higher target. He recalled the case of Montes, a Chilean boutique winery that enjoyed an average FOB price of $44 per case. The business strategy of Montes was somewhat different. It sold 220,000 cases a year, with a sales force of nine people covering 45 countries, since the potential volume per country at this price level was more modest. Positioning Chilean Wines Middleton also had to make a recommendation to the board regarding the initiative of Vinas de Chile to create an industry plan to build an image around Chile and the â€Å"Wines of Chile. † He agreed that the Chilean wine industry lacked a proper image, and he pondered how the investment in an industry plan would add value to MontGras’s strategy. He recalled that the guest speaker at a recent dinner, a business school professor who had investigated the wine industry, expressed concern about building an image around â€Å"Wines of Chile,† since it raised the risk of standardizing the image of all Chilean wines. Certainly, while Chilevid members exported at an average $26 per case and were enjoying 24% annual growth, Vinas de Chile members achieved an average $21 and were growing at only 4%. Nevertheless, they represented 85% of all exports and therefore drove the perception of Chilean wines abroad. Once Middleton ended up his meeting with the Wine Enthusiast journalists, he had to work on MontGras’s export strategy. He knew that the MontGras shareholders had differing views on the issue. How should they enter the U. S. market? With which distributor? Should they focus on a margin strategy or look for volume, or could they achieve both simultaneously? How would the â€Å"Wines of Chile† campaign impact MontGras strategy? Middleton could not delay the reentry to the U. S. market; however, he wondered whether the search for a joint-venture partner should not be a priority. 15 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-7860. 503-044 MontGras Exhibit 1a World Wine Production 1996 1,560. 962 1,528. 067 790. 426 490. 802 329. 706 219. 718 224. 692 175. 096 246. 480 99. 416 1,463. 860 7,129. 225 1997 1,432. 548 1,314. 641 863. 642 680. 576 351. 008 210. 979 220. 865 160. 519 153. 768 118. 279 1,463. 122 6,969. 947 Year 1998 1,411. 046 1,485. 650 785. 824 533. 000 329. 508 200. 265 281. 680 192. 802 93. 080 142. 344 1,475. 476 6,930. 675 1999 1,636. 310 1,509. 893 849. 264 539. 500 413. 080 207. 179 319. 435 221. 297 204. 334 124. 969 1,489. 783 7,515. 044 2000 1,553. 266 1,405. 16 1,086. 530 650. 000 325. 962 285. 551 262. 102 222. 405 174. 031 173. 525 1,530. 438 7,669. 526 % Share 2000 20% 18% 14% 9% 5% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 20% 100% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Wine Production (millions of gallons) France Italy Spain United States Argentina South Africa Germany Australia Portugal Chile Others Total Source: Adapted from Food and Administration Organization of the United Nati ons (FAO). Exhibit 1b World Wine Exports in Volume 1996 336. 365 348. 787 174. 962 52. 876 33. 714 41. 982 64. 092 50. 630 31. 193 32. 597 257. 567 1,424. 765 1997 391. 682 326. 304 225. 651 83. 659 40. 142 53. 053 57. 59 63. 689 26. 550 35. 527 274. 002 1,578. 218 Year 1998 425. 479 394. 967 266. 482 90. 909 50. 025 65. 523 57. 875 58. 440 27. 982 30. 996 237. 952 1,706. 630 1999 412. 834 476. 317 217. 080 91. 254 56. 030 68. 223 60. 198 49. 499 21. 128 25. 213 159. 393 1,637. 169 2000 385. 453 381. 558 202. 099 104. 611 80. 830 72. 005 62. 774 48. 763 44. 200 23. 951 157. 836 1,564. 080 % Share 2000 25% 25% 13% 7% 5% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 10% 100% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Wine Exports (millions of gallons) France Italy Spain Chile Australia United States Germany Portugal South Africa Argentina Others Total Adapted from FAO. Source: Exhibit 1c World Wine Exports in Value 1996 4,824. 017 2,130. 132 1,094. 021 429. 337 293. 743 304. 491 537. 378 485. 185 186. 713 67. 678 1,161. 044 11,513. 739 1997 5,143. 070 2,098. 590 1,130. 678 535. 808 423. 990 394. 632 523. 396 413. 807 189. 307 128. 250 1,420. 822 12,402. 350 Year 1998 5,890. 723 2,365. 195 1,286. 912 611. 429 510. 422 512. 140 528. 281 435. 238 184. 969 152. 482 1,341. 429 13,819. 220 1999 6,101. 171 2,463. 772 1,313. 676 793. 650 523. 652 518. 921 520. 075 436. 314 121. 965 141. 007 1,176. 021 14,110. 224 2000 5,044. 48 2,229. 584 1,126. 106 903. 594 576. 822 530. 596 468. 958 352. 331 244. 753 148. 771 1,100. 856 12,726. 719 % Share 2000 40% 17% 9% 7% 5% 4% 4% 3% 2% 1% 8% 100% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Wine Exports (US$ millions) France Italy Spain Australia Chile United States Portugal Germany South Africa Argentina Others Total Adapted from FAO. Source: 16 Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. [emailprotected] harvard. edu or 617-783-78 60. MontGras 503-044 Exhibit 2 Price Ranges in the United States High Icon Price range:US$50 volume market share: