PEOPLE always assume that I'm against wine from supermarkets.
Not at all. I'm all for wine being accessible, and the undeniable truth is that most of us do the weekly shop in a supermarket and it's far more convenient to grab a bottle or two as you pass the wine aisle.
In the same way that Geoff can appreciate the quality of their mushrooms, I can approve of the wines on their shelves.
A huge point in their favour is their buying power. This allows them to supply you with a decent bottle at a decent price, just as long as they don't inflate that price initially only to offer you a "discount" down the line.
You may have noticed that the supermarket wines I normally recommend come from Waitrose and Marks and Spencer.
That is not because they pay me to recommend their wines, or even send me an occasional sample to taste. I assure you they do neither.
The reason that I recommend them is that they have interesting ranges and fair prices.
Marks and Spencer is currently featuring wines from unusual destinations such as Brazil, Georgia and India.
Any one of these countries could be the next big thing, and Marks and Spencer would be justified in saying that they got there first.
So, buying wine from a supermarket doesn't make you a bad person. Just make sure that it's interesting and engaging, and that it is worth putting on the dinner table.
Aracauria Riesling Pinot Grigio 2013 (M&S, £8.49). This crisp, fresh blend comes from Brazil and is perfect for glugging on its own or with spicy food.
Jewel of Nasik Sauvignon Blanc 2013 (M&S, £6.99). An utterly delightful Sauvignon from India which is bound to change opinions and also impress your friends.
Experiment and enjoy!
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article