PE bubbly | Champagne vs Sparkling ... should QF know better?

[Mal]

On my recent SYD-LAX, LAX-SYD Premium Economy trip, Qantas appeared to have cost cut and removed the usual champagne offered (Charles Heidsieck I believe). This was replaced with "Croser Adelaide Hills non-vintage Sparkling Wine".

From the Qantas website:

Start your journey in Premium Economy with a complimentary pre take-off Champagne or juice.

I'm going to take the moral high ground here (perhaps this will be unpopular), and state that I respect the protected geographical status of the "Champagne" name, so don't believe Qantas should be calling a sparkling wine a Champagne.

I realise people do often call sparkling wine "champagne" within Australia, but for a carrier that has won many wine selection awards, and has a wine panel I find this inappropriate.

The staff on-board were somewhat oblivious to it not being a Champagne. So much for Qantas having training for their staff regarding wine selection.

Comments?

 

[nonpop]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Agree. They should supply what was advertised.
To me, bit like ordering a Bentley limo to collect you and then finding a Falcon shows up. Both are automobiles and will get you to your destination but are a different experience AKA Qantas / Jetstar ... but having said that QF seeming to becoming JQ a little more every day.

 

[Major]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Also agree. Whilst there are some excellent Australian sparkling wines they are just not in the same class as champagne.

 

[david870mdg]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Yet another QF "ENHANCEMENT"...

 

[Princess Fiona]

Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Outrageous !!!! Aussie sparkling is not Champagne, even although some of the better ones are IMHO better than the cheaper French Champers
Shame on you QF

 

[jamesatfish]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

I actually thought it was 'illegal' (in an international trade agreement sense) to label or market sparkling white wines as 'Champagne' if they aren't actually made in the Champagne region of France? I'm pretty sure this is something that Australia signed up for and it impacts all sorts of geographic-based variety names, not just Champagne.

My personal gripe is the replacement of Dom Perignon in the F cabin with the (more expensive but to my mind not near as good) Tattinger, from a similar 'what's on the flight is different to what's advertised' point of view.

I was actually just about to write that the A380 walk-through on the Qantas site still shows a bloke in First being presented with a bottle of Dom, but I just checked the site again and funnily enough he's now being given a bottle of Tattinger.

Original Photo:

Current Photo:

But they did forget something from the Dining section...

 

[TheInsider]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Yet another QF "ENHANCEMENT"...

Oh seriously, you sure some of you arn't named Kevin and from Double Bay who post comments on certain news websites?

 

[pauly7]

Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Oh seriously...

Oh I hear you QFCSA Plus 1.

 

[medhead]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Meh! I would have preferred Jansz over Croser probably. Actually, good to see a point of difference in PE vs J besides the seat. Serious the food is pretty much the same as J, the welcome drink the same, surely this devalues J.

I realise people do often call sparkling wine "champagne" within Australia, but for a carrier that has won many wine selection awards, and has a wine panel I find this inappropriate.

The staff on-board were somewhat oblivious to it not being a Champagne. So much for Qantas having training for their staff regarding wine selection.

I think you have given yourself the answer on that point.

 

[tuapekastar]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

I agree with the OP that Qantas should know better. It's quite possible that they do know exactly what they've done, but decided it is not worth the effort and expense to modify their advertising to differentiate between Champagne in F/J and Sparkling Wine in Y+. Or maybe the Croser is only a temporary thing.

As an individual point not something I would be worrying about much (while I really like the Taittinger and other 'real' Champagnes, Croser will do at a pinch), but as a possible indication of a wider corporate mindset (near enough is good enough, inattention to detail, who cares if we mislead people a little), it could ring some alarm bells.

 

[Danp]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

You know you've got a pretty sweet life if getting served Tattinger in first class instead of Dom P is an issue for you haha

 

[samh004]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

I’m forever correcting people who say they love drinking Champagne, but actually consume Passion Pop no joke!

Does the onboard menu for PE specifically list the word Champagne?

 

[drewbles]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

I actually thought it was 'illegal' (in an international trade agreement sense) to label or market sparkling white wines as 'Champagne' if they aren't actually made in the Champagne region of France? I'm pretty sure this is something that Australia signed up for and it impacts all sorts of geographic-based variety names, not just Champagne.

My personal gripe is the replacement of Dom Perignon in the F cabin with the (more expensive but to my mind not near as good) Tattinger, from a similar 'what's on the flight is different to what's advertised' point of view.

I was actually just about to write that the A380 walk-through on the Qantas site still shows a bloke in First being presented with a bottle of Dom, but I just checked the site again and funnily enough he's now being given a bottle of Tattinger.

Original Photo:

Current Photo:

But they did forget something from the Dining section...

There's nothing wrong with the Comtes de Champagne Taittinger. They do offer Dom on some flights, but it's usually the Comtes from what I've seen recently.

I prefer the Comtes personally, but they're both excellent Champagnes.

 

[markis10]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Maybe it's a one off event, the cellar had a dry spell?

 

[jamesatfish]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

There's nothing wrong with the Comtes de Champagne Taittinger. They do offer Dom on some flights, but it's usually the Comtes from what I've seen recently.

I prefer the Comtes personally, but they're both excellent Champagnes.

Any idea what sectors still have Dom? Haven't seen it myself in about 20 QF First flights since 2008 or so- but nice to know it still exists.

The Dom is a personal favorite as I never really drank champagne until it was served on my first QF First flight about 5 years ago. I'm not nearly good enough to really tell the difference between the good champagnes, but Dom Perignon to me epitomizes the First experience and that's why I miss it. That QF still use Dom in their First marketing but don't offer it on most flights is what irks me the most.

 

[Mal]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Does the onboard menu for PE specifically list the word Champagne?

No it doesn't. Think "sparkling wine" is used instead.

BTW, I believe this has been occurring on the SYD-LAX and vv routes since March or so.

 

[Blackadder]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Oh seriously, you sure some of you arn't named Kevin and from Double Bay who post comments on certain news websites?

Makes me wonder at times.

 

[samiam]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Oh seriously, you sure some of you arn't named Kevin and from Double Bay who post comments on certain news websites?

Champagne taste on a [-]beer[/-] sparkling wine budget?

 

[Mal]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Thought I'd add a poll

 

[anat0l]

Re: Champagne vs Sparkling ... should Qantas know better?

Should anyone know better? For sure - Champagne only comes from the said region. Any sparkling wine is not a Champagne.

It really gets to me how even you can have "American Champagne" (i.e. sparkling wine made in the USA that imitates Champagne - or rather just the behaviour of the drink). There is no loss of grace per se in calling it what it is, i.e. "sparkling wine", or if you must insist on a simpler / more cosmopolitan one, why not "bubbles" or "bubbly"?

Now as for QF serving sparkling instead of Champagne on the flight, that's not good but the argument is because it should be proper Champagne and not just an ordinary sparkling wine as that is what is to be expected (i.e. Y pax do not get any Champagne and usually have to content themselves with Jacob's Creek, vs. Y+ get a generous subset of, if not the same, cellar as J). Which I find hard to believe, because if QF really wanted to they could serve Moet et Chandon NV, which is the cheapest Champagne one can find around. People may not like it, though (i.e. Moet et Chandon NV itself).