Wines of WA 2021-22 Annual Report

2021 – 22 ANNUAL REPORT

Introduction

2021-22 Strategic Priorities President’s Report

Chairman’s Report

Chief Executive Officer’s Report

Membership and APC Collection Report

Industry Production Report

Member Benefits

RD&E Report

Market Development

2021 22 Board of Directors 15

Appendices

2021 22 APC Budget

2021-22 Audited Financial Report

2016 21 State Vineyard and Production Data

2021-26 WA Wine RD&E Strategic Priorities Plan

2014 24 WA Wine Industry Strategic Plan Summary

2021-22 Wine Australia Regional Program Report

2021 22 WA Wines to the World Program Reports

Project reports

Monitoring and Evaluation report

Introduction

The Wine industry Association of Western Australia (Inc.) Wines of Western Australia), established in 1987, is the state’s primary organisation of wine producers.

It is our mission to provide a unified, strategically influential voice that creates opportunities for the fine wine regions of Western Australia.

Industry Overview

Wine is a major value adding industry with significant regional economic and employment benefits In 2021 22 the total value of the WA wine industry was estimated at over $750 million with a farm gate grape value of $65 million. Regarding market channels, 48% of total value was sold in WA, 44% in eastern Australia and 8% in exports.

The Western Australian wine industry produces about 45 million litres of wine annually representing 4% of the volume of Australia’s wine production but 8.5% of the value.

WA Wine Industry Vision

As outlined in the WA Wine industry Strategic Plan 2014 24, WA producers have a shared vision of:

“a Western Australian wine industry that grows sustainably and profitably, built on the reputation of its great fine wine regions”

The pathway to this vision is a unified and strategical influential industry focused on regional fine wines of provenance and authenticity. Producers and Regional Associations are the custodians of their Regional brand.

Wines of WA Charter

The strategic plan mandates that Wines of WA should, “provide stewardship of the industry” to create opportunities for producers and the fine wine regions of WA.

From an operational point of view, this service is provided through:

• Advocacy and Representation to ensure government, at all levels, understands our industry the benefits we provide to the state economy, particularly in regional WA and the assistance and resourcing we require to further develop our industry. We work to ensure our social license to operate is retained and strengthened. We continue to build strong partnerships with tourism, developing complimentary market development programs. We work raise the stature of our industry so that West Australians are truly proud of our wine industry

• Administration of technical and marketing program funding to provide Regional Associations and producers opportunities to improve business practises and market access.

• Communication to ensure wine industry participants are aware of the issues that affect their businesses, enabling them to make informed decisions on the direction of the industry and their individual businesses.

We look forward to working with Producers and Regional Associations in 2022 23 on developing a sustainable and profitable future for the WA wine industry.

Strategic Priorities 2021 - 22

Priority Priority Issues

INDUSTRY STRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT

Build a culture of collaboration with an expectation of success

Support industry development through partnerships and collaboration.

Provide administrative and governance resourcing for partnerships and collaborative projects

Activities and Progress

Amended Wines of WA constitution to ensure regional representation on Board of Directors.

Managed grants on behalf of industry.

Managed/facilitated Committees and working groups.

Managed relationships with state government agencies, Wine Australia, Australian Grape and Wine

MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Strategic regional collaboration driven by energised producers

Secure Export Market Development funding and resources in collaboration with RAs and producers

Build partnerships (government, value chain, allied sectors) to support Regional brand development and increase national and international consumer demand

Facilitated all of industry review of RDE strategic priorities

Managed compliance and administration of Export Growth Partnership including Industry Steering Committee.

Worked with Wine Australia, Austrade/TradeStart, Department of Primary Industries, Tourism WA, Development Commissions, local government and allied sectors to implement EGP

5 year RDE strategic priorities document ratified by all Regions.

SUSTAINABILTY, INNOVATION, RDE&A AND BIOSECURITY

All of industry best practise across the value chain

Smoke taint

Provide administrative and compliance support for Wine Australia funded Regional Program

Supported Regions and producers to manage prescribed burns programs. Built stronger relationships with DBCA and OBRM

In partnership with Department of Primary Industries, Technical Committee implemented programs to address identified challenges through the Wine Australia Regional Program

Monitor new planting material resources and availability

Ensure taxation regime offers best operational environment for WA fine wine producers.

Advocated for policy settings and government support to address identified challenges

Continued to share industry ratified position for further taxation reform with other regions/states.

ADVOCACY AND REPRESENTATION

Lean, proactive, unified and Influential

Ensure legislation and regulation offers best operational environment for WA fine wine producers.

Ensure an enduring social licence for WA wine producers.

Advocated for further amendments to Liquor Control Act; support national advocacy on mandatory labelling requirements; container deposit scheme; COVID restrictions; workforce issues

Worked with Australian Grape and Wine and other state associations to ensure aligned and strong communications/advocacy.

Chairman’s Report

Any reflection on the 2021 22 financial year must include the continuing impact of COVID 19 restrictions. It is easy to forget that unrestricted travel into and out of WA only resumed in March 2022. And following that, travel and movement of goods was more difficult and expensive than it was pre pandemic. This has impacted on many parts of the supply chain including access to temporary labour, servicing intestate and international markets, sourcing inputs and securing logistics to send product to market It is a testament to the resilience and energy of the WA wine industry that we quickly adapted to the rapidly changing operating environment WoWA’s remit is to ensure the best operational environment for WA producers We engaged with state and federal governments and industry stakeholders, ensuring the interests of WA producers were clearly understood.

Despite the requirement to maintain a watching brief on COVID 19 issues for much of 202122, as an industry, we still addressed our key strategic areas of focus

The framework for this is the 2014 24 WA Wine Industry Strategic Plan. The plan was reviewed in June 2021. While the agreed priorities (see below) for the final three years of the plan are simply stated, the impact of achieving them will be significant.

Funding/Partnerships providing ample resources to further drive industry growth and development Efficient, adequately resourced associations

Biosecurity and access to better plant material are key focus areas for projects going forward 100% of WA producers are Sustainable Winegrowing Australia (SWA) certified

The WoWA Board provided direction to executive and key committees to address these priorities working in partnership with Regional

Associations, national bodies and the state government.

The biggest project currently being implemented is the Export Growth Partnership which focuses on growth and diversification of export opportunities for WA producers across scale of production. The alignment of resources and funding achieved has been significant

While the main goal is increased export value and volume, the secondary outputs include increased capacity at regional association level through stronger stakeholder partnerships and more engaged producers.

There is a focus now on securing resources and funding to support RDE priorities as confirmed by the RDE strategic review completed in August 2022. The importance of SWA and how biosecurity is legislated and implemented was confirmed. Access to high quality planting material forms a part of this as is best practise on farm biosecurity.

With clear space to proactively advocate, we are now also providing input to further reform of the WA Liquor Control Act. This is an ongoing process with more work to be done in 2022 23.

Despite the challenges of the previous three years, the opportunities for the fine wine regions of WA are real and significant Consumer demand across a range of markets and wine styles is strong, driving a measured response by producers to these strong market signals to expand vineyards

Our industry is in a good position to grow sustainably and profitably. We now need to collectively set the strategic vision to guide the next ten years. WoWA will support the industry in doing so in 2022 23.

Trevor Whittington Independent Chair

Treasurer’s Report

The 2021-22 Financial Year has been a challenging and complex one for Wines of WA. The Association successfully commenced the Export Growth Partnership (the EGP - known as the WA Wines to the World Program) while continuing to deliver its core services of advocacy and representation, all within the context of an increasingly uncertain economic and political environment.

The Financial Review Committee (FRC) was set up early in the financial year and played a key role in overseeing the financial and risk implications of the EGP.

Overview

The summary of the Association’s income and expenditure is as follows: 20222021 $000's$000's

Operating activities Revenue

APC Producer Grant Funding 262232 Grant administration fees 25 Membership Fee 12 9 Cash Flow Boost 16 Wine Education Centre 10 8 Total Revenue 309265

Operating Expenditure (247)(215) Net Operating Surplus 6250

Grant activities Grant Income 623875 Grant Expenditure (623)(974) Net Grant Income/(Expenditure) (99)

Surplus/(Deficit) for the year 62(49)

Operating activities

Revenue from operating activities totalled $309,000 for the year compared with $265,000 in the prior year, an increase of $44,000. Most of this increase arose from APC Producer Grant Funding, which rose from $232,000 to $262,000 driven by the increase in the total tonnage from Vintage 20 (45,961 tonnes) to Vintage 21 (54,000 tonnes) In addition, the Association earned $25,000 from the administration of various grants during the year.

Overall operating expenditure increased from $215,000 in the prior year to $247,000 in the current year. This increase was due to the increase in various advocacy and representation activities as the remaining COVID 19 restrictions were lifted by the WA Government, together with additional costs for ensuring compliance with various grants.

As a result, the net operating surplus of the association increased from $50,000 to $62,000.

Grant activities

Grant activities comprise income and expenditures that relate specifically to various grant programs and are therefore excluded from Operating activities. Net grant income amounted to $nil compared with a net expenditure of $99,000 in the prior year

Deficit/Surplus for the year

The surplus for the year amounted to $62,000, versus a deficit of $49,000 in the prior year, and the year ending cash and equity positions remained strong at $777,000 and $166,000 respectively

As I am stepping down from my position as Treasurer, I would like to thank Larry, Trevor and the rest of the Board for the amazing support I have received since joining the Board at the beginning of last year. During my tenure there have been a number of interesting and challenging issues to deal with but it was made a lot easier having a dependable team to lean on for support. I would also like to thank Deb Bell who has been instrumental in setting up and maintaining additional processes to accurately record inflows and outflows from grant activities. This has been essential for accurate and timely reporting to provide the Board with an accurate overview to ensure compliance and monitor risk management.

David Bowyer

Treasurer

Chief Executive Officer’s Report

As outlined in Strategic Priorities for 2021 - 22 our focus for the year prioritised:

• Assisting Regions to implement strategic plans and secure funding and resources to implement these

• Securing funding and resources to implement programs for international and domestic market development including wine tourism

• Ensuring legislation and regulation offers the best operational environment for WA fine wine producers and a secure, enduring social licence for WA wine producers

• Addressing RD&E priorities through the WA wine technical committee, leveraging federal and state government agencies funding and resources

The key activities to achieve these aims were, Advocacy, Representation, Administration and Communication

Advocacy

In 2021 22, Wines of Western Australia advocated for the industry on the following issues:

• Continued engagement with the state government and Wine Australia to align Export Growth Partnership (EGP) resources to support export market development for WA wine producers In 2021 22, a total of $441,000 of state funding and $384,000 of federal funding was leveraged with $274,00 WA producers’ funding In total, an investment of $1.09 million to build strong and diverse export markets

• Developed a position paper for Liquor Control Act Reform process. To be submitted in October 2021

• Worked with all Regional Associations and the Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions establishing late season burn off

protocols to ensure late harvested fruit was not affected by prescribed burning

• Worked at state and federal level to ensure that COVID 19 related restrictions were implemented with minimal impact on WA wine producers and ensuring continuity of operations during 2022 vintage, noting COVID restrictions were still in place

• Worked at state and federal level to ensure access to temporary workforce for 2022 vintage and winter vineyard operations

• Worked with DPIRD and AGW to manage confirmation of Graper Vine Red Blotch Virus in WA.

Representation

In 2021 22, Wines of Western Australia engaged the following government and industry bodies on the following issues:

• Minister for Agriculture and the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development and Minister for Tourism and Tourism WA, advocating for increased alignment of funding for market development, wine tourism and industry development

• Department of Racing Gaming and Liquor to maintain direct communication links on issues affecting WA wine producers

• Liaised with government agencies (liquor licensing, tourism, primary industries) on a range of COVID 19 issues

• Maintained strong links with Australian Grape and Wine attending (AGW) State Association meetings, Small Winemaker Committee meetings and providing WA input to national advocacy processes

• Maintained strong links with Wine Australia Planned visit to WA by incoming executive team in August 2022

Administration

In 2020 12, Wines of WA administered the following projects on behalf of the WA wine industry:

• Worked with APC administration and Wine Producers’ Committee to refine collection process for FFS collection on the 2020 vintage

• Project management/compliance of the EGP with State Government, Wine Australia, Austrade and Regional Development Commissions

• Administration of the Wine Australia Regional Program in partnership with Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development

• Management of the WA Wine Technical Committee

• Negotiated terms for the WA wine industry service agreement with Australia Post

• Negotiated terms for the WA wine industry co-membership arrangement with CCIWA

Communication

In 2021 - 22, we continued our regular communications strategy including

• A weekly e-newsletter which provides non time sensitive information.

• Regular updates

• For urgent, critical information, members receive an email, text message or phone call directly from me

• Eye to eye on a regular basis to share a coffee or a glass wine, depending on the time of day, discussing what you feel are the key issues affecting your business and region Maintain www.winewa.asn.au as a highly ranked landing site for consumers and tourists and a resource for WA wine producers via assets listed below:

• the localista searchable database was linked directly to the Australian Tourism Data Warehouse which feeds into Australia.com, Tourism Australia’s consumer facing platform

• the Wine Adventurer guide to the fine wine regions of WA

• the Wine Exportal, a one stop information shop for WA producers

Human Resources

Wines of WA has one employee however, through contracted professional services and formalised working groups, our capacity to deliver value through the fee for service model has been greatly enhanced

We currently have the following contracted service providers:

• Trevor Whittington as Independent Chair

• Hydra Consulting as Project Manager of the EGP

• Robin Birch as Communications Consultant

We currently have the following Industry Working Groups:

• Wines of WA Technical Committee which provides oversight of the Wine Australia Regional Program other RDE&A activities and biosecurity issues for WA producers

• Liquor Licence Act Working Group which developed a submission to the Agency on further reforms to the Act to support WA wine producers

• RDE Working Group which is developing a business case for further support and resourcing from Wine Australia and DPIRD to address RDE strategic priorities

• Export Growth Partnership Industry Steering Committee Comprised of the WoWA CEO, industry representatives and DPIRD, this working oversees and approves the EGP program developed by Hydra Consulting

• Financial Review Committee (FRC) Comprised of the WoWA Executive Committee and Board members, the FRC provides oversight of WoWA’ grant funding financial commitments

National Representation

It is important that WA continues to provide energised and capable people at a national representative level to ensure our state issues are understood and addressed. In 2021 22, WoWA facilitated the following input at national level.

Australian Grape and Wine

Western Australian Board representatives were:

• Penny Dickeson (Small Winery Membership Committee)

• Larry Jorgensen WoWA (Small Winery Membership Committee)

Penny is Estate Manager for Cape Mentelle

Wine Australia

Cath Oates continued as a Board member of Wine Australia in 2021 22 and is Deputy Chair.

In addition to these formalised positions, Wines of WA has continued to strengthen our relationships with other State and Regional organisations. We will continue to communicate and collaborate with our inter state partners to advocate collectively where common interests exist.

In closing, I wish to acknowledge the contribution and support of the following people:

• Regional Association Committees who have provided input to the development of policies and programs to support industry development.

• Producers who have provided input to the development of policies and programs to support industry development.

• The Wines of WA Technical Committee, and specifically, Chair Lee Hasselgrove, Jim Campbell Clause, David Botting, Steve Partridge Richard Fennessy and Andrew Taylor.

• The Wines of WA Board of Directors, and specifically, Independent Chair, Trevor Whittington.

• Treasurer David Bowyer. David will retire from the Treasurer’s position at the AGM. His methodical, attention to detail custodianship of WoWA finances has set in place a solid framework to manage grant funding compliance. All delivered with grace, patience and humility.

Larry Jorgensen Chief Executive Officer

November 16 2022

APC Collection Report

The WA wine industry again utilised the fee for service APC funding model for the 2021 22 financial year. The fees were affected against the 2021 vintage. A fee per tonne was collected from the owner of the fruit at crush and distributed to Wines of WA to provide statebased services and to Regional Associations based on the GI origin of the fruit to provide regionally based services

The aggregated budgeted revenue from APC collections for 2021 - 22 was $702,750, based on a 55,000 tonne vintage. The final reported amounts at 30 June 2021 were $628,950 and 54,000 tonnes. This represents 90% of budgeted revenue and 98% of projected volume WoWA APC income was budgeted to be $280,000 with $261,500 collected. See APC Budget and the audited financial report in appendices.

Margaret River produces 58% of state volume and Great Southern 23%. The remaining 19% is comprised of Swan Valley (7%), Southern Forests (5%), Geographe (5%) Blackwood Valley (2%), Perth Hills (1%) and Peel (.1%).

In total, 315 producers provided return forms for payment with a further 96 lodging “nil” returns Nil returns are attributable to the impact of smoke taint events, weather events and other factors which impact vineyards, annual production decisions to balance inventory and the variety of business models that exist. The number of producers skews towards under 150 tonnes at 81%. The share of aggregated production skews toward over 500 tonnes at 65%.

Industry Production Data

A significant benefit arising from the APC collection is resulting production data. Information collected via the process includes GI origin of fruit by variety. This provides an accurate snapshot of production capacity and will be invaluable to producers in dtermining how to structure their business to best meet market demand State level summary data follows.

Average production over the five-year period from 2017 – 21 is 56,000, noting 2019 and 2020 vintages were weather affected resulting in sub 50,000 tonne vintages. The 2017 vintage can be considered an outlier also at 69,000 tonnes

Vineyard area of 11,700 hectares was confirmed via satellite scan and subsequent ground truthing in 2016.

Production is skewed towards white production at 56% of production.

In 2021, the top five white varieties in order of volume were, Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay, Semillon, Chenin Blanc and Riesling.

The top five red varieties were Cabernet Sauvignon, Shiraz, Merlot, Pinot Noir and Malbec, noting Tempranillo and Grenache are similar in volume to Malbec.

The full report by region is available in the appendices

Member Benefits

Advocacy and support

The primary role of Wines of WA is to represent the interests of WA wine producers.

Access to Export Growth Partnership

All FFS paying producers can participate in EGP programs

Weekly Industry Update

Wines of WA provides access to essential information for WA wine producers through weekly emails

Australia Post

Membership entitles access to the Wines of WA alliance with Australia Post whereby members can take advantage of specialised wine handling and delivery services at significantly reduced prices in both the domestic and overseas markets.

Chamber of Commerce and Industry, WA (CCIWA)

Membership permits access to the dual Wines of WA / CCI membership agreement. This provides members with access to the full range of CCI member benefits including: advice and assistance on industrial relations, workplace agreements, worker’s compensation, occupational safety and health, industry training, trade, environmental compliance and more.

Localista listing on Wines of WA website

All FFS paying producers are listed for free on the Wines of WA website Localista searchable data base. The list is searchable by a number of criteria and is a useful online tool for wine tourists visiting the fine wine regions of WA.

Affiliate Membership Benefits

Affiliate members receive the following benefits:

• Receive regular issues of the WoWA Enewsletter and keeping up to date with all the latest wine industry news

• Access and notification to networking events and workshops with WOWA wine producers and growers

• Access to WA wine industry Australia Post parcel rates,

Research Development and Extension

Technical Committee

The Wines of WA Technical Committee oversees the development and implementation of the Wine Australia Regional Program for WA. The Program provides grants based funding for R&D projects with specific regional relevance.

The Committee also reviews:

• biosecurity

• water security

• resource management

• biosecurity issues

Committee Members for 2021 - 22 were:

Lee Hasselgrove – Mure Viticulture (Chair)

Jim Campbell Clause – AHA Viticulture

Dave Botting – Burch Family Wines

Con Simos – AWRI

Andrew Taylor - DPIRD

Jeremy Galbreath - Curtin University

Richard Fennessy – DPIRD

Keith Pekin – Perth NRM

Michael Considine – UWA

Larry Jorgensen – Wines of WA

Wine Australia Regional Program

The Regional Program is funded through Wine Australia. In each year, the Technical Committee identifies key issues using the RDESP to focus on priority issues to be addressed through extension programs.

Program administration is provided by WoWA. DPIRD provides project management through Richard Fennessy.

The 2021 22 program report is included in the appendices

RD&E 5 Year Strategic Plan

In July 2021, the Wines of WA facilitated a strategic planning session to identify the RD&E strategic priorities over the next 5 years. The 2021 – 26 WA Wine industry RD&E Strategic Priorities Plan (RDESP) is included in the appendices and is available on the Wines of WA website in the Technical Section

The process included a one day workshop attended by WA producers, regions, DPIRD, Wine Australia and other stakeholders

The RDESP is the guiding document in determining what issues are addressed by industry through research and extension in partnership with state and federal government agencies. The priorities identified were:

1. Understanding the intricacies of provenance and the fine wine regions of WA

2. Rapid access to new genetic plant material

3. Supporting WA producers to adopt Sustainable Winegrowing Australia (SWA)

4. Supporting WA producers to adopt on farm biosecurity practises

5. Declining vineyard yields

6.Low adoption rate of RDE in WA

A summary of outputs and strategic priorities is included in the appendices

Market Development

Export Growth Partnership

The Export Growth Partnership (EGP), with the customer facing project name, “WA Wines to the World” was initiated in 2021 - 22. The EGP is a five year partnership between the WA wine industry and the State government. Each partner will contribute $3 million dollars to support export market development and growth activities.

The aims are:

-to double the value of wine exported from WA to over $100 million, increase the average price per litre to over $12, increase the number of WA producers who are successfully and profitably exporting and

-Align investment and resources in international wine marketing, promotion, media and wine tourism to maximize profile and sales outcomes for WA fine wines

Pre program work completed in 2020 21 identified target markets, priority activities and strengthening relationships with key partners including Austrade, Wine Australia and state government overseas trade offices

The key markets currently are UK, USA, Singapore, Japan, Hong Kong, Canada and South Korea. As the program evolves, the focus will change through an industry led strategic review of opportunities

Given COVID restrictions on travel were in place in WA until March 2021, activities up to borders reopening focused on virtual engagement with customers and consumers in priority markets.

When international borders did open in late May 2022, the EGP supported Margaret River region

participated in the Aspen Food and Wine Classic as part of a collaborative project supported by Austrade, Wine Australia, Wine Victoria and South Australia Department of Trade and Investment

Other activities which leveraged funding and resources included:

-Regionally focused tastings in Japan, UK, USA, Canada and Hong Kong

-Support for WA producers to participate in the Wine Australia USA market entry program

Support for WA producer and regions to purchase space on Australian Wine Connect

Support for the Great Southern region to develop an Australian Wine Discovered educational module in partnership with Wine Australia

Collaboration with Austrade/Tradestart and TWA to implement a new to market program into the UK.

A full review of program activities and outcomes for 2021-22 is included in the appendices of this report.

Wines of WA Board of Directors 2021-22

Board Position

Skills Based Independent Chair

Trevor Whittington

Producer Under 150 TonnesLiz Maiorana – South by South West Wines

Producer 151 1000 Tonnes - Cameron Rhodes Fermoy Estate

Producer Over 1000 Tonnes Franklin Tate – Franklin Tate Estates

Regionally Appointed Perth Hills/Peel/Swan Valley (note one vote for this shared position)

Josh Davenport – Myattslfield Vineyard

Garth Cliff – Vino Volta

Regionally Appointed GeographeRyan Gibbs – Aylesbury Estate

Regionally Appointed Margaret River (note one vote for each regionally appointed position)

Liz Mencel – Margaret River Wine Association (retired April 2022)

Amanda Whiteland - Margaret River Wine Association

Regionally Appointed Blackwood Valley/Southern Forests (note one vote for this shared position) Andrew Mountford – Mountford Wines Craig Nield – Beulah Wines

Regionally Appointed Great Southern Tom Wisdom – Plantagenet

Skills Based Treasurer

David Bowyer

Skills Based -

Mike Calneggia – Calneggia Family Vineyards

Executive - Chief Executive Officer

Larry Jorgensen – Wines of WA

Wines of WA Board of Directors 2021-22

Schedule of Meeting Attendance and Summary of Terms

Board Position Appointment/ Retirement Date Jul Aug Sept Oct AGM Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Skills Based Independent Chair

Trevor Whittington

Producer Under 150 Tonnes

David Mazza - Mazza Wines

Re appointed December 2020 P P P P P P P P P P P P P

Appointed to 2nd Term October 2019 Retired at 2021 AGM P A A A P P N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Livia Maiorana South by South West Appointed to 1st Term December 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A A N/A N/A P P A P P P

Producer 151-1000 Tonnes

Cameron Rhodes Fermoy Estate Appointed to 1st term April 2021 P P P P P P P P P P P P P

Producer Over 1000 Tonnes

Mike Calneggia – Calneggia Family Vineyards

Appointed to 1st term December 2019 to 1st term December 2019 Retired at 2021 AGM

P 11:35 am - 12 pm

A P P A A P N/A N/A N/A P P A

Franklin Tate Tate Family Vineyards Appointed to 1st term December 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A P N/A N/A P P P P P P

Perth Hills/Peel/Swan Valley

Josh Davenport Myattsfield

Appointed to 1st term November 2020 A A A P P P P A A A P P A

Appointed to 1st term October 2020 P A A P P P P A A P P P A Geographe Ryan Gibbs Aylesbury Estate Appointed to 1st term October 2020 A P A A P P A A A A P P P

Garth Cliff Vino Volta

Margaret River

Liz Mencel – Margaret River Wine Association Appointed to 2nd tern October 2020 P P P P A P P P P P P N/A N/A

Amanda Whiteland Margaret River Wine Association Appointed to 1st term October 2019 P P P A P P P P P P P P P

Southern Forests/ Blackwood Valley

Andrew Mountford/Mark Aitken/Monica Radomaljic Mountford Wines

Craig Nield Beluah Wines

Great Southern Tom Wisdom Plantagenet

Skills Based

Mike Calneggia – Calneggia Family Vineyards

Appointed to 1st term November 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A P (MA) N/A P (MA) A A P (MR) P (MR) A A

Appointed to 1st term November 2020 A A A A A A P A P P A P P

Appointed to 2nd term October 2020 P P A A A P P P P A P P P

Appointed November 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A P A P P P A

Rob Mann - Corymbia Appointed to 1st term December 2018 Retired November 2021 P P A A A A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Skills Based - Treasurer

David Bowyer Fenrgrove

Executive - Chief Executive Officer

Larry Jorgensen Wines of WA

P

Appointed January 2021 P P P P P P P P P A P P P

Originally appointed May 2013 Contract re confirmed March 2021 P P P P P P P P P P P P P

Meeting Notes

2021 – 22 Wines of WA APC Budget

The Committee members

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. Bentley Delivery Centre Locked Bag 4 Sort Bin 27 Bentley DC WA 6983

Dear Committee Members, AUDIT MANAGEMENT LETTER FOR THE YEAR ENDED 30 JUNE 2022

Following the completion of our final audit of Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. for the year ended 30 June 2022, we have not identified any significant areas where improvement in procedures could be made or matters were noted which we feel should be considered by management.

Our test work was conducted on a sample basis and as such may not necessarily include all matters that exist within the systems.

Accordingly, our comments are not intended to cover all aspects of the Association’s internal controls and accounting systems and are limited to those matters that arose from our normal audit procedures.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you and take this opportunity to thank your staff for their assistance and co operation during the course of our audit.

If you have any queries in respect of the report, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours faithfully

Viral Patel, CA, CPA

Registered Company Auditor number 333615

Director Australian Audit

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. Contents

30 June 2022

Committee's declaration 2

Committee's report 3

Auditor's independence declaration 4

Independent auditor's report to the members of Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. 5

Statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income 8

Statement of financial position 9

Statement of changes in equity 10

Statement of cash flows 11

Notes to the financial statements 12

General information

The financial statements cover Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. as an individual entity. The financial statements are presented in Australian dollars, which is Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.'s functional and presentation currency.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc is a not-for-profit incorporated association, incorporated and domiciled in Australia. Its registered office and principal place of business is:

Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive Bentley 6102

A description of the nature of the incorporated association's operations and its principal activities are included in the Committee's report, which is not part of the financial statements.

The financial statements were authorised for issue on 10 November 2022.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Committee's declaration 30 June 2022

In the sole Committee's opinion:

• the incorporated association is not a reporting entity because there are no users dependent on general purpose financial statements. Accordingly, as described in note 1 to thefinancial statements, the attached specialpurpose financial statements have been prepared for the purposes of complying with the Western Australian legislation the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 and associated regulations;

• the attached financial statements and notes comply with the Accounting Standards as described in note 1 to the financial statements;

• the attached financial statements and notes give a true and fair view of the incorporated association's financial position as at 30 June 2022 and of its performance for the financial yearended on that date; and

• there are reasonable grounds to believe that the incorporated association will be able to pay its debts as and when they become due and payable.

Name: Larry Jorgensen Position: CEO

10 November 2022

Name: David Bowyer Position: Treasurer

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Committee's report 30June 2022

The sole Committee presents his report, together with the financial statements, on the incorporated association for the yearended30 June2022.

Committee members

The followingpersons were committeemembers of the incorporatedassociationduring thewhole of thefinancial year and up to the date of this report, unless otherwise stated:

Trevor Whittington Independent Chair Re-appointed December 2020

David Bowyer Treasurer Appointed January 2021

Larry Jorgensen - CEO Originally appointed May 2013 (Contract re-confirmed March 2021)

Rob Mann Appointed to 1st term December 2018 ;Retired November 2021

David Mazza Appointed to 2nd Term October 2019; Retired November 2021

Mike Calneggia Appointed to 1st term December 2019; Retired November 2021

Cameron Rhodes Appointed to first termApril 2021

Amanda Whiteland Appointed to 1st term October 2019

Liz Mencel -Appointed to 2nd term October 2020; Retired May 2022

Livia Maiorana -Appointed to 1st Term December 2021

Tom Wisdom Appointed to 2nd term October 2020

Ryan Gibbs Appointed to 1st term October 2020

Franklin Tate Appointed to 1st term December 2021

Garth Cliff Appointed to pt term October 2020

Josh Davenport Appointed to 1st term November 2020

Radomaljic Appointed to 1st term November2021

Craig Nield Appointed to 1st term November 2020

Mike Calneggia Appointed November2021 to skills- based position

Andrew Mountford-Appointed to 1st term November 2021

Principal activities

During the financial year the principal continuing activities of the incorporated association consisted of:

• Advocacy to confirm government, at all levels, understands the wine industry and also ensure the value of the wine industry is clearly understood by government, the community and other complimentary industry sectors.

• Administration of technical and marketing program funding to provide Regional Associations and producers access to opportunities to improve business practices and market access.

• Communication to ensure wine industry participants are aware of the issues that may affect their businesses.

Operating Result

The Surplus for the year ended 30June 2022 was$62,396 {2021:Deficit of$48,511)

Name: Larry Jorgensen

Position: CEO

10 November 2022

Name: David Bowyer

Position: Treasurer

AUDITOR’S INDEPENDENCE DECLARATION TO THE MEMBERS OF WINE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA INC

I declare that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, during the year ended 30 June 2022 there has been:

(i) no contraventions of the auditor independence requirements of the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 (WA);

(ii) no contraventions of any applicable code of professional conduct in relation to the audit.

Dated this 11th day of November 2022 Perth, Western Australia

Viral Patel, CA, CPA

Registered Company Auditor number 333615 Director Australian Audit

Directors: robert campbell RCA, CA Viral patel RCA, CA alastair abbott RCA, CA chassey DaViDs RCA, CA PO BOx 7465, ClOisteRs squARe PO, WA 6850 | level 8, 251 st GeORGes teRRACe, PeRth, WA 6000 (08)9218 9922 | infO@AusAudit COm Au | WWW AustRAliAnAudit COm Au | ABn: 63 166 712 698

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation

Trade mark of Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand and used with permission

Directors:

robert campbell RCA, CA

Viral patel RCA, CA alastair abbott RCA, CA chassey DaViDs RCA, CA

INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT

To the members of Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. Report on the Audit of the Financial Report

Opinion

We have audited the special purpose financial report of Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. (the Entity), which comprises the statement of financial position as at 30 June 2022, the statement of income and expenditure, statement of changes in equity and statement of cash flows for the period then ended, and notes to the financial statements, including a summary of significant accounting policies and the statement by the Members of the Committee.

In our opinion the accompanying financial report has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 (WA) including:

a) giving a true and fair view of the Entity’s financial position as at 30 June 2022, and of its financial performance and its cash flows for the period then ended; and b) complying with Australian Accounting Standards to the extent described in Note 1.

Basis for Opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Report section of our report. We are independent of the Entity in accordance with the ethical requirements of the Accounting Professional and Ethical Standards Board’s APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (the Code) that are relevant to our audit of the financial report in Australia. We have also fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with the Code.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

Emphasis of Matter – Basis of Accounting

We draw attention to Note 1 to the financial report, which describes the basis of accounting. The financial report has been prepared to assist the Entity to meet the requirements of the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 (WA). As a result, the financial report may not be suitable for another purpose. Our opinion is not modified in respect of this matter.

Responsibilities of Management and Those Charged with Governance for the Financial Report

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial report and have determined that the basis of preparation described in Note 1 to the financial report is appropriate to meet the requirements of the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 (WA) and the needs of the

POBOx 7465, ClOisteRs squARe PO, WA6850| level 8,251 st GeORGes teRRACe, PeRth,WA6000 (08)9218 9922 | infO@AusAudit COm Au | WWW AustRAliAnAudit COm Au | ABn: 63 166 712 698 ,WA 6000 (08)92189922| AB : 63166

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation

Trade mark of Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand and used with permission

members. The responsibility of Management also includes such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation and fair presentation of a financial report that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

In preparing the financial report, management is responsible for assessing the Entity’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters relating to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless management either intends to liquidate the Entity or to cease operations, or has no realistic alternative but to do so.

Those charged with governance are responsible for overseeing the Entity’s financial reporting process.

Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Report

Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with the Australian Auditing Standards will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of this financial report.

As part of an audit in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards, we exercise professional judgment and maintain professional scepticism throughout the audit. We also:

• Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial report, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.

• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Entity’s internal control.

• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by management.

• Conclude on the appropriateness of management’s use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the Entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our auditor’s report to the related disclosures in the financial report or, if such disclosures are inadequate, to modify our opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditor’s report. However, future events or conditions may cause the Entity to cease to continue as a going concern.

• Evaluate the overall presentation, structure and content of the financial report, including the disclosures, and whether the financial report represents the underlying transactions and events in a manner that achieves fair presentation.

We communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and significant audit findings, including any significant deficiencies in internal control that we identify during our audit.

Viral Patel, CA, CPA

Registered Company Auditor number 333615 Director

Australian Audit

Date: 11 November 2022 Perth, Western Australia

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income

For the year ended 30 June 2022

Note 2022 2021 $ $

Revenue

Grant and Project Income 3 648,489 874,512

APC Producer Grant Funding 262,000 232,000 Membership Fee 12,485 9,386 Cash Flow Boost 16,110 Interest Income 10 105 Other income 3,520Wine Education Centre 10,227 7,928 936,731 1,140,041

Total revenue 936,731 1,140,041

Expenses

Grant Expenses 4 (623,489) (142,215) IWTG Expenses 5 (832,416) Employee Benefit 6 (143,015) (143,589) Accounting Fee (23,340) (6,080) Insurance (2,407) (3,429) Memberships (16,809) (4,752)

Representation and Consultants (27,178) (27,364) Computer Maintenance and Supplies (733) (2,569) Communication and PR (2,200) (1,556) Occupancy (5,665) (6,695) Administration (4,072) (2,788) MV Allowance (6,000) (923) Travel and Accomodation (4,880) (1,588) Venue Hire and Meeting (1,843) (407) WEC Expense (6,451) (5,233) Other expenses (4,786) (5,718) Finance costs (1,467) (1,230) Total expenses (874,335) (1,188,552)

(Deficit)/Surplus for the year attributable to the members of Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. 15 62,396 (48,511)

Other comprehensive income for the year - -

Total comprehensive income for the year attributable to the members of Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc. 62,396 (48,511)

The above statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes 8

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Statement of financial position

As at 30 June 2022

Note 2022 2021 $ $

Assets

Current assets

Cash and cash equivalents 7 776,698 285,561 Trade and other receivables 8 38,191 76,307 Total current assets 814,889 361,868

Non-current assets

Property, plant and equipment 9 1,832 1,832 Intangibles 10 2 2 Total non-current assets 1,834 1,834

Total assets 816,723 363,702

Liabilities

Current liabilities

Trade and other payables 11 54,578 4,926 Contract liabilities 12 554,625 220,915 Borrowings 13 6,660 2,935 Provisions 14 34,295 30,757 Total current liabilities 650,158 259,533

Total liabilities 650,158 259,533

Net assets 166,565 104,169

Equity Retained surpluses 15 166,565 104,169

Total equity 166,565 104,169

The above statement of financial position should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes 9

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Statement of changes in equity

For

the

year ended 30 June 2022

Issued Retained capital Reserves surplus Total equity $ $ $ $

Balance at 1 July 2020 152,680 152,680

Deficit for the year (48,511) (48,511) Other comprehensive income for the year

Total comprehensive income for the year (48,511) (48,511)

Balance at 30 June 2021 104,169 104,169

Issued Retained capital Reserves surplus Total equity $ $ $ $

Balance at 1 July 2021 104,169 104,169

Surplus for the year 62,396 62,396 Other comprehensive income for the year

Total comprehensive income for the year 62,396 62,396

Balance at 30 June 2022 166,565 166,565

The above statement of changes in equity should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes 10

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Statement of cash flows

For the year ended 30 June 2022

Note 2022 2021 $ $

Cash flows from operating activities

Receipts from customers

Payments to suppliers and employees

Interest received

Net cash generated/(used in) from operating activities

Cash flows from investing activities

Payments for property, plant and equipment

Net cash used in investing activities

Cash flows from financing activities

Repayment of borrowings

Hire Purchase

Net cash used in financing activities

Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the financial year

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the financial year

1,295,488 891,562 (804,361) (1,187,980) 10 104

17 491,137 (296,314) 9 (1,832) (1,832) 1,538 (10,619) (9,081) 491,137 (307,227) 285,561 592,788

7 776,698 285,561

The above statement of cash flows should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes 11

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes

Note 1. Significant accounting policies

to the financial statements 30 June 2022

The principal accounting policies adopted in the preparation of the financial statements are set out below. These policies have been consistently applied to all the years presented, unless otherwise stated.

New or amended Accounting Standards and Interpretations adopted

The incorporated association has adopted all of the new or amended Accounting Standards and Interpretations issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board ('AASB') that are mandatory for the current reporting period.

Any new or amended Accounting Standards or Interpretations that are not yet mandatory have not been early adopted.

Basis of preparation

In the sole Committee's opinion, the incorporated association is not a reporting entity because there are no users dependent on general purpose financial statements.

These are special purpose financial statements that have been prepared for the purposes of complying with the Western Australian legislation the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 and associated regulations. The Committees have determined that the accounting policies adopted are appropriate to meet the needs of the members of Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc..

These financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the recognition and measurement requirements specified by the Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board ('AASB') and the disclosure requirements of AASB 101 'Presentation of Financial Statements', AASB 107 'Statement of Cash Flows', AASB 108 'Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors', AASB 1048 'Interpretation of Standards' and AASB 1054 'Australian Additional Disclosures', as appropriate for not-for profit oriented entities.

Historical cost convention

The financial statements have been prepared under the historical cost convention, except for, where applicable, the revaluation of financial assets and liabilities at fair value through profit or loss, financial assets at fair value through other comprehensive income, investment properties, certain classes of property, plant and equipment and derivative financial instruments.

Critical accounting estimates

The preparation of the financial statements requires the use of certain critical accounting estimates. It also requires management to exercise its judgement in the process of applying the incorporated association's accounting policies. The areas involving a higher degree of judgement or complexity, or areas where assumptions and estimates are significant to the financial statements, are disclosed in note 2.

Revenue recognition

The incorporated association recognises revenue as follows:

Revenue from contracts with customers

Revenue is recognised at an amount that reflects the consideration to which the incorporated association is expected to be entitled in exchange for transferring goods or services to a customer. For each contract with a customer, the incorporated association: identifies the contract with a customer; identifies the performance obligations in the contract; determines the transaction price which takes into account estimates of variable consideration and the time value of money; allocates the transaction price to the separate performance obligations on the basis of the relative stand-alone selling price of each distinct good or service to be delivered; and recognises revenue when or as each performance obligation is satisfied in a manner that depicts the transfer to the customer of the goods or services promised.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements 30 June 2022

Note 1. Significant accounting policies (continued)

Variable consideration within the transaction price, if any, reflects concessions provided to the customer such as discounts, rebates and refunds, any potential bonuses receivable from the customer and any other contingent events. Such estimates are determined using either the 'expected value' or 'most likely amount' method. The measurement of variable consideration is subject to a constraining principle whereby revenue will only be recognised to the extent that it is highly probable that a significant reversal in the amount of cumulative revenue recognised will not occur. The measurement constraint continues until the uncertainty associated with the variable consideration is subsequently resolved. Amounts received that are subject to the constraining principle are recognised as a refund liability.

Membership Fee

Revenue from the membership fee is recognised on receipt basis.

Rendering of services

Revenue from a contract to provide services is recognised over time as the services are rendered based on either a fixed price or an hourly rate.

Interest

Interest revenue is recognised as interest accrues using the effective interest method. This is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a financial asset and allocating the interest income over the relevant period using the effective interest rate, which is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash receipts through the expected life of the financial asset to the net carrying amount of the financial asset.

Other revenue

Other revenue is recognised when it is received or when the right to receive payment is established.

Income tax

As the incorporated association is a tax exempt institution in terms of subsection 50-10 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997, as amended, it is exempt from paying income tax.

Current and non-current classification

Assets and liabilities are presented in the statement of financial position based on current and non-current classification.

An asset is classified as current when: it is either expected to be realised or intended to be sold or consumed in the incorporated association's normal operating cycle; it is held primarily for the purpose of trading; it is expected to be realised within 12 months after the reporting period; or the asset is cash or cash equivalent unless restricted from being exchanged or used to settle a liability for at least 12 months after the reporting period. All other assets are classified as non-current.

A liability is classified as current when: it is either expected to be settled in the incorporated association's normal operating cycle; it is held primarily for the purpose of trading; it is due to be settled within 12 months after the reporting period; or there is no unconditional right to defer the settlement of the liability for at least 12 months after the reporting period. All other liabilities are classified as non-current.

Cash and cash equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents includes cash on hand, deposits held at call with financial institutions, other short-term, highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and which are subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value.

Trade and other receivables

Trade receivables are initially recognised at fair value and subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method, less any allowance for expected credit losses. Trade receivables are generally due for settlement within 30 days.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements 30 June 2022

Note 1. Significant accounting policies (continued)

The incorporated association has applied the simplified approach to measuring expected credit losses, which uses a lifetime expected loss allowance. To measure the expected credit losses, trade receivables have been grouped based on days overdue.

Other receivables are recognised at amortised cost, less any allowance for expected credit losses.

Property, plant and equipment

Plant and equipment is stated at historical cost less accumulated depreciation and impairment. Historical cost includes expenditure that is directly attributable to the acquisition of the items.

Depreciation is calculated on a straight-line basis to write off the net cost of each item of property, plant and equipment (excluding land) over their expected useful lives as follows:

Buildings 40 years

Leasehold improvements 3-10 years

Plant and equipment 3-7 years

The residual values, useful lives and depreciation methods are reviewed, and adjusted if appropriate, at each reporting date.

Leasehold improvements are depreciated over the unexpired period of the lease or the estimated useful life of the assets, whichever is shorter.

An item of property, plant and equipment is derecognised upon disposal or when there is no future economic benefit to the incorporated association. Gains and losses between the carrying amount and the disposal proceeds are taken to profit or loss.

Impairment of non-financial assets

Non-financial assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. An impairment loss is recognised for the amount by which the asset's carrying amount exceeds its recoverable amount.

Recoverable amount is the higher of an asset's fair value less costs of disposal and value-in-use. The value-in-use is the present value of the estimated future cash flows relating to the asset using a pre-tax discount rate specific to the asset or cash-generating unit to which the asset belongs. Assets that do not have independent cash flows are grouped together to form a cash-generating unit.

Trade and other payables

These amounts represent liabilities for goods and services provided to the incorporated association prior to the end of the financial year and which are unpaid. Due to their short-term nature they are measured at amortised cost and are not discounted. The amounts are unsecured and are usually paid within 30 days of recognition.

Contract liabilities

Contract liabilities represent the incorporated association's obligation to transfer goods or services to a customer and are recognised when a customer pays consideration, or when the incorporated association recognises a receivable to reflect its unconditional right to consideration (whichever is earlier) before the incorporated association has transferred the goods or services to the customer.

Borrowings

Loans and borrowings are initially recognised at the fair value of the consideration received, net of transaction costs. They are subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements 30 June 2022

Note 1. Significant accounting policies (continued)

Finance costs

Finance costs attributable to qualifying assets are capitalised as part of the asset. All other finance costs are expensed in the period in which they are incurred.

Employee benefits

Short-term employee benefits

Liabilities for wages and salaries, including non-monetary benefits, annual leave and long service leave expected to be settled wholly within 12 months of the reporting date are measured at the amounts expected to be paid when the liabilities are settled.

Other long-term employee benefits

The liability for annual leave and long service leave not expected to be settled within 12 months of the reporting date are measured at the present value of expected future payments to be made in respect of services provided by employees up to the reporting date using the projected unit credit method. Consideration is given to expected future wage and salary levels, experience of employee departures and periods of service. Expected future payments are discounted using market yields at the reporting date on national government bonds with terms to maturity and currency that match, as closely as possible, the estimated future cash outflows.

Fair value measurement

When an asset or liability, financial or non-financial, is measured at fair value for recognition or disclosure purposes, the fair value is based on the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date; and assumes that the transaction will take place either: in the principal market; or in the absence of a principal market, in the most advantageous market.

Fair value is measured using the assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability, assuming they act in their economic best interests. For non-financial assets, the fair value measurement is based on its highest and best use. Valuation techniques that are appropriate in the circumstances and for which sufficient data are available to measure fair value, are used, maximising the use of relevant observable inputs and minimising the use of unobservable inputs.

Goods and Services Tax ('GST') and other similar taxes

Revenues, expenses and assets are recognised net of the amount of associated GST, unless the GST incurred is not recoverable from the tax authority. In this case it is recognised as part of the cost of the acquisition of the asset or as part of the expense.

Receivables and payables are stated inclusive of the amount of GST receivable or payable. The net amount of GST recoverable from, or payable to, the tax authority is included in other receivables or other payables in the statement of financial position.

Cash flows are presented on a gross basis. The GST components of cash flows arising from investing or financing activities which are recoverable from, or payable to the tax authority, are presented as operating cash flows.

Commitments and contingencies are disclosed net of the amount of GST recoverable from, or payable to, the tax authority.

New Accounting Standards and Interpretations not yet mandatory or early adopted

Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations that have recently been issued or amended but are not yet mandatory, have not been early adopted by the incorporated association for the annual reporting period ended 30 June 2022. The incorporated association has not yet assessed the impact of these new or amended Accounting Standards and Interpretations.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements 30 June 2022

Note 2. Critical accounting judgements, estimates and assumptions

The preparation of the financial statements requires management to make judgements, estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts in the financial statements. Management continually evaluates its judgements and estimates in relation to assets, liabilities, contingent liabilities, revenue and expenses. Management bases its judgements, estimates and assumptions on historical experience and on other various factors, including expectations of future events, management believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. The resulting accounting judgements and estimates will seldom equal the related actual results. The judgements, estimates and assumptions that have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities (refer to the respective notes) within the next financial year are discussed below.

Allowance for expected credit losses

The allowance for expected credit losses assessment requires a degree of estimation and judgement. It is based on the lifetime expected credit loss, grouped based on days overdue, and makes assumptions to allocate an overall expected credit loss rate for each group. These assumptions include recent sales experience and historical collection rates.

Fair value measurement hierarchy

The incorporated association is required to classify all assets and liabilities, measured at fair value, using a three level hierarchy, based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the entire fair value measurement, being: Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the entity can access at the measurement date; Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly; and Level 3: Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability. Considerable judgement is required to determine what is significant to fair value and therefore which category the asset or liability is placed in can be subjective.

The fair value of assets and liabilities classified as level 3 is determined by the use of valuation models. These include discounted cash flow analysis or the use of observable inputs that require significant adjustments based on unobservable inputs.

Impairment of non-financial assets other than goodwill and other indefinite life intangible assets

The incorporated association assesses impairment of non-financial assets other than goodwill and other indefinite life intangible assets at each reporting date by evaluating conditions specific to the incorporated association and to the particular asset that may lead to impairment. If an impairment trigger exists, the recoverable amount of the asset is determined. This involves fair value less costs of disposal or value-in-use calculations, which incorporate a number of key estimates and assumptions.

Employee benefits provision

As discussed in note 1, the liability for employee benefits expected to be settled more than 12 months from the reporting date are recognised and measured at the present value of the estimated future cash flows to be made in respect of all employees at the reporting date. In determining the present value of the liability, estimates of attrition rates and pay increases through promotion and inflation have been taken into account.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements

30 June 2022

Note 4. Grant Expenses

AGWA Regional Program

2022 2021 $ $

12,098 30,415

Contractor fees - Growers Group 11,971 Export Growth 611,391 99,829 623,489 142,215

Note 5. IWTG Expenses

2022 2021 $ $

Product Development 5 Integrated Promotion 513,257 Regional Support 319,154 832,416

Note 6. Employee Benefit

2022 2021 $ $

126,377 119,038

LSL Expense 2,096 16,321

Annual Leave Provision 1,442 (3,166)

Superannuation 13,100 11,396 143,015 143,589

Note 7. Cash and cash equivalents

Current assets

2022 2021 $ $

Cash at bank 776,698 285,561

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements

30 June 2022

Note 8. Trade and other receivables

Current assets

2022 2021 $ $

Trade receivables 34,968 63,249

APC Provisional debtor 1,50036,468 63,249

Pre Paid Expenses 1,723 -

GST Receivable 13,058 38,191 76,307

Note 9. Property, plant and equipment

Non-current assets

2022 2021 $ $

Office equipment - at cost 1,832 1,832

Note 10. Intangibles

Non-current assets

2022 2021 $ $

Prepaid APC Establishment 37,427 37,427

Less: Written down Expense on Prepaid APC Establishment (37,426) (37,426) 1 1

Wines of WA Brand 19,477 19,477

Less: Accumulated amortisation (19,476) (19,476) 1 1 2 2

Note 11. Trade and other payables

Current

liabilities

2022 2021 $ $

Trade payables 26,021 1,030

PAYG Withholding Payable 2,268 2,400

Superannuation Liability 3,855 1,496

Accrued Expenses 7,780Gst Paid 14,65454,578 4,926

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements

30 June 2022

Note 12. Contract liabilities

Current liabilities

2022 2021 $ $

AGWA Regional Progam 76,074 80,789 Export Growth Partnership 388,551 140,126 EMDG 90,000554,625 220,915

Note 13. Borrowings

Current liabilities

2022 2021 $ $

Credit Card 6,660 2,935

Other payroll Liabilities 23,168 23,168 Salary Package - Novated Lease (23,168) (23,168) 6,660 2,935

Note 14. Provisions

Current liabilities

2022 2021 $ $

Annual leave 15,878 14,436

Long service leave 18,417 16,321 34,295 30,757

Note 15. Retained surpluses

2022 2021 $ $

Retained surpluses at the beginning of the financial year 104,169 152,680 (Deficit)/Surplus for the year 62,396 (48,511)

Retained surpluses at the end of the financial year 166,565 104,169

Note 16. Constitutional Requirements

Under the Constitution, if the Association is wound up, any property of the Association that remains after satisfaction of the debts and liabilities of the Council and the costs, charges and expenses of that winding up,that property shall be distributed to another incorporated association having similar objects to those of Association for charitable or benevolent purposes .At the date of this report it would appear that there is no intent to have the Association wound up.

Wine Industry Association of Western Australia Inc.

Notes to the financial statements

30 June 2022

Note 17. Reconciliation of surplus/(deficit) to net cash generated / (used in) from operating activities

Surplus/(Deficit) for the year

Change in operating assets and liabilities:

2022 2021 $ $ 62,396 (48,511)

Increase/(Decrease) in trade and other receivables 38,116 145,508

Increase/(Decrease) in trade and other payables 49,652 (11,465)

Increase/(Decrease) in contract liabilities 333,710 (394,558)

Increase/(Decrease) in borrowings 3,725Increase/(Decrease) in benefits 3,538 12,712

Net cash (used in)/generated from operating activities 491,137 (296,314)

Australia Vintage 2021

Red Variety

Vintage 2018Vintage 2019Vintage 2020Vintage 2021vs prior year

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 10755.18930.48397.39220.610% SHIRAZ 10414.97748.07591.68381.710% MERLOT 2710.32123.91616.91814.412%

PINOT NOIR 812.2621.2695.4910.831% MALBEC 839.9515.9 507.6572.513%

TEMPRANILLO 487.0303.4 409.6484.518%

GRENACHE 279.9424.1 317.2462.946% OTHER 164.9109.6253.4197.4-22%

CABERNET FRANC 232.8150.7 212.5171.2-19%

PETIT VERDOT 230.8167.5 149.4143.1 -4%

SANGIOVESE 67.148.0 52.784.861%

ZINFANDEL 62.849.4 47.648.21%

MOUVEDRE 57.023.0 41.642.73%

NEBBIOLO 34.127.0 26.734.429% BARBERA 14.311.3 9.723.5141% DURIF 20.614.0 16.415.5 -6%

GRACIANO 3.7 9.9 9.411.522%

PINOT MEUNIER 0.8 1.8 3.010.6250% NERO D'AVOLA 6.0 8.7 8.3 9.111% GAMAY 1.9 3.8 3.9 8.8124% DOLCETTO 3.6 3.7 4.5 4.3 -4% MONTEPULCIANO 0.4 0.5 0.5 2.8421% SAPERAVI 1.9 1.8 1.9 2.426% LAGREIN 1.4

CHAMBOURCIN BRACHETTO 1.0 1.6 1.2 2.397% TANNAT 5.8 1.0 1.0 2.2113% MEUNIER 0.7 0.6 0.2 1.4474% AGLIANICONE 0.1 0.7898% RED (TOTAL) 27210.921300.920379.822664.1 11%

White Variety

Vintage 2018 Vintage 2019 Vintage 2020 Vintage 2021 vs prior year

SAUVIGNON BLANC 10926.29 8997 7552.3517 10203.2 35%

CHARDONNAY 8910.54 8014 6979.344 8442.3 21%

SEMILLON 8880.30 6194 5946.925 7025.2 18%

CHENIN BLANC 2304.96 2186 2132.926 2156.1 1%

RIESLING 1350.63 1102 889.77 1398.1 57%

VERDELHO 799.22 705 603.211 645.7 7%

PINOT GRIS 159.61 237 321.302 469.4 46%

MUSCADELLE 189.97 179 199.721 181.7 -9%

SAVIGNIN BLANC 370.41 354 450.334 164.8 -63%

OTHER 213.57 235 83.603 161.4 93%

VIOGNIER 126.24 82 88.593 119.8 35%

PROSECCO 14.89 14 55.532 103.9 87%

VERMINTINO 76.21 61 55.426 101.6 83%

GEWURTZTRAMINER 51.61 18 40.228 83.1 106%

MUSCAT BLANC A PETITS GRAINS 47.43 111 98.318 80.5 -18%

FIANO 43.15 28 36.565 50.6 38%

VERDEJO 29.86 29 9.06 17.1 89%

ARNEIS 12.99 15 19.444 14.9 -24%

GRUNER VELTLINER 2 5.718 12.0 110%

TREBBIANO 4.00 5 4.118 9.2 124%

PEDRO XIMENEZ 14.31 8 7.573 4.6 -40%

SCHEUREBE 6.42 4 3.605 3.1 -14%

ROUSSANNE 1.37 1 1.349 2.0 50%

TRAMINER 8.40 2.14 2.0 -8%

HARSLEVELU 1

WHITE (TOTAL)

34,542.37 28,581.41 25,588.16 31,452.14 23% TOTAL 61,753.28 49,882.34 45,967.99 54,116.26 18%

Variety Tonnage Variety Tonnage

SHIRAZ 200.867 -9 SAUVIGNON BLANC 366.757

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 135.449 SEMILLON 278.51

MERLOT 74.63 CHARDONNAY 142.515

MALBEC 10.954 VERMINTINO 1

TEMPRANILLO 10.588 VIOGNIER 0.968

GRENACHE 1.5 OTHER 0.5

BARBERA 0.684 MUSCAT BLANC A PETITS GRAI 0.469

DURIF 0.248 PETIT VERDOT 0.2

APC Wine Producers' Committee Blackwood Valley Vintage 2021

APC Wine Producers' Committee Geographe Vintage 2021

Variety Tonnage Variety Tonnage

SHIRAZ 551.0 CHARDONNAY 398.8

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 378.9 SAUVIGNON BLANC 324.3

MERLOT 175.8 SEMILLON 225.7

TEMPRANILLO 102.6 RIESLING 49.7

MALBEC 52.5 CHENIN BLANC 20.5

GRENACHE 42.7 SAVIGNIN BLANC 15.4

BARBERA 20.5 OTHER 13.6 OTHER 19.6 VERMINTINO 9.8

ZINFANDEL 19.4 MUSCAT BLANC A PETITS GRAIN 6.9

SANGIOVESE 8.9 0.01 ARNEIS 5.0

MOUVEDRE 8.7 0.01 VERDELHO 3.8

GAMAY 7.7 0.01 GEWURTZTRAMINER 3.7

DOLCETTO 4.3 0 VERDEJO 3.6

PETIT VERDOT 3.6 0 FIANO 2.9

GRACIANO 3.3 VIOGNIER 1.3

NERO D'AVOLA 2.7

CABERNET FRANC 2.5

NEBBIOLO 2.5 DURIF 2.1

MONTEPULCIANO 0.5

PINOT NOIR 0.2

RED - TOTAL 1409.7 WHITE TOTAL 1084.8

APC Wine Producers Committee Great Southern Vintage 2021

Variety

Tonnage

Variety

Tonnage

SHIRAZ 3238.9 SAUVIGNON BLANC 1657.1

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 2010.0 CHARDONNAY 1535.5

PINOT NOIR 517.0 RIESLING 1114.1 MERLOT 238.4 SEMILLON 1085.8 MALBEC 173.1 PINOT GRIS 177.9

TEMPRANILLO 119.7 GEWURTZTRAMINER 69.6

GRENACHE 60.6 VIOGNIER 40.5

CABERNET FRANC 42.1 VERMINTINO 34.6 OTHER 25.6 FIANO 20.1

MOUVEDRE 19.9 GRUNER VELTLINER 12.0

SANGIOVESE 18.2 VERDELHO 7.2

NEBBIOLO 12.6 CHENIN BLANC 6.1

PETIT VERDOT 11.5 ARNEIS 6.0 PINOT MEUNIER 9.1 SAVIGNIN BLANC 4.0 MEUNIER 0.7 OTHER 0.8 TANNAT 0.3

RED TOTAL 6497.6 WHITE TOTAL 5771.3

APC Wine Producers Committee Margaret River Vintage

Variety

2021

Tonnage Variety Tonnage

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 6413.5 SAUVIGNON BLANC 6885.7

SHIRAZ 3738.8 CHARDONNAY 5370.7

MERLOT 1180.2 SEMILLON 5284.2

MALBEC 315.5 CHENIN BLANC 871.1

TEMPRANILLO 188.5 RIESLING 215.7

PINOT NOIR 146.5 PINOT GRIS 145.1

CABERNET FRANC 120.3 SAVIGNIN BLANC 125.3

PETIT VERDOT 108.6 VERDELHO 60.8

GRENACHE 91.3 VIOGNIER 59.9

OTHER 68.2 MUSCAT BLANC A PETITS GRAINS 59.5

SANGIOVESE 39.0 OTHER 33.0

ZINFANDEL 13.9 VERMINTINO 31.2

NEBBIOLO 13.4 FIANO 22.5

MOUVEDRE 11.0 VERDEJO 10.2

GRACIANO 6.4 MUSCADELLE 9.6

CHAMBOURCIN 2.3 SCHEUREBE 3.1

TANNAT 1.1 PROSECCO 2.2 GAMAY 1.1 ROUSSANNE 2.0 GEWURTZTRAMINER 0.9

RED TOTAL 12459.7

WHITE TOTAL 19192.7

APC Wine Producers Committee Peel

Vintage 2021

Variety

Tonnage Variety

Tonnage

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 4.0 CHARDONNAY 6.0

SHIRAZ 3.3 CHENIN BLANC 2.1

MERLOT 2.0 VERDELHO 2.1

PINOT NOIR 1.0 SAUVIGNON BLANC 2.0

CABERNET FRANC 0.8 SEMILLON 2.0

TEMPRANILLO 0.7 FIANO 0.5 OTHER 0.6 MUSCADELLE 0.3 ZINFANDEL 0.5

TOTAL 12.9 TOTAL 15.0

APC

Wine Producers' Committee Perth Hills Vintage 2021

Variety

Tonnage Variety Tonnage

SHIRAZ 139.6 CHARDONNAY 27.4

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 30.4 VERMINTINO 14.3

GRENACHE 21.2 VIOGNIER 8.2

TEMPRANILLO 20.2 SEMILLON 4.8

MERLOT 12.7 OTHER 4.1

PINOT NOIR 8.9 VERDEJO 3.3

DURIF 6.6 VERDELHO 2.7 OTHER 5.9 FIANO 1.6

BARBERA 2.3 GEWURTZTRAMINER 1.1

BRACHETTO 2.2 MUSCAT BLANC A PETITS GRAINS 0.2

MOUVEDRE 2.1

NEBBIOLO 2.1

PETIT VERDOT 1.8

NERO D'AVOLA 1.7

ZINFANDEL 1.5

MONTEPULCIANO 1.4 SANGIOVESE 1.4 MALBEC 0.1

RED TOTAL 262.1 WHITE TOTAL 67.7

APC Wine Producers' Committee Swan Valley Vintage 2021

Variety

Tonnage Variety

Tonnage

SHIRAZ 407.4 CHENIN BLANC 1256.2

GRENACHE 245.5 VERDELHO 562.0

CABERNET SAUVIGNON 165.5 CHARDONNAY 301.8

OTHER 77.5 MUSCADELLE 171.9

TEMPRANILLO 41.4 SEMILLON 77.9

MERLOT 39.2 OTHER 76.6

SANGIOVESE 17.3 PINOT GRIS 36.3

MALBEC 9.2 MUSCAT BLANC A PETITS GRAINS 13.4

PETIT VERDOT 8.0 SAUVIGNON BLANC 11.1

DURIF 6.6 VERMINTINO 10.6

NERO D'AVOLA 4.8 TREBBIANO 9.2

ZINFANDEL 3.9 VIOGNIER 8.7

CABERNET FRANC 2.9 PEDRO XIMENEZ 4.6

SAPERAVI 2.4 FIANO 2.7

GRACIANO 1.8 TRAMINER 2.0

MOUVEDRE 1.0 PROSECCO 0.3

MONTEPULCIANO 0.9

PINOT NOIR 0.3

RED TOTAL 1035.5 WHITE TOTAL 2545.2

WA Wine Industry RDE Strategic Review 27 July 2021

Department

of Primary Industries and Regional Development Verschuer Drive, Bunbury

SUMMARY AND OUPUTS

The purpose of the meeting was to explore the key challenges faced by WA wine producers and then develop a strategic framework to address these. The outputs confirm:

1. What are the challenges?

2. How can these be overcome?

3. Who can assist WA producers to do so?

4. When can the programs be implemented?

These outputs will be used to guide RD&E the resources allocated by WA wine producers in partnership with the WA state government, Wine Australia and the relevant research service providers.

Members of the Wines of WA Technical Committee, representatives from all WA wine regions, WoWA Board members and WA based RDE researchers/service providers and key DPIRD personnel participated in the meeting.

The group first reviewed the 2014-24 WA Wine Industry Strategic Plan and 2017 RD&E Strategic Review Outputs. It was agreed that the broad themes regarding RD&E outlined in these documents remain relevant. Confirming the industry’s strategic direction has been consistent and focused on the medium/long-term challenges and opportunities that will enable innovation and sustainable growth.

Input from Australian Grape and Wine (AGW) and Wine Australia (AGWA) confirmed the need for a strategic national approach in allocating resources and funding from federal levies and research & development corporations (RDCs). Additionally, the federal government has requested that all agricultural RDCs collaborate to ensure cross-sector projects, further leverage levy funding. The RDC’s focus going forward will move towards facilitating adoption and commercialisation to drive innovation and sustainable growth.

For wine industry levies specifically, it was noted that there will be less allocated to Strategic Partnership Agreements (SPAs), with more competitive grants for state/region specific projects It should be noted, the amount of federal levies available will decrease over coming years, increasing the need for an over-arching national strategic framework that guides the allocation of levies.

AGW and AGWA have been consulting broadly with state/regional bodies, a draft discussion paper has been circulated to encourage a national approach to RDE priorities.

WA Wine Industry RDE Strategic Review 27 July 2021

Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development Verschuer Drive, Bunbury

SUMMARY AND OUPUTS

RDE Strategic Focus Areas

1. Understanding the intricacies of provenance and the fine wine regions of WA Wines of WA Strategic Plan 2014-24 is focused on improving our fine wine quality, and the distinctive qualities of our fine wine regions. Understanding what makes a wine region unique is important to both producers and consumers, particularly those regions producing iconic wines. A greater understanding of the interaction of climatic and geophysical aspects on wine composition and sensory attributes is essential in verifying provenance, guiding future vineyard developments, improving quality and our competitive advantage in the market. This information will become a powerful tool to communicate throughout our value chain/s the uniqueness and value of WA provincial wines from a scientific basis. Funding and resourcing for this project has been confirmed under the Export Growth Partnership with the WA government. The project will be delivered by DPIRD in partnership with Margaret River and Great Southern wine regions initially and other regions subsequently

2. Supporting WA producers to adopt Sustainable Winegrowing Australia (SWA)

Why: WoWA is of the view that the WA wine industry can be world leaders in sustainability. Supporting an evidence based approach to sustainability will improve the viability of our grape and wine businesses and enhance our competitive advantage, as well as addressing our social license to operate. It’s for these reasons that the Wine of WA Strategic Plan supports the SWA certification of all grape growers and wine makers by 2030. What: SWA is the national program for grape growers and winemakers to demonstrate and continuously improve the sustainability of vineyards and wineries through the environmental, social, and economic aspects of their businesses

How: An Industry Development Officer (IDO) to support growers/producers to adopt SWA and implement it into their business practises Who: A partnership between WA wine industry, AGWA and DPIRD to support an IDO, with direct links to the national SWA program When: Immediate start Success: 100% members and 60% certified in 5 years

3. Supporting WA producers to adopt on farm biosecurity practises

Why: A key component of our unique value proposition or competitive advantage is our freedom from many pests and diseases. Less pests and diseases leads to reduced inputs and improves the quality of our fine wines. Protecting this important competitive advantage is critical. WoWA identified this as one of their top 5 priorities in the WoWA Strategic Plan 2014 24 What: To protect our competitive advantage and build on it its was recognised that that we needed to increase the awareness and application of best practise biosecurity at the farm level.

WA Wine Industry RDE Strategic Review 27 July 2021

Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development Verschuer Drive, Bunbury

SUMMARY AND OUPUTS

How: An Industry Development Officer (IDO) to support and drive the implementation of on farm biosecurity best practise

Who: A partnership between WA wine industry, AGWA and DPIRD to fund/resource an IDO, with direct links to the national SWA program

When: Immediate start Success: Within 5 years 80% of vineyards and winemakers have implemented the industry agreed on farm best practice biosecurity functions.

4. Why are vineyard yields declining in WA?

Why: As a result of broad industry consultation and feedback it is acknowledged that many vineyards in WA are declining in yield. In most wine growing areas in the world plantings are replaced every 20 to 25yrs through rotational establishment programs. In WA most vineyards were established 20 to 25 years ago. This has the WA industry confronted with a unique situation. The issue being when to replace the vines. A diagnostic approach to addressing the decline in yield would help determine the priority areas for replacement. As well as how best to manage the remaining vines to obtain optimum production from them for the remainder of their lives.

- What: Vineyard yield is declining across most regions. A program to determine why and how to address this is required. As well as a strategy to replace the vines in the best sequence to optimise production and returns. How: Case studies at farm level across regions to investigate the cause of yield decline. Agronomist to review economics of various mitigation strategies to address issue effectively.

Who: DPIRD/industry

When: immediate start Success: In 5 years, 50% of grape growers are applying the knowledge to effectively address the factors contributing to yield decline in vines. They know how to determine when vines need to be replaced, and how to optimise the yield of existing vines waiting to be replaced. This is supported by economic modelling, and decision support tools that growers interact with to determine the critical intervention points. Every year at least 20% of the total area to vines is replanted to new root stock.

5. Why is the adoption of RD&E so low by WA Wine industry?

Why: RD&E conducted for an industry that is not adopted is of little value to that industry. The WA Wine industry wants to grow and be sustainable into the future, however it recognises that the adaption and implementation rate of many of the technologies developed by the RDCs is low amongst the WA levy payers. What: Often there are very logical reasons while growers are not applying these technologies. Identifying these constraints and barriers will enable the industry to be more innovative and productive going forward.

How: PhD project looking at why current technologies are not be adopted by growers. It will focus on the perceived barriers and constraints to the adoption of the key technologies, and how these can best be overcome. A second PhD project will look at who are the influential people in the industry across a range of key topics and map the these out This study will also look at how growers want to be supported to take on new technologies. As well as what

WA Wine Industry RDE Strategic Review 27 July 2021

Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development Verschuer Drive, Bunbury

SUMMARY AND OUPUTS

publications they read to understand the new technologies available and how to assess if they worth employing. review current adoption strategies and examples of best practise models in other regions (Napa, NZ) and industries. An IDO to oversee and implement recommendations.

Who: Murdoch, UWA, WA wine industry, AGWA/AWRI, ASVO and DPIRD

When: Immediate start

Success: In 5 years (50% of growers) widespread implementation on-farm of at least three key technologies that are not currently widely adopted across the industry. This could include on-farm biosecurity, sustainability certification and strategies to address vineyard yield declines.

6. Rapid access to new genetic plant material

Why: Access to large volumes of new genetic material at comparable costs to the eastern states is essential to ensuring the WA industry is able to response rapidly to emerging consumer trends, and take on disease resistant, and improved quality/yielding lines/varieties. An inability to access this material will result in reduced plantings, greater risk with new plantings not having resistance and/or yield and quality improvements. This would result in the WA industry losing its competitive advantage and/or market share over time, with the industry becoming unviable in the medium term.

- It is well recognised and acknowledged that protecting the WA industry from additional pests and diseases is critical. That is why it’s imperative that access to new genetic plant material doesn’t compromise this position, but it’s cost effective, and the risks have been effectively mitigated ensuring our pristine environment is not compromised.

What: WA growers do not have the same access to enough quality plant material compared to other state and countries. This has limited innovation, renewal, and growth of vineyards.

How: Advocate for policy change to allow direct importation of quality plant material from certified national and international providers

Who: WoWA and DPIRD When: Immediately Success: Within 12 months, producers have rapid access to the required plant material. A process is in place to enable large volumes and range of varieties/lines of pest and disease free material to enter the state in a timely manner at reasonable cost to the growers.

2021 WA Wine Industry Forum Key Messages

Great progress to date on implementing 2014 24 WA Wine Industry Strategic Plan by WoWA and Regional Associations

ACTIVITY REPORT

Please copy and complete the table below for the number of activities you pursued in 2021 22 Activities should correspond to those detailed in the 2021-22 AOP, subject to subsequent variations. Please complete the budget overview at the end of the document.

ACTIVITY 1

DEVELOPING AND ASSESSING CELLAR DOOR EXPERIENCES

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

This activity provided Incubator Initiative recipient Dr Ben Thomas an opportunity to extend his research findings on optimising cellar door experiences. Workshops were held in Margaret River and Geographe wine regions but the Great Southern and Swan Valley workshops were not held.

On the 19 May 2022 I was advised by Ben’s supervisor he was unable to conduct the remaining workshops due to a new born and other unspecific reasons.

This was disappointing but Ben and Curtin University were not seeking the payment of $9K that was allocated to this activity.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. 50 wine producers will be provided insights into different wine tourist profiles and their behaviours when visiting cellar door Approximately 25 producers received this information.

2. 50 wine producers will understand techniques to collect data to develop their own customer profiles Approximately 25 producers received this information.

3. 50 wine producers will understand different approaches to developing cellar door experiences to match visitor profiles and increase customer spending Approximately 25 producers received this information.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. There are different segments of customers that visit cellar doors and tailoring offerings to suit their interests can lead to increased spend.

2.

3. What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

Two regional workshops

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference

$9,000 was budgeted, this was unspent with in-kind used to deliver the two workshops.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

Unfortunately, this activity was not fully realised the reason provided was that the presenter did not have the capacity to deliver as intended.

ACTIVITY 2

GARDEN WEEVIL WEBINAR

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. At least 40 growers will have accessed this planned webinar by June 2022.

2. 85% of attendees will have their knowledge improved of the potential of biological control agents and management practices outside of Australia concerning garden weevil.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. There is current research on the effectiveness of biological control agents, with some internationally registered products commercially available

2. Still no single solution to managing this pest other than an a multifaceted IPM approach

3.

What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

The webinar is scheduled for 15 September.

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

The budgeted $1,000 will be fully expended once the webinar is completed, the funds will not be used for a Zoom subscription but rather to cover the time of the organiser/facilitator as this was significantly more than initially expected.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

Has been delayed due to the difficulty in securing a South African viticulturist to give practical insight into management strategies with biological control agents and also the availability of the multitude of speakers.

ACTIVITY 3

REGIONAL WINEMAKERS’ TRIAL FORUMS

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

Swan Valley (SV) event held 30 Nov 2021, presented wines from Chardonnay winemaking trial, emerging varieties (SV sourced), Shading trial with Shiraz and some local contributions. The event was highly regarded by the 10 producers in attendance. Overall, a successful event with interest to continue holding.

For efficiency, the Great Southern event was combined with activity 1 from the 2020-21 program, featuring a tasting of Margaret River Cabernet clones/selections plus a Chardonnay winemaking trial, Merlot clones, Shiraz shading trial and some local innovative wines generated discussion amongst the 20 producers.

A Margaret River event is scheduled for 7 September with a focus on winemakers sharing their experiences with different formats of fermentation and maturation vessels.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. At least 40 producers will attend these events across the three regions, 90% of which will perceive these tastings as valuable or very valuable use of Regional Program funds. Expect this will be achieved after the Margaret River event on 7 Sept.

2. Attendees will share knowledge of innovative vineyard and winery practices by contributing their own wine trials and/or providing opened commentary of the wines as they perceive them. Achieved.

3. At least 80% of attendees will believe they have improved their knowledge on a certain theme due to these tasting events. Expect this will be achieved after the Margaret River event on 7 Sept.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. Wine producers are willing to share experiences and knowledge on different vineyard practices and winemaking techniques.

2. The forums are well attended and confirm that extension and adoption are valued by producers when the content is relevant, noting comments below on what is required to ensure attendance.

3. The forums offer an opportunity to further engage industry through inclusion of promotional material for other initiatives and discussions on what issues are important.

What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

Two regional workshops and a third scheduled for 7 September.

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

The budgeted $2,000 was spent as budgeted.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

As noted above, there is a willingness from wine producers to be involved in these forums but engaging with them can be challenging and usually requiring numerous phone calls to prompt people to be involved.

ACTIVITY 4

NATIONAL COONAWARRA AUSTRALIAN CABERNET SYMPOSIUM MARGARET RIVER SATELLITE

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

This activity was cancelled as the event organisers have postponed until late 2023.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

$6,000 was budgeted and reallocated to 2022-23.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

ACTIVITY 5

TRUNK DISEASE SURVEY

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

An expression of interest was sent out to gauge how many samples would be provided which returned at least 60 samples would be submitted. Forty-seven samples were eventually received across six wine regions which is below our expectations of 80 samples across all nine regions.

A webinar to present and discuss the findings is still to be scheduled.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. ~80 samples across WA wine regions to be assessed for a specific trunk disease diagnosis and provided appropriate management options by June 2022

2. 80% of webinar attendees to have an improved understanding of trunk diseases prominent in WA.

3. 80% of producers contributing samples and webinar attendees to have found this activity valuable or very valuable use of levy funds.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. Eutypa was not detected in any of the samples which supports the view of WA being free of this pathogen

2. Botryosphaeria is by far the most significant trunk disease in WA vineyards

3.Awareness of the issue is high and will be higher following Simonit and Sirch worksops. What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

Diagnostic reports have been provided to all the producers who submitted samples and a webinar is planned to disseminate the results and highlight key management techniques for Botryosphaeria.

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

$20,000 was budgeted and expended, analytical costs were higher than anticipated as they included additional analysis to determine the species of the pathogen detected.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

Did not experience a full conversion of initial expression of interest to submit samples to the number of samples received. However, the findings confirm anecdotal belief that Botryosphaeria is the most prevalent trunk disease in WA vineyards. Webinar and newsletter article to present and discuss the findings is yet to be scheduled attributed to delays in getting samples submitted and the consequential analysis completed.

ACTIVITY 6

DEMONSTRATION OF EFFECTIVE SNAIL MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

This activity has completed the laboratory and field demonstrations which have been summarised and published in the respective December 2021 and June 2022 wine industry newsletter editions.

A webinar has yet to be scheduled.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. Increase the awareness of over 40 growers on the effectiveness of snail baiting products and the impact of timing on vineyard snail management by December 2021.

2. 80% of growers attending the webinar to indicate they will review their snail management strategy.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. The brown garden snail is an opportunistic re producer; large snails are biologically equipped to reproduce when environmental conditions are conducive thus important to monitor and act throughout the year.

2. Of the four different bait products compared it was clear there were differences in rates of consumption but this did not correlate to mortality.

3. Organic bait products performed similarly to the synthetic pesticides.

What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

Two wine industry newsletters:

https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/newsletters/win/win-vol-141-1 https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/newsletters/win/win-vol-143

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

$6,000 was budgeted and fully expended.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

ACTIVITY 7

DEMONSTRATING THE INFLUENCE OF CLONAL SELECTION ON MARGARET RIVER CABERNET SAUVIGNON WINE QUALITY

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

All 14 clones/selections were harvested, wines have been made and bottled, vineyard measurements completed 26 Aug 2022 and findings and wines to be scheduled for regional tastings.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. By August 2022 up to 50 WA viticulturists and winemakers will have increased awareness and knowledge of clones of Cabernet Sauvignon available in WA and their unique attributes displayed in one year from a trial site in Margaret River. Delayed, requiring to schedule regional tastings.

2. Up to 90% of attendees of the tasting will understand the benefit of multi clonal plantings compared to mono clonal. Delayed, requiring to schedule regional tastings.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. There were clear differences in rate of sugar accumulation between the clones/selections resulting in two picking dates for the block.

What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

14 different wines produced, approximately 12 bottles of each clone/selection available for upcoming tasting workshops and potentially contribute to the Coonawarra Cabernet Symposium.

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

$11,000 was budgeted and fully expended.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

ACTIVITY 8

SUSTAINABLE WINEGROWING AUSTRALIA CERTIFICATION TRAINING

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

In January 2022, a total of 29 participants attended Sustainable Winegrowing Australia online certification training with five of them doing both Viticulture and Winery bringing the total number of registrations to 34.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. By February 2022, provide 29 producers (SWA members) with the necessary training to become certified members. Achieved.

2. Promote the adoption of SWA, increasing current financial members to certified so at least 25% of members are certified by 2023 Currently 17% of members are certified.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. WA wine producers (especially Margaret River) have great interested and engagement in their involvement of the SWA program and more specifically value the opportunity to demonstrate to their customers of their sustainability credentials.

2.Many producers (especially small/medium) require significant engagement to understand the value of SWA

3. For industry wide adoption of SWA, on the ground, round the table is key.

What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

$11,500 was budgeted and expended.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

ACTIVITY 9

SIMONIT&SIRCH PRUNING WORKSHOPS

Was the activity achieved and, in the timeframe, expected? (250 words)

In June 2022, Simonit&Sirch pruning workshops conducted by Mia Fischer were held in the Swan Valley with 40 people in attendance, in the Great Southern with 30 people and in Margaret River with 32 people in attendance. Workshop consisted of ~2hrs presentation of S&S principles and practices and then ~1hr field walk involving a couple of vines pruned as a practical demonstration and discussion. Outside of these workshops vineyard visits at Forest Hill, Frankland River Estate, Woodlands, Pierro, Juniper and Deepwoods were conducted.

If applicable, please re state and report specifically against the SMART objectives as specified in your AOP.

1. Of the 102 participates, 43 people completed a survey showing that 98% found the event a good use of funds, 100% found the information valuable and will lead into a review of practice change.

What were the three key learnings of this activity for your region?

1. There is a great demand for new knowledge on how to better care for aging vines and how to address issues such as trunk disease to ensure the longevity of vineyard assets. Driven predominately by yield and vine decline in WA’s aging vineyards.

2. Again, programs for adoption are successful when relevant to industry

3. Contrary to point two, industry sometimes does not know what it doesn’t know. The Regional Program should also lead on industry challenges.

What final products were generated by this activity, if any?

Budget: was funding expended as approved in the Regional Funding Agreement and 2021 22 AOP? Please state approved funds and actual expenditure and detail any difference.

$11,524 was budgeted and expended. $7,225.36 accounted for speakers fees and flights while the balance covered ground travel, accommodation, venue hire, catering and administration.

Comments: please provide any further comments about this activity

Very pleased on the engagement received across the various regions for this activity, attendance numbers exceeded expectations.

2021-22 Wine Export Growth Partnership Monitoring and Evaluation Report

Wines of WA and the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD) have established a partnership to develop and diversify export markets for wine produced in Western Australia. The purpose of the WA Wine Industry Export Growth Partnership (partnership) is to implement key priority elements of the Western Australian Wine Export Strategy 2019 2024 (WA Wine Export Strategy).

The WA Wine Export Strategy aims to increase the profitability of the WA wine industry by:

1. Growing the average value and volumes of WA wines exported

2. Growing the number of WA wine producers successfully participating in export markets

3. Aligning investment in international wine marketing, promotion, media and wine tourism to maximize profile and sales outcomes for WA fine wines

The WA Wine Export Growth Partnership is designed to run over five years as set out in the WA Wine Export Growth Partnership Financial Assistance Agreement for the partnership.

As part of the partnership, a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan is required to monitor the performance of the partnership as set out in the Financial Assistance Agreement and the aims of the WA Wine Export Strategy. The plan requires that effectiveness and efficiency monitoring is undertaken in April of each of the five years of the partnership.

2021-22 Executive Summary

The WA wine industry has set medium- and long term goals to increase the volume, value and value per unit of wine exported while also building market diversification. The overarching strategic rationale for this is to develop market demand which will support further industry development. Increased market demand will give wine producers the confidence to invest in growth and innovation and the economic basis to access finance to do so. The Australian domestic market is unlikely to provide this market pull with population growth relatively stable and alcohol consumption levels per person reducing.

The Export Growth Partnership (EGP) is focused on further developing profitable sales in existing markets (UK/Europe, USA/Canada and Singapore) and opening new markets in SE/NE Asia. This is the first time such a coordinated and adequately funded program has been implemented. Previously, such work was done primarily by Wine Australia, the federal wine RDC. Unfortunately, their remit is broad and caters for every Australian wine offer. Given the vast difference in price, position and required promotional strategy between WA and the broader Australian wine offer, the results were always patchy. The EGP seeks to address this market failure.

Wines of Western Australia

Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T– 9284 3355 E - winewa@winewa.asn.au W

This is the first year of the partnership. A substantial amount of foundational work to establish industry driven market focus, strategic and tactical framework was completed prior to commencement of the 2021 22 program. Much of what was identified as key to driving market demand was not possible because of COVID 19 restrictions across all markets. For this reason, many hybrid/online activations were undertaken to ensure producers remained connected to trade customers and consumers in key markets. Not all were successful and most agree that virtual engagement is an adjunct to in-market and in-bound activities. Thus, the focus in 2022-23 will return to in-market activations and in bound trade and media visits.

Challenges noted below were significant. Despite this, aggregated value and volume increased compared with 2021 22. Value increased by 5.7% and volume by 11.4% across all markets replacing much of the market share lost in China. The UK and USA provided most of this growth and there is potential to grow volume and value in these markets at a similar rate in 2022 23. This will be supported by lower levels of aggregated volume in other markets which are suited to smaller producers selling at higher price points. Singapore/SE Asia and Japan will be targeted for this cohort.

Challenges through 2021-22 include:

- Complete collapse of China market due to imposed trade sanctions. While producers reported strong pull through for products already in market and a definite desire for WA wine in China, punitive tariffs made such trade unviable. The aggregated value of WA wine exported to China dropped by $3.9 million in FY 2021 22. Further, the number of exporters dropped by 53 in FY 2021 22. Most of these were businesses with a business model focusing exclusively on exporting to China. (Wine Australia Wine Export Approval data)

As noted above, COVID 19 restrictions made in person promotion impossible. Additionally, in market movement restrictions meant restaurant trade was substantially down and specialist retail outlets were challenged to reach consumers. As a premium wine offer focused on these channels, WA was significantly affected.

All exporters were affected by logistics issues. In WA, given the lower volume of value added goods moving out of the state generally, securing reliable and cost competitive container space was difficult.

Wine supply was reduced by three years of weather affected grape production. Through 2019 2021, production volumes were down by 20% on the long term average. (2022 APC annual return report)

The inability to travel as noted above has put WA as wine producing region behind others in Australia and internationally.

Opportunities going forward are:

Market demand is increasing in the UK and USA for WA regionally branded wine. These markets offer different opportunities and are complimentary.

In the UK, demand for aromatic white wine styles is increasing. These styles are well suited to southwest WA’s climate and production capacity. Additionally, these styles can be exported in bulk containers for packaging in market. This allows for a price point that can both move significant volume and provide profitability through the value chain. Visibility in market as a result will lift awareness of WA’s regionally branded wine offer and support other wine

Wines of Western Australia Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T 9284 3355 E winewa@winewa.asn.au W www.winewa.asn au

styles. The 2022 23 program provides support to WA wine producers to drive sales through their existing sales channel partners. This in store visibility lends itself to partnership in country promotion with Tourism WA as the UK is a significant visitor market for WA.

In the USA, strong demand for Chardonnay and Cabernet Sauvignon wine styles has driven growth in volume while increasing value per unit. The depth of this demand is substantial, and WA’s regional fine wine offer is perfectly suited to the consumer profile buying it. The 2022 23 program is providing support to new market entrants and those with existing sales channels to take advantage of this demand.

Southeast Asia, including Singapore offer an opportunity for new to export producers. Singapore has strong understanding of WA’s fine wine offer from Margaret River, and this can be built on for other regions. Geographic proximity and similar legal and economic framework make it an easy market regrading compliance and cultural alignment. Other countries in the region are becoming more open and cosmopolitan and have significant high end tourism which will provide opportunities for regional fine wine producers

With international travel now possible, attendance as a coordinated and well resource collaboration at key trade fairs is important. Equally important is the messaging that focuses on WA’s reginal fine wine offer. As noted above, while Wine Australia facilitates attendance at these events, this messaging is often diluted. The 2022 23 program will ensure WA has the resources to drive this messaging.

While the over supply of wine in Australia resulting from the closure of the China market will exert some downward pressure on pricing generally, WA is well placed to position its regional fine wine offer above this.

Wines of Western Australia Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T 9284 3355 E winewa@winewa.asn.au W www.winewa.asn au

Efficiency monitoring

1. Has the expenditure profile of the partnership matched the requirements of the agreement?

The expenditure profile of the partnership aligns with requirements of the agreement, noting in each financial year, Wines of WA charges $20,000 to administer and manage compliance. The remaining funds ($808,000) have been expended on delivering services for the program,

2. Are there efficient processes in place to ensure the timely assessment and disbursement of funds to participating organisations?

Presently the agreement milestone schedule is the resource to manage assessment and distribution processes. Wines of WA is working with DPIRD to further refine this to ensure work required to produce reports are scheduled appropriately.

Key performance indicator Results

Administration cost ratio – partnership funds required to administer the activities of the partnership each year as share of the total budget provided

Timeliness indicator – timeliness of reporting against agreement milestones

In 2021-22, the estimated breakdown is: Services - $1,098,000 or 98.1% Administration- $20,000 or 1.9%

Note total expenditure was 1,078,000

In 2021- 22, there were no significant timeliness issues related to reporting against agreement milestones, noting this report as an exception. It should be noted that the timelines for this report do not match the agreement milestones

Wines of Western Australia

Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T– 9284 3355 E - winewa@winewa.asn.au W

Effectiveness Monitoring

4. What activities have been most effective in achieving the stated outcomes of the agreement? As this was the first year of the program and international travel was not possible until late April 2021 (nor could it have been contemplated or planned for earlier), most activity was implemented via virtual and remote means. Generally, these served the purpose of keeping WA producers connected to trade and media in key markets. However, as other states and countries began to travel to market ahead of WA, the impact of such activities quickly diminished. The value of these activities increased when aligned to programs with an intent to connect producers to potential distributors in market, particularly the UK and the USA where several producers obtained market partners through new to market matching programs. Programs focused on consumer sales that started towards the end of the 2021-22 financial did result in new orders from distributors. These types of activations will increase in 2022-23.

5. Has the real value of wine exports increased over the assessment period? The real value of wine exports has increased by 5 % relative to the starting point of 1 July 2021. (Wine Australia Export Approval Report June 2022)

6. Has the volume of wine exports increased over the assessment period? The volume of wine exported has increased by 11% relative to the starting point of 1 July 2021. (Wine Australia Export Approval Report June 2022)

7. Has the participation of wineries in export markets increased? Participation numbers in export markets has decreased by 13% relative to the starting point of 1 July 2021. Note the result at a national level was a drop of just under 50% (Austrade Report October 2022)

8. What additional investment has the Government’s investment in the partnership achieved? An additional investment of $387,500 has been contributed by WA wine producers and stakeholder partners. This represents 47% of total spend.

9. Did the partnership align state and national resources aimed at international wine marketing? Yes, most activations this year involved partnerships with state and/or federal resources including Austrade, Wine Australia, WA Trade offices (London, Singapore and Tokyo), Tourism WA and the SWDC and GSDC.

Key performance indicator

The real value of wine exports each year from WA by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties) by market destination

The percentage growth in the real value of wine exports

Results (1 July 2022 v 1 July 2021)

Aggregated value across all markets increased 5.71 % to $38.9 million, supported largely by a 30% increase in un packaged wine to the UK Notable increases by market include: an 11% increase in aggregated value to the UK; a 100% increase in aggregated value to the US (off a COVID affected July 2021 total of $3.4 million); a 6% increase in aggregated value to Singapore. Note there was a China market affected 30% decrease in aggregated value to Hong Kong

Wines of Western Australia Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T– 9284 3355 E - winewa@winewa.asn.au W – www.winewa.asn au

Key

performance indicator Results (1 July 2022 v 1 July 2021)

each year from WA by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties) by market destination

Aggregated total value across the top 5 markets (which now excludes China) increased 18.4 % with a 15.6% increase in bottled wine and 30.8% increase in un packaged wine.

The biggest growth by variety included: Sauvignon Blanc increasing by $1.7 million to $3.2 million (106% growth); Sauvignon Blanc blends increasing by $1.6 million to $3.2 million (100% growth). Cabernet remained the top variety by value and grew to $9.4 million across all markets (1% growth); Chardonnay was second at $8.5 million across all markets (7.6% growth); Shiraz was third at $6 million but dropped by 15.5% as a result of the loss of China trade.

The total real value of wine exports each year from WA as a share of total Australian wine exports

The real price per unit (PPU) of exported wine by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties)

The percentage growth in the real price per unit of exported wine by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties)

The total real value of WA wine exports as a share of total Australian exports increased by 30% from 1.44% in July 2021 to 1.86% in July 2022

The volume of wine exports each year from WA by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties) by market destination

The PPU ($/litre) dropped 5.3% to $8.64 for all wine exported. The increase in unpackaged wine exported to UK was the reason for this.

The PPU for bottled wine increased by 4% to $12.59/litre

The PPU for unpackaged wine dropped by 2.6% to $3.20

The PPU for top varieties were: Cabernet up 2.4% to $12.42; Chardonnay up 5.6% to $13.42; Shiraz up 6.8% to $6.17; Sauvignon Blanc down 21% to $3.83 (affected by large increase in volume of unpackaged to UK); Sauvignon Blanc blends down 3% to $8.51 affected by large increase in volume of unpackaged to UK)

Note that bottled PPU for Sauvignon Blanc blends increased by 13% to $10.78 and Sauvignon Blanc 1.1% to $9.78. Both also increased volume shipped. As a “cash cow” for the WA industry (typically un wooded, early release, low input styles), this is an important point. All points along the value chain win when Sauvignon Blanc and blends are in demand and selling at good PPU. As a relatively high yield variety, cost per unit production is significantly lower than for Cabernet and Chardonnay.

The volume of all wine exported to all markets increased by 11% to 4.5 million litres

The volume of bottled wine exported to all markets decreased by 2.5% to 2.6 million litres

The volume of unpackaged wine exported to all markets increased by 38.6% to 1.9 million litres

The growth in the volume of wine exports each year from WA by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties) by market destination

The volume of all wine exported to the UK increased by 4.4% to 2.2 million litres; unpackaged wine exports increased by 32.6% to 1.8 million litres; bottled wine exports decreased by 11% to 511,000 litres

The volume of all wine exported to the USA increased by 91% to 521,800 litres; unpackaged wine exports are not sent to the USA; bottled wine exports increased by 91% to 521,800 litres

The volume of all wine exported to Singapore decreased by 7.1% to 187,000 litres. Unpackaged wine is not sent to Singapore

The volume of all wine exported to Canada increased by 1.1% to 170,500 litres. Unpackaged wine is not sent to Canada

Wines of Western Australia

Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T

winewa@winewa.asn.au

Key performance indicator Results (1 July 2022 v 1 July 2021)

The volume of wine exported by variety follows: Shiraz down 21% to 980,200 litres; Sauvignon Blanc up 150% to 849,600 litres; Cabernet down .8% to 757,000 litres; Chardonnay up .8% to 629,600 litres; Sauvignon Blanc blends up 209% to 377,900 litres

The total volume of wine exports each year from WA as a share of total WA production

In 2021, the total volume of wine exported (4.5 million litres) as a share of 2020 total production (29.9 million litres) was 15%.

It is worth noting that the last 3 vintages to 2019 have been below the long term average of 60,000 tonnes (2019 – 50,000 tonnes; 2020 – 46,000 tonnes; 2021 – 56,000 tonnes). These results are largely due to weather events. For this reason, the amount of stock available for export markets may have been reduced depending on individual business decisions on which markets to supply.

The total volume of wine exports each year from WA as a share of total Australian wine exports

Aggregated number of exporting wineries

The value of any contributions by wine producers and parties external to DPIRD.

The total real volume of WA wine exports as a share of total Australian exports increased by 16.7% from .6% in July 2021 to .7% in July 2022

While there were new exporters who obtained distribution through program supported activities in 2021-22 the net result was a 26% drop (down 53 to 150 from 203) in the aggregated number of wineries exporting.

An additional investment of $657,00 has been contributed by WA wine producers and stakeholder partners. See appendices for a full list of contributors

The ratio of the value of the increase in wine exports by market compared to the expenditure in each market.

Market Program Spend Value Increase Spend Ratio

UK $122,000 $1,200,000 10% USA $553,700 $3,400,000 16.3%

Japan $30,000 $210,000 14%

Canada $8,000 -$100,000 N/A

South Korea $5,000 $210,000 2%

Hong Kong $3,000 $1,600,000 N/A

Singapore Nil $220,000 N/A

Note that $264,314 was spent on global activities to support all markets. These included supporting regions and producers to purchase content space on Wine Australia’s digital hub, “Australian Wine Connect”; purchase of consumer and market research data from Wine Intelligence; Capability development webinars for new exporters; and development of state wide promotional collateral and content

List of state and national programs leveraged by the program

Wine Australia Australian Discovered online education portal Wine Australia Australian Wine Connect producer expo space; regional feature x 3; curated collections

Wines of Western Australia

Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T– 9284 3355 E - winewa@winewa.asn.au W

Key performance indicator Results (1 July 2022 v 1 July 2021)

- Wine Australia trade tastings; UK, US, Japan, Canada, South Korea x 9

Austrade/Tradestart Meet the Buyer UK in partnership CCIWA, SWDC and GSDC Wine Australia Explore UK Wine Australia US Market Entry Program Wine Australia/Austrade/ Meat and Livestock Australia/Wine Victoria/South Australia wine US Aspen Food and Wine Classic event

Wines of Western Australia Unit 3, 14 Brodie Hall Drive, Bentley WA 6102 T– 9284 3355 E - winewa@winewa.asn.au W – www.winewa.asn au

All contents copyright Agknowledge®. All rights reserved. The related bodies corporate, directors and employees of Agknowledge® accept no liability whatsoever for any injury, loss, claim, damage, incidental or consequential damage, arising out of, or in any way connected with, the use of any information, or any error, omission or defect in the information contained in this publication. Whilst every care has been taken in the preparation of this publication Agknowledge® accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information supplied.

Background

The Export Growth Partnership (EGP) is a fiveyear co-funded partnership between the WA wine industry and the WA state government. The state government is contributing $3 million and the WA wine industry $2.8 million and $200,000 in-kind to support the program which aims to

The principles behind Industry Growth Partnerships (as defined in the Draft Primary Industry Strategy) include:

• A clearly defined market opportunity for a new product, product differentiation, value-adding, and/or accessing premium markets.

• The outcome is transformational for the sector.

• Medium to long-term project duration.

• Industry led, with government supporting with cash and in-kind contributions.

• Focus on supporting partnerships along the entire value chain.

• Clearly identified opportunities to leverage investment.

• Risk managed through milestone and stagebased project management and financial contributions.

State government funding is allocated through a milestone payment schedule. Industry co-funding is allocated by spend on each project which includes remuneration for a consultant to manage the program.

In each financial year both as a milestone requirement under the partnership agreement and as a part of project governance by Wines of WA (WoWA), a review of outcomes will be undertaken. The aim of this review is to:

• ensure compliance with partnership contract requirements.

• measure outcomes against the stated aims of the program.

• ensure the strategic direction and implementation of the program is addressing industry needs to increase profitability and resilience at a business and industry level.

The WoWA Board has determined that in the first year of the program an independent consultant should be engaged to undertake a portion of the review to ensure an impartial and accurate assessment of the program to date is produced. The purpose of the external review is to assess industry engagement with and perceived value of the EGP to date.

increase the profitability of the WA wine industry by:

1. Growing the average value and volume of WA wines exported.

2. Growing the number of WA wine producers successfully participating in export markets.

3. Aligning investment in international wine marketing, promotion, media and wine tourism to maximize profile and sales outcomes for WA fine wines.

In June 2022 Wines of WA contracted Agknowledge® to engage with wine producers to review the first year of operation of the EGP program and assess industry engagement and the perceived value of the EGP to date, and then provide feedback to the EGP on how to improve engagement and alignment of EGP activities to address industry needs and expectations.

The Program Managers provided an audit of activities for this review, listing activities completed to date with alignment to the partnership outcomes. In summary there was a total of $720,186 invested in Year One with a 50:50 split between industry and the matched funding arrangement.

The activities funded initially supported a range of information, knowledge and baseline reports and studies. These were provided at little or no cost to registered participants and were understood to be the entry ticket to the program. The larger number of ‘participants’ is initially due to the free programs under the ‘Global’ initiative.

ContextLocation Total spent Activities # Participants

Global $142,890 11 58 UK $154,072 11 68 USA $332,542 6 19 Canada $16,476 5 6 Japan $40,284 2 20 Singapore $20,300 3 15 Total $720,186 38 112

A review of individual wineries who participated in the program to date revealed a list of 60 active investors and a further 45 wineries who accessed the programs on offer at no cost to date. The Pareto chart below also shows that 22 wineries contributed the 80% of funds to the program.

8,000

6,000

Southern Forests Valley

Southern 3% 2% 1% 1%

10,000 Wines of Merritt Wills Domain Victory Point Wines Thompson Estate Peos Estate Nannup Estate Lange Estate Juniper JilyaraEstate Fermoy Estate Driftwood Estate Credaro Wines Byron and Harold Aylesbury Estate Wignalls Wines Sandalford Wines Rosabrook Wines Peccavi WinesMillbrook Jarrah Ridge WinesFlowstoneAccolade Wines Woodlands Wines West Cape HoweThree Hills Swings & Roundabouts Rockcli e Winery Pty Ltd Oakover GralynVineyards Estate Evans & Tate Cape Landing Pty LtdAshbrook Stella Bella Wines Deep(Suckfizzle) WoodsLenton Brae Plantagenet Wines Passel Estate Fogarty Wine Group Forest Hill VineyardAlkoomi Wines Moss Wood Pty Ltd Plan B Wines Flametree Wines Frankland Estate Wines Vinaceous Wines Calneggia Family VineyardsXanadu Wines Leeuwin Estate Cullen Wines Domaine CapeNaturaliste Mentelle McHenry Hohnen VintnersCherubino Wines Forester Estate Howard VoyagerPark/Madfish Estate Marron Creek Wine FerngroveCo Capel Vale WinesVasse Felix

2,000

Winery Pareto –% of total investment 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

WttW program 2021-22

Margaret River Great Southern Geographe Southern Forests Swan Districts Blackwood Valley Perth Hills 62%23%

Margaret

River Great Southern Geographe Southern Forests Swan Districts Blackwood Valley Perth Hills

incl.) 62%23% 7% 6,000 8,000 10,000 Co-contribution $ 3% 2% 1% 1%

62%19% 7% 5% 5% 0

Margaret River Great Southern Swan Valley Geographe Southern Forests Blackwood Valley Perth Hills Peel

Vasse Felix

WA Wine Export Growth Partnership Program Stakeholder Overview

Agknowledge® interviewed 12 wine producers as part of the consultation phase of the program review, of which 9 have been involved in the EGP program activities while a further three respondents who haven’t been actively involved were also consulted. The 12 wine producers were selected to cover regions, scale and operations. The time taken for each conversation averaged 30 minutes.

of the Stakeholder Consultations

The wine producer consultation interviews clearly identified that the EGP program is proving to be effective in helping WA wine producers to grow wine exports, and while there were some criticisms of the program these can easily be addressed moving forward. Conversations with program participants and non-participants highlighted the following:

• Prior to COVID the percentage of wine production exported by respondents averaged 15-20%. This has subsequently dropped below the 15%. In the future, producers aspire to increase exports to an average of a third of their overall production.

• Most of the respondents interviewed are aware of the shared assets and activities that the EGP program has developed.

• The EGP program is viewed as practical and flexible enough that it allows producers to choose what activities best suit their business and enables them to work with their own distributors and to customise the program to tailor it for their market.

Summary• The UK market activities were the most popular with respondents in terms of participation, and the US market had the largest overall investment.

• The non-participants are smaller wine producers.

• Non-participants haven’t participated due to lack of awareness of the program; being time poor; lack of resources and a limited budget; or they were not eligible.

• Non-participants would participate if the EGP program was more supportive of smaller producers and allowed them to connect with a customer or distributor prior to exporting.

• Smaller producers lack the capacity and resources to effectively target the export market.

• Smaller producers are not producing cheap wines and they generally want to sell premium wine so their goal is to focus on value markets not volume.

• Concern was raised that the program is targeted towards larger wine producers; that it is Margaret River-centric, and it creates competition amongst individual producers.

• Many respondents said it was too early to rate the program as it has only just been implemented and that it required objective data to support it.

• More than half of the respondents believe the EGP program is achieving some of its stated goals as it is engaging wine producers and raising awareness of WA wines in global markets, even though it hasn’t contributed greatly to an increase in export sales.

• The uptake of activities by producers is seen as disappointing.

• There is no feedback provided by the EGP program management on the outcome of events in terms of success or learnings.

• Despite it being only early days, the EGP program has assisted producers to participate in promotional events they wouldn’t normally take part in and has resulted in establishing relationships with distributors, assisted with funding to spend on promotion to increase distribution, and resulted in an increase in the volume of wine exports for some producers.

• Lack of success in market activities is attributed to no connection with distributors; slow response and limited feedback from events; poor attendance at events; and pressure to reduce wine prices. Some producers also acknowledged they were time poor and didn’t utilise the program to its full potential.

• Marketing efforts don’t always get an instantaneous reaction, therefore some respondents are still hopeful they will get a result.

• Virtual events, despite being suited to COVID times, had a low impact and are not viewed as effective as a physical face to face activation.

• Lack of engagement with distributors has prevented a few respondents from participating in activities.

• Supply and budgetary constraints restrict producers’ involvement in the program.

• Criticisms include lack of direct communication with producers to discuss their priority markets and to seek feedback; too many questionnaires; poor or late communication of opportunities and lack of relationship development in markets. The program is spending a significant amount of money on ticking boxes; the consultants are seen to have a conflict of interest as they also run other programs; and there is replication in projects.

• Sustainability of markets is important.

• All respondents plan to maintain their engagement with EGP, including producers who are critical of the program’s activities as they would like to continue to provide feedback and don’t want to alienate themselves.

• Respondents are not fully aware of the EGP’s collaboration through alignment of investment with other organisations within industry. There was some awareness of partnerships with Austrade and Wine Australia in activities, otherwise they were not familiar with other partners.

Areas to consider

for the Export Growth Partnership (EGP) program

Based on the discussions with wine producer stakeholders, respondents outlined the following areas that could be considered in refining the EGP program to increase producer engagement and to further increase the profitability of the WA wine industry in the future.

EGP Current Activities

• Review the Wine Connect platform in terms of its cost and success, to ensure it delivers value for producers.

• Limit virtual wine tasting activities.

• Investigate the promotional value of ‘wine fairs’ as part of the EGP program in terms of individual wine producers, as opposed to a collective or region.

• Continue to provide market entry programs to enable producers to connect with distributors.

• Increase the cap in the overall budget to allow more producers to access export market opportunities.

• Re-run the Hong Kong promotion with Watson’s.

• Seek feedback on each of the program’s activities in line with the stated aims, to determine the success or lack of success.

• Share activity feedback with producers.

• Be transparent and promote the success and learnings of the program.

• Utilise feedback to fine tune and make further improvements to the program.

• Promote industry partners that have collaborated and leveraged funds against the program.

• Continue to offer a range of activities that cater for new and established exporters.

• Review marketing activities and criteria and develop a sub-category that allows smaller businesses to participate.

• Review activities to determine how they can be changed to provide opportunities for smaller producers to be involved.

• Continue to offer a range of different marketing opportunities to cater for the different needs of producers and regions.

Future EGP Activities / Opportunities

• Utilise social media influencers at wine tasting events to identify which wines excite them and to increase the promotion of WA wines.

• Engage with various government departments to host wine tasting events around the world in target markets to engage with potential buyers.

• Continue to coordinate in-bound marketing activities and bring serious wine buyers and importers to the regions to experience them and taste WA wines.

• Organise more on-premise and on-trade focused activities to target the restaurant trade and venues.

• Provide funding opportunities for producers to work as a collective to target export markets.

• Investigate market opportunities for producers to work as a collective – identify specific markets, program and producers who have the ability to service the market.

• Identify the barriers that are preventing smaller producers from participating in the program to better suit the needs of smaller producers.

• Assist smaller producers with collective marketing / collaborative marketing that allows them to target specialist markets and share costs and be more competitive in the export market.

• Engage with smaller producers through conversations to create more interest and to encourage more to be involved in the program.

• Support smaller producers to increase their capacity to connect with export markets.

Markets

• Ensure the target markets are relevant and are sustainable.

• Develop long term relationships with the respective markets.

• Review the value in targeting the United States market.

• Continue to provide market entry opportunities in Japan and South Korea that enable exporters to connect with distributors.

Producers

• Seek broader engagement from wine producers.

• Encourage producers from all regions to be involved in the program.

• Encourage and constantly seek feedback from producers, and where necessary communicate face to face to address any concerns.

• Engage with wine producers and exporters to determine what they want out of the program, their priorities, target markets, target price etc.

• Minimise questionnaires and the engagement of consultants seeking program feedback.

Collaboration

• Develop partnerships with the food sector in complementary relationships to showcase unique WA foods in partnership with WA wine, to grow WA’s wine and food reputation worldwide.

Data

• Review WA wine exports in terms of value and volume for the past 15 years to identify growth.

• Determine the return on investment.

• Establish marketing opportunities in Germany, Malaysia, and Scandinavia.

• Target the Singapore market.

• Undertake more market research to identify the wines currently available for the export market and determine if there is a market to match.

• Identify the top 20 WA wine exporters to determine which ones are participating, their growth, and why they may not be involved in the program.

• Promote producer success stories associated with the EGP program to raise awareness and get more traction.

• Collaborate with the tourism sector to promote WA as a food and wine destination.

• Identify the top 20 WA wine exporters to gauge growth.

Recommendations

WA Wine Industry EGP Review Questionnaire

1. How many years have you been exporting?

a. What % of your production before COVID did you export?

b. What % of current production do you export?

c. What % of production do you aspire to export?

2. As a participant in the EGP first year’s program, are you aware of the shared assets and activities that the EGP has developed for all regions and producers? E.g.: Media, Education, Knowledge hub. Yes No Comments

a. Don’t know about them

b. If so, have you used them?

c. Do you intend to use them?

Participant (identified)

Investment (from record)

3. What EGP programs have you participated in?

4. Non participants only – Why have you not participated in the EGP to date?

5. Non participants only – Are you aware of the EGP and the opportunities available to support export market development?

6. Non participants only – What would it take for you to be involved?

7. Do you believe the EGP engagement is achieving the stated aims? What would you rate in on a scale of 1 to 10 where 10 is the program is achieving its aims?

a. From your company perspective? Rate on scale 1 – 10

b. From a WA Industry perspective? Rate on scale 1- 10

8. Has your participation with EGP supported your efforts to increase sales/profitability in the targeted market?

a. Can you please provide examples of success and or not so successful?

E.g.: did these help you to obtain a distributor/agent?

b. How did you find the EGP program to work with?

E.g.: communication, clear activities, follow up and delivery.

c. Will you look to grow/continue or reduce your engagement with EGP?

9. What activities do you believe the EGP should do more of or focus on? (Includes non-participants)

10. What activities do you believe the EGP should do less of? (Includes non-participants)

11. How has EGP linked wine producer efforts up with other market development activities and leveraged funds with other parts of industry?

(Includes non-participants)

Global UK USA Canada Japan Singapore Others

WA Wine Export Growth Partnership Program Review –Stakeholder Responses

NOTE:

Question 1

Q1. Participants and Non-participants:

a. How many years have you been exporting?

b. What % of your production before COVID did you export?

c. What % of current production do you export?

d. What % of production do you aspire to export?

Of the 12 wine producer respondents interviewed, nine of them have been exporting for 10 or more years with two producers exporting for two years and one respondent who hasn’t exported to date.

Prior to COVID, the percentage of their individual production exported ranged from 0% up to 70% with an average of 16.25%. Exports have dropped marginally to an average of 14% currently and vary between 0 – 25% and this is mainly attributed to COVID, China tariffs, shipping/ freight costs and shutdowns.

Producers aspire to increase exports to an average of 30% of their production, again with a range from 10 – 70% of their total wine production. The majority of respondents are looking to increase their level of exports.

Comments• We have lost a couple of orders because of shipping costs and exports have dropped off due to some shut downs, and we had some stuff to go into China but that didn’t happen because of the sanctions they put on Australia. We had an order from Canada and they pulled out because of the shipping freight costs; we quote all our pricing on FOB so shipping is their responsibility and they discovered it had gone up 60% from their last order. We tried to help out at our end but couldn’t find any better price. We would love to increase our exports up to 40% as it is a great way to get wine out and in a different country you don’t have competition with the supermarkets who dictate to us. (2)

• Exports have dropped off due to COVID and China tariffs. (6)

• Our exports have fallen off, principally to do with COVID. (7)

• We would like to maintain our exports in the future but change the value proposition. (9)

• We would like to do more ideally growing domestically and growing the export market. Domestic sales are easier and often for a better margin. Our goal is to grow everything and have a diverse offering and find a home for the fruit we purchase or grow. (8)

• We haven’t had experience or interaction with anyone from overseas, we want to grow our exports. (10)

• As a business we registered interest but actually to date have only participated in information sessions, we have not dived in in any other way. We haven’t exported ever, in terms of what we aspire to export – that is unknown. We are not too sure, and it is one of the biggest issues for our business. Pre-COVID we were starting to explore this and with COVID we put the brakes on fully. One of the biggest issues we have identified is that connection to the customer/ other end – who will buy our product as we are a small business and produce something unique where we also compete with varieties in European countries. We find it hard to work out where this product would fit. We are not going to look to export unless we know we have a customer. (12)

Question 2

year’s

E.g.: Media, Education, Knowledge hub.

a. Do you know about them?

b. If so, have you used them?

c. Do you intend to use them?

Or others?

The majority of active participants interviewed are aware of the shared assets and activities that the EGP has developed for all regions and producers. While 77% of respondents were aware, only 55% reported using the assets, whereas 33% hadn’t made use of them to date and didn’t believe they would ever use them. A couple of producers were unsure if they had used them or had come across them due to using a consultant and being time poor.

Aside from the EGP market programs, respondents report accessing regional maps, language guides, webinars, and regional videos. Comments about the assets include that they have been made more broadly for the regions and not specifically to benefit individual producers or businesses. Assets such as regional maps and key words have assisted internal marketing departments with content to help educate the market about WA wines and also provided information for tenders.

While some haven’t used the assets to date, they do believe they will look to utilise them in their promotional materials in the future. EGP assets and activities vary and cater for market entry and also established exporters, therefore not all of them are applicable to everyone and respondents assess them based on what is best suited to their business.

A couple of respondents stated that they will not use the assets as they are not really relevant to their business, and they already have a regional map they use. It was also mentioned that the regional information booklet, while it looks great, was not ideal to show potential new customers as it also features other competing regions in WA.

Comments Aware

• Yes, I am aware but haven’t really used them. There are specific assets developed for some activations that we have participated in that we used. With the Japanese activation there was a similar function in a regional video they made that we got some use out of. The assets have been made more broadly for regions not so much companies/ businesses. Wine Australia created assets as educational modules, they are not designed specifically for individuals but to upskill people about the regions. In the future we will continue to use the assets developed, there is some talk at the moment – Margaret River has developed a fantastic media kit in conjunction with DPIRD and some external people who also assisted. The Great Southern would like to follow suit and develop a media kit as well that describes the region – history, soils, climate, sustainability etc. like a provenance story. It hasn’t been developed but there is some talk so it is on the drawing board for the region to work with DPIRD and the EGP. (1)

Q2. As a participant in the EGP first

program, are you aware of the shared assets and activities that the EGP has developed for all regions and producers?

• Yes, I am acutely aware of them and we do use those assets. The knowledge hub is useful for the marketing department to get updates as people are not familiar with new mapping and key words that describe the regions. Educational tools are used internally, and we will start to use them externally but we haven’t got our act together. They help explain and assist marketing to understanding things when they are filling out tenders and looking for content for us. The tools provide useful updated language and outlines the right geographical locations. It is another resource we can use and also dovetails with what Wine Australia is doing. In the future we will use some of the other assets. Wine Folly came out this week so we will look to populate that, so the assets are a great tool that the marketing department can use. People forget that global marketing is very competitive, and the market is saturated, and people don’t know where Margaret River is so the educational tools and assets are vital for bridging the gap and educating the market on our wines so we can market them and sell them with confidence. (4)

• Yes, we have used the media kit for Margaret River but I am unsure if that was part of the EGP, otherwise we use some of the assets and activities. We haven’t used market entry programs because we are already in the market. We have used assets with maps and other resources. Some assets we haven’t used as we don’t need to as we are already exporting. (5)

• Yes, we have used some and participated in webinars. The program is extremely well put together and is a valuable source of information – much more than what I was aware of. We have used the ability to look at gaps in the marketplace that suit our price point, varietal and region – I didn’t know that you could look that up. There’s also lots accessible through the website. (7)

• Yes, I am aware they have put brochures together which are not quite complete and that is a marketing asset. We haven’t used any assets but if they do include any good maps etc. of which I understand there is one that is better than others that have been developed – it will be beneficial and we would include it in our material. (8)

• Yes, I am aware of some of the assets and activities, but we haven’t used any assets and no we don’t intend to as they are not really relevant. I am not saying they are not good, everyone can take something and use it to their advantage. As producers, I believe we have got to front up and work hard with distributors, there are only a handful of good distributors, if you are serious, to work with. We don’t have our own marketing department, the reality is that you are better off spending money and fronting up yourself in person to promote your own product. (9)

No

• No, we haven’t really been actively involved in the program, we took up some funding for us to get involved in the US market, but otherwise that is it. I am aware of the assets and activities. We have had a regional map for years, so we don’t really need things like that. We are one of the largest exporters. Do I intend to use them, no not really, it is a beautiful booklet but it’s not what I call relevant to me in being able to pitch to a new export customer when it also features other competing regions. Our region only has a little write up in the book compared to other regions, but I am not complaining about that – it is not useful or relevant information to show my potential new export customer. (6)

Not aware

• Probably not aware of them as much as I should be. I might have used some but not really aware of the shared assets and activities. We also liaise with Periscope to assist us with stuff as well. I only go to the website when something is on and I have to know about it but otherwise not fully aware of what’s on offer but I am also time poor. Perhaps EGP should promote what’s available more. (2)

• We haven’t really used any of the media assets that have been developed as such, the Margaret River Wine Industry Association developed a media kit which we shared with our brand team that we use with our information. I am unsure if that was EGP or Margaret River on its own. In the future I am sure we will take part in other activities that the EGP initiate as we have made a commitment to be part of the program and we make our own judgments on what is valuable to us. Some programs are developed for exporters newer to market, so they are not as appropriate as we are already in markets and doing things ourselves. (3)

Question 3

Q3. What EGP programs have you participated in?

The UK market appears to be the most popular amongst respondents in which 78% of active respondents have participated in activities in that market and invested $3,500; followed closely by global activations (67%); and then Canada and Japan with 55% involved. The USA market attracted 45% involvement and the biggest overall investment of more than $15,000 and Singapore was 22%. Other activities that respondents had participated in include the South Korea Master Class and Hong Kong Watson’s activation.

Respondent reported activities included live tastings, virtual events, market entry programs, trade focused campaigns and distributor incentive programs. Issues raised about the EGP programs that respondents had participated in include a lack of connection with new distributors in market activations; slow response and feedback from activities; poor attendances at organised events at the other end; and pressure to reduce wine prices as markets seek cheaper wines post COVID.

Comments

• We have been involved in lots of activities which include live tastings and virtual ones. We are also one of the few people who bought into the Wine Intelligence deal in which we got our subscription subsidised which was great. We are a heavy user in many activities that are suited to our current export markets. We didn’t participate in Japan and South Korea as we don’t have distribution in those markets. The activities were helpful in markets where we already have distribution. In discussions with Liz, the program manager, there is intention next year to open up to market entry programs in Japan and South Korea, like they did in the USA but a smaller version for smaller markets and that is something we would participate in. (4)

• Individual market programs, distributor incentives and trade focused campaigns – virtual and face to face. (5)

• The US market entry program which involved getting wines over there and reviews with US journalists, which was about trying to connect between new distributors and you. The feedback was more around reviews of the wine, and we had nothing come out of it – no interest from distributors. (6)

• Yes, we have done two activities. One was the Vinorium activity for which we submitted product, I am not sure where that is at, apparently is has been slow at their end. I don’t think it is a definite no, fingers are crossed on that one and we also did another initiative that involved tasting at the Institute of Masters of Wine in London. Our own experience in talking to a buyer in the UK recently, whilst they hadn’t attended the Masters event at the Wine Institute, they said they would access our left-over product from that event to look at us. It certainly saves us money in sending bottles over there instead of the excess being used at the office party. (7)

• Canada, and we put wines in front of distributors in the UK. I haven’t pursued attendees as I don’t think it was super well attended even though I know I should follow up. We are trying to create a product and looking at selling at 20-35 pounds but there is reluctance and people are conservative and want cheaper wines. They say they like the wine but they want to push the price down, whereas prior to the COVID environment they were happy to take the risk and pay extra. (8)

• The US market is a waste of time as only 3 or 4 Australian wines are selling in volumes in America; we will never see America return as a meaningful market in my life time. I don’t want to know about it, it’s a waste of time and money targeting that one. (9)

Question 4

Q4. Non participants only – why have you not participated in the EGP to date?

Only three non-participants were included in the industry consultation. The reasons why they have not participated in the EGP to date include lack of awareness; being time poor; lack of resources and a limited budget. A respondent mentioned they were not eligible to participate due to their turnover and the co-contribution amount was over their allocated marketing budget. Other reasons include connecting with a distributor outside of the project; and the need, as a small family business, to connect with a customer prior to exporting.

Comments

• It hasn’t pricked my ears, we are a one-man band and there is a certain amount of time in the day to focus on priorities at any time, and at the moment that focus is more on the squeaky wheel. (10)

• We didn’t take part in program as we connected with distributors outside of the project, I don’t think we were eligible to be part of the program due to our turnover which is less and also the minimum amount required to co-contribute is way over our budget. We only established in 2013 so we are relatively new, we don’t aim to grow. We are production limited by our own philosophy that we only make wines from vineyards that we own, and we don’t intend to grow. (11)

• As a business we registered interest but actually to date have only participated in information sessions, we have not dived in in any other way. Pre-COVID we were starting to explore this and with COVID we put the brakes on fully. We are a small family business and to export, we need acceptance of the product in the export market first and to know the customer. As our wine range is specific and we are not large producers, we can’t produce container loads of it. We are selling everything domestically at the moment and have the capacity to grow but won’t bottle unless we know we can sell it. The dilemma with the program for us, and what is missing is we need to be first and foremost connected to someone who wants our wines, then it opens it up to other questions for us on the returns – is the pricing viable? How do we ship in the current climate? It’s all unknown so it is hard to quantify – one could use the rule of thumb preCOVID 5-10% of our direct cellar door business was international customers, maybe we could recoup that. The market is always in the back of our mind, and our biggest request is from Singapore where they buy wine when they go home, and they go home with volume but we lose that repeat business in that country so we could potentially enter the Singapore market. The other issue is resourcing, we are in a catch 22 as we are not big enough to be able to jump on a plane, it is not about cost but time involved and having someone out of the business to do this makes it difficult, in my head I am thinking most small businesses are in the same boat –do you invest that time and you are not 100% sure of the return? There needs to be a clear connect and level of guarantee as it can’t be a fishing expedition. You can’t go to a big wine fair and hope like hell with the rest of the mob, and put money and time in without a guaranteed outcome. (12)

Question 5

Q5. Non participants only – are you aware of the EGP and the opportunities available to support export market development?

The non-participants were mixed in their responses regarding awareness of the EGP and the opportunities available to support export market development. One respondent was unsure if they had heard about the program but admitted that it could have been lost in all of the emails they receive, whereas the other two respondents were aware of and were following the program. One respondent did sign up to participate in the US market entry program but pulled out after connecting with an importer on the side of the program. Whereas the other has participated in information sessions and is focused on connecting with a customer prior to exporting and participating in any programs.

Comments

• I am not sure, there are a lot of programs out there so I’m not sure, I can’t answer. It doesn’t ring a bell; we get lots of emails and in the end, we focus on what we need to focus on. I could have seen it and not reacted to it, sometimes later never comes. (10)

• I regularly read the newsletter from WIA and actively try to participate where we can. There have been some great initiatives, sometimes we can take part sometimes we can’t. I did sign up to the US new market entry program and pulled out at the last minute as we were able to connect with an importer on the side of the programs. I don’t want to establish new markets but more so strengthen our current export markets. South Korea is doing well for us, and we would love to strengthen the US and Hong Kong. The Watsons wine activity was difficult for small business to participate due to the price of one pallet they would have ordered. One pallet is worth $6000 and it was going to cost $3600 to participate –they weren’t ordering enough to make it viable so there goes your profit. (11)

• Yes, I am across it and subscribe to the communications which I look at when it comes out to determine is it or isn’t it suitable. Nothing has interested us at the moment. Following COVID, we are resource strapped like many businesses. We have participated in presentations – education of markets and market insight information. Singapore and Asia is our area of interest – we would take a lot of convincing to purse the UK and US markets. Otherwise, I am not across everything they are doing but I do see some stuff through emails. (12)

Question 6

Q6. Non participants only – what would it take for you to be involved?

Non participants stated they would participate in the EGP program if it adds value to the process and helps them to target export markets; is more supportive of smaller businesses in terms of the criteria; allows producers to connect with a customer/ distributor prior to exporting; and is a viable activity.

As the non-participants are smaller producers, they are reluctant to spend and want to ensure they get bang for their buck. They also don’t want to lose control over the outcomes and are focused on high end premium wines and not volume. Respondents would like to increase their exports across a broad spread of target markets which include Vietnam, Japan, US, South Korea and Singapore.

Concern was raised by a respondent that the EGP program is geared towards larger businesses with many employees and that the criteria restricts the involvement of smaller businesses who have limited capacity, resources and budget. The program would present a more diversified picture of Australian wine if it was more supportive of smaller producers.

Comments

• Yes, if it adds value to the whole process and helps targets markets, we would get involved. We are looking for distributors mainly – there are lots of opportunities to do exhibitions but from my experience it is pretty hard to make it successful and you need to be seriously lucky to jag the right person at the right time. We are more interested in other ways to access the market without spending a fortune and not having any control over the outcomes. It mitigates risk, we need to get more bang for our buck - we are looking at Vietnam, Japan, US and probably South Korea. The first three are our priority, we have no desire to be in China. It is closer to home, we can manage them and be on the ground to support them. We are looking for distributors – we are not looking for big volumes; our business is smaller, and we are focused on the on-premises side of the market with high end premium wines. I want to increase exports based on a broader spread across markets so when something does

happen in the economy in different parts of the world, it helps mitigate risk and the damage that might be done. You don’t want all your eggs in one basket, it is not a good policy to protect business from fluctuations that you have no control over. (10)

• Sometimes I feel programs are geared to much larger businesses with many employees and with people heading up departments. We are a two-person business and do all the specs of the business. Sometimes the criteria don’t meet small business capabilities so it would be nice to include smaller producers. If they can support smaller producers, it would present a more diversified picture of Australian wine imports. The turnover and co-contribution require sub categories. Larger companies meet those marks but the program needs a sub-category for smaller producers. We would certainly be involved if we met the criteria and that is why we like to see the opportunities available. (11)

• We would like to target the Singapore market, but we need to begin at the end and have a very clear connection to the customer at that end. For us to participate we want to know that if we put our wines in front of someone they will seriously look to buy. Over the years we have been involved in in-bound visits and had wine go to the UK for testing and we never heard anything back. So we want to know and narrow it down to the target customer who will buy our wine in Singapore, and perhaps get a distributor or wholesaler between us and customer. But will they really get to our customer and move some of our wines, and then we will start the next step but we wouldn’t ramp up our production of wine unless we knew. Our stock is selling out but we would like to grow the business and grow for a market, it makes good financial sense if you seriously look at it. It also comes down to what price point and if that price is viable. We are not going to look to export unless we know we have a customer. (12)

Question 7

Q7. Do you believe the EGP engagement is achieving the stated aims? On a scale of 1 to 10 – what would you rate it where 10 is high and the program has achieved its goals.

a. From your company perspective?

Why / Why not?

b. From a WA Industry perspective?

Why / why not?

From an individual company’s perspective, more than half of the respondents believe the EGP program is achieving some of its stated goals. A smaller proportion rated the program less than 5 out of 10 and not really achieving its goals. In saying that, many respondents mentioned it was too early to rate the program as it requires objective data to support it, and the program has only just been implemented and is only one year into a five-year program.

Respondents believe the program is engaging people and is somewhat achieving the stated aims, whereas others believe it will achieve results. They have found the program to be sensible and broad enough to allow producers to work with their own distributors and to customise the program to tailor it for their market while enjoying the benefit of EGP. To date, respondents report they have had some success in terms of an increase in value and volume of WA wine exported.

On the flip side, producers state they haven’t got much out of the program in terms of any extra wine sales. While the EGP program has only just swung into action, they say you can’t measure success yet and that it hasn’t achieved its objectives as many activities are at the beginning of being rolled out. According to one respondent, the first year is more about capability development, developing assets and engaging with stakeholders. They believe it might have garnered a little bit of attention for a small amount of time but it hasn’t resulted in an uptick in sales. This is based on the lack of success of events involved in and lack of feedback from management on activities.

From a WA industry perspective, two thirds of respondents believe the EGP program is achieving some of its stated goals and rated it 6 and above out of 10, and the remaining third

didn’t believe it had attributed to an increase in the value and volume of WA exports. While respondents said that it was too early to rate the program and attribute any growth in exports, they did say it is raising awareness of WA wines in global markets and that the EGP program has resulted in more effort in trying to engage and educate producers about export markets.

Comments include that the program does provide opportunities for distribution in key markets and that the program’s range caters for new exporters, smaller producers with smaller budgets up to retail activation opportunities for bigger exporters. Producers can choose what they want to be involved it and what best suits their brand/ wine. Respondents have found the program to be practical and flexible enough to incorporate everyone in some way, and one producer said it is the best program they have seen in a long time that is WA-focused.

It is reported that there has been some good learnings and adjustments made by the management team to better position the EGP program already in its first year. However, concern was raised that the program is very Margaret River-centric; and that the uptake by producers has been disappointing. It was mentioned that any growth in wine exports for WA at this stage is not attributed to the EGP program but rather to individual producers focusing on the market themselves.

Some respondents said they were unsure if other WA wine producers have benefitted with an increase in volume or value; or connected with new distributors because of the program so the question was hard to answer. One respondent stated that there is no feedback provided on the outcome of individual activities and that producers would like to know the successes or lack of success as they do contribute to funding the program through levies. Another respondent acknowledged that they also had to dedicate more time to it and that they were not using the program to its full potential as they are time poor.

Comments Company perspective

• 7/10 - it is doing a reasonable job, but it is too early to tell as you need objective data. The program is generally engaging people, there could be more engagement. We have done two activations. It is somewhat achieving the stated aims. (1)

• 5/10 – we had a couple of little nibbles but didn’t get too much out of it, we haven’t got anything extra in terms of sales. From the Japan activation, the importers loved that we did that, it was more of a promotional thing than sales. I don’t think the volume has changed; with other markets we were wanting distributors to get into an extra market. We are about to go back into South Korea with an old importer we have used previously not through EGP. (2)

• 5/10 – but I feel that that is not the right question, the program is a 5-year program and we have just had year 1. I don’t think I can really rate those KPIs in year 1 when so much has been about capability development, developing assets and engaging with stakeholders and research. There are a huge array of programs that are just at the beginning of being rolled out, it is still in the early development phase and I don’t think I can judge how effective it is being on those measures until a couple of years in. At the moment it’s not achieving those aims but that’s not to say the program is not worthy or valid as it is too early in its life. (3)

• 8/10 – I know it has been very effective in increasing the volume and value of WA wines exported with increased marketing activity and spend, particularly the UK market got a huge boost with the activities. It is all helping to drive our listing further and elevate the wines already in place – is has been very potent and very much

appreciated. For us it has been very valuable and I would say we are one of the biggest beneficiaries and we are also one of the largest exporters in the state. (4)

• 8/10 – it’s only early days and the program has just been implemented and is on-going. I have given it a high score because I believe they will achieve their results, some of the activities are just happening now for us with the UK or the US has just happened, there is a lag of 3-6 months. For the first year they have done campaigns that are trade and media focused. It is sensible and broad enough so we can work with our own distributor and customise our own program and tailor it for the market, whilst still enjoying the benefit of the EGP. It is broad enough but not limiting in scope i.e. Singapore fine wine retail was practical enough to incorporate and tailor programs which has allowed us to do more than what we could do originally because of EGP activities. (5)

• 1/10 – It hasn’t really swung into action so how do you measure success when it has only just started. I have rated it solely on the event I was involved in. I don’t know how it went as we don’t get feedback from it so how do I know how it’s going. I disagree with how they are going about it. (6)

• 9/10 – I am not sure how effective it is being for other people, in terms how it is put together and its aims it is a really excellent program. My past experience is that people think we are a homogeneous market and Margaret River wasn’t on the map. This initiative will enable us to get the regional recognition that we require and in terms of putting us in front of people. It also comes down to the strength of product now if it turns into dollars. Apart from that as a company we make a concerted effort to make sure we have a full suite of marketing assets to support these initiatives like endless photo libraries, tech notes and pages of reviews. The supporting materials have been carefully curated and put together on our behalf. (7)

• 7/10 – we have had some success; you can’t expect everything to be successful and some stuff is hit and miss. The UK was a miss with what we have done there but we had success in the US market. (8)

• 3/10 – No it hasn’t achieved any of its objectives, it might have garnered a little bit of attention for a small amount of time but hasn’t resulted in a meaningful uptick in sales from our personal experience so we haven’t got any value out of it. (9)

WA industry perspective

• 7/10 as there is engagement but it is very Margaret River-centric in terms of the programs and the uptake has been disappointing in the Great Southern but that is more from the producer’s point of view. For whatever reason, it might be the function or size of producers and if they export or are not currently. It would be great to have more engagement from the Great Southern through communication and value proposition of the relevant programs. (1)

• 5/10 – I would like to think it is achieving its aim, but I don’t know if anyone else has actually benefited with new distributors and volumes, so it is hard to answer that and I can only really answer from our perspective. It is a great program and I think it is a wonderful thing and I need to dedicate some time in my schedule to look through this, perhaps it is us producers who are not using it to its full potential. Everyone is time poor and we get busy but we need to be looking into it. (2)

• 6/10 – the EGP program is doing a better job of achieving its aim from the industry perspective in terms of awareness of WA wines but as I said it is too early to really rate the program as it is only one year into a 5-year program. (3)

• 7/10 – There are a lot of companies I know that haven’t had distribution in key markets or taken advantage of programs like the US before this. The program provides lots of opportunities from providing information on how to sell into a market right through to resulting in orders for wine. It tells me it is working, there are low hanging fruit options in the US and UK where you can get most bang for your buck and then Hong Kong and Singapore retail activations. You speak to other wineries and they are happy with the activities and we are now stronger and more potent as a group and that shouldn’t be lost on people. When we go to market with a strong campaign promoting several wineries it is a lot stronger than just 2-3 wineries. There is something for everything and everyone with smaller activations for those with smaller budgets which offer cost effective ways to get traction into markets right up to bigger exporters who can chose to invest in retail activations. The Vinorium activation in the UK was targeted at small to medium producers and that was good for the WA industry. The EGP program has been effective from year 1 and there are also some good learnings from it in which the management team have been reacting to and hence they are in a better position for next year. International bodies know we are active and organised and they are starting to realise that we are thinking long term and they are happy to work with us and their interest and benefit is mutual. Wine Australia has been going through a quieter

period of late while they realign so it is good that WA is keeping pressure on in the global markets to keep reminding people and pick up the slack where Wine Australia is having a recalibration period. (4)

• 8/10 – it’s great because you can choose what you want to be involved in. It is broad enough to capture a vast array of exporters, not just big and established but also incorporate the smaller guys and those who haven’t exported. The program needs to be flexible to incorporate everyone but it also needs to be effective, broadly speaking they are doing a good job and it is the best thing I have seen for a long time. Wine Australia is always South Australian-centric and is not always applicable but with the EGP information we can customise it to suit our own requirements. We can use it in our own branding, regional information etc. and it’s the in-market practical joint funding initiatives which are good. They are practical programs because as producers we can’t fund it and do all those markets – we would only do half as much. It is very commercial and practical. (5)

• 1/10 this is based on my experience and from what I hear. The two triggers are volume and value – has it increased I can’t tell you; I don’t know as we haven’t heard any feedback from the management of the program on the outcomes of activities on their success. (6)

• 9/10 – I am not sure what has been achieved in terms of the framework and the state of the objectives, but I believe it’s going well. The program has been carefully considered and put together thoughtfully. (7)

• 5/10 – It is hard to comment on that because I don’t know the successes other companies have had. I would like to know successes and that is the sort of feedback we need to get as an industry through WoWA as we all contribute through levies. (8)

• 6/10 - There has been no real growth in exports lately, I have seen a lot more effort in trying to engage and educate other markets, but really the people that matter who do the buying are not involved in the process or do they have time to be involved. They aren’t engaging and the only reason is to buy cheap sauvignon blanc because New Zealand has priced itself out of the market, but as soon at that comes back – those buyers will leave again. It is based on decisions to fill a hole in supply in the interim. In the last 15 years where’s our growth in exports? What have we grown the WA exports by? I would say it’s very little and of those three individuals have contributed to the majority of that in their own right so I would say it hasn’t really met its aims. (9)

Question 8

a. Can you please provide examples of success and or not so successful?

E.g.: did these help you to obtain a distributor / agent?

From discussions with respondents there are more success stories (9) attributed to the EGP program than unsuccessful reports (4) to date. Respondents also believe it is too early to see a big uptake in product demand as they understand that marketing doesn’t always get an instantaneous reaction.

Japan was noted as the most successful targeted market by respondents who participated in activations where their wine was featured in front of industry experts and sommeliers. Comments include that the wine was well received, the events were sold out, people were excited and invigorated (after COVID); and that the events provided a great opportunity to showcase WA wines. The event was good in that it provided a little more contact than having people order over the internet. And while it hasn’t translated into sales, mention was made that it could still be 6 months away and that distributors were now aware of their wine and product. One respondent reported great success in the promotion with Watsons which resulted in an increased order size (double the normal order) for their wine and that one of their wines was highlighted by Watsons as part of their promotion.

Marketing activities in South Korea provided respondents with an opportunity to present to potential new importers/ distributors via a tasting Masterclass. As mentioned by a respondent they wouldn’t have otherwise done this event without the assistance of the EGP program, as they don’t have an importer in that market. While it was reported that some distributors were interested, nothing has resulted from the event.

An established exporter shared their success in the UK market, and that their involvement in the EGP program has helped elevate their brand to number 1 white/red in Tesco’s from WA and into the top 10 in Australia. The respondent said the program assisted in some funding in the retail space to get extra distribution on those products and has driven their volumes as had they more money to spend on promotion to increase distribution.

Only one respondent nominated the United States market which was indirectly related to the EGP program. While they originally signed up for the program, they withdrew prior to starting as they were approached by an importer who was coincidentally introduced to them because of the program. Now they are exporting to the United States. Another respondent reported success with the Singapore retail promotions support program which enabled them to do a retail promotion in conjunction with their own distributor, which they wouldn’t have done otherwise, and it resulted in a new, larger order. Unsuccessful efforts included disappointing event outcomes which were mainly related to virtual events that had a low impact as they weren’t well attended and hence didn’t have the reach and impact that a physical face to face activation might have. Disappointment was also expressed about the result of the UK wine tasting and distributor event, which was also a virtual event, in that people were conservative and were reluctant to support a higher valued product.

Respondents also noted that activities hadn’t translated into engaging with any distributors or interest in their wines, hence sales; and that some market activities were not suited to smaller producers who don’t have the volume of wine such as what is required in the Canadian market. A respondent also mentioned they were unable to participate in some activities as they didn’t have distribution in Japan and Korea, but they acknowledge that it was their responsibility to get their act together to find a distributor so they could participate in future activities.

Q8. Has your participation with EGP supported your efforts to increase sales / profitability in the targeted market?

One respondent mentioned that they couldn’t attribute any success to their involvement in the EGP program in terms of sales as they believe at the end of the day the only way to guarantee investment is when you take control of your own destiny.

Other comments about the program are that it is still only early days, and that there have been some practical targeted activities and sometimes it takes months to target a market and get results. The program has helped to create brand awareness for the regions and showcase WA wines. It has also helped make the dollars invested more effective, therefore some producers are still quietly confident they will get a result.

Comments UK

• The brand Madfish, we were able to make it in the last 2 years (Madfish white and shiraz) into number 1 white/red in Tesco from WA and into the top 10 in Australia. That is because of the EGP assisting us in some funding in the retail space to get extra distribution of those products, which has directly driven our volumes as we have had more money to spend on promotion to increase distribution with our subsidised activity (40%) in the UK for retail promotion. The retail activation program also applied to Howard Park chardonnay in Waitrose and that also enabled us to tip in more funding into our annual promotional plan which has driven sales and we have managed to double sales. (4) MARGARET_RIVER White Wine | Dry and Sweet White Wines | Waitrose Cellar

Japan

• Feedback from the Japan activation where wine featured in front of industry experts and sommeliers was well received, but it hasn’t transferred into sales but that could be 6 months. We are already in the Japan market, we are trying to get additional pull through but haven’t seen it as a result of the activations. (1)

• The UK not really, maybe with Japan – that’s a stable market for us anyway and we have regular orders. Japan was excited about the Masterclass event that was done – it has invigorated people after COVID and with people not being able to travel, they got slack. They do like to put a face to a name, but the event has given it a shot of exuberance to think there is stuff that is still happening and that they don’t just have to order through the internet as it provided a bit more contact. But overall, we haven’t had an increase in sales or profitability from our involvement in the program, but it did make distributors think and now they know about our wine and product. (2)

• Hong Kong was a promotion with Watsons Wines which entailed significant promotion across WA brands which included EDM, digital, instore display, social media etc. It resulted in an increased order size for our wines (double normal size of order) and also resulted in Watsons highlighting our new Blanc de Blancs as part of the promotion. (5)

• Japan involved Tokyo trade tasting and Masterclass which was presented by a decorated sommelier Mr Taku Iguro from 3 Michelin-starred restaurant L’Osier in Ginza, Tokyo. Both events were sold out (reached maximum capacity at the Embassy, with 106 attendees at the tasting and 32 participants at the Masterclass, all being qualified VIP trade selected by the distributors. It was a great place to showcase our top wine i.e. Tom Cullity. (5)

US

• We were signed up to be a part of the US export program and prior to that starting we were approached by two importers in the US so we withdrew from the program and coincidentally had an intro which was because of the program and at the same time we were in discussion with an importer outside the program. We are now exporting to the US. It happened before the program commenced. We are happy to say some success as we chose an exporter who was introduced to us because of the program. Coincidentally we would have had some success in the market anyway. (8)

South Korea

• Korean Masterclass – there were some distributors that were interested but nothing became of it. Periscope is going to follow it up, we are going to start going in separately to the EGP very soon. It is only early days but I still think the program is great as it has given people a boost. In general, the virtual meetings of buyers haven’t resulted in anything and that is what we are seeking – new and varied distributorships. (2)

• Korea provided an opportunity to present to potential new importers/ distributors via a tasting Masterclass. We would not have otherwise done this without the EGP as we don’t have an importer in that market. We had good interest following the Masterclass. (5)

Singapore

• Singapore was a new retail promotion supported by EGP, it enabled us to provide a retail promotion in conjunction with our importer/ distributor there that we would not have done and resulted in a new, larger order to allow for the promotion (more wines imported). (5)

Unsuccessful

• UK activation Riesling tasting – we would need to review the last order from the importer but potentially it is too early to tell, as it is not material at this stage. We haven’t seen a big uptake in product demand. Marketing is hard as you don’t always get an instantaneous reaction. The outcome was disappointing as the UK was a virtual tasting and was at a time where people were generally jaded with the mode of communication so it didn’t have the reach and impact that a physical activation might have. If they had it again, I wouldn’t do it knowing what I know now. It wasn’t the right audience, and it wasn’t the right medium hence it had a low impact outcome. We are already in the UK market; we are trying to get additional pull through but haven’t seen it as a result of the activations. (1)

• Japan and Korea we would have liked to be more active in that space but we couldn’t be involved in that program as we didn’t have distribution so that is on us. The key learning is to try to do more market entry programs or maybe we need to get our act together and find a distributor. There are lots of other wineries that don’t have distribution in those markets. (4)

• EGP hasn’t translated into any distributors or interest in our wines, or sales with the Wine Australia US Market Entry Program we participated in. I am still interested in doing it myself.

We are always looking to expand and in this current environment re-engaging in markets is difficult because of COVID and other factors. (6)

• With Canada we decided that was not for us due to how the system works and overall thought you need to make wine before you sell wine, whereas some markets you can sell a small amount of wine and the market grows and you grow. In Canada and Scandinavian countries there is a government monopoly liquor system so it is no use going in unless you have a few hundred cases. Even though the opportunities were there, we decided it wouldn’t work for us so decided not to put the time and effort into it as we are pretty small and need to value our time as well even though the opportunity was there. (8)

• UK – we put wines in front of distributors for tasting, I don’t think it was super well attended and I haven’t pursued attendees even though I know I should follow up. From a conversation with an attendee they are wanting lower valued product, we are trying to create product selling at 20-35 pounds but they are reluctant / conservative as they want cheaper wines. They say they like the wine but want to push the price down, prior to COVID it was an environment of risk taking and people were happy to pay extra. I am not aware that anyone was approached after the event. There was a Master of Wine who attended. Perhaps it might be more successful with lower priced wine but the sustainability of the WA industry isn’t around creating lower price wines. It was a disappointing result. It was a virtual event where each winery did a 1-minute clip and sent over 4 wines. Virtual events can be effective, but face to face or real virtual (where presenting live and in the moment) is better I believe. I know we need to make compromises in terms of costs. (8)

• I can’t attribute any involvement in the program to success in terms of sales etc. All my sales are based on the fact that prior to COVID and then post COVID when the borders opened, I was there in the market promoting and talking to people that sell my wine. It’s not attributed to the EGP. The UK online tasting forums – not a lot of participants joined and no one goes back and watches it later. A lot of wines we offer are focused on premise and on trade for restaurants and bars. It means nothing at all if there aren’t any buyers active. Virtual events aren’t really suited to anyone’s wines and if journalists are involved, no one really reads their articles. At the end of the day the only way to guarantee investment is when you take control of your own destiny. (9)

Other

• So far, we have only taken part in three activities Japan, Canada, and Aspen – for us it is more about creating better brand awareness for our region and showing our wines to the audience we already deal with. Has it increased sales or our price point? No but what it did do was to remind people we are in those markets. We weren’t looking for a new distributor. Canada is all about a government run monopoly – the only way to increase sales is to sell more to government. So for us the activities are about building brand awareness. Everything you do where you show people wines and talk about wines does that and the activities we took part in we felt would help more grow brand awareness. (3)

• It is early days but they have done some practical targeted activities and some they have only just announced so it takes a couple of months to target a market. So some are planned but not done, I would say in 3-6 months we will be in better position to say what has worked and what hasn’t. (5)

• The primary focus of this program is volume and value. The UK is not a value but volume market, we are a volume producer and that is a priority market for us. We also need value and SE Asia is a great market where they pay more for wine. What markets in SE Asia give you value? Singapore, and new markets like Taiwan are priority value markets. The US is a combination of value and volume and you can get some half decent value. Different markets have different appeals. At the moment there seems to be a scattergun approach. As long as the consultants tick the boxes for the program for value and volume. I would pull the handbrake on and stop. (6)

• UK – we haven’t sold any wine yet, hopefully this will be the difference but that is part of the difficulty with the UK market. Apart from the fact you need to position yourself with the right distribution, you get attention under the one umbrella and promote the message. It makes life simpler, and the dollars invested more effective. It is about working as a collective and strength in numbers. We certainly got the attention from the import company (who does deals with on trade, duty free, distributors). For us it is about targeting who we want to offer which wines to meet their client base – we have tried to partner with the right guys. In both instances we are still dancing the dance. I am quietly confident we will have a result, but it is not always immediate. It takes a long time to establish a brand. (7)

• The US market is a basket case, as only 3 or 4 Australian wines are selling in volumes in America, we will never see America return as a meaningful market in my life time. I don’t want to know about it, it’s a waste of time and money targeting that one. (9)

E.g.: communication, clear activities, follow up and delivery.

The majority of respondents have found the program good to work with in terms of the overall communication, good feedback and follow up, and quick responses from the management team. It was mentioned they receive a lot of emails from Wines to the World which provide a lot of opportunities and it is up to individuals to follow up with the information if they are interested or the activity is applicable to their business.

As stated by one respondent, with any new program there are so many stakeholders and lots to get across that it’s a challenge for any program to penetrate year 1 – as the focus has been on stakeholder engagement, capability development, and asset development.

Overall it was said that the program is practical, commercial, and flexible and responsive enough that some respondents are hopeful it continues rather than be a one-off and that it turns into a successful business relationship at the end of the day.

A respondent believes that that the biggest challenge is selling some of the success stories and testimonials from those producers, which will remind wineries that if they are looking to sell wine then they can try some of the activities. They believe the EGP program needs to get people excited in order to meet the program’s objectives.

It was also mentioned that it is slightly confusing in that there are several different programs running with Wine Australia as well, and that there may be some overlap of people and activities in the same field and that it was easy to lose track as to who you are talking with about what.

b. How did you find the EGP program to work with?

Only a couple of respondents reported that the program wasn’t very good which they attribute to lack of direct communication with producers to discuss their priority markets; too many questionnaires; poor or late communication of opportunities and lack of relationship development. There was also criticism around spending a significant amount of money on ticking the boxes, and that consultants have a conflict of interest as they also run other programs, and that there is replication in some projects.

Comments Good

• The communication is pretty good as they are very aware. When we have participated, there are plenty of opportunities that have come through which is a positive. We have been chosen to participate in two and the follow up and feedback is very good and well established. For me as a participant we got feedback from the event which was useful even though the outcome was disappointing. (1)

• The overall communication is pretty comprehensive. With any new program there is so many stakeholders and lots to get across that it’s a challenge for any program to penetrate year 1 – it’s all been about capability development, asset development etc. They have done an enormous amount of work in the first 12 months and to outsiders it might not seem to be a lot of activity. I would say it needs a stronger industry PR effort as they need to do a better job of communicating to the rest of industry some of the activities and the work they have done and show people how much effort is going into asset development. (3)

• It is very good; we get lots of emails from Wines to the World and there are plenty of opportunities there for people and if they follow their emails, they are going to have information in front of them. It took about 6 months for people to realise the serious opportunities available to lift exports and in the last 6 months it has picked up momentum. The biggest challenge is selling some of the success stories and testimonials from those who have had success which will remind wineries that if they are looking to sell wine, then they can have a look and try one or two activations and see how they go. It is an ambassadorial job and they need to get people excited in order to meet their objectives. (4)

• They are doing very well, Liz is doing a great job – good communication, and a good sense of urgency in terms of promptness/ quick response. The follow up is very good to date. From what the program has produced they are doing a really good job given stakeholders and minority groups can be noisy. It’s practical, commercial and flexible enough and responsive enough that hopefully it continues rather than be a one-off program. (5)

• It is excellent, what is slightly confusing is there are a number of different programs running with Wine Australia as well – there may be overlap but there are lots of people working in the same field and you lose track as to who you are talking to about what. I am happy with EGP, I wouldn’t say a bad word about any of it but I am hopeful it will turn into a successful business relationship at the end of the day which is what it is all about, repeat business. (7)

• Overall it is fine, we have had some success but also we are not overly involved. The UK was pretty simple and the US we would have been quite involved but we had success before the program started. A lot of what we are being taught, we have already learnt a reasonable amount – there is always insights as far as exporting goes. We have attended a couple of seminars etc., if anything it is me having to choose between working in the winery or vineyard or attending a seminar. The vineyard wins out at the end of the day. The reality is that sales are going ok, we still need to keep working on sales always but we are not panicking about it either. The communication is mostly through newsletters, and we are more aware of opportunities we can pursue. (8)

Not very good

• No one from the EGP program has ever reached out to me as a producer, apart from the questionnaires, to sit down and talk about ‘what are your priority markets, what should we be aiming for? I think they should pull the handbrake on. They should be sitting down with stakeholders. We always get questionnaires and the same questions. What the program is doing is spending a significant amount of money, and ticking the boxes as to where the pot of money goes. Why don’t they approach or poach someone who has done this before? Wines of California program is brilliant, their website and resources are excellent. That is a starting point. At the moment there are a bunch of consultants running it and there is also conflict of interest with them as they run other programs as well and there is also replication of some projects. Larry is in the office under-resourced and trying to do everything. They should start again and employ someone and stop employing consultants to do questionnaires, get back to basics. (6)

• It’s communicated very poorly, generally sometimes communication comes through very late and there is no opportunity to act on those in a meaningful way. Every dollar I spend myself is a dollar better spent. The whole export thing is built on fronting up and having an on-going relationship. Liz has been a breath of fresh air, she gets it. The key people who represent the interests of export programs (you can wipe out the last 3 years due to COVID) there is a revolving door that lacks relationship development. You can’t stick winemakers on a plane and send them to an irrelevant market and spend dollars on wine and food as there is no sustainability in relationships. I am aware of those who have been involved in a few of them of late, they still haven’t worked out – and there is very little uptake if you keep going to the same producers and continue to do the same stuff as they have always done. Now they are clutching at straws and sending weird crap to capture the market which is not working. Australia is fast becoming irrelevant in the global market. The intent and the way people are organising, they are trying really hard but the commercial outcomes are not there – they don’t understand the fundamentals about who decides what gets purchased as they don’t have commercial people running industry bodies. They have never spent a cent of their own money putting a product out there for an outcome. If I didn’t have to pay industry bodies, I wouldn’t. As an industry that has invested $3 million, there has been no change in the needle in terms of sales.

In the next three years, they need a person with great ideas but ultimately, they don’t care. You are better off getting on a plane yourself, if you are serious about export. (9)

Other

• I can’t really say as I don’t do much of it, Periscope assists us with the program and exporting. (2)

c. Will you look to grow / continue or reduce your engagement with EGP?

All respondents will maintain their engagement with EGP, with some even looking to grow their involvement through more targeted, more focused programs for the region which will also benefit individual businesses.

Others plan to continue in the hope that it will result in export growth, or new markets and online sales; or assist in connecting with distributors. While respondents recognise that not all activities are suited to their business, they find the program allows them to keep abreast of opportunities, export requirements, issues and markets. Other respondents, while they are frustrated with the program, are happy to sit on the sideline and provide feedback; and continue to invest money to support it as they don’t want to alienate themselves.

One respondent mentioned they will probably continue with the program, but things are tight at the moment and hence they are reluctant to invest, and they are also constrained by supply so they not actively pursuing markets to the same degree.

Comments Grow

• We plan to grow more through more targeted, more focused programs for the region which will also benefit my business. The program has been very top down and it has recently been tweaked so it is more of a bottom-up approach so the regions can become drivers of the program rather than the recipients. This followed a clear message from the regions who wanted more control of the programs they want to run rather than saying yes or no as they can now say there are markets that they want to target. (1)

• We will look to maintain or increase our engagement and look to target other markets at entry point – that is where we see more upside. (4)

• We will try and increase our engagement if the program continues to do what it is doing, we liked the focus and in-market activities. (5)

Continue / Maintain

• We will reassess that, but we will definitely continue. We are really interested in emerging markets like India and South Korea and Vietnam maybe Dubai. We are hoping to grow markets and it is good to keep in touch with what others are doing and see how people interact and keep abreast of the issues and markets. (2)

• We will continue to engage with EGP in activities we feel suit us, some activities are not relevant to us because we are not new to market. Where we see value for us is to expand in markets, so our priorities might not be the same as other brand’s priorities. (3)

• We won’t reduce our involvement but will sit on the sideline. We are frustrated, better off doing it ourselves and sometimes think we are better off going to Tourism WA and Qantas to do a promotion. We won’t walk away from it and will provide feedback. (6)

• We will maintain it as is, if the right opportunity gets offered to us or we notice something in the newsletter we will pursue it. We are looking for traditional distribution and not getting into new countries with online sales. (8)

• In lots of instances, we put money in because we want to support it in some way, I am not happy about it but will do it and you can’t alienate yourself. There is lots of politics if you are not there at a tasting, it is a bit like making a donation to a political party, you need to maintain it. (9)

Unsure

• We will probably continue; it depends very much on the cost. Things are tight at the moment for everyone and the appetite for investing in what might be, as opposed to what is – is not as great for the business. At the moment we haven’t been very active as we are constrained by supply so we are not actively pursuing markets to the same degree that we would. We do plan to do more in the future but we don’t have the inventory to push (not sitting on a stack of inventory) so we have put it on the backburner but we when we do, we will be onto it again. (7)

Question 9

Q9. What activities do you believe the EGP should do more of or focus on?

(Includes non-participants)

Respondents would like to see the EGP program seek feedback/ input from producers; assist smaller producers to target export markets; provide opportunities as a collective; collaborate with other sectors; focus on broader engagement with producers; and continue to offer a range of marketing activities.

A few respondents mentioned that the program should keep engaging with producers/ exporters in terms of feedback and ideas as it is important to understand what participants want, and to ensure the programs are still valid. It was also mentioned that producers should be engaged in one-on-one conversations, rather than emails, to determine what their marketing priorities are, and what generates the biggest margin? In collecting this information, and upon an opportunity arising the EGP program is then aware which producers have the capacity to meet the market requirements. Another suggestion was to identify the top 20 exporters in Western Australia to gauge their success, and to also determine why they are not participating in the program.

As one of the metrics of the program is to grow the number of WA wine producers participating in the export market, it was suggested that more assistance/ support should be provided for smaller producers as currently they lack capacity and resources to be able to get into the export market. Export needs to be viable and currently there are several barriers holding smaller producers back that the program should identify. Opportunities exist in finding a way to allow smaller producers to work collaboratively and make the program more targeted to address their needs and create more interest to make export more attractive. It was acknowledged that it’s a balance between working with larger producers and also helping the smaller ones.

Broader engagement with WA producers was also raised to get them more enthused about the program and the value it could potentially offer them. It was mentioned that a lot are waiting to see the successes of others before they are prepared to put their money where their mouth is and participate in the program, therefore it is important to promote the successes.

Working as a collective of producers, as opposed to individuals, was also suggested to allow the program to better use funds to drive promotion through determining the players who have the ability to service a particular market and work together. It was reported that the program has recently made some modifications to allow for funding to assist cohorts/ regions or groups of producers.

Respondents believe that the EGP program should collaborate more with the tourism and food sectors. Consumers are looking for food and wine destinations and if the wine industry can work with these industries – everyone wins. Shared effort will also result in better bang for the buck. Ideas include working with Tourism WA and Tourism Australia to run a holiday promotion, with support from Qantas which can help build momentum. The wine industry could also build a partnership with food to grow WA’s reputation world-wide. It would be a complementary relationship with food unique to WA such as Manjimup truffles, Dorper lamb, cheeses etc. which could provide a great opportunity to showcase both product ranges.

Some markets, on top of the current activities, that respondents would like the program to target include Germany, Malaysia, and Scandinavia. It was also suggested that there should be more market research to understand what product is out there in terms of the of varieties to export, and is there a market for those? This market research could help smaller producers, who lack the resources, to determine the right market for their wine.

Other market activities suggested include more on trade, on premise focused activities in terms of direct funding for restaurants and venues in export markets; and in-bound buyers to experience the regions and taste local wines. One producer said they were happy to cover half of the costs, as they viewed in-bound as more effective than virtual events however it was mentioned that the buyers should be well researched.

Respondents also suggested liaising with various government departments around the world to get them to host wine tastings of a critical mass of WA wines that will allow producers to engage with potential buyers. It was mentioned there is no substitute for putting wines in people’s mouths. The use of social media influencers was also raised to gauge which wines are exciting people and to increase promotion of WA wines.

It was suggested that the EGP program should raise the cap in the budget to allow more producers to access the opportunities as some programs have had lots of interest and some producers have missed out such as the UK retail promotion; and the Hong Kong Watson’s promotion which a respondent suggested should be run again.

Respondents understand that it is hard to try and assist everyone at the same level because there are some regions within the state that are already very established. Regions need different activities and balancing those competing needs is very complex and a challenge for any program. Therefore, it is hard to give equal weight to regions and for everyone to get the same value because everyone is at a different stage and level and the challenge in the program is that it needs a raft of different opportunities to cater for the different levels of export.

Comments

Collaboration / Collectives

• Funding for collectives – the current modifications will be favourable with allowing funding in the program to assist cohorts/ regions or groups of producers to do things is a positive change to the program. There will be other topdown activations that will continue, individual producers can make up their own mind up if they want to be involved. Funding can be allocated to a collective or regions and that is a powerful thing that hasn’t been there. (1)

• I really believe they need to do the program as a collective. They need to look at who are the players in that particular market who have the ability to service supermarkets and then pitch as a collective. That is where we will get biggest bang for our buck. There is no one driving or doing that, they are saying here’s the pot of money go and do something with it and it will tick some boxes for us. I have had people ring up after bulk wine, as they want to utilise the money to go into the market to do a promotion. They want to use the money for a one-off listing fee, and then the next minute move onto the next thing. It is not sustainable – what will happen in 3 years’ time is that they will blow all the money and when we look back we will ask what did we get for it? I have worked with the UK market with a massive Tourism Australia promotion which worked well and we managed to sit down as a collective. At the moment as individuals everyone is competing against each other. They need to think about how to turn $60,000 into a $120,000 potential investment. Why go individually, why not do it as group collective – that is a better use of funds to drive promotion. It’s open only short term not long term, there is no longevity in the program because once the promotion is done, people walk away. There should be more collaboration, you see the Barossa Valley work together, we don’t have to have a Margaret River brand – WA is still strong enough. We should work collectively as we are better together rather than individuals.(6)

• When the world opens up, it would be great to get involved in market opportunities and collaborate with other producers in key markets and head to them and do promotional activities with support from EGP to showcase our wines. Through the Swan Valley wine marketing association we did a Swan Valley to Singapore project which worked well and we managed to get importers out of that. (11)

Collaboration with other sectors

• Collaborating with other sectors is better as what we do in wines is no different to tourism and food. We spend lots of money on research etc. and consumers look for food and wine destinations why not take that research and collaborate with food and tourism and wine together. Everyone wins, we get bums on seats. More collaboration and shared effort will result in a better bang for your buck. Why don’t they over say the next 12 months work together with someone like Tourism WA and Tourism Australia who want to get bums on seats and look to run a WA holiday promotion and also get support from Qantas. And then all of a sudden you build momentum. (6)

• Wine and food partnership - one of the challenges for Australia as a wine producing nation and one of the reasons why we are not seeing Michelin Restaurants like other nations is that they don’t think of Australia as being a gastronomic nation. Their minds go back to a shrimp on the BBQ and they see us as sporty and not epicurean. One of the things that might be helpful is in partnering with cuisine in this country as it deserves a reputation around the world that it doesn’t have i.e. Manjimup truffles, take dorper lamb so we can cement this idea overseas if you want to eat well go to Australia and develop a food and wine partnership, I am not looking at one outside of the other but rather complementary. One of the things that has held us back is that some restaurants have the most amazing menus but their wine list is an afterthought as they favour their own portfolio. People are becoming more discerning and adventurous. In the wine trade we don’t partner enough with artisan producers of cheeses, mushrooms, charcuterie - they are a missed opportunity and uniquely WA. (7)

Feedback / ideas from exporters/ producers

• The EGP should keep engaging with different exporters for different ideas, seek ideas and innovative ways of doing things and don’t rely on the tried ways. It is about understanding people who want to engage in the program and where their priorities lie in terms of markets, channels, demographics etc. They should get more information from participants and what they want. A bit like this what you are doing, industry consultation. Revisit the assumptions, are they still valid – who are the target exporters who are not participating in the program. Identify the top 20 exporters in WA and of those who are not participating – why are they not a part of the program? What channels are they interested in and how can the EGP program engage with them? Who hasn’t engaged and why? And do they export? (1)

• Employ someone to sit down with stakeholders to get an understanding of what they are looking for and then look to restart the program. Because in three years’ time there will be nothing. There is nothing for the long term, it is a quick fix to move some volume, it should be about long-term sustainability of the market. (6)

• If someone runs a program, they need to understand their membership base. They need to understand what producers want to focus on and ask within your portfolio which things generate the most margin for you? Forget about 10 cases of this and that. It is about better information and better technologies so that when the opportunity

comes up, they know who to ask and who has the capability, and what wines do they want to push out? At the moment they are picking out weird and wonderful wines which is nice, and they tell a story but they don’t represent what Australia wants to do in moving volume. It is uglier than ever with China out of the market we have a serious problem, and some segments of markets will collapse with the oversupply, it is coming. Most people in WA don’t think there is an oversupply. There has been no uptick in sales, and our wines have very little relevance on the dinner table. (9)

Assist smaller producers

• Need to look at ways to resource smaller producers – one of the issues going forward is that most owner operators are wearing multiple hats and then you add on export. To me the admin and sales side of it in a bigger company is someone’s job. In a smaller company you need a good return or to be able to afford someone to put on it. Perhaps a cooperative business made up of smaller producers, where they find the right people and put them together in a room and help with the processes and how to resource it as it is one of the things we need guidance on and if you get 3-4 producers together, they can afford to employ someone so this may be an option to explore. One of the metrics of EGP is that it is looking to grow the number of producers exporting, to do that successfully, aside from the bigger producers who have the resources to export so they are already doing it, they need to assist smaller producers. Export needs to be viable or find a way to work collaboratively. In the current market, shipping/ container costs are an issue but if you get a pallet of wine from 4 producers that cost is shared. Look to consolidate or do it with other industries. If we were to export and pay the whole cost of freight and the same as a bigger producer, it’s not cost competitive. The issue going forward is easy for WoWA – if they are serious about the metrics, they need to identify what are the barriers. The biggest two are that no one is going to leap into export without a known connection to customer, and resources along with the cost of getting goods to market. (12)

• Market research - there is enough education, I don’t believe they need to do any more but they need to try to understand what product is out there as there is a mix of varieties to export and is there a market for those? Maybe more market research to report back to small producers – e.g. there is a market in ……, Dolcetto would fit this. Some level of specificity and at what price point. Do some stuff that little producers can’t do like

market research and determine the right market for that product which can provide them with opportunities. (12)

• If there is a program available where there is one on one conversation, that is the best way to start the process to help people understand what is available and understand what people are looking for. A 10-minute conversation rather than an email in the inbox. I don’t have 20 staff. There are lots of small businesses with minimal staff and now they have less staff than before COVID. It needs a more targeted personal approach without spending weeks on it, that would be an incentive to help create the interest needed. They need to get more people on side and sell the idea /concept to more producers and then they will have more of a chance of making it work. It is important to understand what their needs are and make it more targeted. (10)

• I would like to see them do more market entry programs into anywhere, and intro into markets and to the right people that allow smaller brands to build up as opposed to something like Canada that would have been a tough ask for us. We are building steadily and sustainably rather than taking a large risk. That would benefit us most and focus on high value areas. It’s a balance in working with larger producers and also helping smaller guys too if they want to increase the WA export volume, they won’t do it just working with small producers. (8)

Broader engagement

• It would be great to have more engagement from producers in the Great Southern and trying to get them more enthused about the program and the value it could potentially offer them. The producers don’t fully understand the value proposition or don’t have the desire to export which has meant that only a few have got behind the program and participated. The first year it ran was a full COVID year so there was a lot of virtual events, no travel and part of exporting is going to trade shows, talking to people, meeting people, talking with distributors so we have been a bit constrained and that might be the reason why it has been so hard to get uptake from producers. Given the COVID times maybe there is not the appetite to co-invest. (1)

• It is early days, and it is hard to accurately assess how it’s going and I also think it would be great for the program to get a broader engagement from producers. I think a lot are waiting to see the successes of others before they are prepared to put their money where their mouth is. Once they see the success people are having, and once they get confidence in the program, they will want to be involved in it. There is certainly

lots of enthusiasm and dedicated people working very hard to get a successful outcome for the program. (3)

Markets

• There is opportunity with Germany and also market entry into Malaysia. (7)

• There are other markets we dabble with like Scandinavia and the US which is an expensive market to service and very demanding. We are looking for opportunities closer to home like South Korea and in terms of assistance possibly Germany. We were there a long time ago, and they tend to favour lower priced product so there could be an opportunity – is there an existing program for Germany we would be interested to see what it entails. (7)

Marketing activities

• You can always do more, I suggest more ontrade, on-premise focused activities in terms of direct funding – i.e. we would do more restaurant and venues in Singapore but we need to fund those activities. Targeted countries should include the UK, US, Japan and Singapore. It’s about more immersion, bringing people to the WA wine region particularly Margaret River – bring key trade and opinion leaders from those markets into the region, we would be happy fund half as well. I appreciate the need to provide other things for other producers as well, we want to do more. I find it works best if you get into the region to experience it, taste wines and see how good it is. Virtual events are still good, but not as effective as people get fatigued. They served a purpose, and we did a lot of virtual tastings across all our markets, but it is not as good as getting people down here. Inbound versus outbound; inbound is way more effective. (5)

• Inbound - bringing distributors and tourists through the wine regions is also beneficial. They need to be realistic and bring in people who want to buy. Relationships don’t happen the first time you meet, sometimes you go backwards and forwards before a sale – there is interest but it might take 6 months to 2 years before it results in something. If there are certain countries that are keen get distributors or importers over, but they need to be the right ones and well researched. An example through Austrade; they wanted to present wine and beer and spirts from Perth amongst other offerings from other industries and we went to the event which included importers and exporters. It was a waste of time, while people liked the wines there was nobody who specialised in wine there they were working with meat and grain and other goods. So, there was nobody at the end of the day who could say they want to import your wine. (8)

• Influencers – We got distribution from a Wine Australia tasting event Singapore which had a lot of wine influencers attend along with distributors and that worked well. I know distributors watch sommeliers and where they are gravitating to, and then distributors make the calls. With Tik Tok and Netflix and You Tube algorithms figure out what is popular and with the way tasting is constructed at the moment distributors decide, whereas you could have consumers (a gate keeper between the public and their influences) say which wines are exciting people. Encourage influencers to taste wines because then distributors could look at which wines are exciting the influencers. (8)

• The cost of bringing buyers to us is cost prohibitive. While they have a great time, turning it into sales is easier said than done. Inbound buyers I am not sure is the best use of funds, as it is expensive. I think tastings with various government departments hosting those tastings around the world so we have a critical mass of wines to taste is best as it will hopefully engage potential buyers to get off their chair and come and have a look. There is no substitute for putting wine in people’s mouths. (7)

• I would like to see them do more market entry programs into anywhere, and intro into markets and to the right people that allow smaller brands to build up as opposed to something like Canada that would have been a tough ask for us. We are building steadily and sustainably rather than taking a large risk. That would benefit us most and focus on high value areas. It’s a balance in working with larger producers and also helping smaller guys too if they want to increase the WA export volume, they won’t do it just working with small producers. (8)

Raise cap to allow more producers to access opportunity

• The UK retail promotion was very significant for us as we already had distribution and the activation just amplified that. What could EGP do – they could raise the cap in the budget to have an overall bigger budget so that more producers can access the opportunity. It was the most subscribed program out of all activations and there was a lot of interest. Other stuff that has been very effective is the Hong Kong promotion with Watsons which was done in conjunction with Wine Australia – that was very successful, and we got an order straight away (we haven’t been in that market for 10 years) and we need to persevere with that market as there is a lot of tip over from China so EGP should look to keep that on for year 2. (4)

Other comments

• I am not sure but what I need to do is keep my finger on the pulse more. What opportunities do I see going forward? I think they need to continue to present things to producers and producers determine if they take them up. (2)

• They did do a wide stakeholder engagement piece early on to understand what producers were looking for and what is required is for that level of interrogation to be regularly sought. Feedback and the value in terms of what is working and is the program fitting those needs will change over the life of the program. It is too hard to say at this early stage of the program as there hasn’t been enough activities and programs to give a strong comparison in terms of did that work or determine what is working. With some activities that has already happened but really, I feel it is still too early to judge if they are successful, there has been good feedback but did anyone get sales from those? Or did it help people to have a different view of WA wines. I would say overall, and I feel the same about Wine Australia - it is very hard for a national or a statebased body to try and assist everyone at the same level because there are regions within the state like say Margaret River is already a very established brand and a strong region and so it is different to the Great Southern or Swan Valley or Geographe as they not as well known. Those regions needs are different activities to what Margaret River would require – and balancing those competing needs is very complex and a challenge for any program. It is hard to give equal weight to regions and for everyone to get the same value because everyone is at a different stage and level. I don’t know how to make it fairer. If you are not an experienced exporter you need different activities, assets and support and the challenge in the program is that it needs a raft of different opportunities as everyone is at different levels. (3)

• It is a hard one with smaller businesses, as resources is man power. Export is hard work as they always want it cheaper, smaller producers are not producing cheap wines. We have the cost of bottles (not in bulk) and WA is producing bloody good wine. Our goal is to sell premium wine not to shift volume. With the export market we need to get the dollar value up, I would rather sell 10 bottles at a higher rate than shift volume. Sustainability of the market is important and a focus on a valued product. There are lots of producers who would be interested, but how do they cater for them – there needs to be more work done to understand barriers which for smaller producers are capacity and resources. (12)

Question 10

Q10. What activities do you believe the EGP should do

less of? (Includes non-participants)

According to respondents, activities that they believe the EGP should do less of include virtual tastings; inbound buyers; wine trade fairs; and they should review the Wine Connect platform.

Virtual wine tastings are viewed as not as effective as face to face, as according to a respondent you miss nuances and can’t pick up on body language compared to having someone physically in front of you. While it is cost effective, respondents understand that the activity suited COVID times and as one said, to be a competitive business you need every little edge and to utilise all mediums.

As one producer stated, they are not convinced that wine fairs work as bigger producers are already known in the market and will go regardless, therefore they believe it shouldn’t be a part of the EGP program as it is not going to help the metric of more producers exporting.

The value of being a part of the Wine Connect platform is being questioned by one respondent who says they haven’t got anything out of it in the first year, for which they were subsidised. There has been no feedback on the success of others and now upon receiving the bill for this year, they are reviewing their membership as the activity is not delivering – therefore they believe it should be free until the platform figures out how to deliver value and be beneficial to wine producers.

Another producer believes that any Wine Intelligence market research information that requires payment should be avoided, as the trends can be accessed via other means and upon release of the information people have already moved on, and it is also hard to distinguish between fashion and trend. Other comments include awareness of timing for the release of market opportunities; and continue to try things and learn from them and refine them. The EGP program is viewed as an ambitious program which is challenging, but everything helps with targeting export markets.

One producer believes the program should spend less money and that they need to focus on working out if these initiatives are worth anything at all. They question the return on investment in terms of how much has been spent? What increase has WA seen in exports in recent years? And how much wine has been sold?

It was also mentioned that the US market is a waste of time and money, as only a few wines are selling in volume in America and that it will never be a meaningful market. Feedback also included avoiding questionnaires in the future, and instead focus on sitting down face to face with producers to understand their frustrations and what they are looking for, whereas another respondent believed that this survey was a great initiative to get feedback.

There was also criticism around the program providing a pot of money for producers to do something with and just tick some boxes. It was mentioned that people are using the money for one off promotion and there is concern that the money will all be blown with nothing to show at the end of the day. Currently the program is viewed by one respondent as not sustainable and that it is creating competition amongst individuals. The funds could be better used to target the export market as a collective, rather than as individuals.

Comments

• Virtual tastings need to be scaled back as I don’t believe they are as effective as face to face. (1)

• There needs to be less of a top-down approach and more collaboration at the bottom and working up which they are doing now which is good. (1)

• No, I don’t think so. I always struggle sometimes with grant applications so perhaps EGP could offer producers support and assistance with grant applications for export opportunities. (2)

• No, it is very ambitious program – the original aims are also very ambitious, and I think it is a big challenge. Everything helps, I can’t say one thing is more valuable than another – our export sales didn’t drop, and we have opened up a few new markets during COVID when people couldn’t travel. Every little thing adds up – export is the same as any business relationship – you have to take the time to build, find the right partner with the same goals is important, and it all takes time. It is about brand awareness, having the right wine in the market at the right price point. Exporting is not straightforward – some activities have felt more successful than others, but I know the program has already done a lot of self-evaluation. (3)

• No, the only bit of feedback is that when they put out the Expressions of Interest be aware of timing and avoid sending it at times like Christmas holidays when they are switched off. I am aware that opportunities that become available at that time and with short notice so it is hard. (4)

• I am not a big fan of the wine intelligence market research stuff as I think you can get trends and what is happening by other means rather than pay someone for it as by the time you pay them, people have moved on and sometimes it is hard to distinguish between fashion and trend. (5)

• Rather than questionnaire after questionnaire and me answering questions, I would really like for the program people to sit down around a table and talk face to face to me (stakeholders) and ask what works for me and my business, what’s not applicable or useful and understand their frustrations and what they are looking for. (6)

• At the moment they are saying here’s the pot of money go and do something with it and it will tick some boxes for us. I have had people ring up after bulk wine, as they want to utilise the money to go into the market to do a promotion. They want to use the money for a one-off listing fee, and then the next minute move onto the next thing. It is not sustainable – what will happen in 3 years’ time is that they will blow all the money and when we look back we will ask what did we get for it? I have worked with the UK market with a massive Tourism Australia promotion which worked well and we managed to sit down as a collective. At the moment as individuals everyone is competing against each other. They need to think about how to turn $60,000 into a $120,000 potential investment. Why go individually, why not do it as group collective – that is a better use of funds to drive promotion. It’s open only short term not long term, there is no longevity in the program because once the promotion is done, people walk away. (6)

• I can’t think of any, I don’t think bringing people here is the right thing, if you are talking specifically about buyers but it is different if they are journalists, as it is more effective. Buyers are too narrow because they also deal with personal bias, whereas journalists are more open minded. (7)

• It’s about trying things and learning from them, the UK tasting didn’t work but that doesn’t mean that if it was better refined or offered at a better time that it would work, it is hit and miss and if you do an event there might be a good crowd and other times there might not be. (8)

• Virtual events – despite what happened with COVID I don’t think they are as effective as in person, as you miss nuances and can’t pick up on body language compared to someone physically in front of you. Having said that they are more cost effective. But to be a competitive business you need every little edge and to utilise all mediums. (7)

• The platform through Wine Australia - the Wine Connect platform for potential importers which provides an intro for them to be able to pursue different wine brands is not working. There is a fee to be involved annually to stay connected but I haven’t found that we have had any contacts through that and am questioning how good is the platform until there is a service delivered – what’s the value of renewing our membership annually. If they are trying to sell that, they need to say unfortunately while it didn’t work for you, we generated this many sales or this much website traffic through it. It is not delivering on that side; it should be free until they figure out how to deliver the aim so that there are benefits. Unless someone is seeing success or getting contacted, then almost everyone will not be renewing their membership. Out of everything that is my biggest bugbear, we had a go but we haven’t seen anything. We did get subsidised for it at the start but we have received a bill this year. (8)

• Spend less money, they need to focus and work out exactly whether or not these initiatives are worth anything at all, as for someone who pays their fees, I want to know what the ROI has been in the last 12 years? How much has been spent in the revolving door on marketing initiatives and poured into export initiatives and what change has there been? How much wine has been sold as a result? My gut feeling is that all it has done is paid for the lifestyles of individuals and not generated anything meaningful. There are 4 WA producers who have contributed to meaningful growth to exports which is not derived from EGP. What growth has there been in exports if any? Or is it the result of the market fulfilling the shortfall? (9)

• The US market is a basket case it’s a waste of time and money focusing on that, as only 3 or 4 Australian wines are selling in volumes in America, we will never see America return as a meaningful market in my life time. I don’t want to know about it. (9)

• I can’t be critical as I don’t know enough about it. But at the end of the day, they need to pique people’s interest and go the extra step instead of sending out general emails and hope they respond to them. (10)

• Doing this survey is a really good initiative to ring around participants to get feedback is a big step so well done. Sometimes we get the feeling when WoWA send out market entry program opportunities that they are not getting lots of people putting up their hands so it is important to ask why? The US activity had way too much interest that they had to select the businesses which made it difficult. (11)

• I am not 100% convinced that going to big wine fairs works, as the bigger producers are already known in the market and they will go anyway so I am not sure if it should be part of the EGP or the sole thing. It is not going to help meet the metric of more producers exporting. (12)

Question 11

Q11. How has EGP linked wine producer efforts up with other market development activities and leveraged funds with other parts of industry? (Includes non-participants)

Respondents are not fully aware of the EGP’s collaboration through alignment of investment with other parts of industry. Comments range from not being aware, to those who are aware of some collaboration with Austrade and Wine Australia in activities otherwise they were not familiar with other partners.

A respondent said that the leveraging of funds with other parts of industry has been effective as it means EGP are able to work with other bodies to amplify support for their programs in each of those markets. It was mentioned that more collaboration with organisations who have the same objectives is essential and adds another layer on, but it subsidises the work for producers who are budget conscious.

Some concern was raised that funds are getting thrown around at the moment, and one respondent said they were getting phone calls from lots of different organisations, so they said there certainly needs to be more collaboration. Another respondent said they find it massively confusing as there are so many different government initiatives and it would be simpler if there was one body that was the go-to and then they match you.

Comments

• I am not fully aware. (2)

• I know they are attempting to, that it is on their radar to do that and try and collaborate where possible. They have worked closely with Austrade in Japan to roll out that activity, and Wine Australia in the UK to roll out activities – how successful they have been, I can’t comment. (3)

• It has been effective as they are able to work with Austrade and other bodies to amplify support for the programs in each of those markets. More collaboration with organisations who have the same objectives is essential and adds another layer to work with, but it also ultimately subsidises the work for producers who are more budget conscious. And it could also tip those wineries sitting on the fence over the fence and be a deal breaker for them. (4)

• I am aware of Wine Australia and that has worked well in leveraging activities otherwise I am not familiar with other partners. (5)

• It probably does, funds are getting thrown around lots at the moment, I am getting phone calls from lots of different organisations. There certainly needs to be more collaboration with food and tourism as well. (6)

• No, I am not aware, I find it massively confusing as there are so many different government initiatives and it would be simpler if there was one body that was the go-to and then they match you. (7)

• I know Austrade has been involved with some activities and involved in the introductory program in the UK, so I am aware of some collaboration, and also with Wine Australia otherwise that is it. (8)

• I am not aware directly as I haven’t come across any. (12)

The Authors

Agknowledge®

Agknowledge® provides strategic management advice to a range of agribusiness companies and farming enterprises across Australia. Agknowledge® principals Peter Cooke and Nicol Taylor work nationally from a base in Western Australia, and combined they have over 70 years of involvement in agribusiness at all levels from strategic planning for agribusiness companies, government and industry policy, research, succession planning and business development.

Julia Ashby has worked with Agknowledge® since 2014 conducting one on one industry interviews on topics including: inland aquaculture opportunities, the value of grower groups, citrus industry consumer research, surveillance needs for invasive species, consultation for the WA Wild Dog Action Plan, and risk management in the Western Rock Lobster industry.

Our advice and contribution is informed by:

• Extensive specialist knowledge of key industry sectors and the issues that are driving operational and strategic change, a significant first-hand experience of working in roles with responsibility for strategic development, and the practical factors that may constrain the implementation of strategic initiatives.

• Government strategy development experience: Agknowledge® has completed many successful strategy and innovation engagements with government. We also bring practical experience of how to develop strategy in the government context.

• Industry and infrastructure experience. We draw on our team’s strong knowledge of regional industries as well as our numerous engagements in conducting industry analysis and building strategic business cases. Our robust analysis supports the qualitative perspectives, underpinned by strong analytical capabilities.

The related bodies corporate, directors and employees of Agknowledge® accept no liability whatsoever for any injury, loss, claim, damage, incidental or consequential damage, arising out of, or in any way connected with, the use of any information, or any error, omission or defect in the information contained in this publication. Whilst every care has been taken in the preparation of this publication Agknowledge® accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information supplied.