Managing Multiple Wine Brands: Systems and Presence with Mike Tracy, Director of Winemaking at Trois Noix
Mike Tracy grew up on the Fry Ranch in Dry Creek Valley, where his mother worked for EJ Gallo and his godfather was among the first cellar workers at the facility. His earliest memories are the smell of fermentation drifting through the air and picking berries off the vine. He went from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo to Cornell, worked his first harvest at La Crema in 2009, then made wine in New Zealand and in Mendoza with Michel Rolland before landing his first assistant winemaker role at Checkerboard Vineyards on Diamond Mountain with Martha McClellan and Bob Levy of Harlan Estate. He later spent four years with consulting winemakers Jennifer Williams and Mark Porembski, managing operations across eight different brands before stepping into his current role as Director of Winemaking at Trois Noix. He also consults for Peter Paul Wines, and in 2025, he is making his first personal label: a Dry Creek Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, bringing him full circle to where he started.
Managing multiple wine brands from a custom crush facility is a discipline that most winemakers develop the hard way, one missed sulfuring window or misaligned expectation at a time. Mike sat down with Lauren Heindel to walk through the systems, presence requirements, and daily habits that allow him to maintain quality across multiple programs without losing himself in the process.
Custom crush winemaking is a fundamentally different problem than estate winemaking. At an estate, everyone around you is focused on one product. In a custom crush environment, you are one of many clients under the same roof, and the team caring for your wines is also caring for everyone else’s. The winemakers who succeed in that environment are not the ones who work the hardest. They are the ones who have built the clearest systems.
In this episode, we cover:
How the transition from estate winemaking at Checkerboard to managing eight brands taught Mike what actually needs to be documented and communicated
Why defining stylistic goals, winemaking protocols, and communication rhythms before harvest is the most important work a consulting winemaker does
What separates the Trois Noix style (acid-forward, neutral oak, no MLF on Chardonnay) from Peter Paul Wines (more opulent, hedonistic), and why picking decisions are the foundation of both
How Mike uses InnoVint to track work orders, fermentation metrics, vineyard maturity data, and COGS across programs in real time from anywhere
Why sulfuring and topping every three to four weeks, not six to seven, is a non-negotiable for quality in a custom crush environment
How CrossFit five days a week, hot yoga, prioritized sleep, and a July wind-down routine make it possible to show up at full capacity through peak harvest
From one wine to many: building protocols that travel
The shift Mike describes from Checkerboard to consulting work was not just a change in volume. It was a change in how trust gets built and where quality comes from. At a single-estate operation, the entire team is oriented around one product. The attention, the buy-in, and the institutional knowledge are concentrated in one place. When you move into a custom crush environment with multiple clients, multiple crews, and multiple winemaking philosophies sharing the same facility, none of that can be assumed.
What Mike learned from working alongside Jennifer Williams and Mark Porembski across eight brands is that the winemaker’s primary job in a multi-brand context is communication. Not just stylistic direction, but the full set of expectations: which practices are non-negotiable, how decisions get escalated, what the team at each facility needs to understand about the wines they are caring for. That clarity does not develop overnight. Mike describes it as taking a few years to build the kind of trust that makes a multi-brand operation run the way it should.
The contrast between custom crush and estate also plays out in what stays visible and what disappears. Small quality decisions, gassing a tank before filling it, monitoring dissolved oxygen at bottling, sulfuring on schedule, are easy to miss in a busy multi-client facility. They do not announce themselves when they are skipped. The winemaker who operates as though the team will default to the right practice without explicit protocols is taking a risk that a focused, well-communicated set of expectations would eliminate.
When you are a winemaker making wines at multiple facilities, I think it's very important to be clear about your protocols, about your expectations for the wines that you're making, and all the different facilities, and having all that be very clearly communicated with leadership at all of the different facilities, with staff.
Mike Tracy , Director of Winemaking
Trois Noix
Before the first harvest with a new custom crush facility or a new client, write out your winemaking protocols in enough detail that any competent cellar worker could execute them without a phone call. The process of writing them will reveal the assumptions you have been making and have not communicated. Shared expectations are not a substitute for written protocols; they are what you document in order to catch the places where your expectations and theirs are not as aligned as you thought.
Staying true to each brand’s identity
The most common concern winemakers raise when they consider managing multiple programs is whether the stylistic identity of each wine stays intact. Mike’s answer is that it starts in the vineyard and in the relationship, not in the cellar.
Trois Noix is built around freshness and acidity. The wines are made with significant neutral oak, minimal new French oak, and the Chardonnay does not go through malolactic fermentation. The picking decisions orient toward preserving acidity and structure over maximizing ripeness. Peter Paul Wines is a different brief: more opulent, more hedonistic, the kind of wine that rewards patience in the glass. The two programs are stylistically distinct enough that there is no confusion about which direction a decision should go, provided the protocols and the picking targets are clearly defined before the fruit comes in.
That clarity comes from the relationships Mike maintains with each brand owner. With Jaime Araujo at Trois Noix, there is regular direct collaboration and a shared sensibility about how wines should taste. With Peter Paul, who is based in New Hampshire, the working relationship is equally close in terms of communication, even across distance. The stylistic goals are not assumed. They are discussed, agreed on, and reflected in everything from the vineyard management approach to the decisions made at the crush pad.
Our wines make themselves when the pick is done correctly.
Mike Tracy , Director of Winemaking
Trois Noix
When managing two programs with genuinely different stylistic goals, document the target profile for each wine the way you would document a fermentation protocol: specific, measurable, actionable. A shared understanding of what Brix, acidity, and phenolic maturity look like at pick for each program protects you during the pressure of harvest, when the decision has to be made quickly and the context is not always easy to reconstruct.
Data as the backbone of multi-brand winemaking
Mike’s analogy for winemaking data is direct: it works like health data. He wears a Whoop to track his recovery, heart rate variability, and sleep, not because the numbers tell him everything, but because what he does not track cannot inform the decisions he makes about training and rest. The same logic applies to wine. What goes unrecorded does not disappear; it just becomes unavailable when you need it.
For Trois Noix, InnoVint is the central system. Every action that happens to the wines goes through a work order. Vineyard maturity data is logged throughout the season. Fermentation metrics, Brix and temperature in real time, are accessible from anywhere. When a nutrient addition is supposed to be triggered at a certain Brix, Mike can see whether it has happened. When he wants to understand what they did with a particular fermentation in 2022, the record is there to look at. For TTB compliance and the Grape Crush report, the data trail that would otherwise require reconstructing from memory or scattered notes is already built.
The part Mike is equally clear about is what data cannot replace. In the custom crush environment, where cellar staff are managing multiple clients’ wines simultaneously, the visibility InnoVint provides is not a substitute for physical presence. It is a complement to it. Seeing that a work order has been completed is not the same as walking the cellar, checking tanks, smelling fermentations, and being seen by the team that is caring for the wines. That presence builds the trust that makes the system work.
sort of akin winemaking data to health data. What you don't record can get lost.
Mike Tracy , Director of Winemaking
Trois Noix
If I'm at home at eight o'clock and I wanna look at what temperature our Merlot is fermenting at, I can.
Mike Tracy , Director of Winemaking
Trois Noix
If your winemaking data lives in notebooks, scattered spreadsheets, or memory, start by identifying the three decisions you rely on most during harvest, whether to trigger an addition, whether a fermentation is proceeding normally, whether a wine has been topped and sulfured on schedule, and build the tracking habit around those three things first. A complete system built after the fact is a much harder lift than a partial system built into the workflow before harvest begins.
Physical presence, the non-negotiables, and reclaiming life outside harvest
Mike’s list of non-negotiables for wine quality is short and consistent: sulfur and top every three to four weeks, not six or seven. Check dissolved oxygen and gas pressure before bottling. Evaluate wines sensorially throughout the year, not just at set milestones. These are not complicated practices. They are easy to execute and equally easy to let slide, especially in a multi-client environment where the wines sitting in barrel are not the most visible thing in the building.
The emphasis on physical presence runs through everything Mike describes. You can track work orders remotely. You can see temperature curves and Brix readings from a phone. What you cannot do remotely is smell whether a fermentation is healthy, taste whether a wine is showing signs of stress, or be seen by the team as someone who cares about the work the way they do. That visibility matters in practice: a cellar worker who sees the winemaker regularly, who understands that the attention is real and not just digital, brings a different level of care to the wines than one who only hears from the winemaker when something goes wrong.
The work-life question in winemaking is usually framed as a tension between the demands of the season and everything else. Mike’s approach is to treat harvest preparation as its own season. In July, he begins adjusting his sleep schedule, pulling back on social commitments, and intensifying the exercise and recovery habits that will carry him through peak harvest. He keeps CrossFit five days a week as long as possible into the season, supplements with hot yoga and Pilates, and treats sleep as the non-negotiable it is when the days start before dawn and the decisions come fast. The structure that makes the wines possible is the same structure that makes the life possible.
You can't smell a fermentation through the computer screen yet.
Mike Tracy , Director of Winemaking
Trois Noix
Map your harvest calendar backward from the anticipated peak crush date and identify the last point at which you can get ahead of each non-negotiable: sulfur checks, tank preparation, bottling readiness. The things that slide during harvest are almost always the things that were not completed before it started. Physical presence during harvest matters most when the decisions are highest stakes. Arriving already behind on the routine work makes those decisions harder, not easier.
Watch or listen to the full episode on YouTube | Spotify.
For more conversations like this, subscribe to Expert Talks and join The Punchdown, InnoVint’s online community for wine professionals.
Frequently Asked Questions about Managing Multiple Wine Brands
How does a consulting winemaker manage multiple wine brands at once? +
Managing multiple wine brands requires clear written protocols for each program, consistent communication with each brand owner or facility team, and systems that provide real-time visibility into fermentation and cellar activity across all locations. Stylistic alignment starts with the brand owner relationship and is reflected in picking targets, cellar protocols, and sensory evaluation standards for each wine. Data tools allow consulting winemakers to monitor fermentation metrics, track work orders, and review decisions remotely, but physical presence at each facility remains essential for building team trust and catching issues that data alone cannot surface.
What data should winemakers track across multiple brands and facilities? +
Winemakers managing multiple programs should track fermentation metrics (Brix and temperature in real time), work orders confirming that additions, topping, and sulfuring have been completed on schedule, vineyard maturity data linked to picking decisions, dissolved oxygen at bottling, and cost of goods by facility and SKU. The goal is to build a record that supports both in-season decisions and year-over-year comparison. What is not recorded cannot be acted on or learned from; the discipline of consistent data entry during the busiest parts of the season is what makes the data useful when you need it most.
How do winemakers maintain quality at a custom crush facility? +
Quality at a custom crush facility depends on clearly communicated protocols, regular physical presence, and a tight maintenance schedule for wines in barrel. Because cellar staff at custom crush facilities manage multiple clients' wines simultaneously, the winemaker's job is to make the expectations unambiguous and to be visible enough that the team understands the standards are actively monitored. Non-negotiables like sulfuring and topping every three to four weeks, not six to seven, and dissolved oxygen checks before bottling are easy to overlook in a busy multi-client environment and require explicit written protocols to stay consistent.
What is the role of physical presence in consulting winemaking? +
Physical presence in the cellar and vineyard serves functions that remote data monitoring cannot replicate. Sensory evaluation, whether a fermentation smells healthy, whether a wine in barrel is showing signs of stress, requires being in the room. Equally important is the effect on the team: a winemaker who is regularly present, who smells and tastes the wines alongside the cellar crew, builds the kind of working relationship that translates into the crew caring for the wines more attentively when the winemaker is not there. Data visibility from anywhere is a complement to that presence, not a replacement for it.
How do winemakers manage work-life balance during harvest? +
Winemakers who maintain balance during harvest typically begin preparing for the season months in advance, adjusting sleep schedules, building physical conditioning, and reducing discretionary commitments before the peak arrives. Technology tools that allow fermentation monitoring and work order review outside the winery reduce the need to stay in the building after dark to complete administrative tasks. The structure that supports wine quality during harvest, consistent protocols, clear communication, reliable data systems, is the same structure that frees up time and mental space for recovery, which in turn supports better decision-making when it matters most.