This is horrible, in that specialized and frankly pro-forma way that comes from being told about a poor situation that doesn’t really affect me: “Cabernet sauvignon grapes from California’s Napa Valley have been among the most prized on earth for fine wine, justifying the cost per bottle of $100 or more. But it seems that one of the area’s top master blenders for elite brands has been fooling gourmets into paying top dollar for bottles that might really be jug quality wine.” …I mean: I generally don’t drink cabs. And I don’t buy $100 bottles of wine, because I can’t tell the difference between them and a $30 bottle.
…Apparently I’m not the only one, huh?
Via
Horrible. RT @irishspy: 'Two-Buck Chuck'? Faux Cabernet Scandal Hits Napa’s Elite Brands – Breitbart http://t.co/SjxhiUzpFX
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) January 26, 2015
People who spend that much on wine, are spending that much on wine as a display of opulence and conspicuous consumption.
.
Sure, they’ll tell you that the grape stompers of a particular area have toe-jam that adds a distinct earthy quality to the wine. But they can’t actually tell, and this has been proven in any number of double-blind experiments.
.
Me, I go by the Buckley rule (adjusted for inflation). $15 a bottle is the highest I’ll go. And I’ve found a lot of good wine that costs significantly less.
like cocaine, $100-a-bottle wine is nature’s way of telling you that you have too much money.
look up Rudy Kurniawan, he didn’t get caught because people could tell the expensive from the cheap, he got caught selling wine that never existed.
Eh. California wine was launched on clueless tasters not knowing the difference in the much ballyhooed “Verdict of Paris” blind tasting. That such trends continue is fitting.
Oos. “Judgement,” not “verdict.” Same difference as the wines, realy.
Every see the movie they made of that? One of the best sports flicks I’ve ever seen.
Regretably, no. Sounds refreshingly novel for a competition flik. Best viewed with a bottle of…something, no doubt.
It was hilarious when Bronco pulled a similar stunt with 2-buck chuck a few years ago, and beat out some ridiculously expensive wines.
http://moelane.com/2009/11/05/movie-of-the-week-bottle-shock/
Most of my wine comes out of a box. But if it comes from a bottle then it is a Michigan wine. Because I am not a connoisseur (or how you spell that) and because Michigan is my home and I am a patriot for the Great Lakes State and everything about it.
I love Michigan and I will promote her. Because it is home. Note – Sharp Pinconning cheese is very good. I am not joking, it is very good.
I like local. 😉 But Idaho actually has some very nice wines.
Thus proving most wine snobs, like most audio-snobs aren’t themselves able to perceive the difference between good and crap.
.
Mew
Nearly all wines are decent above the $10 level. Over $20 bucks is where branding starts to play a factor with the price. Anything north of that is spending too much really, with certain imports being the exception. I have my favorites in a few price ranges and styles, but I do make sure to try out sub $10 brands every now and again to find good table/everyday juice. Most are not great, but many aren’t that bad. Perfectly fine with a meal or a cheese snack.
Indeed, there have been more than a few blind tests that prove even ‘professional’ wine testers can’t choose between a $20 wine and a $100 wine 90% of the time.