Don’t worry, the people who make insipid comments probably have never had it.
To the original post - I ordered (as I’ve bought since the 1994 vintage). I don’t really worry about the reviews as I like the producer. They did cut back on allocations. Although I haven’t ordered my full allocation in ages (I think it has most recently been a case - but I’ve been ordering six), this year I was limited to two bottles. Price increase from $135 to $140.
Just think how hilarious and fun it would be if, in every thread about a new red Burgundy or Loire release, a bunch of posts went up with pictures of weeds and dirt and the lottery. And that went on for years and years, using the same handful of parroted tropes almost every . . . single . . . time, yet somehow, the people who posted those pictures giggled and high fived each other each time as though the joke were hilarious and fresh.
I’m probably overthinking this, forget I brought it up.
Hey, how come nobody has posted the maple syrup picture yet? Come on, that one is a riot!! And nobody has accused others of being “score whores” yet? What, you’re saving those for the next Kosta Browne release? Don’t save them, you can just use them all over again for that, and the next one, and the next one.
I think this was just friendly banter Chris; I don’t think anyone was trying to be malicious. I’m not a QC fan but do like K. Browne which like you stated gets flamed every time a thread pops up.
These wines need years in the cellar before showing their best. Well made and will reward your patience.
I want to “like” this statement over and over. I don’t understand Burgundy (or old world, really) wines, and I haven’t really liked the ones I have had, so I stay out of the threads about those wines. If someone doesn’t like the wines, and has nothing constructive to say, I sure wish they would stay out of the threads about those wines.
+1
So you’re saying that only people who like the wine should post and those who find it to be a fruit bomb, or tannic, or oaky or candied shouldn’t warn the poster. Well that’s just flat out silly.
And when I drink QC it does remind me of Skittles.
It seems the AFWE are both intolerant and sensitive
I can recommend the 2004 currently. Quite satisfying in a juicy-like-a-pomerol style, imo. I also recommend to drink/study QC by itself without any other wines (same with rinaldi/charvin/gouges/salvioni/et al) to get the full effect.
How much is the current release going for, out of curiousity?
The incredibly reasonable price of $140. ![[wink.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/04707e6a7bbb03e0153e349d8a9270d30e1e9525.gif "wink"){kind=small}
By all means, share your experiences. I’m just asking you to look at it from the other side, to see whether you think this kind of response in the threads about wines you love would be helpful and positive, or perhaps you might find it demeaning and snotty, as though the only people who would spend the money on that wine are bunch of rubes and sheep. “Who would pay $200 for this Burgundy crap? You could rake the back yard, soak the leaves and dirt from the pile in pond water for a week, and it would be the same thing. Can I get a high five?” Would it be “flat out silly” to discourage there from being a half dozen posts like that in every Burg or Loire or Rhys thread?
Anyway, I love this board and I value the opinions, but I feel as though sometimes we need to stick our necks out a bit to keep it being a place where people who love different kinds of wines can have respectful and helpful discussions about them (which should certainly include positive and critical comments). So I’ve taken my turn, and not because I’m a big fan of QC. I’ll leave it at that, and if you want to share a different opinion about these kinds of responses, I’ll listen respectfully and then just let this go. Thanks for hearing me out.
I don’t hate on these wines. The two I’ve had have been very good to great. But even if they hadn’t kicked me off their list for not buying all the time, I don’t see these as being worth $140. At a tasting I went to a couple years ago, the Quilceda Creek barely beat the Betz cab, and the Betz cab was marginally better than Columbia Crest Reserve. So I’ll stick to Columbia Crest Reserve and the Betz when I want to splurge. The Quilceda Creek is just too pricey for what you get. Oh, Corliss too. I’d rather buy a Corliss AND a Betz for the same price as 1 QC.
Sell it for the release price and you would have some takers.
Agreed. someone just did one in CC at release price, and most of it is sold.
The example that comes to mind for me is Rivers-Marie regular and SV cabs for a third or half of the QC.
If I’m really splurging it would be a Keating GIII which is still significantly less.
OBO means Or best offer
I could always save a couple for when I drink with Tom Lee or Eric Levine.
From now on, everyone should just assume that I agree with everything Chris says.
Also, who’s going to post the Kool-Aid man pic? We’re still missing that one.
Fair enough, but that’s California. Regardless, the Quilceda Creek seems more expensive than it is worth.
This could probably be said for many many many wines.
Like’em or not, QC is widely regarded as the top (didn’t say best, so please don’t get into subjective battles with me) winery in Washington State. What are the top wineries in Napa charging. OK, the middle tier?
Don’t get me wrong, it is too expensive and I am not trying to defend the pricing of this or any other “premium” wine… but let’s be fair about things and not single out QC for being too expensive,