Yep - and even easier if it’s an Italian wine.
BTW, while I understand Monsieur Trimpi’s answer, and certainly agree that the “hunt for value” can be an exciting and rewarding quest, if that is your sole focus in collecting, you will miss out on a lot of great wine.
and drink a ton of crap in the process. with the money spent on the search, one could drink wines a bit higher in price and of known quality. don’t get me wrong, i’m always on the hunt for value.
French.
Well if you pick randomly, sure. But that would be stupid. With some knowledge and a good wine shop or three, it’s easy to drink very well for $20 or less per bottle. Frankly, I don’t see any reason at all to spend more than that on current and short term wines. Aging? some will (Muscadet is the obvious example) but really, does every wine have to age for 20 years?
Bob, how many bottles of “Briords” should one have? ![[wink.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/04707e6a7bbb03e0153e349d8a9270d30e1e9525.gif "wink"){kind=small}
Most geeks today were not fortunate enough to build their cellars when most everything was < $50. Still, occasional splurges are fun and there’s no denying the excitement generated by label bling.
I only wish spending big bucks corresponded to a guarantee of quality. Somewhere in China there’s a happy entrepreneur with a counterfeit bottle of Lafitte.
RT
French
This is an interesting question… I buy more and generally prefer French… however if you look at what I have bought, the average price per bottle is much higher for California.
My take is that I pretty much HAVE to spend $50 or more to get a halfway decent wine out of CA… other than some of the very few and far between exceptions (i.e. ESJ). $50 seems to be the entry level pricing from what I have seen- Caveat I don’t spend a ton of time looking for CA QPR.
Contrast that with France, and I can find a ton of very good wines in the whole spectrum up to $50 and beyond… so while I am willing to spend more than $50 and do so with some frequency, I don’t feel I HAVE to.
+2
I know that I’m missing out on a lot of great wine, but with my budget and amount of storage space, it’s not an option. Fortunately, with some understanding of my palate, CT to refer to (thanks, Eric), and patience in purchasing, I’ve found a lot to enjoy in humbler price ranges. Even if I had more disposable income, I’m not sure how much I’d change my price range when buying - I don’t know if I’ve had a $60 bottle that I wouldn’t trade for two of my favorite $30 bottles (or even three of my favorite $20 bottles).*
In actually responding to the OP, I’m more likely to splurge on something I can taste before buying…which, I suppose, means that I’m a vote for California, even though my palette leans somewhat towards the old world.
*EDIT: They’re probably out there…I’m just glad I haven’t found them yet. 
Look, I get the “wine hunter” syndrome - and I think it is a legitimate way of drinking wine. My only point here is that if you never splurge on a bottle or three, how does one ever get to know the “promised land”? Rich’s cite of Clos De Briords is an excellent example - I buy cases of the stuff, buy it religiously vintage-to-vintage, and quite frankly would be hard-pressed to name a better QPR.
That said, when you have the opportunity to drink a Raveneau Les Clos, or Dauvissat Preuses, or Moreau Valmur, you all of a sudden realize that for all the magic Marc Ollivier can conjure into a humble bottle of Muscadet, at the end of the day he’s still playing in the minor leagues. Now if all you ever want to do is drink wine at the triple A level, that’s cool, but my only point was (and is) that you miss a lot of great wine being that singularly focused.
There’s no accounting for taste.
spoken like a true snob
But one could make the opposite statement: how does one discover the true diversity of great wines if he’s convinced that only a small subset of producers in several regions selling above a certain price point can make great wines? It only costs so much to produce a wine in an artisan fashion. There are certainly under the radar producers or regions whose wines are priced as expensive commodities based on production costs (say $25-$50) rather than luxury goods (say $50-$50,000).
It comes down to what you believe, especially if you are drinking with knowledge of the label. There are people who genuinely believe that Charles Shaw is as good as any wine. If you had them taste blind, though, there’s a good chance they’ll prefer a different under $10 grocery store wine, though for $2 they’d be smart to take 4 or 5 of 2BC for they same price if they find it palatable.
Wine enjoyment depends on what you bring into it. If you look for a flaw in any wine, you will find it. If you look for complexity, you will find it. If you look for terroir expression from a specific commune and exposure in Burgundy, you will find it. If you don’t know anything about specif terroir expressions in a Burgundy, then you will probably be left scratching your head what differentiates X from Y.
If you think there are diamonds in the rough, you will sometimes find them. If you don’t, then you must pay a higher price to experience the pleasure.
The dollars I spend are more heavily weighted toward French than California. The reason is that the only thing I buy from California is cabernet, while from France I buy Bordeaux, Burgundy, Champagne and CDP and these compose the heart of my cellar.
According to CT, I have bought 94 bottles so far this year at an average price of $91.57.
54 bottles are from France and 30 from California. The breakout on these purchases are exactly as described above. This year I have focused primarily on French Champagne and Burgundy, the areas where I am the weakest. Because of my age, I am also having to focus on older vintages. These two reasons are why my average cost is the highest it has ever been.
The last 10 bottles are from Italy and Portugal.
Interesting. Luckily there are Moreau Valmurs < $50. Would William Fevre’s Preuses, Valmur or Bougros still be minor league? Could you reliably peg the Gilbert Picq Vosgros as the “cheapie” in a blind line-up?
There’s no denying the label excitement of the Raveneau. But does it always show the quality that makes it 2x - 5x the price of its nearest competitors? Could you really tell unless a flight was available to compare it against?
If one signs up for a Raveneau Off-line, it would be rude to show up without one. But mine might be wrapped and accompanied by a similarly disguised “AAA league” impostor.
RT
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
I buy almost no CA wines, but when I hear dismissive comments like that, it makes me think about Parker & all the bitching that goes on here about his condescending demeanor when faced w/ someone whose palate differs from his.
Had a tremendous ~ $20 Scholium Project Naucratis last night. Lodi region Verdelho and just delicious with Ceviche salad. I imagine we could have had a very similar experience with top-flight Muscadet @ a close pricepoint.
I am not sure I understand the question.
Greg, if you are one of those folks out there that think wine appreciation is totally subjective, that there are no objective standards whatsoever and everone’s opinion on a wine is just as valid as the next guy’s regardless of their level of drinking experience, then I can tell you right up front that you and I will never agree on this topic.
Because at least IMO, the guy who thinks Charles Shaw is really a top wine is either a jackass with no palate or someone who doesn’t have any experience whatsoever and therefor wouldn’t know a good wine if it splashed him in the face.
Rich, I’m not even sure if we are arguing here? Is it possible for a random bottle of Gilbert Picq’s wine to outperform a Raveneau at a given moment/tasting? Sure. But absent a faulty bottle, I feel pretty confident in saying that Raveneau will win the race 90 out of 100 times, and in at least 60 of those tastings, the Raveneau will literally blow the Picq off the table. Now the obvious question is whether or not that margin of superiority is worth the additional tariff for the Raveneau, and I guess that’s a question every wine buyer has to answer for themselves when they make purchasing decisions. But at least to my way of looking at it, wines like Raveneau are objectively better than wines like Picq, and that will come across to any kind of experienced taster who knows what to look for in a chablis regardless of whether it’s blind or otherwise.
Sure sounds like it. BTW, you can get Snowden The Ranch Cabernet, 95 pt Parker-94 pt Tanzer for $35, or The Reserve 97+ Parker for $60.