RIP Fred Franzia, the creator of Charles Shaw brand wine aka 'Two-Buck Chuck' (sold at Trader Joe's)

[JEDI]

Two-Buck Chuck: Wine of the People or a Cultural Wedge? (Published 2022)

Fred Franzia built a cult following with his Trader Joe’s wine, but it comes at a cost to the wine business.

www.nytimes.com

'
($1.99 in CA, $2.99 in other states)

Fred Franzia, the head of Bronco, died on Sept. 13 at 79, having sold more than a billion bottles of Charles Shaw.

Two-Buck Chuck did not damage American wine culture. But Mr. Franzia relentlessly told American wine drinkers that no wine could possibly be worth more than $10. “Elites,” he argued, were trying to brainwash people with all their talk about terroir and nuances.

“You tell me why someone’s bottle is worth $80 and mine’s worth $2,” he said in a 2009 profile in The New Yorker. “Do you get 40 times the pleasure from it?”

 

[BoomerD]

I had a crane or boom truck in their Ceres winery a few times in the late 80's and early 90's when they did upgrades or a transformer had to be replaced.

Nice people.

RIP.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I respect the work, but humbly disagree. There's a dramatic difference between shit wine and good wine, alongside shit anything and good anything. Yes, there's diminishing returns, but there's a reason why something like a Brunello costs so much, and that's not even getting into truly expensive wine.

 

[deadlyapp]

I respect the work, but humbly disagree. There's a dramatic difference between shit wine and good wine, alongside shit anything and good anything. Yes, there's diminishing returns, but there's a reason why something like a Brunello costs so much, and that's not even getting into truly expensive wine.

Pretty sure he's equating pleasure with getting a buzz because I wholeheartedly agree with you. Charles Shaw may be considered drinkable by many, because it is designed for the masses which generally equate "tasty" wine with generally boring heavily fruit extracted flavor that can be drank immediately. There's a lot more to wine than that, no different than an IPA vs a mass produced pilsner.

 

[JEDI]

I respect the work, but humbly disagree. There's a dramatic difference between shit wine and good wine, alongside shit anything and good anything. Yes, there's diminishing returns, but there's a reason why something like a Brunello costs so much, and that's not even getting into truly expensive wine.

yeah, my best bang for the buck wine bottle is Beringer's Founder's Estate cabaret.
$7 for 750mL or 13.50 for 1.5L

for box wine, it's Costco brand cabaret in 3L box at like $4.50/Liter.

 

[JEDI]

There's a lot more to wine than that, no different than an IPA vs a mass produced pilsner.

i dont like IPA's.
too bitter.
double and triple iPA's are even worse.

Give me a mass produced pilsner anyday.
Note: Budweiser is an ale so not that

 

[deadlyapp]

i dont like IPA's.
too bitter.
double and triple iPA's are even worse.

Give me a mass produced pilsner anyday.
Note: Budweiser is an ale so not that

My point is that people have tastes that vary from the mass produced. Budweiser, Bud Light, Coors, etc are all mass produced because they aren't offensive, you can drink a ton of them, and they're cheap - just like Charles Shaw. You don't drink beer like that to pick out the flavors.

Replace IPA with porter, or a quality ale/lager/bock etc and it accomplishes the same point.

 

[IronWing]

Crap gets you sideways, why pay more?

 

[Mai72]

Reminds me of NightTrain wine from back in the day. The wine of box car Willie.

 

[nakedfrog]

i dont like IPA's.
too bitter.
double and triple iPA's are even worse.

There's a huuuuuge variety of IPAs, ranging from barely bitter to intensely bitter, and I've had standard IPAs that were more bitter than some double or triple IPAs.

Give me a mass produced pilsner anyday.
Note: Budweiser is an ale so not that

No it isn't. From their own website: "Discover Budweiser Beer, a flavorful American-Style lager. "
Lagers and ales are the two main styles of beer. I don't generally care much for lagers as they're typically fairly light in flavor.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Pretty sure he's equating pleasure with getting a buzz because I wholeheartedly agree with you. Charles Shaw may be considered drinkable by many, because it is designed for the masses which generally equate "tasty" wine with generally boring heavily fruit extracted flavor that can be drank immediately. There's a lot more to wine than that, no different than an IPA vs a mass produced pilsner.

Yeah but if I'm going for a buzz, why the hell would I be drinking wine? Whiskey's a lot cheaper (and tastier than that) for a buzz, and I don't have to drink half a bottle or more to get there.

 

[Muse]

yeah, my best bang for the buck wine bottle is Beringer's Founder's Estate cabaret.
$7 for 750mL or 13.50 for 1.5L

for box wine, it's Costco brand cabaret in 3L box at like $4.50/Liter.

@JEDI - Do they sell that Beringer's at Costco?

Disclosure: The only wine I've bought for some years is 2 buck Chuck. (which has been usually more than $2 for a few years now, I only see it at Trader Joe's)

Edit: New York Times had a piece on the death of Fred Franzia a few weeks ago.

I get a chance to taste more expensive wines when I go to family gatherings, but don't remember being impressed, at least not to the point where I look askance at my Charles Shaw Cabernet (which I DO NOT bring to those gatherings!)