zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,891
- 31,410
- 146
I'm no stranger to $100 bottles of wine. I've spent some time tooling around the Chianti, Burgongne regions, etc, dropping stupid money on Brunellos and such
I'm not an idiot, nor are my taste buds dead, when I say that for $2, you're getting the best damn deal in the wine industry.
and better than most wines you can find at 10 or $20
We've kind of gone off topic talking about the days of drinking actual terribly shitty alcohol. I'll see if I can't give two buck chuck a try tonight. Might as well pick up a few bottles for pregaming before I go out to the bar to celebrate the big 2-2.
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,891
- 31,410
- 146
yeah...I noticed that later
I must say though...that 2 buck chuck is NOT Franzia...strangely different world there.
when you consider (well, before the blasted Euro), that a decent bottle of wine in France would cost you about $1, and a phenomenal bottle could be had for $10, paying $2 for a good bottle of wine is not that unrealistic. sure...it's France, but the Napa and Sonoma regions certainly aren't environmentally handicapped in terms of being able to produce premium wine....
Dr. Detroit
Diamond Member
- Sep 25, 2004
- 8,558
- 949
- 126
Who knew this stuff was good enough to win awards. I'll be passing these links to my wine snob coworkers.
Gibson486
Lifer
- Aug 9, 2000
- 18,378
- 2
- 0
$50 at Trader Joes will barely get you by.....not because it is expensive, but because you are gonna go in there and realize that there is nothing for you to buy in there. That will result in you going to the nearest Shaw's or Whole Foods, where they price gouge like there is no tomorrow.
that said....
I remember when they had 95% lean ground beef for $1.99 lb a year ago. I stocked up!
It's pretty insipid stuff as far as wine is concerned.
Also, state fair awards does NOT mean it's the "best wine in the country" or whatever other nonsense is being spread about. There's simply no possible way a wine sold at a profit for $2 could be in direct competition with truly good wines... ever. It has nothing to do with snobbery; it has to do with the fact that you can't produce a Ferrari for a Ford price, because it simply costs too much.
That said, there are reasonable < $10 wines, and though the offerings from Trader Joe's, Whole Foods (365 brand), etc. are decent efforts for the price, they're still pretty terrible.
Also, state fair awards does NOT mean it's the "best wine in the country" or whatever other nonsense is being spread about. There's simply no possible way a wine sold at a profit for $2 could be in direct competition with truly good wines... ever. It has nothing to do with snobbery; it has to do with the fact that you can't produce a Ferrari for a Ford price, because it simply costs too much.
That said, there are reasonable < $10 wines, and though the offerings from Trader Joe's, Whole Foods (365 brand), etc. are decent efforts for the price, they're still pretty terrible.
Originally posted by: evident
they dont sell wine in anything other than state stores in PA
Illegal $2 wine smuggling rings FTW?
Because going from one grape to another is the same as going from a shitty pushrod V8 heavyset land barge to a highly tuned V12 with carbon fiber and aluminum everywhere is completely analagous.
The difference in wine has a lot less to do with cost of production and a lot more to do with branding. I have had many expensive wines and while I can certainly tell the difference, it's not leaps and bounds compared to some good cheaper wines.
SP33Demon
Lifer
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,928
- 143
- 106
Text
Won't let me copy>paste for some reason, but explains why Shaw wine is so cheap. Even though it says Napa on the label, the grapes aren't from Napa, it's a marketing ploy. I'll try some tonight and keep you posted, for $2 it's cheaper than getting messed up off any cheap beer and probably tastes better.
Won't let me copy>paste for some reason, but explains why Shaw wine is so cheap. Even though it says Napa on the label, the grapes aren't from Napa, it's a marketing ploy. I'll try some tonight and keep you posted, for $2 it's cheaper than getting messed up off any cheap beer and probably tastes better.
Incorrect. I'll elaborate.
Not to be dismissive, but not everyone appreciates the value of a better wine. Just because it's expensive doesn't mean it's better, and just because you drink it doesn't mean you are able to detect the qualities. Most people that buy expensive wines just because they're expensive don't know wine, and so literally they're throwing their money away. In fact, many of the most expensive wines taste nothing whatsoever like your typical wines. Spice, earth, mushroom, leather, tobacco, etc. are all qualities of an older, better wine that most people fine offensive on first tasting.
And no, it has a lot less to do with branding. You simply cannot produce the same quality of wine for $2, and I will give you a few reasons as to why. This is also true for tea, coffee or basically any commodity based on a processed crop.
1) For the quantity produced by Trader Joe's and Whole Foods, you cover a wide geographic area and therefore many climates. The results of this is obvious: You ultimately blend away the character produced by the soil, climate, harvesting and of course grape quality. You can have an incredible vintage in one area and a mile away have a terrible one. The Russian River, Cote d'Or, Willamette Valley and some areas of Napa Valley are well known for this. There is a profound difference in quality unless you think everyone is just insane.
For a more pronounced example, try tasting a regional Burgundy and then try a Gevrey-Chambertin, a Volnay, a Beaune and maybe even something like a Vosne-Romanee. All vastly different, and the regional won't express this because it's blended from all of these regions.
2) Better grapes come from vineyards with less yield. Pinot Noir vineyards, for example, often seek lower yield to get better grape quality; the results are a more complex wine, but at a substantially reduced yield.
3) Better grapes come from better land. This means land that hasn't been depleted of resources, has ample sun (depending on the type of grape), etc. You can buy an acre in Napa for $3M or so, but you can get 20 acres in Mendocino for a lot, lot less. Yes, some of that has to do with the fact that it's "Napa", but it's a lot more to do with the climate. You simply cannot produce the same quality of grapes, so land costs are higher. This means the resultant wine is higher.
4) More labor. This means using more sustainable growing measures, crop rotation if necessary, better fertilization techniques, better irrigation techniques (better Pinot Noir vineyards use gravity-based irrigation which is why places like the Cote d'Or are so expensive), etc. This ultimately means more cost, which is why places like Chile are so much cheaper; labor is a lot cheaper.
This doesn't even include the winemaking methods themselves, of which there are another multitude of different styles and methods that ultimately produce better wines. The better wines come from methods that are more labor intensive.
So, really, it's not a secret and it's not some conspiracy to fool the consumer. I could give you another few dozen reasons, but I have to go to a meeting.
There's nothing wrong at all with a $2 bottle of wine, but I don't think we should fool ourselves into thinking it's in any direct competition with the better wines. It is what it is, and let's enjoy it for that.
imo.
[edit]Spelling[/edit]
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,891
- 31,410
- 146
clearly, Descartes knows what he's talking about. and he's right on every point. All I'm saying is try to find a better wine at $2-$3.
Americans, for the large part, have an incredibly undeveloped wine palate. It doesn't help that the FDA enforces sulfite composition either. While a natural component of wine production, FDA requires higher percentages of sulfites within a bottle than you will fine in bottles purchased overseas. Imagine my horror, when returning to the states, upon discovering that the same bottle of "random '97 Chianti" bought in the US was strikingly different (much worse) than the very same bottles I had grown accustomed to while living in Florence. It is also why cheese produced and imported in the US is horrible (pasteurization) in comparison to the real stuff.
All that being said... a mass-produced $2 bottle of wine does the job as well as anything else in its category, when compared to bottles purchased in the states. It's absolutely not the best battle out there, but it's better than it's price.
Americans, for the large part, have an incredibly undeveloped wine palate. It doesn't help that the FDA enforces sulfite composition either. While a natural component of wine production, FDA requires higher percentages of sulfites within a bottle than you will fine in bottles purchased overseas. Imagine my horror, when returning to the states, upon discovering that the same bottle of "random '97 Chianti" bought in the US was strikingly different (much worse) than the very same bottles I had grown accustomed to while living in Florence. It is also why cheese produced and imported in the US is horrible (pasteurization) in comparison to the real stuff.
All that being said... a mass-produced $2 bottle of wine does the job as well as anything else in its category, when compared to bottles purchased in the states. It's absolutely not the best battle out there, but it's better than it's price.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
yeah...I noticed that later
I must say though...that 2 buck chuck is NOT Franzia...strangely different world there.
when you consider (well, before the blasted Euro), that a decent bottle of wine in France would cost you about $1, and a phenomenal bottle could be had for $10, paying $2 for a good bottle of wine is not that unrealistic. sure...it's France, but the Napa and Sonoma regions certainly aren't environmentally handicapped in terms of being able to produce premium wine....
I don't think you've been to France for a while because $1 is worth only about .60 Euro which won't get you much. But yes, for 2-4 Euro you can get some great wine over there.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,586
- 986
- 126
Originally posted by: George P Burdell
I :heart: two buck Chuck
I've got to give it a try. Been meaning to, just haven't done it yet.
hehe
we bought 27 bottles of 2 buck chuck (all varieties) for a graduation party last weekend. The stuff was a big hit.
I mix the shaw in with all my other $10-20 dollars of wine in my rack and truthfully enjoy it just as much.
the best part was, i walked out with 27 bottles of wine for less than a hundred bucks. and the cashier didn't even blink an eye. apparently that's not that odd there
we bought 27 bottles of 2 buck chuck (all varieties) for a graduation party last weekend. The stuff was a big hit.
I mix the shaw in with all my other $10-20 dollars of wine in my rack and truthfully enjoy it just as much.
the best part was, i walked out with 27 bottles of wine for less than a hundred bucks. and the cashier didn't even blink an eye. apparently that's not that odd there
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter