winefarm


quality posts: 7 Private Messages winefarm
gcdyersb wrote:OK, reporting back on the MacCallum 2005 Cab Franc. In short, buy this wine. It's lip smackin' delicious.

My girlfriend and I shared this wine over dinner and the course of the evening. We decanted the wine, but poured a taste to try from the bottle to start



Context #1: Pop 'n' pour, t = 0 minutes

Bouquet: I could smell this all day! Crushed flower petals. Leather. Perfumey. Homey, earthy. Damp wood.

Palate: Delicious, almost seamless, gentle berry (as opposed to 'aggressive berry' you'd get from a big Zin or Shiraz), integrated oak, lovely finish.

Basically, this wine was ready to go from the moment the cork was popped. By the way, the capsule is wax, not foil, which adds a really nice touch letting you know this was made by hand from start to finish.

Context #2: With Burgers, t = 30 minutes

OK, we had leftovers. But they were home-burgers made with love--and rosemary, red pepper, onion and various seasonings. The wine description isn't different other than we've noted more dark berry, maybe black currant, flavor. The floral aromas are primary along with the leather and everything else is really secondary. This is a wine that's nicely balanced and stuffed enough to stand up to and complement a moderately seasoned dish without overpowering everything else on your plate. I would say it's more of a red meat than a chicken wine. Pork should work, too. Vegetarians, well, you're on your own.

Context #3: On its own, t = 50 minutes

The initial observations are still holding true at this point.

My girlfriend commented that the wine melts away on the finish like a fine Belgian chocolate. There's no heat and the tannins are present yet very soft and mouth coating. Nice roundness to the mid-palate. The acidity is well balanced and is just slightly mouth watering.

t = 70 minutes

This wine simply has a great mouth-feel, very smooth and elegant.

t = 150 minutes

Still have a half-glass remaining and the description is essentially constant. It is the same beautiful wine it was initially and isn't falling apart. Not much evolution, but it really didn't need to go anywhere given where it began. I could still smell this wine all day.

My final thoughts are that this wine is a steal at about $20. I'd probably grudgingly pay up to twice this price in a tasting room if I'd really enjoyed the experience at the winery. This Cab Franc has its share of stuffing, though it's more about finesse than power. I was a little worried about the high proportion of new oak, but the oak is seamlessly integrated. So there's no in your face vanilla, woodiness or astringent oak tannin to throw you off. There's only a sense of sweetness that's held in check by the acidity and tannin. I can't really comment on aging--I'd trust the MacCallum folks on that question--but this wine can definitely be consumed now without a long decant.

In relation to other Cab Francs, this has no overt herbaceousness. If you are a hard core Chinon fan and demand rustic edges, damp forests, veggie compost and pure muscle, this probably will not satisfy. This wine is polished, though not without character of its own. As far as Woot Cab Francs I've tasted, it's as good as the Iron Horse in my opinion, but it's a different approach to the varietal. I'd say the Iron Horse is more acidic, is more slanted towards red fruit like raspberries, and has a little more of a forest undertone than the MacCallum. Relative to the Yorkville Cab Franc, I prefer the MacCallum. The Yorkville in comparison is less structured and slightly flabby, albeit earthier in its aromas. Out of the three this wine has the heaviest oak accent. Accent is the right descriptor, though.

Bottom line, if you like Cab Franc and appreciate the diversity of wines it can produce, you're probably already sold. For those new or not yet sold on Cab Franc, this is your gateway wine. It's a Cab Franc that should please more than hard core Cab Franc fanatics (or Cab Francophiles). It really does seem a lot of attention to detail went into producing this wine.




Damn good Rat reports. nice work.

WD

auditor55


quality posts: 4 Private Messages auditor55
winefarm wrote:Damn good Rat reports. nice work.

WD



I concur completely. I'm pretty new to wine.woot but have been completely smitten by the customer/community involvement knowledge, participation from the winemakers etc. And because my guess of the identity of this offering turned out to be correct, I feel obligated to be in for 1, despite better judgment.

Your report convinced me, gcdyersb. Nice blog, too. I'm going to pick up some of that Julia's vineyard PN next time I see it!

jsronce


quality posts: 4 Private Messages jsronce



I hope my report stands up to the rest! This is my first time, and I'm no expert.

Two friends came over to help me do the review. All three of us love wines, and one has a membership at at least one local winery and attends tasting tours with his wife. This was our first time rating a wine and we had a blast! Due to some things that came up this afternoon I wasn't able to cook dinner to go with it. Instead we ran out for quick sushi and opened up the Barely Buzzed cheese (rubbed with espresso & lavender)to go with the wine. I will start with mine and add my friends' notes later. I printed up the UC Davis rating system as a guideline. I haven't checked other reviews of this wine, so I hope I'm not way off!

2005 DJ Red

Wax (or plastic?) covering cork instead of foil. Easily removed with gentle use of fingernails. Cork stained about halfway up, no sediment.

First pour: VERY dark red. Loved the color, and how opaque it was in the decanter! My friends agreed that the color was closest to garnet, but I haven't the faintest idea. Some fine sediment. (I poured small amounts into the decanter and put a stopper in the bottle.) The first sniff was rather hot, but that went away very quickly. Aromas of cherry, spice, sweet fruit. The taste is red fruits and mildly tart cherries. There is no vinegar in the aroma, and the acidity is nicely balanced with a pleasant zing. The sweetness and body are also balanced. Even though it's mostly syrah, it's not nearly as heavy and bold. The flavor definitely corresponds to the bouquet, and it is not oaky but instead very mellow and easy to drink.

I think we went through four rounds of small pours? We made it through about 2/3 of the bottle. As it breathed it became less tart. One of my friends poured a small amount from the bottle at the very end, and said the difference between it and the decanted wine was night and day. I'm sure we could have easily polished off the whole bottle, but my friends had to drive home (and I want to try it again tomorrow!). We broke out the cheese about halfway through. They were great together! The cheese was a little spicy when eaten right after a sip. Overall, I had a very hard time finding any fault with the DJ Red. I gave it 18 points out of 20. I recall someone pricing it at $28, and we all agreed we would buy it at that price. We're not rich so we would save it for a nice occasion, but we considered it worth the money.

From my friend Emily: 15 points out of 20. Fantastic with cheese. Really nice, mellow fruitiness. A bit tart. Beautiful color. Medium body. Should definitely be decanted!

From my friend Dave: 18 points out of 20. This is a nice, well balanced wine. There is no heavy aftertaste and no harsh alcohol flavor or aromas. The color is rich and clean and it is a medium body. The weight is good and stays on the glass. I'd buy this wine.

Thank you wine.woot and MacCallum Family Cellars for giving me the opportunity to labrat! I'm looking forward to trying the other two bottles.

MaxAlex


quality posts: 0 Private Messages MaxAlex
yumitori wrote:Oh, for those you should visit the Politics thread...



Or read the newspaper every day.

SonomaBouliste


quality posts: 238 Private Messages SonomaBouliste
gcdyersb wrote:OK, reporting back on the MacCallum 2005 Cab Franc. In short, buy this wine. It's lip smackin' delicious.

My girlfriend and I shared this wine over dinner and the course of the evening. We decanted the wine, but poured a taste to try from the bottle to start



Context #1: Pop 'n' pour, t = 0 minutes

Bouquet: I could smell this all day! Crushed flower petals. Leather. Perfumey. Homey, earthy. Damp wood.

Palate: Delicious, almost seamless, gentle berry (as opposed to 'aggressive berry' you'd get from a big Zin or Shiraz), integrated oak, lovely finish.

Basically, this wine was ready to go from the moment the cork was popped. By the way, the capsule is wax, not foil, which adds a really nice touch letting you know this was made by hand from start to finish.

Context #2: With Burgers, t = 30 minutes

OK, we had leftovers. But they were home-burgers made with love--and rosemary, red pepper, onion and various seasonings. The wine description isn't different other than we've noted more dark berry, maybe black currant, flavor. The floral aromas are primary along with the leather and everything else is really secondary. This is a wine that's nicely balanced and stuffed enough to stand up to and complement a moderately seasoned dish without overpowering everything else on your plate. I would say it's more of a red meat than a chicken wine. Pork should work, too. Vegetarians, well, you're on your own.

Context #3: On its own, t = 50 minutes

The initial observations are still holding true at this point.

My girlfriend commented that the wine melts away on the finish like a fine Belgian chocolate. There's no heat and the tannins are present yet very soft and mouth coating. Nice roundness to the mid-palate. The acidity is well balanced and is just slightly mouth watering.

t = 70 minutes

This wine simply has a great mouth-feel, very smooth and elegant.

t = 150 minutes

Still have a half-glass remaining and the description is essentially constant. It is the same beautiful wine it was initially and isn't falling apart. Not much evolution, but it really didn't need to go anywhere given where it began. I could still smell this wine all day.

My final thoughts are that this wine is a steal at about $20. I'd probably grudgingly pay up to twice this price in a tasting room if I'd really enjoyed the experience at the winery. This Cab Franc has its share of stuffing, though it's more about finesse than power. I was a little worried about the high proportion of new oak, but the oak is seamlessly integrated. So there's no in your face vanilla, woodiness or astringent oak tannin to throw you off. There's only a sense of sweetness that's held in check by the acidity and tannin. I can't really comment on aging--I'd trust the MacCallum folks on that question--but this wine can definitely be consumed now without a long decant.

In relation to other Cab Francs, this has no overt herbaceousness. If you are a hard core Chinon fan and demand rustic edges, damp forests, veggie compost and pure muscle, this probably will not satisfy. This wine is polished, though not without character of its own. As far as Woot Cab Francs I've tasted, it's as good as the Iron Horse in my opinion, but it's a different approach to the varietal. I'd say the Iron Horse is more acidic, is more slanted towards red fruit like raspberries, and has a little more of a forest undertone than the MacCallum. Relative to the Yorkville Cab Franc, I prefer the MacCallum. The Yorkville in comparison is less structured and slightly flabby, albeit earthier in its aromas. Out of the three this wine has the heaviest oak accent. Accent is the right descriptor, though.

Bottom line, if you like Cab Franc and appreciate the diversity of wines it can produce, you're probably already sold. For those new or not yet sold on Cab Franc, this is your gateway wine. It's a Cab Franc that should please more than hard core Cab Franc fanatics (or Cab Francophiles). It really does seem a lot of attention to detail went into producing this wine.



Nice job. An excellent description and very apt comparisons re style. You are the supreme Cab Francophile.

cheron98


quality posts: 123 Private Messages cheron98
clayfu wrote:Oh? You can figure out people's palate likes based on VARIETAL and REGION? And THEN figure out what their FRIENDS like based on the same thing? PTERODACTYLS! Parker, You're the King of Wines

WOW.



Back off, clay. He did say "right or wrong" about his impression. And it was just an IMPRESSION. People can be mistaken. Obviously if the man was wrong, he now knows better, and if he's not, then why would you be getting all offended? Seriously, chill out.

I saw HitAnyKey42 on wine.woot! and clicked "I want one!"

cheron98


quality posts: 123 Private Messages cheron98

Rats, you've all been packed.

I saw HitAnyKey42 on wine.woot! and clicked "I want one!"

iceeblue7


quality posts: 3 Private Messages iceeblue7

Okay finally back on the horse after three months of self imposed exile, due to a scalded tongue. I can finally step away from the Boddingtons. From the hop to the vine its time for some juice.

I am looking forward to the CF thanks labrats you sold me.

BuckshotEsq


quality posts: 0 Private Messages BuckshotEsq

I had successfully resisted until the labrats reported in. On a particularly rough tax day, no less. I have no idea where I am going to put this.

0U812


quality posts: 1 Private Messages 0U812

No teabags here... Just wine and that's fine.

In for two!


MacCallum Northwest Trio
Current numbers (updated each minute)
First sucker: MaskedMarvel
Speed to first woot: 0m 5.860s
Last wooter to woot: 0U812

gcdyersb


quality posts: 141 Private Messages gcdyersb
Moondragon wrote:But what if clayfu is making recommendations based on deductions about what you may like from your posts...



I like wines that are available and affordable. Since I can't recall clay ever recommending a wine other than something from a mailing list only winery or costing upwards of $40 (but typically both) I think his suggestions were intended for someone else. Or perhaps a pterodactyl.

Cabernet Franc: it's not just for blending! It's also for blogging.

MarkDaSpark


quality posts: 187 Private Messages MarkDaSpark
gcdyersb wrote:I like wines that are available and affordable. Since I can't recall clay ever recommending a wine other than something from a mailing list only winery or costing upwards of $40 (but typically both) I think his suggestions were intended for someone else. Or perhaps a pterodactyl.



He did say he thought this offer was worth a try, and he has recommended Jaffurs (Santa Barbara) as well, and their wines are under $40.

I think you both need to go to neutral corners. And I've never known Clayfu to go for jam in wines .....


Someone has to put WD's kids thru college, but why does it have to be me!
*This post is for purposes of enabling only, and does not constitute any promise of helping pay for said enabling. It does indicate willingness to assist in drinking said wine.

Winedavid39


quality posts: 210 Private Messages Winedavid39

Guest Blogger

jsronce wrote:

I hope my report stands up to the rest! This is my first time, and I'm no expert.

Two friends came over to help me do the review. All three of us love wines, and one has a membership at at least one local winery and attends tasting tours with his wife. This was our first time rating a wine and we had a blast! Due to some things that came up this afternoon I wasn't able to cook dinner to go with it. Instead we ran out for quick sushi and opened up the Barely Buzzed cheese (rubbed with espresso & lavender)to go with the wine. I will start with mine and add my friends' notes later. I printed up the UC Davis rating system as a guideline. I haven't checked other reviews of this wine, so I hope I'm not way off!

2005 DJ Red

Wax (or plastic?) covering cork instead of foil. Easily removed with gentle use of fingernails. Cork stained about halfway up, no sediment.

First pour: VERY dark red. Loved the color, and how opaque it was in the decanter! My friends agreed that the color was closest to garnet, but I haven't the faintest idea. Some fine sediment. (I poured small amounts into the decanter and put a stopper in the bottle.) The first sniff was rather hot, but that went away very quickly. Aromas of cherry, spice, sweet fruit. The taste is red fruits and mildly tart cherries. There is no vinegar in the aroma, and the acidity is nicely balanced with a pleasant zing. The sweetness and body are also balanced. Even though it's mostly syrah, it's not nearly as heavy and bold. The flavor definitely corresponds to the bouquet, and it is not oaky but instead very mellow and easy to drink.

I think we went through four rounds of small pours? We made it through about 2/3 of the bottle. As it breathed it became less tart. One of my friends poured a small amount from the bottle at the very end, and said the difference between it and the decanted wine was night and day. I'm sure we could have easily polished off the whole bottle, but my friends had to drive home (and I want to try it again tomorrow!). We broke out the cheese about halfway through. They were great together! The cheese was a little spicy when eaten right after a sip. Overall, I had a very hard time finding any fault with the DJ Red. I gave it 18 points out of 20. I recall someone pricing it at $28, and we all agreed we would buy it at that price. We're not rich so we would save it for a nice occasion, but we considered it worth the money.

From my friend Emily: 15 points out of 20. Fantastic with cheese. Really nice, mellow fruitiness. A bit tart. Beautiful color. Medium body. Should definitely be decanted!

From my friend Dave: 18 points out of 20. This is a nice, well balanced wine. There is no heavy aftertaste and no harsh alcohol flavor or aromas. The color is rich and clean and it is a medium body. The weight is good and stays on the glass. I'd buy this wine.

Thank you wine.woot and MacCallum Family Cellars for giving me the opportunity to labrat! I'm looking forward to trying the other two bottles.



A fine addition to this week's labrat reports. Love the inclusion of friends in the tasting.

maccallum


quality posts: 13 Private Messages maccallum

[quote postid="3141701" user="jsronce"]

I hope my report stands up to the rest! This is my first time, and I'm no expert.

Thanks for the nice reviews on this site. We are really happy that people are liking the wines. People always ask me if we stress over quality. You have no idea. Sleepless nights are the norm as you debate if the two yeast trials are really that different.

By the way, the tops of the bottles are waxed with normal parafin wax. These are all hand dipped by Mitzi, myself and unsuspecting friends. We just like doing it versus a foil cap. Masochists I guess.

Depending on who waxed them they can be a bit heavy and hard to get off. Mine are usually easy to pop based on my 50,000 bottles of experience. But Dave Morrow a friend who has been a mainstay the past years is always a bit heavy on the wax and I will lodge a complaint with him. He works for wine and is a jolly guy so you will all understand why I put up with a certain level of incompetence.

We will be on the blog most of the day if you have questions.

kylemittskus


quality posts: 231 Private Messages kylemittskus
cheron98 wrote:Rats, you've all been packed.



Awesome reports this week. Let's make them the new standard huh? The one paragraph, "I like it" reports just don't do it for me.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

clayfu


quality posts: 10 Private Messages clayfu
cheron98 wrote:Back off, clay. He did say "right or wrong" about his impression. And it was just an IMPRESSION. People can be mistaken. Obviously if the man was wrong, he now knows better, and if he's not, then why would you be getting all offended? Seriously, chill out.



I'm not offended, he doesn't know me or my habits so it's all baseless. I just find it HILARIOUS, wanted to point out how ridiculously silly his comments are. (as mark has already done for me). Which at no point has he retracted from his comments.

At any point where he wants to reply about how he can figure i like "jammy" PARKER wines based off of suggestions of Varietal and Region that'd be awesome. Considering I've been pimping the guppy out of wineries in Santa Barbara region on wine.woot as well as one particular winery that is known for be one of the most "anti parker" pinot/chards in Cali.

vinokeeno


quality posts: 2 Private Messages vinokeeno

Highly relevant post: Mmmmm that DJ Red looks wonderful. I am still on the fence here. I wish I had the storage for this. At least they didn't stick us with a bottle of merlot in this set.

My Cellar - "This wine is too good for toast-drinking, my dear. You don't want to mix emotions up with a wine like that. You lose the taste." Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises

clayfu


quality posts: 10 Private Messages clayfu
gcdyersb wrote:I like wines that are available and affordable. Since I can't recall clay ever recommending a wine other than something from a mailing list only winery or costing upwards of $40 (but typically both) I think his suggestions were intended for someone else. Or perhaps a pterodactyl.


From what you're saying, it doesn't seem like you have more than a very limited experience with well crafted $100+ wines to give such an opinion. So how could you so easily assert a blanket statement like "$100 wine will not be twice as good as a $50 wine"?

were you talking out of your butt when you made this statement?

A $100 wine will not be twice as good as a $50 wine (unless the $50 was horribly overpriced). So the optimization is really about finding good quality with representative characteristics at mid-price.



You write great detailed blogs/reviews about the wines you drink in the price point you love. I'm having a hard time grasping the need to make statements like that when that's not even the "spectrum of drinking" that you're in.

vinokeeno


quality posts: 2 Private Messages vinokeeno
clayfu wrote:From what you're saying, it doesn't seem like you have more than a very limited experience with well crafted $100+ wines to give such an opinion. So how could you so easily assert a blanket statement like "$100 wine will not be twice as good as a $50 wine"? were you talking out of your ass...



I have been into wine since around 95 and I figure I've pulled close to 100 corks a year. Having participated in several BLIND tastings over the years where "well crafted $100+ wines" where included, I cannot remember even once where one of these flagship labels was picked top of the heap according to my notes or for the group averages. Now, I not implying they were of poor quality. But by my (informed?) opinion, the price of a bottle is very little to no indication of the level of quality of the wine inside. But rather is strictly a result of supply and demand. Quality/Price Ratio is a far better barometer to go by when selecting which labels to buy.

My Cellar - "This wine is too good for toast-drinking, my dear. You don't want to mix emotions up with a wine like that. You lose the taste." Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises

ssufish


quality posts: 6 Private Messages ssufish

gcdyersb, outstanding report! You likely put me over the edge with this one. I'm gonna mull it over for the afternoon on how many to get (1 or 2). It's game on if the little yellow button starts jumping around. Thanks!

maccallum


quality posts: 13 Private Messages maccallum
vinokeeno wrote:Highly relevant post: Mmmmm that DJ Red looks wonderful. I am still on the fence here. I wish I had the storage for this. At least they didn't stick us with a bottle of merlot in this set.



We do not make Merlot but WA Merlot is the best in the country. I think you will love these wines!

kylemittskus


quality posts: 231 Private Messages kylemittskus
vinokeeno wrote: Quality/Price Ratio is a far better barometer to go by when selecting which labels to buy.



However... you can get a $100 wine that is huge QPR if it drinks like a $350 wine. QPR is relative to just that: the quality of the wine to the price. Are there hundreds of amazing $20? Of course, and a lot of them have very good QPR. The quality you get for the $20 is well worth it. However, the same can be true for any priced wine, including those wines that are expensive. For an example, Corison Kronos.

vinokeeno wrote:But by my (informed?) opinion, the price of a bottle is very little to no indication of the level of quality of the wine inside.


And often times, the wines that are more expensive are that way because they were ranked very high previously for the QPR they provided. Big scores (like it or not, good or bad) will increase the cost of the next vintage (in a lot of cases). The debate about expensive wine being not as good or not worth the big price has been going on for a very long time and both sides have valid points. However, I think saying "'well crafted $100+ wines' where included, I cannot remember even once where one of these flagship labels was picked top of the heap according to my notes or for the group averages" is a blanket statement that is contigent upon many factors including your palate (both preference and training) and the same for "the group" and thus, may not be entirely true without you lying.
.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

Moondragon


quality posts: 8 Private Messages Moondragon
vinokeeno wrote:Netiquette 101 Tip of the Day - Learn to snip. It is neither necessary nor desirable to quote the entire original post (with pictures) when replying on the forum.



Was that for the benefit of WD? ;)

speedoo


quality posts: 41 Private Messages speedoo

In for two sets. The winery has a compelling story and the fabulous labrat reports indicate these wines are excellent.

I hope to visit the winery next time out that way.

gcdyersb


quality posts: 141 Private Messages gcdyersb
clayfu wrote:You write great detailed blogs/reviews about the wines you drink in the price point you love. I'm having a hard time grasping the need to make statements like that when that's not even the "spectrum of drinking" that you're in.



I think at some point we should both accept we're looking from different perspectives. While your enjoyment scales linearly with price, I view wine pricing in terms of a logarithmic model. At the upper end there's a marginal improvement in quality per dollar you pay (on average since there's a sizable statistical variance). Most of what drives price there is a small supply of a well-known, highly sought after commodity.

There are plenty of amusing anecdotes like one where a man tasted a '47 Cheval Blanc blind and called it "the best Zin he's ever tasted." One wine writer was so cruel as to pour a well-made Washington Meritage from the bottle of a First Growth Bordeaux. Her guests raved about it--until the switch was revealed. And then there's the tale of Hardy Rodenstock and his unending supply of shockingly well-preserved 18th and 19th century wine.

I've tasted blindly enough to see how often expectations and results differ. And my personal experience with high end cuvees is that they do represent a marginal difference in quality relative to a winery's mid-level wine. But the price reflects mostly that there's less of the more expensive wine and also that the wine demonstrates some unique expression. The Veblen good phenomena is a much bigger contribution than any difference in quality.

Cabernet Franc: it's not just for blending! It's also for blogging.

mrzitro


quality posts: 0 Private Messages mrzitro

Too bad it wasn't a 4-pack. I'd love to get the Malbec also. I'm in for 1.

woopdedoo


quality posts: 36 Private Messages woopdedoo
Moondragon wrote:Was that for the benefit of WD? ;)



I'm sure he will get the hang of it sooner or later ;)

canonizer


quality posts: 22 Private Messages canonizer
gcdyersb wrote:I think at some point we should both accept we're looking from different perspectives. While your enjoyment scales linearly with price, I view wine pricing in terms of a logarithmic model. At the upper end there's a marginal improvement in quality per dollar you pay (on average since there's a sizable statistical variance). Most of what drives price there is a small supply of a well-known, highly sought after commodity.



I will just step in the middle of the friendly fire to suggest that Clayfu's tastes do not scale linearly with price, which is a little sour for our forums. Sometimes calling a spade a spade means pointing out that $100 wines are wonderful and sometimes it means saying that they are not (or that they are not, subject to their costs).

Regardless, the winemaker's time is dwindling. I'm still on the fence and am, amazingly, still considering it. I think that shows off the beauty of woot - a set I did not want on day 1 is looking attractive on day 3.

signed.

ddeuddeg


quality posts: 32 Private Messages ddeuddeg
vinokeeno wrote: At least they didn't stick us with a bottle of merlot in this set.



OK, we get it that you don't like Merlot. Do you really have to keep babbling about it even when there's none offered?

"Always keep a bottle of Champagne in the fridge for special occasions. Sometimes the special occasion is that you've got a bottle of Champagne in the fridge". - Hester Browne


Ddeuddeg's Cheesecake Cookbook

gcdyersb


quality posts: 141 Private Messages gcdyersb
kylemittskus wrote:However... you can get a $100 wine that is huge QPR if it drinks like a $350 wine. QPR is relative to just that: the quality of the wine to the price.



A bottle of Chateau Lafite-Rothschild costs about $13 to produce. I don't care whether it's discounted from $350 to $100, that's still an insane profit margin. If a Mercedes S Class gets you from A to B triply as well as a Honda Civic, then I guess that is the QPR of the decade.

Cabernet Franc: it's not just for blending! It's also for blogging.

gcdyersb


quality posts: 141 Private Messages gcdyersb
canonizer wrote:Sometimes calling a spade a spade means pointing out that $100 wines are wonderful and sometimes it means saying that they are not (or that they are not, subject to their costs).



Alright, I am done here until future offers. I've made my contribution, but things have certainly strayed FAR off topic at this juncture.

Cabernet Franc: it's not just for blending! It's also for blogging.

maccallum


quality posts: 13 Private Messages maccallum
mrzitro wrote:Too bad it wasn't a 4-pack. I'd love to get the Malbec also. I'm in for 1.



Shoot me an email from the website once you get the woot receipt and I may be able to help you out with a bottle of the 2003 Reserve Malbec. I have a few in the private stash available. This is the favorite wine in our house at this time.

canonizer


quality posts: 22 Private Messages canonizer
gcdyersb wrote:A bottle of Chateau Lafite-Rothschild costs about $13 to produce. I don't care whether it's discounted from $350 to $100, that's still an insane profit margin. If a Mercedes S Class gets you from A to B triply as well as a Honda Civic, then I guess that is the QPR of the decade.



I know you are said you are out of this discussion - but is there a mortgage on the property? Do the employees get paid year round? What is included in your costs?

It doesn't matter. I appreciate your contributions, in general, and your notes on this week's wine, specifically. See you next...offering.

signed.

SonomaBouliste


quality posts: 238 Private Messages SonomaBouliste
canonizer wrote:I know you are said you are out of this discussion - but is there a mortgage on the property? Do the employees get paid year round? What is included in your costs?

It doesn't matter. I appreciate your contributions, in general, and your notes on this week's wine, specifically. See you next...offering.



The numbers are irrelevant - the point is that the correlation between cost and price is very low when it comes to luxury consumer goods like clothes, perfumes, wines...
gcdyersb also made a good point that the correlation of price and "quality" drops a lot in the upper price ranges as well, and that the difference in price at the $40-$400 range may be due more to image, scarcity and perception than to "quality". I'm not saying that the average $100 wine isn't superior to the average $40 bottle, just that there's a lot of overlap and subjective valuation.

clayfu


quality posts: 10 Private Messages clayfu
kylemittskus wrote:And often times, the wines that are more expensive are that way because they were ranked very high previously for the QPR they provided. Big scores (like it or not, good or bad) will increase the cost of the next vintage (in a lot of cases). The debate about expensive wine being not as good or not worth the big price has been going on for a very long time and both sides have valid points. However, I think saying "'well crafted $100+ wines' where included, I cannot remember even once where one of these flagship labels was picked top of the heap according to my notes or for the group averages" is a blanket statement that is contigent upon many factors including your palate (both preference and training) and the same for "the group" and thus, may not be entirely true without you lying.
.



took the words right out of my mouth Kyle

gijose


quality posts: 4 Private Messages gijose
gcdyersb wrote:Alright, I am done here until future offers. I've made my contribution, but things have certainly strayed FAR off topic at this juncture.



i think it's fairly obvious that all clayfu was saying all along was... don't make assumptions about him and presume to have knowledge of his wine preferences, because you don't know him or his wine preferences at all... =/

good winery participation though!

NYC!

clayfu


quality posts: 10 Private Messages clayfu
gcdyersb wrote:I think at some point we should both accept we're looking from different perspectives. While your enjoyment scales linearly with price, I view wine pricing in terms of a logarithmic model.



once again another horrible assumption on your part. I think you need to stop assuming things. Those who knows me, know I advocate QPR on top of everything. Like Kyle said, there are QPR "values" in the $100 range as there are in the $20 range. Just because I'm more comfortable buying in the $50-100 range than you are does not make me any less QPR sensitive.

Has nothing to do with label. Sure i'm on some mailing lists that have long wait lists.. sure I buy them.. but those aren't "daily drinkers", "weekly drinkers", or even "monthly drinkers". I'm obviously buying wine to consume around dinner with some friends.

As well, the cost of the wine bottle is certainly relative to who's making the wine and if they estate grapes.

If you're like Peter who has his own grapes, is his own winemaker then your WM cost and grape purchasing costs are lower. But what if you have to source out Premium Napa Fruit from Beckstoffer? Then hire a great winemaker like Thomas Brown in the 100k/yr area? Then get an assistant winemaker he trusts? Who makes your wine, where you get your grapes matter for quality wine. That's the reason some wineries have mid level wines... cause it's their cast off grapes or lower level grapes!

Those aren't costs? If you put out a premium wine, you're going to use premium glass, cork, barrels.

Lafite/Latour/Margux, all the big house Bordeaux and Silver Oak/Caymus , all the big house Napa wineries are exceptions not the rule when it comes to luxury cuvee. Most wineries don't have the option to produce over 400 cases a year. I like buying from small producers who have a total case production of under 1500 a year (i'll stretch it if they sell more than one vineyard bottling for Pinot). Those costs are not easily recouped when they don't have estate fruit.

These are things that should be obvious.. since you've been drinking wine since 1995 right? (this isn't meant to be snide, I haven't been drinking wine for nearly as long as you have and I understand the technicalities very clearly... also doesn't hurt to have a lot of winemaker/winery owner friends!)

clayfu


quality posts: 10 Private Messages clayfu
gijose wrote:i think it's fairly obvious that all clayfu was saying all along was... don't make assumptions about him and presume to have knowledge of his wine preferences, because you don't know him or his wine preferences at all...



you get a Tommy point!

jonstrib


quality posts: 14 Private Messages jonstrib
maccallum wrote:We do not make Merlot but WA Merlot is the best in the country. I think you will love these wines!



take it you mean your offering rather than (or in addition to) WA merlot generally appreciate your participation and will look forward to trying-and ejoying-your wines. they sound interesting/distinctive and i'll have fun comparing them to some of the CFs and Syrahs i've been trying from various regions/countries. if the PN is also more along the lines of your description rather than one of the labrat reports, that'll be a bonus.

dayoff53


quality posts: 6 Private Messages dayoff53
maccallum wrote:Hello this is Jim MacCallum from MacCallum Family Cellars. I am the owner/winemaker.



Well, Jim, your Woot offering is about done, and I have to get off to an important meeting - my monthly poker game. It was a pleasure making your acquaintance. You can count on hearing from me when I have discretionary money for wine - your wines sound like just my cup of juice. I appreciate your participation in the forum and hope you will get some of your wines on Woot again!

DayOff53
my cellar