ajrod27 wrote:How is ‘tax after’ any different than what your local store charges when purchasing wine,

It's no different other than optics. But optics and marketing go hand in glove.

Also, Anil (my local wine shop proprietor) gives a case discount which effectively eliminates sales tax and he is able to get Woot worthy deals on a regular basis. The added benefit there is that he knows what our wife and I like and can give very customized recommendations.

SmilingBoognish wrote:It's no different other than optics. But optics and marketing go hand in glove.

Also, Anil (my local wine shop proprietor) gives a case discount which effectively eliminates sales tax and he is able to get Woot worthy deals on a regular basis. The added benefit there is that he knows what our wife and I like and can give very customized recommendations.

Some great deals on Woot.

But you hit the nail on the head..your local wine merchant should be a relationship you cultivate for exactly the reasons you mention.

Winedavid39 wrote:Thank you Winters Hill for your participation and for the great offer.

Come on back !

Yes please do come back!

I'd love to see some of your reserve or single vineyard pinot here

BTW the current offer is drinking very nicely on the second night

[Note: Copied and pasted from another thread as suggested by another Wooter.]

(This is about the 2009 Winter's Hill Pinot Noir I'm drinking tonight.)

There were already detailed tasting notes posted here, mostly consistent with what I'm tasting right now - especially bsevern's notes, for which my only minor disagreement is that I wouldn't have said my bottle has a "nice tartness." Not saying bsevern is wrong; I think I might be less sensitive to tartness than average, or alternatively I might just like acidity more than most. (I found this to be the case with the Vino Noceto Riserva Sangiovese as well -- I thought it had a pleasant tartness but no pucker, while my wife thought it had some pucker factor.)

The main reason I'm commenting, though, is to address the question from the earlier discussion about whether this Pinot is more Oregonian or Californian.

Pinot used to be my favorite varietal. But in the mid 2000s, when the cost of a decent Oregon Pinot rose beyond my budget, and when the least expensive Saintsbury Pinot ("Garnet") hit $20 a bottle at my local wine discounter, I gave up. I shifted my interests to Zin, Shiraz/Syrah and Cabs, for which decent bottles could be had for considerably less than a decent bottle of Pinot. And my preferences/palate changed to match.

So I was pretty curious about whether I would still find Pinot enjoyable, at this late date, for less than $15 a bottle.

With my first sample of the Winter's Hill, the memories came rushing back, and they screamed "Oregon" to me.

Imagining a number line with 20 points on it, quintessential California Pinot on the left at point 0 and quintessential Oregon Pinot on the right at point 20, I'd put this wine right around 16 or 17.

It's only after doing some critical analysis that I get what RPM was saying about it falling in between the two styles. Mine is a gut reaction to the overall experience -- bouquet, mid-palate, and finish, without much critical thought. The whole thing together says "Oregon" to me, even if upon further reflection there are a couple of aspects that don't quite fit the Oregonian mold.

Anyhow, it's clear that I still like Pinot quite a bit after several years away from it -- at least this Pinot. Maybe the next time I see a Carneros Pinot pop up here for a reasonable price, I'll bite, just for the sake of comparison.

EDIT: I was ready to post this, and now I have to backpedal a bit. Now that the bottle's been open for a couple hours, it's starting to shift left on my number line. Both the nose and the flavors seem less typically Oregonian now. I still don't think I would call it a California Pinot in a blind taste, but it's not as far to the right on my number line now. Maybe a 13? Now I'll be forced to sample it again tomorrow to see how it evolves. ;)