There are two reasons to drink wine, one that is simply imbibing, and the other is to “be somebody”.
The latter dominates the sport.
That’s why a decent bottle is over $20, and a really good wine costs at least $50.
Without the snootiness, no wine should exceed $20 a bottle. The costs of production, and taxes, storage/aging, bottling and transport are just not high enough to warrant a higher price.
While this mindset is now readily prevalent in CA, it’s DOMINANT in France.
My wine costs $3.50 a 750mL bottle..................
I got to have some Krug Champagne a few years back. Let me tell you there was a whole lot of difference between that and a bottle of Veuve Clicquot.
California is littered with boutique vineyards that are nothing but money pits and tax write-offs.
Also some legit wineries, including some very big ones.
I remember reading an article in, I think Wine Spectator. It was about what wine to serve with Thanksgiving dinner. It was hysterical. Essentially the writer suggested just getting a couple ‘box wines’. He said, ‘Why waste the money on anything else? Your aunt Edna and grandmother aren’t going to know the difference anyway.’
“Without the snootiness, no wine should exceed $20 a bottle. The costs of production, and taxes, storage/aging, bottling and transport are just not high enough to warrant a higher price.”
Eh, not so much. I agree anything over $100 or so is usually too much, but there are plenty of wines (of limited supply) and high quality that simply have no comparison in the sub $50 market.
I don’t like to drink wine.
As far as I’m concerned it’s only fit for cooking.
“That’s why a decent bottle is over $20, and a really good wine costs at least $50.”
Bullhockey. You can find some outstanding Malbecs for $15 or so.
L
And Scotch shouldn’t sell for more than $30 bucks...