On the whole, I think they’re closer to California wines in style most of the time, though there’s a wide range of styles and grapes.
![[rofl.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/a7452fcd8e675af869f8da01174474a545b03944.gif "rofl"){kind=small}
Joe, you and only you have to decide whether you’re getting the value out of these wines. It’s like the old Warren Buffett quote, “Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.”
In this hobby, I think we sometimes develop this twisted “wine math” that makes it nothing to drop $150 on a bottle of wine, but then wrestle over whether $50 is too much for a dress shirt, for example. It all comes down to whether you believe you’re getting a solid ROI with your wine purchases.
I’d also challenge you to find wines out there (maybe not Napa cabs) which deliver an equal or better wine experiences for much less money.
Great thread and a question I have always pondered about wine in general ever since I got into it, not just expensive ones like Bordeaux, Burgundy, Cali Cabs, etc. . If you really want to get all professorial economics about it, the literal answer to the question is that we are not unless the producers or distributors of the desired wine have in fact colluded to fix the price of the wines. Remember the Wirtz law fiasco in Illinois?
Of course that’s not what you meant, I am just making a point. We as a whole aren’t paying too much. Whether you are is a matter of individual choice. The market supports what it will support. I strongly feel that the Heitz story punchline posted above me perfectly sums it all up – if you want it, that’s what it costs. That really sums it all up for me. As long as there is nothing shady going on, I’m okay with that. While I’m personally gobsmacked by some of the high prices of California Pinots and Cabernet Sauvignons – no Phillip Togni for me, for example – somebody out there is paying for them and making both themselves and the wineries happy.
So no, we aren’t paying too much. We are paying what others have shown they are more than willing to pay. If you are no longer part of that group – and I personally never have been – it is time to set a price limit on what you buy (My personal cap is $70 CDN on par for a decent to good Cali Cab or Pinot) or start buying from another region with high quality and more affordable prices. Argentina and Chile in particular come to mind for Cabernet Sauvignon.
In fairness, Cali Cab isn’t the only wine that brings up this dilemma. I recently tasted an amazing 08 Shiraz and was shocked to find that it actually cost $130 USD. Did it taste like a $130 Shiraz? Damn right it did. Will I buy it? No. I’m very happy with a $40 Shiraz of high quality.
That is utterly a matter of personal taste. Personally, I find that, beyond maybe $50 or $75, the price of California cabs is pretty much inversely correlated to pleasure for me. In my experience, the higher the price, generally the riper the grapes, which means less and less varietal character, more and more alcohol and overextraction of oak elements.
But your mileage may vary.
I believe Scott was agreeing with you, though his choice or words could be read almost either way. Pretty sure he was giving the advice that there are plenty of great wines out there to be found for far less money than the going rate of top Napa Cabs.
OK. The urge to believe that you can only have good wine if you pay through the nose is very strong.
Very timely thread, as I am trying to decide whether to pull the trigger on the Fairchild GIII offer tomorrow. Given the availability of GIII Cabs from a number of really good winemakers, I am struggling with justifying spending an extra $50 a bottle for Larry’s iteration. I have also concluded that I lack the palate to really discern the differences in quality - my typical tasting note range would be “tastes bad”, " tastes good " and the occasional “tastes really good” 
yes
This. As long as US economy keeps humming along these prices will be sustained so, for now, you aren’t paying too much but, by October, you probably will be. With tide going out we’ll see who’s naked. After four high quality harvests (three of which were large) there is plenty of Napa Cabernet out there…the only thing hard to come by these days in Napa/Sonoma is warehouse space. I just had 100,000 gallons of '14 Napa Cab run past my nose…these guys see the writing on their wall and decided to cut bait and try to make a smaller profit on the somewhat frothy bulk market. My gut says prices have peaked for now. That said, wineries are loathe to cut prices so they’ll pare inventories by selling bulk, producing private labels, or the occasional flash sale site (which don’t seem to have any problem securing inventory for sale prices) so don’t look for wineries to offer deals to their mailing lists.
I should add quality of '13 and '14 will help sustain prices for producers with strong track record…both are fantastic vintages on North Coast.
This. Many of my cab purchases are in the $50-75 range.
Certainly this is a supply and demand question. Wine is a luxury good, which does well when the world economy is doing well, and contracts quickly when it is not. There are still many wineries trying to get rid of the wine they were selling during the 2008-2010 timeframe. People will drop wine purchases well before they fail to pay their mortgage, utility bill etc. When you couple tremendous vintages like '12 and '13 with possible peak world demand, it causes the price to rise. My personal opinion is that Napa wineries are choosing to raise their prices at a precarious time, coupling possibly world economic retraction with less stellar vintages (starting with '14). That could eventually mean more wine sold to wholesalers and significantly reduced margins, with less of us buying from lists since we’ll find is cheaper retail. Only time will tell, but wine is definitely going to go through big peaks and valleys. I think this is a major peak.
If you paid $11 for the '68 Martha’s you were robbed. That’s when Bill Cadman was working in the cellar and Joe let his employees buy as much as they wanted at the wholesale price of $8. Everyone in our tasting group (Mike Richmond, Bruce Neyers, Leigh Pomeroy and others) bought cases of the stuff.
I’m sure that there are many examples when this is not true; Spottswoode and Forman are two that come to mind.
I like Spottswoode but I find the last few vintages to be pretty modern. Not overdone but I didn’t get much tobacco/cedar/herbal notes that I associate with ‘varietally correct’ Cabernet Sauvignon.
Here…, where?
30 years ago, i was 17 making $3.35 an hour at a fast food restaurant.
A long time ago a co-worker posited the notion that a new millionaire (this is back when being a millionaire was a big thing) was minted quite often and that Bordeaux prices were bound to rise because X percentage of these millionaires would want a nice cellar.
He did not foresee the epoch of cult wine, Super tuscans, etc.
But on the whole he was right. Rich people all over the world want to cellar the top wines of the planet.
For many of these people, $300 a bottle is chump change. So if you want to drink Colgin, Bryant, Mouton, harlan etc…be prepared to shell out some serious dough.
He also failed to foresee an era when really really rich people have an itch to make great wine in the Napa Valley. This is where Andy Beckstoffer was smarter than my friend.
If people do not like those examples, add Monte Bello, Montelena, Togni, Dunn and a number of others.
But, on the other hand, there are a lot of excellent Cabernet for $30 to $60 including Ridge Estate and Stony Hill. So, what you pay is your choice. More important is style and knowing the style you like and when you want to drink it. Once you know what you are looking for, you probably can find something that fits the bill in a variety of price ranges. And, wines that are not in your style will seem like overprice swill.
He probably also did not foresee a time when older Bordeaux was around the same price as recently released Bordeaux, which often is the case these days. But, then, of course, 2009 and 2010 were the great vintages ever and vintages like 1970, 1975, 1978, 1979, 1985, 1986 and 1989 are swill.