Nothing seems to give this board greater pleasure than criticizing Parker. Some of the criticism might actually be accurate, but there seems to be an unwritten rule here that no one should give him credit for being a relative pioneer and for helping a lot of people to avoid bad wine and find good wine to buy. Many of the negative opinions seem neither fair nor balanced. He may be a big ego, but he has helped fill my basement (and many others) with good wine. Let’s not dwell on one without mentioning the other.
Phil Jones
Phil, it’s good that your palate aligns with Parker. But for some of us, there is virtually nothing I still buy that he introduced me to, and a lot of overripe, overoaked, overpriced slop he convinced me to buy in years gone by. Couple that with the fact that he has an insatiable, narcissistic need to give huge scores to those very few wines I do like, thus driving up both demand and price to the point of being out of reach, and his disappearance from the wine scene cannot come soon enough for me. Doesn’t help that he is one of the most obnoxious, demeaning, and insulting personalities online.
Basically, Robert Parker is the Aerosmith of wine criticism. In the early days, there was Sweet Emotion and Walk This Way with Run-DMC.
Later, there was Dude Looks Like a Lady, Cryin’, and those other songs. Lots of people bought those records.
Basically, Robert Parker is the Aerosmith of wine criticism. In the early days, there was Sweet Emotion and Walk This Way with Run-DMC.
Later, there was Dude Looks Like a Lady, Cryin’, and those other songs. Lots of people bought those records.
OK, this went WAY over my head. I’m sure there’s meaning here but I don’t understand it at all.
Sorry - I don’t know the Aerosmith oeuvre. Wish I did though - this reads like it would be obvious to those who know.
Welcome to the Wine Berserker board Phil. He’s the girl who said “no” when all these boys were teenagers…
There is nothing more annoying than being painted with a broad brush. Just because there is a lunatic fringe here who insist on examing Parker’s scat on a daily basis doesn’t mean that the entire board exists to rip at Parker.
FIFY 
FIFY
I’d say the analogy fits pretty well.
At my age, I was delighted that I understood it, and agree that the analogy is a good one. That means much more to me than Parker’s relative influence.
For an older crowd, how about Ozzy Osbourne, the “godfather of heavy metal”, in his Black Sabbath days, versus the Ozzy of today, roughly the same age as Parker?
For an older crowd, how about Ozzy Osbourne, the “godfather of heavy metal”, in his Black Sabbath days, versus the Ozzy of today, roughly the same age as Parker?
Or Tom and Jerry before they started talking?
Exactly, and it’s so frustrating, because we’ve had HUNDREDS of posts praising Parker, acknowledging his inimitable influence on the wine world, how he helped each of us in one way or another, so to say that it’s ‘always’ negative is total b.s.
I got the impression from Levi Dalton’s I’ll Drink to that interview with Galloni that Parker chose not to sell it to him and went with a different buyer, in a way forcing Galloni to go to plan B - Vinous. I am guessing that the investment banker’s deal was better for Parker. Perhaps we are saying the same thing if Galloni couldn’t pull the financing together.
Bill, I like the Ozzy analogy. I certainly didn’t peg you to be a metal head.
wasn’t there an increase in release price as well?
even if the wines are sold at the same prices, since the cost basis is higher the ‘% of premium’ would be less?
I am not sure that Galloni’s spin counts for much in that discussion, and I am confident that Galloni did what he could to make the deal happen and failed. Who in their right mind would want to start from scratch, alone, with Vinous if he or she could step into Parker’s shoes? Or be the employee of somebody other than Parker after failing to succeed him? We know that Galloni had a WA employment contract with an option to buy WA, of sorts (more in the nature of a non-binding agreement), as we have seen it. (There was some question as to whether his last WA contract ever got executed by both parties.) I am going strictly into the realm of personal opinion at this point, but we know that Galloni was trolling for investors, and I am guessing that too many of them believed that a WA without Parker would be a poor investment. (Smart investors.) I believe that Galloni simply ran out of time, and Perrotti-Brown saw that coming and got her banker husband and his colleagues to broker a deal with a couple of wealthy but naive Chinese investors that she may have met while she was organizing wine events in Asia. (And Jeff, yes, little question that the deal cut was better for Parker than Galloni could have mounted.) The details may vary, but broad-brush, that is almost certainly what happened. Given the time frames in Galloni’s contract, sold out from under him would not seem to wash. And then there is the persistent but as yet unverified West Coast rumor that Charles Banks is a Vinous investor or lender…
Wine-Searcher has a piece that suggests that the unrepentant Bordelais intend to raise prices on the 2014s, regrdless of the state of Parker/Martin influence…
Good luck with that.
I am curious, what was the last positive thread on Robert Parker on this site? Because I haven’t seen one in years.
AND - Not that he doesn’t deserve criticism, everyone has a right to their opinion. Just curious -
If you use the search function, you’ll see 71 results using keywords ‘parker positive influence’ and many threads that contain quite an affirmative spin on him, including from me. Don’t paint with a broad brush, particularly when it’s not true.
I am new here and occasionally check that board too but I was unaware of its closure, currently or in the future? Can someone clarify.