At least for what I buy it just seems that my (mostly northern) California purchases seem to offer exceptionally good value. Most of my favorite wines from France are 200 to 300 dollars a bottle and the Firsts and top Burgs seem more like 500 to a 1000 a bottle and up. I just am happy that I can get some top tier Cabs and Pinots in the c - note range (75 to 125 dollars). I have managed to get on many mailing lists over the last year or so as people bailed due to the lousy economy. Prices have not risen like years past and it just seems like Cali puts out a consistent product year after year.
P.S. The stimulus for this post is I received my 08 Latour that I bought on futures - and I checked the current price. OMG - give me a break - like I am going to drink this - clearly a wine to store and auction off in 20 years.
In my usual price range (<$50 and more commonly <$30) and preferred flavor profile (light to medium bodied and acid-driven) I find France offers the most value. That’s not to say I don’t enjoy many Cali wines, but the selection is not as wide (in my sweet spot) and the QPR usually not as good.
IMO there is a case, probably a weak case in the ~$100 range.
There is a strong case, stateside, in the <$10 range, but
a) that doesn’t seem to be your subject
b) that price range is dominated by tax and transport pricing, and
c) the rest of the world manages to compete well despite the handicaps.
At $10 - 50, and over $150, I’ll take Europe, hands down. Of course I’m biased, I import European wines .
I also import some Argentine wines, and if inflation wasn’t tearing the heart out of the country and its wine business, they would be strong competitors at <$10, despite tax and transport.
As far as French wines, most Chateauneufs, including one I import, still are generally and easily available for <$100. According to the ratings they get from the press, these are still incredible values. Apparently Chateauneufs are not among your favorite wines.
Actually I think CdP is fairly competitive for QPR and I like the wines. Although the prestige bottlings like Cuvee da Capo and Hommage a Jacques Perrin are out of this price range, at least they are not a 1000 dollars a bottle. For 100 dollars or so there are some great wines to be had. My feeling is the values are better than Burgundy or Bordeaux.
This conversation is doomed to failure, since “value” is a concept of price relative to how you value the thing you’re buying.
If you think some $60 wines from California are the equal of the best wines around the world, then the answer is probably yes. If you generally dislike California wine (as is the zeitgeist on this board), then obviously the answer is no. Many on this board think $25Village burgs are better wines than the most highly-rated California pinots, for example. On the other hand, I think many wine drinkers outside this board would probably prefer $30 Napa cabernet to $150 classified growth Bordeaux.
The answer also varies considerably based on what categories of wine you’re talking about. I think the value proposition is pretty good for California pinot and syrah, for example, but weaker for California cabernet and chardonnay. Of course, I can only mean that in the context of what wines I like and dislike.
If one were talking about relative to major critics’ ratings (and I know that wasn’t what the OP meant, nor am I advocating that others should view “value” in this fashion), I’m guessing the best values, the most consistent sources of good critical scores relative to price, are probably German riesling, Port, Sauternes, CdP, Tuscan reds, and Piedmont reds. At the lower QPR range, probably Aussie shiraz, Argentine malbec, NZ sauv blanc, and Chilean cabernet. The worst are probably white and red Burgundy, Napa cabernet and Bordeaux.
There is certainly an argument here that if one has been burned (like me) by imported wine on more than one occasion then California offers a better chance at “value” than most non-California upper echelon wines. In other words, while value is relative, I would rather risk my $50 or $75 or even >$100 on a California stalwart than a fruitless, oxidized, spoiled, 3000 mile transit wine, blah blah blah. That said, I’m more willing to risk my 15 or 25 bucks on such a journeyed wine on the chance the payoff is oversized. YMMV.
Yes, this board generally shows a dislike of California wine such as Bedrock, Carlisle, Rochioli, SQN, Peay, Arcadian, Rhys, Rochioli, Cayuse, Sojourn, Mt Eden, Copain, Siduri, Pott, Littorai, Kutch…
Are prices for top Bordeaux and Burgundy absurd? Absolutely. Is California any better? I guess it depends on how you slice it and, of course, your palate.
Next to Lafite, I guess cult Californians look cheap. But in the $25-$75 range, there are lots of first rate, complex wines from other regions that hold real interest for me, and very, very little in that range in California I can say the same for. For example, there is precious little California cabernet I’d pay that much for. Yet I’m finding terrific Barolo and Barbaresco for $40-$55. Not to mention stellar values in German riesling. I can find excellent Gigondas for $25-$30, and some serious Crozes Hermitage and St. Joseph at the $40-$50 level that I’d far prefer to California wines in that range.
I’m a huge Cali fan… but at the < $20… maybe $25 or $30 price point (which is my value category), nothing touches southern France (Cotes du Rhone, CDP, Languedoc, Roussillon, Cotes du Provence, Ventoux… the list goes on). Step up a small notch on the price however, and California competes with anyone out there.
I’ve been buying a few California Syrahs lately and have found some at that price range that I’ve liked a good deal. And Nate’s list of producers is a good start for high quality in a variety of styles, without the Napa Cult Cab (or 1er Cru and up Burgundy, Bordeaux, etc. prices.)
I would challenge this (a little), Aren’t they all the same at this point. Simple CdR’s are $15-$20 depending on where your located, here in Seattle CDR, CNP and N.Rhone are the worst values, so we have to ship, which makes them more expensive than comparable versions from California or Washington State. For me, If I wanted to live on Pinot and Syrah I could do very well in the Sub $30 category without giving up too much.
The Major difference is that you can get stellar examples of Beaujolais, BDX, Muscadet, Saumur, ect. which set this area apart.
Just to be clear, I was saying that based on cost relative to major critic’s scores, not my personal opinion of value.
Really, more than anything else, once you learn what wines you enjoy the most, and figure out the ones of those which deliver the most pleasure relative to the cost, that’s what delivers you the “best value.” It could be any kind of wine from anywhere, or if you’re like me, certain examples of wines from almost everywhere.
As someone who buys slightly more US wines than their counterparts from overseas, my answer is, “It depends.”
For Zin, California is unrivaled; I’ve never had a Primitivo in the same class as Carlisle, for example.
For Pinot, I think some premier US estates offer great value compared to their overseas counterparts. Perhaps the best burgundies are more profound, but not necessarily better value. Anyway, Tom Blach would tell me I’m comparing apples and oranges.
For Cabernet, well I just don’t understand the style of many contemporary CA cabs, so can’t find the value compared to any level of Bordeaux. Note, this isn’t a slam on CA Cabernet, probably more on my palate and my unwillingness to spend big dollars on a huge gamble. To tell the truth, I’m not drinking much Bordeaux lately either, and I’m not buying any.
For Chardonnay, there are a few $50 CA chards that I would happily bring to a white burg tasting. But plenty of mediocre wines from both areas, too.
I also like and buy California Syrah, but can’t claim it’s a great value compared to say, Australia.
So, if forced to answer yes/no to the initial question, I’d have to answer no, while acknowledging that there are good values in California.
![[snort.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/bdc3944606213c4dca6c1169cf0a166c8bc4f8c9.gif "snort.gif"){kind=small}
.