I bought 1 bottle of the Krug 2004 at the $209 because of the reviews and updates on this thread. I don’t have a large champagne collection. Only a few prized bottles for special occasions. This past Friday, I popped a Krug 164 (2008 base wine) with my family to celebrate my son’s 1st birthday. It was fantastic!!! I had a bottle of the 2006 Dom when he was born and the 2008 on my wedding anniv this past May. Since I had the Krug 164 so recently in time to the 2 Doms, I slightly prefer the Krug style but I’ve never had a vintage Krug. I’ve had several other NV Krug’s but that was before they designated the base year and a few half bottles that didn’t designate either. I have a 2006 and 2008 Dom left but the rest of my collection is NV, such as Ruinart.
My question is, if I want to purchase a few more bottles, am I I better served purchasing a few more Dom 2008 at at price point below $170, the Krug at $209 or the Krug 164 (prices have risen and not many 750 bottles out there that ship.to PA for less than $180)?
I have the space to age these if I choose but I would need a deeper collection to do so, which is why I’m starting to build my champagne collection a little. I’ve never had a well aged Dom or Krug but have the capability to do so.
Thanks for the advice and thanks for starting this thread. I would have never come across a vintage Krug for $209!
William - very hard to answer your question about how you would be better served. So much depends on your budget and appetite for champagne.
Like you I started out loving the big names like Krug and Taittinger Comte and bought a handful. I bought both vintage and MV Krug. But the big shift for me is changing my attitude towards Champagne from a special occasion wine to a deliciously regular part of my wine consumption. That had me looking for other brands that scratched that yummy itch at lower price points. Turns out that there are a lot between $50 and $80 that are excellent and drink nicely younger. Many threads here on this subject.
But … if you only want more pricey bottles to drink rarely, then buy what you like best.
Which is why negative interest rates won’t work or stick around. It would cause a run on the banks and the entire economy would collapse just like it did in the 30s. I don’t see that happening.
William, the answer depends on whether you like vintage Krug $40 more than Dom. Since you haven’t had vintage Krug, you can’t answer the question. Therefore, your options are:
Pop the vintage Krug or find some way to taste it and decide if it’s worth buying vs. the Dom.
Or
Hedge your bets and buy some of both.
I think $210 is as good a price as will be seen for 2004 Krug.
I often buy a few bottles of both Dom and vintage Krug, and the MV, but your preferences may differ.
Thanks for the guidance. I think I’ll hedge my bets and buy a few more of the Dom 2008 and Krug 2004 but lean a bit heavier on the Krug since it’s a great deal for that bottle and I can probably find the Dom at a decent price point closer to years end. I appreciate everyone’s comments!
Now ask yourself how in Hades can the Keller G-Max continue to sell for more than $2000 per bottle if the greater Germanic Usury Industrial Complex can only offer negative outlooks on 30-year horizons?
.
.
None of this makes any sense, unless you’re willing to entertain some very dark, ugly, frankly rather apocalyptic thoughts about the necessary consequences of all this Fake Money having been pumped into the system since forever.
Personally, I’m having difficulty envisioning the Happy Ending.
.
Because the monthly tune up on a 100 ft yacht cost more than all the g max available in the world. We think wine is expensive…it’s not to some who all the sudden decide they want it. Just hope what you like stays off their radar.
I get that you are troll, but at least make some sense in trolling?
billionaires don’t give a shit about negative interest rate or $2000 wine…$2000 is like 20 cents to some folks… if you wanted something for 20 cents, do you care about what the interest rate is in the market? or do you just go buy it?
I actually think there is some merit to some of the points you make, but the trolling aspect is just getting old.
Actually, I hate to break it to you, but Billionaires OBSESS* about this stuff.
And they hire small armies of Quants & Historical Empiricists & CPAs & JD/CPAs & folks with brothers-in-law who work for the Central Banksters etc etc etc, all of whom are paid handsomely to themselves obsess about this stuff [and vacuum up as much gossip as possible] 24x7.
That’s why Billionaires are worth billions of dollars.
I mean. i don’t know for a fact b/c i’m not Fu / Billionaire… Not sure how you know / breaking it to me, unless you ARE a billionaire…
they obsess over tax savings and loopholes to save them millions/billions. I don’t think they obsess over wines that cost the equivalent of pennies to them ($2000 gmax).
