Around $30.
1 Like
Was curious because i just bought 375s of ‘21 LS for $30, free shipping. (They are still available, just checked, for those interested). The Geyserville 375’s were $32 or $33 i believe.
I like Ridge wines, the MB membership made sense because I only have to pay for shipping once a year, where as the other programs are three times a year. Then I take advantage of free shipping specials and 15% off during the year.
Plenty of chatter about that topic. Some taste it, some don’t. They weren’t the only winery selling potentially tainted wine
As a casual Ridge drinker I at least applaud them for taking it back
You did read the results from one of the lab tests done by one of the reviewers, right?
Cheers
You are missing the point with your comments: Yes you can return the wine, but ONLY if you are a well informed customer, such as those on this site, who know that is an option. Ridge has NEVER made this option public information and I would posit that the vast majority of customers do not only do not know about this option nor are even aware of the controversy about this vintage in general.
5 Likes
Dropped after the 2020 vintage. Was very glad to hear about the option to return the wine after reading many bad reviews. They made the return very easy, but the option only came up after I contacted them. IMO, the prices have now crept up enough that the futures programs doesn’t make a lot of sense for me. And I don’t need more wine that will need 15-20 years of cellaring.
1 Like
Guess that’s where we differ. If someone is dropping $100+ per bottle on a futures program and has been on that list/program for years (there is a waitlist) I think most WOULD know there were bad fires in 2020.
Was that lab test available to Ridge in 2020?
Is there a baseline available?
Did Ridge do the test in 2020 and just ignore the results?
Did you see people’s posts here who drank them, some in groups with several people, and didn’t detect any taint?
There are too many questions to speculate. Easy sitting on our side and questioning their moves.
All I said is you aren’t stuck with the product, they will take it back. Maybe they shouldn’t have released it, but I try to be a positive person, and the customer service from Ridge, post sale, seems solid, and that wouldn’t hold me back from buying in the future
1 Like
The Futures is definitely not for me (especially because of the price increase) as I can find some good bottles for a reasonable price on the secondary market + being required to purchase other Ridge wines before getting the opportunity to purchase the Monte Bello (the Monte Bello is the only Ridge wine I’m interested in).
Spot on @Daniel_Walsh. I joined the MB Collectors club 5 years ago with the specific intent of buying this iconic California wine and was happy to purchase other Ridge wines for a guaranteed MB allocation. 5 years on, I have 2 vintages of MB and decided their plan wasn’t aligned with my goals. Maybe the MB allocation was never guaranteed and if so, that’s on me.
3 Likes
So it’s on the regular loyal customer to know the macro vintage environment vs trusting a long time winery that you’ve supported to do the right thing and release a quality product?
Even IF you debate that ridge didn’t KNOWINGLY release a bad product b/c their lab test didn’t show any taint at the time they tested it, it’s obvious that subsequent tests does show it. did they do a product recall?
Did they even communicated openly and widely to the buyer base the return your bottles option? (i don’t this so geuinely asking) Did they email all their buyers - Hey if you don’t want to keep you can return? OR
was it if you complained, they offered the return option? If the former - that’s substantially better. if it’s the latter, that’s just damage control to me…
4 Likes
while not detecting obvious smoke taint, many of those same ANECDOTAL tasting group notes on WB also did say the wine isn’t the usual ‘montebello quality’. so goes back to the point that Ridge released a sub par product, either knowingly or unknowingly. thus - pretty sus as my kid would say 
Others have also said, if they declassified it to estate cab… that would have probably garnered more trust in their decision making.
3 Likes
So it’s ok to release known tainted wine if you make it “Estate” vs “MB”? Just charge less? Because everyone seems to think Ridge knew it was tainted but release it anyways. So its ok to release known tainted wine at a price point you deem fair?
There were 100’s of posts on this in another thread, this is about the 2023 release so I’ll basically stop here.
My comment was that if a winery is willing to take something back, that is good customer service. Not me personally, but some of my friends who are collectors have had issues returning flawed bottle back to other wineries that they purchased direct, and that to me is poor customer service.
It’s never ok to knowingly release tainted wine.
But the bigger point is that it’s not good customer service to take it back at all, it’s just the bare minimum they can do. Good customer service would be to recognize the problem, proactively reach out to customers, and offer a resolution. Ridge did not do that.
9 Likes
As a 20+ year Ridge superfan (who wasn’t forced to buy the estate stuff) I didn’t think I’d have the guts to cancel, but I did.
5 Likes
I think if they said “hey our test shows no smoke taint, and we stand behind our wine. However given the overwhleming risk of the vintage, and to protect our flagship brand, we are choosing to declass all the MB into the estate cab, and not releasing a MB’” that would have generated a lot of good will, and respect for the winery.
It’s not ‘knowing release a tainted wine’. heck they still claim they believe it’s not tainted, but even they can’t deny there’s a clear macro environment risk right? so if you wanna talk about 'good customer service… that would be one method.
No that’s not “good” customer service.
If they sent all buyers/MB members an email. Heck they can still claim innocence. “We tested our wine and it was clean, we stand by our wine, etc etc”… sure… However given the recent critic release and now multiple issues identified, we will accept anyone who wants to return their wine.
That’s good customer service.
If they stay quiet or in fact go on certain social media posts to continue to defend their position, even when multiple incidents of smoke taint have been anecdotally noted, as well as by a professional critic who completed a lab test? Meanwhile only offer a refund when someone actively complains?
that’s not good customer service. sure it’s better than flat out saying “tough shit, u bought it, it’s yours”… but that can’t be the bar for “good” CS right?
3 Likes
A company is willing to take something back if you dont like it or even want it anymore - and usually that is outside of their return policy - is a fair return policy and pro consumer. If you don’t feel they did enough, let your money talk and spend elsewhere. you won’t be the first person to do so. If you feel that burned, reach out to Consumer Affairs and the BBB.
I do not have WS Pro, but with regular WS I see 69 online stores selling 2020 MB and if I had Pro I would see 193. Someone should reach out to those 193 websites and make sure the wines are listed as smoke taint on those websites. Benchmark is selling 7 bottles and no mention of smoke taint - should we not trust Benchmark?
Ridge put those 193 stores at risk. Benchmark isn’t the root cause.
5 Likes
the buyers at those 193 stores aren’t aware of what happened in 2020?
this is thread drift, there were 100’s of comments in a thread about 2020 in particular.
We agree to disagree on the nuisances of customer service and running a business. That’s it
Cheers