As for Port wines, back in the day there were the Lot 271 2003 Napa Valley Tawny Port ($169 / case of 3) and the Lot 272 2007 Napa Valley Ruby Port ($129 / case of 3).
2 Likes
Anyone else going through UPS delivery craziness? ~ First of all we were notified that our CX wine would be delivered Monday 10:30 - 2:30. That sounded great. By that afternoon there was a 2:30 - 6:30 update followed by a note that the wine which needs a signature would arrive by 9:00 pm. NOTHING happened. Today (Tuesday) we were notified early in the morning to expect the delivery between 10:30 - 2:30. OK, but now UPS sends out another notice of a Wednesday delivery between 2:30 - 6:30 pm???
This is happening after we scheduled last week a CX delivery to a UPS Access pickup point, but it was delivered to our house and UPS is still sending us notice to pick up the package at the ‘pick up’ address (even though this location has no record of our name or tracking number delivered to their site)!
Is this just UPS chasing cheaper gas and consolidating shipments??
1 Like
UPS has been great here in Denver metro so far through a crazy amount of shipments.
Same here. It’s been UPS Nirvana ever since I trained BOTH my weekday & my Saturday drivers!
Both know what to do!
if we are outta town, I simply delay it with “My Choice” So Nice!
4 Likes
UPS is great when they don’t lose or break your package. Thankfully Cam’s been great about sending replacements.
2 Likes
Has anyone been able to crack the code on COLA searches recently for Cam X wine?
The last filing under “intergalactic” is lot 28 from 8/11/25. Nothing since.
It’s still 1.5% for wines below 14% and 1% for wines above 14%, with the caveat you ‘can’t cross’ 14% . . . so if a wine is actually 14.9, it can be labeled as low as 14% and as high as 15.9%. If a wine is actually 14.5%, it can be labeled between 14% and 15.5%.
Cheers
6 Likes
Thanks, that did the trick! All previously filed wines have been released, and no new wines have been filed since January.
2 Likes
So do we think there will be break in releases or is there a third name?
1 Like
What ever happened to The Negociant (or is that still being legally contested)?
So apparently the rebottling of Lot 25, which in the original Jan 28 email was described as the “exact same wine” as Lot 25 has been “improved with some excellent additional componentry” per today’s email. I didn’t buy any but I can’t imagine people who did wanted anything other than what they thought they were getting, which is the exact same wine as Lot 25. A real head scratcher.
Funny enough, this is the kind of thing that makes me both wonder what else is going on under the hood that we don’t know about, but also continue to have confidence in Cam’s earnestness. I can’t imagine blending in 3-5% of whatever he did could create any reasonable cost-saving, so the only logical reason to do it is because Cam & Team thought it would genuinely be better tasting, no matter the head scratching business implication. And of course if he wanted to do it without telling us, we’d never find out. It does raise some questions for me on future orders, though.
1 Like
That’s been the party line. All the after the fact blending is done for improvement. Of course, that’s all subjective and I know do do about blending varieties but seems malbec and PV somehow always find their way in there.
I didn’t order #25.2 but this would not make me happy. First you sell us on it being the same juice and now you have to blend something in. Probably it wasn’t quite the same juice as others had suspected earlier. I’m not saying it’s not “better” but that’s subjective. So why not sell it as a new lot since it’s clearly not the same? I’ve bought a lot of wine from Cam and I can’t complain about the value proposition but stuff like this just rubs me the wrong way.
So after today’s wine go into the bottle shop, there are no more futures left. Everything we know of is bottled. No COLA. Very strange…
1 Like
It doesnt have to be better tasting, lets say they have 50G of Malbec left, its not enough for its own so you got to get rid of it somehow. So blend it in and now you have extra 50 gallons of new#25 to sell.
3 Likes
I see your point but is saving ~30-50 gallons of malbec (or selling a few dozen more cases) worth throwing away customer trust? It’s just a really weird choice if the goal is saving money given that the upside is so limited but the downside is losing the entire customer base.
You really have to get into the specific wording, as the page doesn’t say the final product is the exact same as the first Lot 25. But it certainly gives that impression. It essentially says we got more of the original product, and makes no mention of any additions or changes, giving the impression it’s the same. “We just picked up a couple hundred gallons of the exact same wine . . . and, . . . I am going to just reuse the original Lot 25 . . .”
Today’s email was the first I recall of mention of changes/additions from the original Lot 25 with, “We improved the wine with some excellent additional componentry and I am telling you it’s even better than the first bottling.” So, clearly not exactly the same final product, and odd that it didn’t get a new lot number.
I have little doubt that I’ll love what’s in the bottle. But it does make you say Hmmm.
2 Likes
It’s a blip on the radar screen. I understand trust and all that but at the end if the day it’s a $20 bottle. I wouldn’t make it out to be more than that. An entire customer base probably doesn’t give a rat’s ass at this price point. The end result is usually the same.
4 Likes
So what happens if it’s actually better than 25v1.0?
2 Likes
Ooooof really gives a customer a second thought in my opinion…
The “only blend to make better” is classic used car salesmen mumbo jumbo.
2 Likes