Has Bourbon Impacted Your Wine Spending?

WINE TALK
41

Scotch/Bourbon has definitely affected my wine purchasing.
$50 on a wine bottle that lasts 1 day or scotch that I can sample for months (or years)?

42

Blanton is $60 out the door in Oregon.

43

While I enjoy many types of spirits they don’t impact wine spending and I consume them much less frequently than I do wine. As to bourbon specifically, about ten+ years ago was still a good time to be into bourbon; now it’s much less so. Ten years ago it was BTAC and Pappy off the shelf for a reasonable price, and S-W pappy at that. Within a few years it was people paying massive markups and, at least in my area, lotteries being the normal means of sale. NAS whiskies have replaced many of the standard 10 and 12 year age statement products we used to take for granted. The Weller range used to be a value alternative, poor man’s pappy, now it’s allocated in many places and sells for large markup. Products like Elmer T Lee and Blanton’s were also widely available and, though a bit more money, represented consistent value. The same thing happened to Scotch in the past, so none of it should be surprising. I still enjoy some bourbon, and believe there are still some good values to be had, but I’m not about the massive hype train at all. To me it seems like less quality for more money at greater effort. Again, there are some exceptions to that rule. It also seems to vary a lot depending on where you live, and some markets get a lot more of the rare products, keeping prices down.

44

Blantons isn’t that hard to find in LA for 50-60. Many Ralph’s have it on the shelf; when I lived there Westwood had it by the case. K&l sells it for retail but it goes out of stock very quickly. I have a lifetime supply of it now, thankfully. I think it’ll go up in price more, though.

45

For me yes. I too have thought about the “value” in buying a $100 bottle of wine that will be done in a day or two vs. a $100 bottle of bourbon that will last me months. Both can be similarly enjoyable, but I can enjoy the bourbon over a much longer period of time. I still buy wine, but not as many of the “expensive” bottles I had in the past.

46

Yes, on a few occasions I have made stupid wine purchases after 2-3 bourbons…

47

[rofl.gif]

48

I’ve always found it interesting that the same WBers who are obsessive about wine not having any noticeable oak and alcohol then turn around and love mega-hops hipster IPAs, plus scotch and bourbon.

It’s not that you can’t like something in one thing and dislike it in another, but it does seem a bit surprising to me that Sea Smoke has too much alcohol and oak but 18 year Scotch is fine.

Anyway, back to the original topic, I’m going the other direction. I find myself buying and drinking even less booze. In fact, I hardly ever drink it at home – it’s mostly a bar/restaurant order when there isn’t a decent wine option (as there often isn’t).

I certainly do understand the practical issues - doesn’t go bad, can just have one glass, how many servings in a bottle of bourbon versus a wine bottle. But I like good wine 10x more than liquor these days.

49

No.

  1. They are different categories. The only foods I might pair with whisky are haggis or kippers. (While I do make a prawn dish sautéed in butter and a splash of whisky and cream I would not serve whisky with the dish).

  2. I don’t drink bourbon so trick question. I’ll answer in terms of whisky.

Have to confess I haven’t had any serious bourbon. Woodford Reserve is about my repertoire. (Malt whisky is another story)

I really don’t get why people talk about substitution between wine and hard liquor. I’m obviously missing something basic. The only substitution I could see is between wine as an aperitif and whisky based cocktails for those gauche enough to drink cocktails before dinner. (And yes I’m guilty sometimes, I do like a negroni or a martini as the sun goes down, but it takes a while for the palate to recover, a long while in the case of the martini !! :slight_smile:). But I would have thought the volumes involved are minor.

50

Do you live in LA? Because that is a bold faced lie.

51

I still love wine and it is my preferred beverage. Especially with food. But this new obsession with bourbon has given me the push I needed to stop buying so much wine. At my age I just needed to scale back on my wine buying. I have a nice cellar with more wine that I could possibly drink in my lifetime. This is how bourbon has impacted me.

52

Monkish has countless releases of double and triple hazy IPAs that have close to no heat. I like fruity, juicy IPAs. Doesn’t mean I like my wines to be fruit bombs.

Also, Sea Smoke sux :stuck_out_tongue:

53

I lived in LA until last year. I bought about a case and a half at retail there. This was from a couple months ago at the Ralph’s in Westwood.
20869C8C-5B2C-49D6-8E90-E419DE0E7BFE.jpeg

54

Your previous remark was in present tense, but even last year, Blanton’s wasn’t readily available. I’d pay to see you replicate that, if true.

The only thing rarer than Blanton’s is a response from you with proper quotes. [wow.gif]

55

The pic I just posted was from Labor Day weekend, not that long ago.

56

I don’t doubt they can get it in stock. You’re saying it’s readily available. Two different things.

57

I mean, it just means what you mean by readily available at retail. I think that if you look hard enough you can find a bottle around 50-60 in LA without too much trouble. Can you walk into any store and find it on the shelf? No, but it’s not like finding weller 12 or even 107 on the shelf, much less BTAC/pappy at retail.

58

Readily available just means readily available… it shouldn’t imply the effort of looking ‘hard enough’ for something. Lol

Feel free to list your location(s). I’ll have a buddy drop by. If you’re right, I’ll give you your own thread and shun myself :stuck_out_tongue:

59

WTF guys…Mr. Chen, chill.

60

No shit. Take a pill dude.