No dog in the race, (Just a little bored today:D ) … Assuming you would spend over $100 for a bottle of California Cab, why does it need to be tested? If reliable tasters, including you, if you have the opportunity to taste it, if you and, or others you trust like the wine, knowing that it comes from good terroir, and there is a very talented team of wine makers, why does it need a track record? Lots of new wines are great out of the gate… Why not here too?
Because I don’t have an unlimited budget. I actually use your reviews pretty heavily since I know where you usually land and am ok taking a year gap (and the risk of not getting in early on a blockbuster wine) versus the risk of tossing money at a new venture that might not check the boxes as cleanly as you laid out (terroir, winemaker pedigree, etc).
It’s the classic Early Adopter conundrum (risk/reward of being early).
I’m not Tom, but in answer to your question, Jeff, I rarely spend $100 for a wine of any stripe, and if I were even a little tempted by this as to a CA wine, I would likely just add another bottle to my Monte Bello order. If this wine turned out to be of the sort I might and establishes a track record, who knows, I might buy. Although, again, it seems most unlikely
Sorry; that was me. Totally tongue/cheek.