Ask the sellers to (in writing) to agree to sell an equal number of 07’s as part of the deal and you will see then flee in terror.
I hope it does. Maybe then the winery will hold the line on the price for once. Not that the (relatively) low score this year prevented them from a price hike. But if the 07 gets a 99 or 100, I think they will jack it up another $25 for sure. And the irony of that will be that they will end up encoraging flipping, as so many of their initial customers, that signed up and bought before the Parker reviews, won’t be able to afford to buy their whole allocation without selling a few.
Let me try to think about this for a minute.
A) If the Dow is a measure of expectations of future profitability of large C-Corporations, and
B) If, in general, the Dow is a fairly good measure of those expectations, and
C) If, in general, those expectations tend to be fulfilled [in reality] by future events, and
D) If the profitability of large C-Corporations tends to correlate fairly strongly with the profitability of other economic legalisms, like free-lancers [“day-traders”?] attempting to earn a profit at flipping cult wines, and
E) If the Dow has fallen from 14,000-ish to 6,000-ish, and
G) Even if you make assumptions that any market whatsoever for cult wines will persist into the near future [to include making either the assumption that there will be anyone capable of offering a demand for cult wines or the assumption that there will be anyone capable of offering a supply of cult wines], then
H) How can you possibly expect that there will be any profit to be made in flipping cult wines?
Which is to say: My gut is telling me that you people are rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
I hope I’m wrong, but, unfortunately, I kinda doubt it…
I tried that with Screagle (offered $1000 for the 2007, 33% higher than 2006) and was rejected by many.
Tried the same thing and got no response.