you think the producer has no idea what sells and doesn’t and just habitually mass overproduces certain varietals every year? And in that case, there should be a lot 401 for every vintage right, not to mention the equivalent at just about any high end CA producer that makes a CF / merlot blend. There isn’t necessarily a big difference between dumping entire production vs excess wine. The best of their 2020 may have been just as good as the worst / second label equivalent of their 2021.
As for #100, 90.8 is definitely upper end of DN reviewed wines, not sure what you’re talking about. You’re just gonna pull one review that’s bad out of 30 almost all positive? It’s pretty clear reading that review that it’s just not stylistically a fit for that reviewer - nothing wrong with that, you guys probably have similar palates, but no idea why you would extrapolate this into some broader objective truth. Part of the reason I’m pushing back in general here is I’ve noticed a tendency for some here to assume their personal taste / experience with a wine is indicative of how everyone should view it, rather than just one subjective data point.
As for the claimed MSRP…almost none of the higher end supposed MSRPs from DN are going to drink like $80-100+ wines. They were sold for a reason with perhaps rare exceptions of forced selling. To me the point of DN is not that you’re literally getting a $100 wine for $15-20, but that something a $100 producer might consider a slight cut below their standard for that bottling is still an exceptional wine that we’d happily pay $30-60 for and can have it for $15-20.
I suppose the disappointment is relative to expectations. There are 49 odd offers between round wines, all with the same hyperbole and promise.
IMO N.50 will be very good with time. N.100 I think is a solid wine—I would not pay the suggested MSRP for it, but the dispersion of $100 Napa cabs is quite large. N.150 I personally enjoyed for what it is. Fresh, red, gulpable. Haven’t tried 200 onwards but will soon.
I do agree that some of the odd offers will beat some of the round numbers (401, 216, 243, 29, 173, 68, 251 come to mind).
I agree with all of this Toby but I’d go a step further:
dN lot #s <100 and really <50 were sourced in a very different environment than we have today or even when he sold lots 150+ so I think they should all be looked at differently.
I purchased almost every Cab <50 and I haven’t had a dud in the bunch. They all fantastic.
Yeah no doubt the early days of DN were different conditions and led to higher quality offerings / QPRs that will only come around once in a while.
And Rohit, agree with your points. If your expectation is for the round # lots to be head and shoulders above others you’re going to be disappointed (possible exception of the super high priced ones). Additionally, as you say, these are only 1 out of every 50 offerings, statistically very likely that a handful of odd lots will be better for most folks.
Yah this is the most obvious pushback here. Of course out of the other 49 offerings there will be some incredible winners. Also, he can’t offer low volume lots in the round numbers as it’s all a marketing game. Something like 401 is clearly better than 400 (and was more expensive) but he had a ton more 400 so that’s why it was 400 and 401 was 401.
Yeah I think this is the fair line of criticism - Cam used the 400 number to move more wine that was a tougher sell than 401. I still think it’s fairly unlikely that he would knowingly sell meh wine at that lot # and price point + hype, but again, possible he liked something that will be a miss for more DN drinkers than usual, who knows. It is interesting to go back to the copy for #400 where he claims the winery sold off a bunch of wine that he passed on, and then he eventually got the best barrels they had held back when they thought they would bottle it. If you’re in the cult you gotta believe haha
PnP, no decant needed. The last bottle of the case, I am sorry to see it go. Someone must have really enjoyed guzzling up all of this delicious double Yum!
Smoke 'em if you got 'em? No Day 2, all gone. with Tri-tip
This afternoon my wife and I opened our first bottle of OG dN Lot 207 2019 Willamette Valley (Yamhill/Eola) Chardonnay that we just received. I don’t have much experience with Chard’s but I thought this was very smooth and easy drinker for us. I was a bit surprised as I read a lot of notes that it was out of balances or not as good as other offers but I have to remember that I don’t have the same experience palate as others. The remaining 11 will be enjoyed sooner rather than later!
2021 Eleveur Cabernet Sauvignon Sage Ridge - USA, California, Napa Valley (11/5/2023)
This is an outstanding bottle of wine. Big, brawny structure, with blueberry, sandalwood, cedar, a tinge of pine needle, baking spice, vanilla bean, and fine specs of graphite. This is all framed by cola & lots of powdery tannins - big up front, but get finer over the hours.
However, after a couple of hours, the wine actually seemingly began to close up for a couple more hours, then opened up again on day 2. This is a baby.
Mouth-coating and delicious, this wine still has a ways to go, the baby fat will certainly come off, but this is a 94-point wine today, in my book, and I believe there is room for this to get even better. I prefer younger cabernet and the energy & structure that they offer. This is it. In my very humble opinion, it was not a waste to open this so early, it was incredibly satisfying. While I'll save the majority, this is one I wouldn't mind opening every year to see where it has gone.
This is an outstanding first effort by De Negoce's Eleveur label. Very impressive.
The 2021 Éleveur "Sage Ridge Vineyard" Cabernet Sauvignon was hand-harvested at night, inoculated with native local yeasts, and aged for 20 months in 100% French oak barrels (65% new oak). (94 points)
Agreed, the first bottle of n.145 Cabernet I opened, I was not impressed. With time, it became better. Same with n.124 Merlot. In 2020, there was nothing there, like, it was structureless cough syrup. Not anymore. Very nice wine, with many years ahead of it.
I didn’t mind 400, just tasted really tight, I was neither blown away or disappointed. I agree with folks 401 is a serious wine, but it’s not very enjoyable now.
But that’s not why I’m here. Finally popped my first 240, lovely out of the bottle, eager to try tomorrow after some air time. The WA cabs from 18/19 just outperform and I don’t think there has been a better QPR from DN than these. I really enjoyed 141 and am happy to have 2.5 cases left. 240 is no slouch either. And no, I still haven’t tried 50
I agree. Plenty of examples of early doom declarations on these pages. Lots of people here hated on 17, then 2 years later the wine comes around and is now universally adored. I, for one, cannot predict the future well, so I trust others with whom I have a 15 year track record (like Cam).
Agree on 269. What makes it even more delicious is my wife likes it as well. She typically turns up her nose at the de Negoce label because she thinks it’s all reject juice!
Had a birthday party for my 8 year old daughter and her classmates which turned into a party for the parents…
Love being able to pop lots of bottles and not break the bank. Wines were well received and i had to explain and tell the story of de Negoce over and over again since everyone kept asking about the wine.
