Mailing list blues

[bacchaebabe]

Just got the Noon's mailer last night. This is of course after having recently received the Grennock Creek, Veritas, Torbreck and Grosset lists.

Checking my buying last year, I know the Rockfords, Mount Mary and Wild Duck Creek mailers are all due soon.

I'm finding it difficult to understand how I have afforded to buy any of these wines in the past! I just faxed off the orders for Noon's (thankfully still a bargain) and a very late order for Grosset today but I'm still trying to figure out a way to purchase a Runrig or six and a Roenfeldt Rd or four.

Does anyone else question their sanity in terms of the amount of money they spend on wine and whether it's really worth it in the end? There certainly is a difference between a $200 bottle of wine and a $30 bottle of wine but is it really that substantial, particularly when you really need to replace your bar-b-que and could get a rooly noice stainless steel jobbie for the cost of just a six pack of these wines. This is of course not even mentioning the effort you have to go to to hide these purchases from your long suffering partner.

Every time I convince myself that life will go on without the 2002 Runrig, I see another review that immediately makes me want to hang the expense and buy a six pack.

Does anyone out there actually do something sensible like budget for this time of the year?

[Guest]

The difference between the $200 and $30 is $170 especially given the high quality of Australian wine.

The bottom line with wine is you dont get what you pay for - its about what the supplier can get away with charging in the relevant market.

My advice is to drink more but less expensive good wine for your blues!

[Paul]

I love my wine, quality rather then quantity.

I'm happy buying Noons, Rockford, Kays, Wendouree, etc, and any other specials thru friends in the know.

I also love to travel and enjoy life which costs $.

So, I'm happy not buying Torbreck, Roennfeldt Rd, etc, or anything over $70 for that matter.

Each to their own I suppose.... just like that person next to me at Greenock Creek cellar door last weekend who bought 6 bottles of Roennfeldt Rd but purchased no other G/C wines.... maybe he is sending them to auction soon!

[Bazza - Guest]

I love my wine, quality rather then quantity.

Each to their own I suppose.... just like that person next to me at Greenock Creek cellar door last weekend who bought 6 bottles of Roennfeldt Rd but purchased no other G/C wines.... maybe he is sending them to auction soon!

When I have been at CD this has definitelt NOT ocurred so not sure how he got away with 6 bottles given limits that have been in palce for years.

[TORB]

Hi Kris,

Once they get over $50 I get very selective. As a result I have dropped Grennock Creek, to name just one example. With the like of the Descendants, Factor, RWT, 707, etc, gone are the days of six packs.

There is only so much room and the cellar and a limited budget to spend. And, there is more great wine available than even Bruce can buy. Or Brian can drink!

I don't think twice on much below $35 for a six pack, its either a yes or a no, but do consider the $36-$49 bracket a bit more carefully and normally buy a six pack. Over $50-$99 is considered very carefully and its normally a six pack buy. Over a $100 I am down to 1-3 normally - if I buy anything at all. It will mean carefully watching others TN's to make sure I get the window right, but that should not be difficult.

Its easy once you learn to just say pass and realise the world will still go on and you will still have lots of good stuff to drink.

[Paul]

Bazza,
The guy appeared to be his partner/wife.
I figure between the 2 of them and between the cab & shiraz they managed to get 6 R/R bottles.
Doesn't bother me as I'm not interested in spending $165 per bottle when I can have a Noon Reserve for $25.

[TORB]

For the record, Kris is not a guy and she is one of the nicest people you could possibly meet.

[bacchaebabe]

Ric, I think Paul's talking about the guy at the cellar door who bought 6 RRs when there is a limit of three and one for the shiraz and CS. So obviously, he got 3 and his wife got 3 making six, which is more than you're supposed to get, strictly speaking.

Hey, but thanks for the nice comment!

I'll have to work on that just say no thing. It's almost against my religion but with all the recent price rises I'm just going to have to change my way of thinking. But yes, when you compare the value (and customer service) between Noon's and GC or Torbreck, they are world's apart.

The comment about not getting what you pay for in wine is very true too. When you look at other commodities, like digital cameras or sound systems or even PCs, you really do get what you pay for. The quality and features go up significantly with every dollar. Can't really say the same with wine.

[Guest]

I'm not sure that I agree with the general synopsis here. I agree that you don't always get what you pay for, in anything, for that matter but to suggest that all expensive wine is a rip off is patently untrue.

If your budget is limited then it makes sense to search for as much 'value' based wine as possible. I would.

Great wine and other commodities are not supposed to be cheap, especially those that have won critical aclaim are a commodity on the global market. Why should these be 'value' based products.

What value do you get from Rolex, BMW, Mont Blanc ? You can do perfectly well with Seiko, Subaru and Parker. Some people are prepared to pay for what they consider the perciveable difference.

Simple really.

[TORB]

Guest,

Can't really argue with what you have said because it makes sense but! And there is always a but most people only have one (or possibly two) Rolex, and one or possibly two BMW's.

People don't have hundreds of them.

With wine, we are talking about a consumable that will be used exactly once, where as with a watch, pen or car they will be used frequently for years.

[Brucer]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for the nice comments Ric

Yes, Ive received them all also, and am trying to buy less.
Ive just tried a 98 and 99 Veritas Hanish, which are amazing, so its....how much of the 02 Hanish can I get.

On the flip side, the is a huge pile of wine ready to go off to Langtons next week. Lots of 98s, some 96s, and some 94s that just have not aged well.
Much is being sold for around what I paid for it, which at least gives me some money to pay for the next lot.

I suppose Im lucky because I dont have a wife to keep me under control.

The guy today fixing my air conditioner was a bit perplexed by the amount of wine. He said.....you cant possibly drink all this, and he was right!

I am worried about some of the 98 reds, particularly from McLaren Vale not ageing very well. I have about 8 to open with some friends on Sunday....Race Day. Will report next week.

Ric.......I really am trying to get the quantity down.

Bruce

[bacchaebabe]

Hey Guest,

Definitely wasn't saying that all expensive wine is a rip off. If that is the case, I've been well and truly ripped off! Certainly most expensive wine gets better barrels and treatment and blah, blah, blah but I'd be inclined to think that the 99 Roenfeldts and the 02 Runrigs were quite similar quality but it's interesting to note the older one is the cheaper one and it's cheaper by $60 a bottle which is not insignificant.

When you start comparing these wines to the likes of rockfords, wendourees, mount marys and even noons, the price difference is very significant yet the quality difference is much less discernable. Wine is much more driven by supply and demand than quality. The market forces are a much bigger factor than the quality as such. Although obviously the quality, or perception of quality, is what initially drives the supply and demand.

Items such as Rolex watches and BMWs are totally quality driven and you really do get what you pay for. There are very percievable difference between a Rolex and a Seiko, a BMW and a Subaru and a Mont Blanc and a Parker and I am very prepared to pay for them - just can't afford them! For the time being I'll have to put up with my TAG, VW and Waterman but it doesn't stop me lusting after the other.

With the wine, I'm not doubting the quality for a second, I'm just moaning about my inablity to afford them at the moment and the fact that they have all increased in price somewhat. I think I paid around $120 for the 95 and 96 Roenfeldt Rds, missed the 97s and can't remember what the 98s were, but they had gone up, and the 98 Runrigs were also around the $100 mark (and worth every cent).

I'm also moaning about the fact that many of the highly desirable wineries release their mailers at the same time making it even harder to choose and more difficult to afford. If I could spread the load over the full year instead of all around Oct and Nov, life would be easier. Or if I could just grasp the concept of budgeting!

[Baby Chickpea]

Just got the Noon's mailer last night. This is of course after having recently received the Grennock Creek, Veritas, Torbreck and Grosset lists.

Checking my buying last year, I know the Rockfords, Mount Mary and Wild Duck Creek mailers are all due soon.

Does anyone else question their sanity in terms of the amount of money they spend on wine and whether it's really worth it in the end? There certainly is a difference between a $200 bottle of wine and a $30 bottle of wine but is it really that substantial, particularly when you really need to replace your bar-b-que and could get a rooly noice stainless steel jobbie for the cost of just a six pack of these wines. This is of course not even mentioning the effort you have to go to to hide these purchases from your long suffering partner.

Every time I convince myself that life will go on without the 2002 Runrig, I see another review that immediately makes me want to hang the expense and buy a six pack.

Does anyone out there actually do something sensible like budget for this time of the year?

That is not considering the other mailers I received this week - O'Leary Walker, Haan, Penny's Hill, Langmeil, Zema, Henschke Hill of Gold futures.

My motto is now buy only the essential wines (usually the prestige marque) and forget about the whites and lower reds. And if it will not last 10 years + (and hopefully get better) then i am also not interested. So from Veritas I will buy the Hanisch and that's it. I only buy less than 6 bottles per winery. In the case of Veritas, I will buy 2-3 bottles of the Hanisch. And because it is a great year - the 2002s - I will buy it wheras I probably will not buy the 2003s next year. If it ain't a great year, I will not buy it.

I repeat this for most wineries. So in upcoming Mount Mary release I will buy 3 Quintets and one Chardie. That's it. For Rockford, I'll get 4 of 02 BP's and that's it (luckily this year I have a credit with the winery so will get my Black Shiraz' gratis). Wild Duck is a worry coz my standing order is a couple of cases but I've supported Dave for many, many years. Thankfully, my favourite wine is the Springflat which is relatively cheap compared to the Reserves and Duck Muck. Barely a day goes buy without me receiving some mailer and my 2004 folder of mailers is already literally 25cm high! So one must be ruthless!

To make matters worse, the 90 Krug is out now and, to me, this is an essential wine for any wine lover, champagne lover or not. So I'll take a hit. Why? My belief is that this wine will be something very special in a decade or two (after my experiences with the 76, 79, 81, 82, 85 and 88 and 89 Krugs), and I will fondly look back, noting the pitiful $300 a bottle it cost me then (much like I do now drinking my 79 Krug's purchased for song back on release but at the price at the time - it's all relative)

Value is very subjective. While I decry the high cost of many wines, my love is such that it overrides its utility value and its intrinsic value for my pleasure in consuming it surpasses its demand/supply metrics. I spend alot of $$$ on wine like many on this board, and it makes more sense to spend this on other things I love like travelling o/s, hand-made suits, seven-fold ties, rare films, first edition literary classics, Bill Henson photographs, or a nice watch (NEVER a hideous Rolex - more likely a Patek Philippe, Breguet, Vacheron-Constantin, Jaeger-LeCoultre or A. Lange & Sohne) - these would all give me years of pleasure instaed of the one night stand with a bottle of premium fermented grape juice. But sense and passion don't mix.

Having said that, I will unlikely in the future buy and more pricey wines over $100 like Roennfeldts, RunRig (just had to have the 2002 and the last I will buy, especially considering how spectacular I thought the 01 RunRig was - my young aussie wine of the year!), Hill of Grace, Grange et al. If they are great vintages then a maximum two bottles will suffice.

What I have learned over the last 18 years of buying is that there will ALWAYS be great wines and you do not need to have everything or every vintage, because in my experience most end up goin to auction - this year alone I have sent cases and cases of wines from Bass Phillip, Penfolds, Wynns, Mount Mary, Burgundy, bordeaux, Lindemans, all my Aussie Pinots, chardies, dry whites etc. And once you get over 1500 bottles I don't see how you can drink all the wines (and I am still way above this number). You end up drinking one from the 4 or 6 or 9 or 12 you bought before another wine is beckoning. So off to auction they go.

[PaulSheldon]

The way I try to look at it is to pace my drinking:

I have plenty of wines at the $10-20 mark, these are my regular quaffers, sit at home watching a movie etc.

I have quite a few wines in the $20-50 range, these are my regular dinner, bbq, having friends around type wines. I would usually only go through perhaps 30 of these a year (bearing in mind that friends are also wine drinkers and bring good wine). Some of these I even consider to be premium regardless of price.

Finally I have my premiums generally over $50, of which I have a few but not too many. These are my special event wines, birthday, Christmas/New Year, and of course Auswine offlines! I only drink a handful of these a year, so I only need to buy a handful a year.

The temptation is certainly still there when great reviews come out and I could easily buy more than I intend to drink, but I justify my not buying them based on drinking rates as well as budget. Of course the level at which you set these types of wines depends entirely on your taste and budget, some peoples' quaffers might be $30-50, mid-range being $50-100 and premium anything over that.

I still enjoy drinking Grange, Hill of Grace, Bin 707 etc, but I tend to restrict these to events where I get to savour a glass or two of several top wines rather than buying by the bottle. Again this is purely a budget concious thing.

[bacchaebabe]

Good strategy, both Paul and BC but one of the main problems is that most of the mailers are for the 02, which is a rather good vintage that I do want to buy up on. Next year won't be anywhere near as expensive I think.

I think I've finally decided to let the RunRigs and Roennfeldts go but just got the Rockford mailer last night and have blown a grand today. For any wineries reading this, apart from the obvious reasons of value and vintage, one of the main reasons for this larger purchase is that Rockfords accept Diners Clubs and all my other cards are at their limits. If Torbreck and GC took Diners, I would have almost certainly purchased.

I had one of a friend's Alicante Bouchet last year and was so smitten, had to get a dozen for summer quaffing this year. I am assuming it will be just as good as the 03 was. I've suddenly become quite a fan of the Rose style but then I started my wine drinking adventures with Lambrusco!

Good point about the drinking rates Paul. I think I am too heavily skewed in the upper price range bracket and wines for longer term cellaring. I've always said I'm going to be drinking some nice wine in my forties but it's hard to justify opening a $50+ bottle of wine for a barby and I often find myself wandering around the cellar thinking I've got nothing to drink when I'm surrounded by bottles of wine. I buy a few quaffers too but they just seem to go so quickly. I guess as my cellar has expanded, I do now think about buying smaller lots of wine, like six packs or threes instead of a dozen as I am beginning to wonder when I'll drink them all.

[Aussie Johns]

Yes, 'tis the season of the mailer.

At $95, the Veritas Hanisch is tempting, but come back in 5 years and compare it to a straight Barossa shiraz around $50, e.g. Centenary Hill, and see if you can pick quality difference.
The 1996 Hanisch is a great wine, as indicated by Rolf in his mailer, but I've seen Peter Lehmann's Barossa shiraz 1996 ($15) confused with it at blind tastings!!

As for paying over $200 for a non-proven wine like Runrig....................well, a fool and his money and all that.
Can someone please explain to me why a bottle of Runrig 2002 is worth nine bottles of Noon's reserve shiraz 2002??????

[Adair]

I had one of a friend's Alicante Bouchet last year and was so smitten, had to get a dozen for summer quaffing this year. It am assuming it will be just as good as the 03 was.

I is better than the 2003.

As for paying over $200 for a non-proven wine like Runrig....................well, a fool and his money and all that.
Can someone please explain to me why a bottle of Runrig 2002 is worth nine bottles of Noon's reserve shiraz 2002??????

Well Aussie, I usually agree with you but I am with Baby Chickpea on this one:

...especially considering how spectacular I thought the 01 RunRig was - my young aussie wine of the year!

Adair

[Neville K]

My motto is now buy only the essential wines (usually the prestige marque) and forget about the whites and lower reds....
Value is very subjective. While I decry the high cost of many wines, my love is such that it overrides its utility value and its intrinsic value for my pleasure in consuming it surpasses its demand/supply metrics. I spend alot of $$$ on wine like many on this board, and it makes more sense to spend this on other things I love like travelling o/s, hand-made suits, seven-fold ties, rare films, first edition literary classics, Bill Henson photographs, or a nice watch (NEVER a hideous Rolex - more likely a Patek Philippe, Breguet, Vacheron-Constantin, Jaeger-LeCoultre or A. Lange & Sohne) - these would all give me years of pleasure instaed of the one night stand with a bottle of premium fermented grape juice. But sense and passion don't mix.

...

What I have learned over the last 18 years of buying is that there will ALWAYS be great wines and you do not need to have everything or every vintage, because in my experience most end up goin to auction - .

Danny,
Great words of wisdom. Clearly you can differentiate between dross and classic. These signifiers of taste mark you as a man of discriminating interests and one who has no doubt made a significant investment in cultural capital. I think of Pierre Bourdieu's Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (1984).

"Taste classifies, and it classifies the classifier. Social subjects, classified by their classifications, distinguish themselves by the distinctions they make, between the beautiful and the ugly, the distinguished and the vulgar, in which their position in the objective classifications is expressed or betrayed."

In one sweeping statement you make alliances between art, photography, fashion, wine, travel, and technology that is significant in forums like these that often fail to make linkages between broader consumer culture and social and political dialogue.

I too lust for a 1930's or 1950's Patek Phillipe: The 'Krug' of Swiss watchmaking. Bill Henson often descends into bathos, but they are moody, atmospheric works. I own one, but have reservations about his later work. I would prefer Thomas Struth, Andreas Gursky any day, but on an Australian level there is whimsy and intrigue in Rosemary Laing's work whilst perennial darlings, Patricia Piccinini and Tracey Moffat, to my mind seem contrived, or derivative, especially of Cindy Sherman.

The really big slippery slope is classic furniture. One great piece outweighs cases of Hill of Grace. But then I value aesthetic considerations beyond commercial common sense: destined always to have big eyes, but little prospect of having the means to satisfy 'the anxiety of taste'( Alain de Botton- Status Anxiety)

The bottom line, gentlefolk, is that there is more to life than wine.

Neville K

[Baby Chickpea]

The bottom line gentlefolk is that there is more to life than wine.

Nevilel k

Essentially this is the key Neville and I am glad someone stated it.

Thanks for the reference to Bourdieu - I'll be chasing it up.

My love of Bill Henson springs from my passion for film. His photos mimic the visual aesthetic of film (like Moffatt and Sherman, both of whom, incidentally have made quite interesting films - "Bedevil" and "Night Cries" for the former; and the very unique, politicised and incendiary "Office Killer" for the latter). Despite the bathos in his work (which I find simple but compelling), his images evoke the wondernment of the banal, replete as they are with self-reflexivity and calling to mind their intrinsic structure (self-referential). Of course this is not new, many film-makers from Godard ("Vivre sa vie"), Bergman ("Persona"), Fellini ("8.5"), as well as the avant-garde/experimentalists (Michael Snow, Kenneth Anger, Jack Smith, Jonas Mekas, Stan Brakhage, et al) have traversed this path. And like wine, one's personal attachment to any object (in my case Henson) is often difficult to validate or justify, apart from deeply profound intrinsic "scars".

Therefore, when AJ states:

As for paying over $200 for a non-proven wine like Runrig....................well, a fool and his money and all that...

Can someone please explain to me why a bottle of Runrig 2002 is worth nine bottles of Noon's reserve shiraz 2002??????

The value we attribute is subjective certainly, but considering all the wines over the years I have drunk, I would argue that $200 is a reasonable amount to pay for this particular wine for this quality level (which I define), given others happily pay $500+ for Bordeaux and Burgundy or Rhone LaLas. The fact that it is "non-proven" is irrrelevant to me, as my personal tastes dictate what I think the wine will turn out to be. AJ's tastes will again differ from mine. As will anyone else reading this.

Some people will pay $7,000+ for a handcrafted and fully-canvassed Attolini or Kiton suit (made in Super 180s wool, and over 50 hours in the making), others are happy with $300 fused (glued) Lowes suits (2 hours on a machine). Is the Attolini 23x the Lowes suit? Probably not to 99.9% of the population.

This is without considering the utility value of the object. I would happily consume (even prefer) one bottle of the 01 RunRig over any nine bottles of Noon anyday (and could never contemplate drinking nine bottles of Noon regularly – In fact, I couldn't stomach more than 4 bottles of Noon a year!!! ). That may make me abnormal. But I understand that AJ or someone else might like to, and I have no problem with that.

Of course, one cannot justify why the RunRig is 9x the Noon but (as a long-time supporter of both wineries) I would merely stipulate that for my palate, the RunRig is clearly the far superior wine (I find Noon wines overly hot, porty and unbalanced for the most part in their youth). Just as one cannot justify the price of other commodities (haute couture/bespoke vs. Target, Ferrari vs. Hyundai, house prices in the eastern suburbs vs the west) because other key drivers are in play – demand, perception, quality, aesthetics (like Neville noted and an important consideration for moi), even fashion. I have female friends who are happy to pay $400+ for trendy jeans by paper denim & cloth, Citizens Against Humanity, Seven For All Mankind, Tsubi, Yanuk, Nudie and Rock & Republic. Others are just as happy with Just Jeans or Supre. The quality differential is negligible.

The 01 RunRig to me is seamless, almost flawlessly structured and drinking well already in an almost dichotomous way (elegant yet concentrated, powerful yet restrained). In short, a stunning wine and, for me, world class in every aspect, something i could not personally say the same about for the stunning 01 Moss Wood (which is probably my 2nd favourite Aussie wine of the year and I went long on it too, breaking my aforesaid commandment not to buy more than 3-4 of the wines I love), compared to Bordeaux and other Aussie cabernets.

I don't mind paying $200 for it either given what it is (I have no objection to paying good $$$ for Aussie wines provided it/they meet my expectations; I would much rather pay $225 for the 02 RunRig than $400 for Grange/HoG or $380 for Astralis or $250 for the 96 Cristal). These facets are important to me, just as a Robert Bresson film catapults my mind into the transcendental and the spiritual. You can't put a price on that despite our psychological obsession for comparisons.

End of my diatribe.

[Gary W]

My love of Bill Henson springs from my passion for film.

He does the Muppets doesnt he? I like that too.
GW

[Neville K]

For an interesting discussion on class, wine vocabulary, and social distinction I commend Nigel Bruce's work:

“Am I getting a little Brazilian woman?” (Alternative title: “It tastes like a gentleman who has lost his temper for the first time in his life”) Clive Coates. 1995

Marks of power and distinction in the discourse of wine
http://ec.hku.hk/njbruce/Peynaud2.htm
http://ec.hku.hk/njbruce/HomePagePapers ... papers.htm

" In Bourdieu’s terms, people’s tastes in wine are the result of their acculturation, and signify their social position or the “cultural capital” (1984) they aspire to.   Both our preferences for and our discourses on wine form part of our cultural capital, and, as with all other observable distinguishing marks like dress, hairstyle, jewellery, such classifying markers serve the purpose of hierarchical discrimination.  People are aware that such fashion statements signify social position or cultural capital, and that a perceived “lack” of good taste can brand someone as “bidoun” – without – and therefore inadmissible to the elite or inner circle."

Classification and hierarchy in the discourse of wine: 
Emile Peynaud’s “The Taste of Wine”
“The wine you drink is the wine you deserve”

This paper is concerned with knowledge and discourse, and how the wine community operates as a “knowledge territory”, developing discourses of classification, hierarchy, and authority.  [Nigel Bruce] focuses on the discourse of smell and taste in wine, and the extent to which these tend to be constructed as objective and as having precise linguistic correlates. He looks in particular at the social stratification and construction of wine tastes - and tasters - by Emile Peynaud, an “authority” on wine making and wine chemistry, in his book: “The Taste of Wine” (1987) [the translation of the 1983 original: “Le Gout du Vin”].

BTW Danny, Tracey Moffat's "Bedevil", a one time Melbourne Film Festival opening night film is a work which has appeal only to the "scarred for life"[a Moffat theme]. It is very very difficult. Pour moi, un chien. It's a howler: a train wreck. But vive la difference!

Neville K

[Paul T]

A really interesting thread guys. On my wages RunRig is priced OTT..as are many other things such a tsubi jeans yadyadyada. However if my financial capability was different (and it is gradually improving) those opinions may change. I'm often broke when i get the rockfords mailer..but always buy my allocations..as to me that wine is priceless..i'd pay more if i had too (but i'm glad i dont)

The lesson on culture was fascinating.

Cheers and enjoy whatever rocks your boat.

Paul