I have no problem with a person who enjoys a $150 bottle of wine because it tastes better to them. But I’d wager that those people are vastly outnumbered by people who will pretend that a $150 bottle of wine tastes better to them.
1 Like
Funnily enough, I LOVE beer, but for the most part I stick to the cheap and cheerful brands. Bud, Coors Light, Molson Canadian. Because those are the beers that I like, and I find that I don’t like the taste of the more expensive microbrews that I’ve tried. But I have very specific tastes about just about everything. So yes, that re-fermented Belgian ale at $13 for 750mls is probably something that I wouldn’t enjoy very much. “Richness of flavor” isn’t something that I’m particularly interested in when I’m having a beer. But hey, everybody’s tastes are different, right? I also can’t stand the taste of coffee, or most wines, or mustard. Taste buds are funny things.
Quite. But then almost everyone I know who enjoys expensive wines (a small list) does so in the company of other people who appreciate (for whatever reasons) expensive wines. It obviously gives them a great deal of pleasure, all of which would be lost on me.
(Personally, I find that for restaurants, even when not paying, my pleasure starts trending downward on food that’s more than $40 for an entree, and to be honest, it’s pretty flat between $20 and $40. I’d never make a foodie.)
Of course all wines don’t taste the same. ut people will think any wine tastes better if you charge more for it. And quality is only poorly correlated with price, (though there may be some threshold price below which it corresponds better?).
But that’s just it - they all sit around looking at eachother appreciating the impression of keeping company with other monied individuals, which they couldn’t do if they were not monied. It’s pure snobbery. Very Section X.
My general rule - the market knows what it’s doing, and I don’t drink much at all, so when I do, I want to be sure to enjoy it - is wine <$15 sucks, $15 - $30, good range, some excellent wines but buy from a reputable place with good advisors, $30 - 45 - gem range, stuffed full of lovelies, $45 - $75, very unlikely to get something bad, $75 + … er … er … all lovely.
Once you exit the swill pool of sweetened fermented juice, you have every chance of getting a great bottle for any price. Yes, a $200 bottle will be magnificent, but rare is the nose that could detect the difference to an excellent $45. And a sorry state their liver must be in.
I bless myself for drinking little, but drinking only nice stuff. $23 a bottle. Spirited Wines in Putney, London, England. No I’m not sharing label names - think I want a run on it? Ha!
As for foodies … I’m with you. I get the point of paying $200 for a meal - impress people. But I have more fun impressing people by taking them somewhere cheap and dangerous, with better food. Ain’t hard to do!
Cheers and happy imbibing!
I’ve VERY rarely paid $200 for a meal, but on those rare occasions, the purpose of it was not to impress people. The purpose was to enjoy a meal at a fancy restaurant, the ambiance and service of which is MUCH different from that at a local dive (which I also enjoy, and more regularly).
Of course it’s different. You enter into a world of snobbery and comparison. Of reassurance that because it’s costly, it’s amazing.
I can’t stand dishonesty, artifice, illusion in my consumption (barring the examination of my reflection). I’m much happier being proposed to by the waitresses in my cheap dumpling joint, which btw serves the best dumplings in London, bar none, than spending cash on food I could cook better drunk and blindfolded.
Which is what I feel all too often in fancy joints - bar one or two. But so often the fish is overcooked, the service snotty, the response to “tap water only” disdainful.
It’s all a sham. My gambit is cheap and amazing. A little research and man, it pays off. I’ve taken fascinated and surprised rich people to places they would never have ventured to, and given them some of the best meals of their life, for under $15 each. They’re dumbfounded. They’re used to the international whirlygig of steak dressed up in local clothing, chicken pronounced colloquially, that kind of thing.
The really good cooks - they haven’t up and come yet, and they can really whack it out.
Maybe it’s because I’m in London, UK, and we’re in a righteous food revolution at the moment. But we’re very, very lucky.
I think we’re just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. There are fancy restaurants that actually serve up incredible food, where the service is outstanding, and they don’t care if you don’t order the $75 bottle of wine. But you and I have obviously had very different experiences. And yes, I am absolutely jealous that you get to experience the London food revolution (although, I don’t envy you your cost of housing :))
1 Like
New York City is similar. Manhattan sucks, food-wise (and in many ways, actually.) It’s full of overpriced, trendy restaurants. But go to Queens, and you will discover a ton of great restaurants at half the price serving food from all over the world. Brooklyn is sort of in between the two.
On the other hand, it’s true that sometimes quality costs more. You can’t unilaterally dismiss that. The expensive steak at Peter Luger’s in Brooklyn is worth every penny!
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
