John Francis wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 01:13:43AM -0400, Doug Franklin wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2005 22:13:38 -0400, John Francis wrote:
In fact there are those who would extend that limit up
to $200 or $300 per bottle.
Personally, I'm a cheap sob ... I'm not MD 20/20 cheap, but I'm not far
off. :-)
One of the benefits of living in California is that I can
be a (fairly) cheap sob and still drink decent wines.
There's a lot of good stuff available at $7-$12 a bottle,
and even for special occasions I rarely go above $20-$25.
[My current bargain pick; Domaine Ste. Michelle - a true
champagne in all but name - at $10/bottle. Brut or Dry.]
I've never paid $200 for a bottle of wine (in fact I've
only paid more than $50 on two occasions), but I've had
the opportunity to drink several wines that retail for
that and more. There's some first-rate stuff coming
out of California; it's getting commonplace to hear of
a Californian wine winning blind tasting competitions.
(That's competitions run in France, by the French.)
Isn't a lot of French wine courtesy of American vine stock, imported (or
rather, reimported) after a particularly bad session of some kind of
disease?
m
ducking
