An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20106
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by JimHow »

Just got out of court my head is spinning, now wait Hound, i get like quadruple negatives in that last sentence of yours.
User avatar
AlohaArtakaHoundsong
Posts: 1460
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:12 pm
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by AlohaArtakaHoundsong »

Yeah, I got hung up on the lawyerly "not inappropriate" thing. To restate, in my experience the Citrans of the world do age well and do develop those secondary/tertiary characteristics that make Bdx interesting.

Almost nobody holds those bottles long enough (15+ years?) for them to develop in that way. But a lot of people also drink raw, unformed classed growths in their first decade too.
User avatar
RDD
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 4:45 pm
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by RDD »

Jeff Leve wrote:
RDD wrote:Magic in a bottle of Leoville Las Cases in now north of 300/btl.
Guess we are just whining about it.
If you are, you are. Do you NEED LLC? Are you entitled to buy it for less for some reason? FWIW, LLC has always been a pricey wine. The truth is, when compared to other famous wines, it's only gone up slightly more than twice over the past decade. If you think you need to spend $300 for magic in a bottle, there is not much to tell you. But I do not see it that way. As I've pointed out, there are strong wines for under $100, that will deliver the goods. I bought some.

The best of everything always cost more. So what? Buy it, or buy somethng else. That is life...
WTF.............
I don't need anything.
I was just discussing things.
Maybe I lament the good ole days when things were cheaper.

The price is what it is.


But I think the whole crux of the matter was there was a time when Parker used to take great pride in saying if you mortgaged the house and bought 1982 futures then you did very well following his advice. And many of us fell in love with those wines. And it is now hard to justify the price. And hard to admit there is no inside tract left such as the The Wine Advocate.

So sorry if I rub you the wrong way Jeff.
And I don't think I need to spend 300 to find magic in a bottle.
Last edited by RDD on Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
stefan
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: College Station, TX
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by stefan »

Does anyone know of a serious analysis of how much of the price increase of top tier Bordeaux is due to increased speculation (or investment, if you prefer)? I suspect that this is a major factor, perhaps a more important one than The Bob.
User avatar
AlohaArtakaHoundsong
Posts: 1460
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:12 pm
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by AlohaArtakaHoundsong »

^Agreed, but aside from the 1sts and a few select others, it is those 98-100 point scores that drive the investment (or speculation, if you prefer) thesis. And I don't think Suckling's or anybody elses scores matter in this regard.
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by Blanquito »

For me, it's a simple proposition: Parker's influence ("Parkerization") has made more regions and wineries unpalatable to me than he has opened new regions and wineries to me that I like.

We can talk all day long about how much better Bordeaux is today, how so many chateau are making their best wines, but if being the "best" means I dislike the wines (as is usually the case these days) or cannot afford the ones I like anymore, what good can Parker's influence possibly offer be for me? So many wines and wineries that I used to like I now avoid, and these are highly correlated with Parker points.

I do acknowledge that early on, Parker was quite useful but the pernicious effects of Parkerization have basically eliminated whole regions for me in recent vintages like Chateauneuf.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by DavidG »

Didn't mean to be whining or to say that I expect magic in a bottle of value Bordeaux. Just pointing out the obvious, I guess.

I find in these situations a listen to this is usually helpful:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG5GOH2CO1k
User avatar
Jeff Leve
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by Jeff Leve »

RDD wrote:
Jeff Leve wrote:
RDD wrote:Magic in a bottle of Leoville Las Cases in now north of 300/btl.
Guess we are just whining about it.
If you are, you are. Do you NEED LLC? Are you entitled to buy it for less for some reason? FWIW, LLC has always been a pricey wine. The truth is, when compared to other famous wines, it's only gone up slightly more than twice over the past decade. If you think you need to spend $300 for magic in a bottle, there is not much to tell you. But I do not see it that way. As I've pointed out, there are strong wines for under $100, that will deliver the goods. I bought some.

The best of everything always cost more. So what? Buy it, or buy somethng else. That is life...
WTF.............
I don't need anything.
I was just discussing things.
Maybe I lament the good ole days when things were cheaper.

The price is what it is.



So sorry if I rub you the wrong way Jeff. And I don't think I need to spend 300 to find magic in a bottle.
Honest, you do not rub me the wrong way. We are fine. I like an open exchange of views. That si what makes the Internet and websites like this work. We do not need to agree. You're an anonymous poster. Which is fine. For me, I would not ever get bent out of shape by someone I do not know. My skin is much thicker than that.


But I think the whole crux of the matter was there was a time when Parker used to take great pride in saying if you mortgaged the house and bought 1982 futures then you did very well following his advice. And many of us fell in love with those wines. And it is now hard to justify the price. And hard to admit there is no inside tract left such as the The Wine Advocate.



If Parker wrote that about 82 Bordeaux, that was 30 years ago. Those days have been gone longer than many posters on the Internet have been alive. I wish prices were lower too. Of course I wish I could afford a classic Ferrari, property in Bordeaux etc... I cannot. Bordeaux has been expensive for more than a decade now. 2000 was the first truly expensive year. Today, people might look back and think the wines were cheap, but at the time, I was just getting started on the Internet and all anyone was doing was complaining about the high prices. After all, 2000 was 100% more money than 1996 or 1998!

While Parker made, and makes it easy for others to know what wines are the best, as well as offer the best value, there is more to it than that. A decade ago, Bordeaux was sold mostly to Europe and America. And much of Europe was probably not buying the wine. Today, it is a global market. More countries than ever want to be the wine. And despite what one board member claims, there is less of it to buy. Prices would have been higher with or without Parker. As much, maybe not. But more than enough for people to complain.

This comment is not directed to you, but I find it funny that Jim, and others who were so enamored with Parker, when prices were cheap, changed their tune when others started buying their wine and prices rose. Parker is no different today, than a decade or two ago. He is not doing anything differently. Everyone has not always liked Bob. That is fine. At least those people have been consistent. I realize that's just my view. And it's a slow news day out west as I have had ample time to post on the Internet.

For Patrick, who has generally speaking, not liked many of the wines Parker has championed, he should have nothing but love for Parker, because those low scores have helped keep the prices down for the traditional style he prefers. He has to the best of my memory remained consistent in his views, which I applaud.

For a touch of irony, while it appears difficult to fathom, in a bizarre way, Parker has kept prices down for many of the best wines. Because there are so many high scoring wines, consumers are able to buy in theory, the best of the best for under $300. Because for the first time history, there are millions of bottles for sale of 100 Pt wine, consumers are not fighting to buy them. Because those wines are not rising in price, pressure on 95 Pt - 98 Pt wines is moderate on down the line. It's bizarre, but true.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20106
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: An open letter to Robert Parker: Bob, please retire.

Post by JimHow »

Hey wait a minute, Jeff, I have always liked Robert Parker, and still do. I still subscribe to The Advocate, although I'm probably not gonna renew it next year, I'm finding I just don't read if anymore, including the Bordeaux issue. But I've always had a skepticism about him as well. I just don't believe in superheroes. I just don't believe Robert Parker has some magical ability to sniff and spit a wine once or twice among hundreds over a ten day period every April and then assign some meaningful magical score that should justify a shift of millions of dollars in world wine markets. Just don't buy it, sorry. As I said in my open letter, Bob Parker can write whatever he wants, it's a free world. If people buy his act, then good for him. But to the extent that his little 40 second interactions with each wine once a year causes those wines to go Rolex, then it would be best if he did the right thing and retired. But that's easy for me to say, I'm not making millions flying around the world tasting the finest wines on the planet.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 19 guests