$100 vs. $2 wine
Originally Posted by dyhppy,Jan 18 2008, 04:29 AM
gettin a bit ot. do you think rich people or people who spend a bunch on the "good" stuff are enjoying life more than those who don't, yet have similarly good quality items? ergo, should we all become brand snobs because it will make us happier?
In many instances, more expensive does not imply better. A lot of fashion is like that, IMO.
On the other hand, there are plenty of instances where the better item does cost a lot more.
For cars? Hmm, it's some of both. More expensive cars are, generally, "better" than cheaper ones. They might not have the same cost-to-quality ratio, though. A $40k car isn't necessarily twice as fast, or twice as luxuries, or twice as well constructed, as a $20k car. But it'll likely be faster, and/or more luxurious, and/or better put together to some extent.
Originally Posted by dyhppy,Jan 18 2008, 02:29 AM
gettin a bit ot. do you think rich people or people who spend a bunch on the "good" stuff are enjoying life more than those who don't, yet have similarly good quality items? ergo, should we all become brand snobs because it will make us happier?
If on the other hand. you're appreciating something because of a need to mimic people who have an aesthetic sense (or at least a better understanding of aesthetics than you), I find that abhorrent. (You bought the Mercedes because it's a symbol of luxury. . . .)
I doubt it's the same situation with cars. I can definitely tell the difference between driving an E39 BMW 530i and a ****ing Ford Taurus.
It's safe to assume that most people who drive in the United States do have a considerable amount of experience driving, whether they're shitty or not, and can definitely discern the difference between a good car and a bad one.
For example, I bet if you gave a wine connoisseur a sip of the $100 wine, and then a sip of the $2 horse shit, he'd definitely be able to tell the difference.
It's safe to assume that most people who drive in the United States do have a considerable amount of experience driving, whether they're shitty or not, and can definitely discern the difference between a good car and a bad one.
For example, I bet if you gave a wine connoisseur a sip of the $100 wine, and then a sip of the $2 horse shit, he'd definitely be able to tell the difference.
Originally Posted by dyhppy,Jan 19 2008, 11:57 PM
i think you overestimate the ability for americans to be objective. bling ftw sadly.
has it occurred to anybody that being told the wine is pricy drives many people to work harder at enjoying it? There is a very reasonable expectation of quality when the price is high.
Tell someone you are serving cheap table wine, and they won't try to find something good about it because it's not supposed to be good. Tell them that it's really expensive wine, you are telling them that it's supposed to be good, so they make an effort to discover what about it justifies the price. And often, all it takes is that effort. I'm not sure why anyone would expect people to gush over what they've been told is cheap swill.
IMHO, especially with wine, there are times when it takes an effort on the part of the consumer to find the value. With camera equipment, such as lenses, the difference between a cheap consumer zoom and a Zeiss 50/1.5 is not always obvious to the casual observer in every pic, but someone who has spent a lot of time looking at images from many lenses will see the differences easily. The fact that an inexperienced person is unable to discern the differences doesn't mean they aren't there or are not relevant, just that it takes experience to recognize them.
Take rifles. One that is sighted in and accurate will make it easier for anyone to hit the target. One with sights that are off and is incapable of consistent groupings will make it harder to hit the target. Someone with very little experience shooting may not find either gun to be significantly better than the other as far as accuracy, but someone who knows how to shoot will find a difference immediately. The fact that the differences are not obvious to the novice doesn't change the fact that there are very real differences that matter. And those differences are a function of the amount of work that went into the item and are reflected in the price.
While it's possible to draw many conclusions from this study, all it really tested is people's willingness to give creedence to someone else's statements. They were led to believe one thing or another, and obviously worked to justify the stated expectation of quality they were told. I really don't see how it possibly demonstrates cheap wines are as good as expensive wines. If anything, it proves increasing your budget for items that are purely for enjoyment will increase your enjoyment of those items.
Tell someone you are serving cheap table wine, and they won't try to find something good about it because it's not supposed to be good. Tell them that it's really expensive wine, you are telling them that it's supposed to be good, so they make an effort to discover what about it justifies the price. And often, all it takes is that effort. I'm not sure why anyone would expect people to gush over what they've been told is cheap swill.
IMHO, especially with wine, there are times when it takes an effort on the part of the consumer to find the value. With camera equipment, such as lenses, the difference between a cheap consumer zoom and a Zeiss 50/1.5 is not always obvious to the casual observer in every pic, but someone who has spent a lot of time looking at images from many lenses will see the differences easily. The fact that an inexperienced person is unable to discern the differences doesn't mean they aren't there or are not relevant, just that it takes experience to recognize them.
Take rifles. One that is sighted in and accurate will make it easier for anyone to hit the target. One with sights that are off and is incapable of consistent groupings will make it harder to hit the target. Someone with very little experience shooting may not find either gun to be significantly better than the other as far as accuracy, but someone who knows how to shoot will find a difference immediately. The fact that the differences are not obvious to the novice doesn't change the fact that there are very real differences that matter. And those differences are a function of the amount of work that went into the item and are reflected in the price.
While it's possible to draw many conclusions from this study, all it really tested is people's willingness to give creedence to someone else's statements. They were led to believe one thing or another, and obviously worked to justify the stated expectation of quality they were told. I really don't see how it possibly demonstrates cheap wines are as good as expensive wines. If anything, it proves increasing your budget for items that are purely for enjoyment will increase your enjoyment of those items.
Back to my original point.
A real wine drinker, similarly to a real driver, can tell the difference between crap, decent, good, and great. The pricing is a marketing issue and only indirectly related to quality. Look at car pricing.
These people were typical sheep consumers...
A real wine drinker, similarly to a real driver, can tell the difference between crap, decent, good, and great. The pricing is a marketing issue and only indirectly related to quality. Look at car pricing.
These people were typical sheep consumers...
if anything, the study shows how pathetic a people we are. mostly sheep. and for those who are not sheep, good luck trying to tell the truth to anyone else. cant argue with the above poster; seems like the only conclusion is to drop a bunch of money for a Bentley so you can tell yourself that it's so much more than a VW.
Originally Posted by INTJ,Jan 20 2008, 02:18 PM
Back to my original point.
A real wine drinker, similarly to a real driver, can tell the difference between crap, decent, good, and great. The pricing is a marketing issue and only indirectly related to quality. Look at car pricing.
These people were typical sheep consumers...
A real wine drinker, similarly to a real driver, can tell the difference between crap, decent, good, and great. The pricing is a marketing issue and only indirectly related to quality. Look at car pricing.
These people were typical sheep consumers...
I do believe that almost anyone can tell the difference between good wine and bad wine, but the price/quality factor has changed in the time in which I was collecting it. It is like performance cars -- there's often a lot of money that has to be spent to get a very small increase in performance. So, strictly speaking, are high end wines worth it? Probably only to people who are really in to it, as the difference between a top quality wine and one that is very good is really quite small when compared to the price difference. There are some fabulous bargains to be had in the $15-$20 price range that can give top wines a real run for their money. The fun is in trying all these different tastes, and in simply paying attention to what you are drinking. That's much like the pleasure that people get in appreciating other good things in life -- art, literature, etc. No big deal, and I'm surprised by the degree of redneck hostility that some posters are showing here.
Zeiss






