About 10 years ago I was being pestered by a friend to share some of my cigars from a special island south of Florida. I smoked the real one and placed the band on $1 dog turd. He smoked it and raves to this day about the difference of those "special" cigars. I never told him.

 

Look at the US guiness. It is canadian* crap, but since the average consumer can't tell a decent beer from goat piss they go with the labeling. Now, side by side, the same people could tell the difference on 2-3 metrics, but few would still be able to tell the original (or even like the original for that matter).

*Not that there is anything wrong with canadian crap...

 

The responses to this topic go along with what the subjects of this experiment thought. 70% of the subjects reported that price did not play a factor in what they thought of the wine. The project shows that the brain reacted differently to the same wine when it was presented as a different more expensive brand.

I think that without any sort of guide one will take clues from price i.e. more expensive SHOULD mean better quality, better growing conditions, more precise control of production etc. So what I think this project shows is that expectation plays a role in judgment.

I imagine if the project were repeated, except instead of telling tasters the price they were told varying wine ratings, then the results would be the same: respondents would say the "good" wine was better than the "bad" wine.

What about the converse? What about when you do find that really incredible 7 dollar bottle? I think I enjoy finding a good bargain more. My favorite cigar is under five bucks. Is it objectively better than a $20 dollar cigar? Not really, but the fact that it is as good and significantly cheaper makes me enjoy it more.