This was the worst wine I've ever had from Phelps. Thin, flavorless, 78.

board-o-do you think you are being generous because of the phelps name?

The only thing worse is Phelps white Pastiche. Tastes like a bad dessert wine.

With something that bad by a relatively respected winery, you'd think they'd just choose not to release it. Ah.. but they are just looking for the money of course...

We were at Phelps last month and we tasted everything from the Viognier to the Insignia. And frankly, I cannot figure out what the big deal is about ANY of their wines. I was not impressed with anything I tasted. I will probably never buy a Phelps wine.

Brent-

Have you had the Insignia from '94? or even '95 and '97? If not, you might change your opinion.

I loved the '96 Insignia also... but that '95... Holy nice wine batman! Even their Phelps Merlot I thought was worthy. Have two bottles of the '99 Cab, but haven't popped it yet, but word has it, it's Very good to Excellent.

I happen to really like their Marsanne. Unfortunately they said they ripped those vines out because they couldn't charge a buttload for a bottle of it. Ah Napa greed.......

Dr. T: The only Insignia I have tried is the 1999 we had last month. I just don't see that this wine is worth the money you pay. I have wines in my cellar now that are cheaper and much more enjoyable than what I had at Phelps. It's just a matter of taste and opinion. I know there are a lot of Phelps advocates out there. I am sure that at some point I will find a Phelps wine I enjoy enough to purchase.

FWIW, I don't think the '99 Insignia is anything special either. Ah but that '97 is another story entirely. HUGE wine! Beautiful!

jb

Yea, the '99 is nice... but for $90? I ended buying a few to put down, but I was hesitant while I did it. We'll see how it turns out.

i know this is a little off topic, but the best deal on insignia is at auction on the 93.

I am no Phelps fan by any means (especially Insignia) but drinking a 99 Insignia now does not give a taster a true picture of what the wine is about. It needs time. It is not a fruit bomb that is easy to appreciate from day one. As a result, there are lots of wines out there that cost much less that do drink better now. The key word in that sentence is "now".

I seriously doubt Napa has a monopoly on greed in the wine business. If by greed you mean selling wine that people are willing to pay the most for then that isn't greed - its intelligence.

In reply to:

---

I seriously doubt Napa has a monopoly on greed in the wine business. If by greed you mean selling wine that people are willing to pay the most for then that isn't greed - its intelligence.

---

Ah, but Jones.... that statement is entirely true, but taboo to say. It's like saying the name of the evil wizard in Harry Potter... "He who shall not be named."

We don't want to hear that a Winery is running a smart business and charges what the market will bear..

However, with the CASES and CASES of Insignia left on the shelves at $90 a pop... hopefully Joseph Phelps will take note. But what should they care even now? It's out of there hands and in the hands of the retailers and distributors already, so to them it's already sold.

So perhaps they really did put it at the price the market will bear. Heck, I bought a few to lay down myself. *shrug*

JW1: I have had other folks tell me the same thing about the Insignia. My only problem is that I don't think it's worth the money. I admit I am not one to judge whether a wine should be cellared for 1 year, 5 years or 10 years. That is still something I am learning.

Granted, the Insignia may be worth the money now if I wait and drink the wine in 10 years. But then again, maybe not.

Actually, the list price of Insignia 99 is $125 per 750 if that makes you feel any better. I didn't buy any of the 99 (I got a mag as wedding gift so I do have a little in the cellar). I tasted it head to head with other like quality wines a few weeks ago and the wine did perform well. It certainly has the stuffing to age. It is a touch rustic however.

Thats fine Brent. I don't think it is worth the money either.

The problem is many people make comments about wines and their analysis is framed by their perception of the relative value of the wine. When one makes a comment but does not expressly state they are not impressed because of the quality of the wine AND how much money is being charged that renders the comment itself misleading. Not liking a wine because in your personal universe it does not offer a compelling value is much different than not liking a wine because it tastes bad. This applies to vintage opinions as well as opinions on individual wines.

A wine's quality has nothing whatever to do with its price.

Here is my opinion right or wrong: It all boils down to taste, no matter how you look at it. JW1, you have the experience and knowledge to tell whether a wine is ready to be enjoyed now or laid down to cellar for a few years. I do not. All I know is I either like it or I don't. If I like it, I ask myself, is it worth the money? Usually it is. Lately I have found myself being introduced to wines that I thought were excellent and a little pricey. I tend to stick to mostly California wines under $50.00. Sometimes I go beyond that marker only when I find a wine that I believe meets my own personal standards of what I like.

Now, here is the question of the day: Is it wrong to say I do not believe the Insignia is worth the money simply because I do not back that up with tons of experience and knowledge?

I certainly hope not. Isn't that what the forums are for? To express differing opinions and learn from one another. And believe me, I learn from people like you. I envy your ability to taste the types of wines you do. I just don't want to feel like my opinion shouldn't count based on a lack of knowledge or experience. I hope that is not what you were implying in your post. Please advise.

I wasn't implying anything in my posts. I am surprised you are getting hot under the collar as a result of my (frankly rather theoretical and innocuous) posts. I said nothing whatever as to whether your opinion (or mine) should be counted or not.

Re: Your question of the day. It is not per se wrong for one to express an opinion as to whether a wine is worth the money or not regardless of one's tasting acumen or experience level.

However, your original post did not mention or reference the price of any Phelps wine. You simply said you were not impressed and couldn't see yourself buying any Phelps wine. What is wrong about your original post is saying that you are not impressed with a wine (or in this case a winery) but failing to indicate you were not impressed with it because you think it costs too much. Whether you think a wine costs too much is not relevant as to the inherent quality of the wine.

This is a common trap that many people fall into from time to time. A point rating isn't a measure of the wine's attractiveness only of its quality.

JW1: Sorry if my post gave the wrong impression. This is one of the things about the Forums that cannot be fixed. I am not upset, hot under the collar, angry, etc. about anything in your post. I read your post and wasn't sure if there was an implication or not so I asked for clarification.

I agree with you regarding this issue. I am just always hesitant to render my opinion due to my lack of knowledge and experience where wine is concerned. Ask me about the theatre and you'd think you were talking to Hal Prince...

Hope you understand I am not upset with you.

Cheers!