Beer Prices v. Wine Prices

[TheRiddick]

Originally Posted by hornitosmonster

You will enjoy the higher end beer more then the low end wine.

Bud is like a Cremosa and a high end Craft Beer is like a Cuban Cigar...

OK, I agree with the first statement and also posted same thought before. I'd rather drink good beer than cheap wine (although there are some great cheap wines if one knows the market and knows what to buy).

But I do disagree with the second. I cannot imagine any beer to be as bad as Cremosa (is to cigars). Also, once again, taste is subjective, not objective. Some people simply don't like high end Belgian beers/ales, and some people don't like Cohibas no matter the "status" nor high price (exclusivity).

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

But I do disagree with the second. I cannot imagine any beer to be as bad as Cremosa (is to cigars). Also, once again, taste is subjective, not objective. Some people simply don't like high end Belgian beers/ales, and some people don't like Cohibas no matter the "status" nor high price (exclusivity).

I disagree with this statement, Greg, and offer any Anheuser-Busch product as evidence.

[TheRiddick]

Tell you what. Go to CA Central Valley and open a bar/liquor store without any Bud beer, see how long you'll last (only as long as your bank account keeps you afloat). Someone on top of the thread mentioned "snobbishness factor" of wine drinkers and yet some posts underscore exactly how beer drinkers are more snobbish than wine drinkers. Bud is still the best selling beer in USA last time I checked and whether you or I like it or not, there is obviously an ungodly number of Bud customers out there (how many people do you know who smoke Cremosas?)

I am not saying Bud is great, but it is easily DRINKABLE (although we seem to disagree on this point). Something I won't say about a good number of wines and a good number of cigars (my Cremosa experiment lasted less than an inch, I honestly tried, and I was ready to vomit by then).

If anything, you do have so called "grape snobbishness" with wine drinkers, many who drink Cab won't ever touch anything else, many who drink Pinot Noir won't drink anything else, many who drink Burgundy (Pinot Noir grown in France) won't ever drink Pinot grown outside of Burgundy, etc, etc, etc. But I know few wine drinkers who won't also drink beer.
.
.
.
.
Darrell,

Interesting points about movies and wine. I can only say that you keep forgetting who comes up with these scripts in the first place, the so called "intellectual elite" (the rest of us are treated and taken as simpletons who can't ever come up with a thought of our own). Winemakers have a saying, "It takes a lot of beer to make wine", and this is a true statement, I can assure you of that. During crush all the refrigerators are stuffed with beer.

And you really don't want to know true stories about these self appointed Hollywood wine aficionados. I dread every time I have to pour at some of their events, my wife wanted to choke a few (literally) on some occasions. Only about 2% of them would be able to tell a 2BC and Screaming Eagle apart and they are mostly driven by price and points.

[mosesbotbol]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

Tell you what. Go to CA Central Valley and open a bar/liquor store without any Bud beer, see how long you'll last (only as long as your bank account keeps you afloat).

You mean USA.

[VirtualSmitty]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

But I do disagree with the second. I cannot imagine any beer to be as bad as Cremosa (is to cigars).

Natty light, Pabst, Genny Cream Ale, Sam Adams Cranberry Lambic, etc. Think i'd rather smoke a Cremosa than drink any of those

Originally Posted by mithrilG60

I think it's also because people see some things (ie. beer) as cheap, others as "inexpensive" for their perceived value (ie. wine) and still others as "expensive" when they haven't actually sat down and worked out the relative values. .......they recognized that it wasn't unaffordable as long as they looked pass the initial purchase outlay and realized the true cost of the bottle over it's lifespan.

Originally Posted by icehog3

But Vic ended his question by comparing high end beer and a low/middle end bottle of wine, not simply cost versus alcohol content. I saw a lot of validity in his post.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by mosesbotbol

This is a bit over-simplified and really hard to compare in terms of cost per percent of alcohol. Drinking a fine beer and a fine bottle of wine are two totally different animals.

MOses, I'm not talking cost per percent of alcohol, per se. And why are drinking a fine beer and a fine wine different animals? or from a nice bottle of single malt for that matter? At the end of the day when I sit down with a drink I'm not 15, i'm not doing it to get blasted, i'm doing it to enjoy the flavors, same as with a cigar. Trust me, you wouldn't want to drink more than one Old Stock Ale, because you would be on your ass if you did. It might take a hour to drink that one beer, that's how intense some "Big" beers can be. It's about the experience, not the alcohol.

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

But I do disagree with the second. I cannot imagine any beer to be as bad as Cremosa (is to cigars). Also, once again, taste is subjective, not objective. Some people simply don't like high end Belgian beers/ales, and some people don't like Cohibas no matter the "status" nor high price (exclusivity).

I won't get into specific beers because Tom and VS have done so so ably.

But high end beers arent' just Belgian beers. Name the style and some craft brewer, probably here in the U.S., is making it. Belgian beers are a very, very small percentage of this.

What I'm trying to get across, pretty feebly, is my confusion at the objection to paying for great beer while people will pay more for crappy wine.

And I just don't get it.

[NCRadioMan]

Originally Posted by Resipsa

What I'm trying to get across, pretty feebly, is my confusion at the objection to paying for great beer while people will pay more for crappy wine.

And I just don't get it.

I think Darrell is on the right track, Vic. I think alot people think it's more sophisticated to drink wine, even crap wine, as opposed to beer. It makes them feel superior.

[TheRiddick]

Originally Posted by Resipsa

But high end beers arent' just Belgian beers.

What I'm trying to get across, pretty feebly, is my confusion at the objection to paying for great beer while people will pay more for crappy wine.

And I just don't get it.

Not sure why you seem to think that I only place Belgian beer in the high end territory, this was just an example of something I may enjoy while someone else may find unpalatable. Same with that Cohiba used as an example of "great cigar" someone posted above. All I can tell you is that I gave up on them BEFORE MOST of this board even started smoking cigars.

What I tried to point out and something that was quickly swept under the rug is TASTE PREFERENCE is ALWAYS SUBJECTIVE and NEVER OBJECTIVE.

Same way it was pointed out that some would rather smoke a Cremosa than drink Pabst (one example). I say, get off those drugs, but then again, it is MY taste preference and it is SUBJECTIVE.

Since you keep making points about "crappy wine", can you at least state what you consider a great wine?

[T.G]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

But I do disagree with the second. I cannot imagine any beer to be as bad as Cremosa (is to cigars). Also, once again, taste is subjective, not objective. Some people simply don't like high end Belgian beers/ales, and some people don't like Cohibas no matter the "status" nor high price (exclusivity).

While there are some really bad beers out there, I do see the point you are making. Cigars like Cremosa should not be on the market, I can't think of any BEER that is quite as bad as a Cremosa. Budwesier = Macanudo, most consistant and highest selling in it's class, but very "plain". Natty Ice = Puros Indios. And so on.

The closest I can think of to a Cremosa for a something based on barley, malt, hops and yeast is some of the bad malt liquors like Earthquake or Pit Bull. They are just plain nasty. Go to one of the "40oz Malt Liquor" forums and even those guys bag on that crap. But, malt liquor has a bad rap to begin with, and from even a semi-purist standpoint, it's NOT beer.

(sorry Sancho)

[macpappy]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

OK, I agree with the first statement and also posted same thought before. I'd rather drink good beer than cheap wine (although there are some great cheap wines if one knows the market and knows what to buy).

But I do disagree with the second. I cannot imagine any beer to be as bad as Cremosa (is to cigars). Also, once again, taste is subjective, not objective. Some people simply don't like high end Belgian beers/ales, and some people don't like Cohibas no matter the "status" nor high price (exclusivity).

Ever try a Buckhorn?