C[omp]ute

From: "andrew cooke" <andrew@...>

Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:13:24 -0400 (CLT)

This interesting paper -
http://www.wine-economics.org/workingpapers/AAWE_WP16.pdf - shows that in
blind trials:

- people who "know nothing" about wine very slightly prefer cheaper
  wines.

- people who are "educated" about wine very slightly prefer more
  expensive wines

The fascination thing here isn't the different between the two groups but
the fact that both trends are so small.  That means that the price of wine
has hardly no relation to the quality (neither good nor bad).

There are various ways to spin this.  If you're looking to make money you
can pick out the most popular low priced wines, and that's what the
authors have done in a book - http://www.newsweek.com/id/129535

Alternatively, if you're looking to save face you can grasp the slight
positive correlation shown by "those that know" and leave the rest to
rhetoric -
http://thepour.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/a-closer-look-at-the-wine-trials/

But both those miss the point.

Wine price is no guide to quality in blind tastings, but that's not how
people drink wine.  This work -
http://www.wine-economics.org/workingpapers/AAWE_WP03.pdf - describes how
people actually decide a wine's quality and this -
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/business/09instincts.html - shows just
how effective price is: brain activity related to pleasure changes in
response to the reported wine price, even though the wine remains the
same.

Expensive wine really does taste better - but only because it is expensive.

What to do?  If you want to save money with wine, somehow you have to fool
your brain...

Andrew