I haven’t actually listened to the Freakonomics podcast on whether expensive wines taste better, but I suspect the answer will be “no”.
I’ve been interested in wines for quite some time now, but I’ve found something that caps the amount of money I’m willing to pay for a bottle of wine to well under $100. Either my palate is insufficiently developed to taste the differences between a $40 wine and a $90 wine, or there really isn’t that much difference.
For most people, most of the time, once you get above the bargain-basement level of wine, you can usually find good, flavourful wine for between $15 and $20. What you may not be able to find is a wine in that price range that will impress your date or your guests. If you’re trying to impress, price will have to be one of the most important part of your decision: fewer people will be as impressed by your really good bargain as will be impressed by the big ticket bottle of “Chateau de Fancy French Name” . . . even if they taste the same.
Believe it or not, the most dominant flavor may be the dollars. Thanks to the work of some intrepid and wine-obsessed economists (yes, there is an American Association of Wine Economists), we are starting to gain a new understanding of the relationship between wine, critics and consumers.
One of these researchers is Robin Goldstein, whose paper detailing more than 6,000 blind tastings reaches the conclusion that “individuals who are unaware of the price do not derive more enjoyment from more expensive wine.”
So why do we pay so much attention to critics and connoisseurs who tell us otherwise?
That’s the question we set out to answer in this podcast.
