Subscribe To Our E-Mail
Please sign up for the email service so we can ping you the second the wine goes live this way you wont miss out on any of the amazing offers
Share this offer with friends
Suggested Retail Price | $38.98
Wine Library Sale Price | $29.98
Best Price On The Web | $29.98
$
29
98
per btl
Cinderella Wine says:
Product Details:
Please note, orders are processed on a first come basis. If you leave the wine in your cart for even a few minutes it might have already sold out as our stock quantity is removed when you submit the order in final, not when you add it to your cart! You will get a confirmation from us when your order is confirmed.
Best Price on Web is determined by Wine-Searcher Pro prices as of yesterday: Wine Library sells this for our sale price of $29.98 and we're the best price on the web. There are 4 other stores selling this from $34.95 to $35.99.
Free Shipping on orders of 3 bottles or more!
This wine is Kosher but not Mevushal.
This wine is 100% Cabernet Sauvignon from Upper Galilee in Israel. The ABV is 13.5%.
Please Note it may take 24-48 hours for your order to be put together for store pickup. You'll get an email when it's ready for pick up.
Best Price on Web is determined by Wine-Searcher Pro prices as of yesterday: Wine Library sells this for our sale price of $29.98 and we're the best price on the web. There are 4 other stores selling this from $34.95 to $35.99.
Free Shipping on orders of 3 bottles or more!
This wine is Kosher but not Mevushal.
This wine is 100% Cabernet Sauvignon from Upper Galilee in Israel. The ABV is 13.5%.
Please Note it may take 24-48 hours for your order to be put together for store pickup. You'll get an email when it's ready for pick up.
| Rating: | 91 Points - Daniel Rogov - Guide to Israeli Wines | Size: | 750ML |
| Region: | N/A | Country: | N/A |
| Varietal: | N/A | abv: | N/A |
"Aged in oak for 15 months, the wine is dark, almost impenetrable purple in color. Firm tannins and smoky wood come together with currant, blackberry, plum and mineral aromas and flavors, those showing hints of Mediterranean herbs and light Oriental spices. Long and generous. Drink now-2012." -91 points- Daniel Rogov- Guide to Israeli Wines
@RichP. Thanks for the tasting notes man. I have 3 in my wine fridge. Enjoy reading peoples tasting notes from wines purchased off this site. thanks all
I would never pay more than $100 for an older vintage without knowing the history of the bottle or without full trust that the seller will take back tainted bottles. One can do a lot of damage in storing a wine improperly for a few years.
A brief tasting note: Just had the Solaria 123 2001 with homemade lamb ragu and pasta. On opening, a strong taste of sour cherry; after an hour decant, still cherry/black fruit, but also leather and tobacco, a bit of menthol, some nice sweet tannins; continuing to evolve. On the whole, this gets a nice golf clap from me — not the best ever Brunello, but excellent QPR given the Cinderella price, and I am glad I bought in.
People, if you look at Wine Searcher, Yquem splits of various vintages are selling for $125 and up. The ‘01 and ‘05 are out of sight, but some less notable vintages are well within reach if you are willing to go a bit over a C-note.
@R-Dawg: read you loud and clear. I like good QPR as much as the next guy. But I also want to drink wines from as many of the great producers before I die. Tasted blind, maybe it won’t rock the world, but I don’t usually taste my wines blind (though it can be fun). Believe me, when I drink my Petrus, my Margaux, my Ausone, my Yquem, I damn well know which wine I am drinking! Cheers.
@Brad B.–I absolutely agree…an average vintage for a top producer can be a whole lot better than a good vintage for most other producers.
Maybe it’s just my quest for QPR, but I don’t get excited about a $500 bottle of Petrus that I’m pretty sure if I tasted blind against a good wine costing much less, I would certainly pick the cheaper bottle. But I see your point…how many chances do you get to taste a D’Yquem for $200 or a Petrus for $500.
@R-Dawg: not selling at what price? My local wine shop has various vintages (some very good ones) of Petrus and Yquem in their fine wine room, and they aren’t selling either. Probably because they are asking thousands per bottle and the guys who got rich during the dot com era don’t live here and already have theirs.
Everything has its price. Even off vintages of the great chateaus will sell like hotcakes if the price is low enough as we just saw today.
A “bad” vintage of Yquem is still better than many, many Sauternes of good vintages just because of the great care they take in grape selection at harvest. The other thing about Sauternes is their drinking window is often 30 or 40 years, sometimes longer. Who’s to say which vintage will be better in 40 years? Many of us won’t even be around then. There are numerous examples of “off” vintages eclipsing good vintages after some aging time.
Mainly, though, this was an opportunity to buy a bottle from a great chateau at a very good price. An opportunity many would otherwise never get.
Yeah, I’m not at all bummed about missing a 2000 Sauternes…very poor vintage.
Same goes for some of the Petrus offers…you have to look closely at the vintage. There’s a reason why those wines weren’t selling. Not all D’Yquem’s and Petrus’ are created equal!
@Phred. It is expensive no question, I managed to snag a case at 412per which is a great deal relatively speaking. The 2001 is a very special Yquem.
@parkers beyatch: 2001 Yquem is more than $500 for a full-size bottle. My cellar doesn’t need Yquem in it quite THAT badly. I was feeling the pinch at $200.
The Jermann Capo Martino is wonderful wine, and the price is half the best price on the web. If you miss out, however, the 2005 may be better wine and is available on the web at one site for $50 as well.
Let me know when the 2001s are available on WTSO!
Point is, if 2000 wasn’t one of the poorer vintages of Sauternes, it wouldn’t be on WTSO and wouldn’t be $199.99. Even this “poor” vintage is 93.5 avg on CT. Nothing to sneeze at. Plus, every cellar needs some D’Yquem.
fellas, dont worry about missing the 2000 Yquem. It was a very poor vintage in sauternes. If you want Yquem, seek out the 2001.
There was a time when I would get the email update from WTSO almost immediately… now it takes a while and I often miss on the hot deals. Bummer.
Damnit!! I completely missed on the chateau d’yquem. I would have bought one. That sucks. That really sucks.
Missed on the Yquem, too, dang it. Woulda been the most I ever spent on one bottle, but worth it once. Ah, well. The wallet (and spouse, though she doesn’t know it) are pleased.
I’d like to see the Petrus return to WTSO. I think last time it sold out in 8 minutes. By the time you get the e-mail it is too late. You have to check that site constantly. That’s the nice thing about Cindy–you know what time to check in, even though there aren’t as many offers per week.
whoa dude-
yquem- $199,
now thats something crazy!!!
just got the memo though…:(
BuffaloLou. It’s coming, it’s coming I can feel it. I hope it’s a good one for you at a great price naturally.
I grabbed 1 bottle of the D’Yquem. Says my order was confirmed, then 1 minute later the site said sold out so we’ll see if I got in under the wire.
At least I could afford the Amarone…If only it were a half bottle at half the price…
@BrunelloBob: Just saw that. Tempting, but I should not drink the sweets!
Now for that Amarone… (That’s for my buddy CortezTK!)
Chateau D’Yquem
Sauterenes 2000
$199 on WTSO.
That’s a 750ml, NOT a 375.
.
Trumps FU?
I can’t make it tonight but my guess on the laptops is so you can post your TN’s on Codk’d (and maybe twitter, FB, etc.)
@Brooks: I’ll be there. With laptop I suppose.
Role call for tonights Cork’d event at 8pm. Anybody Anybody Anybody? Also CW/WL why is it recommended we bring our laptops? Pax you.
Sorry to be unclear, but I wasn’t really talking about the software. More like how people deal with the spacing of a large cellar. Do people sort by country? Varietal? Age? Do people just slide them in anywhere? How do they fill a cellar? Right now I pretty much throw everything in my small cellar and track by the number on the rack, but that seems less ideal to me in a larger cellar.
@royo: I have a small collection myself (~100 bottles), but I likewise don’t see why CT isn’t scalable. Heck, there are 3000+ bottle collections on there, starting with Eric LeVine’s http://www.cellartracker.com//list.asp?Table=List&iUserOverride=1&Page=0
@WineKnurd: Ratings are for the most part used incorrectly. Ratings are typically given by people with lots of wine experience – people who know enough to be able to judge whether or not a wine is a good example of its type. So for most professional reviews, I don’t have to worry about the details of the exact scoring. This isn’t precise, objective measurement, and I would expect the same scorer, scoring the same wine on several different occasions, may well give different scores. A good reviewer, though, will usually give close to the same score every time. I think this is mostly why RP has the reputation he has.
As a consumer, though, know your reviewer. If you taste a few wines that RP scores well, and you find you like them, too, then a Parker score is a reasonable guide for you to use in the future when buying a similar wine you otherwise know nothing about. On the other hand, you may find yourself disagreeing with him on certain types of wine. Maybe he likes Aussie fruit bombs more than you do. So a high score from Parker on an Aussie wine is not a good guide for you (unless maybe it comes with a tasting note commenting on how “Old World” the wine is, for example). Or maybe you can find a better correlation between IWC scores and your taste in Aussie wines, and you can use that as a guide for that genre.
The purpose of scores is to fill the gap when making a blind purchase, in the hope that you won’t spend a lot for a wine you hate. They are mainly for folks who put a premium on not “making a mistake” with a wine purchase. Personally, I use scores more as a guide for premium purchases of producers I don’t know. At lower price points, I don’t care about “mistakes” and if I know the producer, then I already have a good idea of what to expect.
What a score definitely is NOT, though, is an assertion that I SHOULD like a wine. Only my own palate can decide that.
@Wine Cutter
Want to see if there is any interest from folks on here in splitting with you or even stepping in to buy your allocation?
if you can give an e-mail and general location where someone could pickup from you, there may be some interest. Just a thought
@royo….why do you think CT couldn’t handle the larger collection? Folks track tens of thousands of bottles on there. What functionality do you think it may lack?
@Wine Cutter: I agree with both WineKnurd and RDawg. If you can, find someone local who will take all or part of your allocation. Have your cake and eat it, too. If you can’t find anyone who will go in with you, just let it go. There are other wines and other allocations if they dump you. And there’s a good chance they won’t dump you.
@Royo, not that I have anywhere near the 500 bottles you ask about or 1200 you may have someday (<200 for me), but I think that CT will be just fine. Just hit the user tab on CT then sort by bottles and you will see that 1200+ is no problem.
Does anyone have any general tips on how they handle their inventory of over 500 bottles? I just moved into a house (from an apartment) and it has a root/cold cellar. I am about half way through the process of turning it into a wine cellar which I estimate will have a capacity for around 1200 bottles. I’ve been managing my 200 bottles quite nicely using Cellar Tracker but I am not sure my current methodology is scalable to that level.
@Wine Cutter–I agree with what most others are saying. No matter how good the wine/winery (even if it is Screaming Eagle or something equally difficult to get), in the end, it is only wine, and there is a LOT of good wine out there. So if you miss one deal or get bumped from one list, who cares.
My view on wine has changed over the past couple of years…I love it more than ever (more each day), but I also realize it’s just a commodity and there will always be other vintages that are great, new wines, new producers, new discounters. So I don’t really ever beat myself up for “missing out” on a deal anymore.
May sound trivial, but I think the company you share your wine with is more important than the wine itself. Just my humble opinion!
Its my understanding that you can allow someone else to purchase your allocation under your name and have a separate shipping address in most instances. This would allow you to hold your spot on the list. I am admittedly not the most experienced with mailing lists. What winery?
@Wine Cutter – You are not alone http://www.latimes.com/features/food/la-fo-cultcab4-2010feb04,0,3672344.story
@ Mr. Kite – Yes I do have family obligations and if my budget were cut that tight then you are absolutley right…no question which is more important. However, I’m in that gray area where I “could” buy the wine but not sure if I “should” buy the wine.
@ Brooks – not in NYC anymore (also a result of the tighter budget) but still very close. Sunny and nice…for now. My back is finally recovering now from shoveling all of the snow on Saturday.
@ Wine Cutter . I have passed on two allocations. It is my guess others are doing the same. If so you go to end of line, but probably keep the “same” place in line. My guess these cult vineyard will come back to reality pricing. If not, you still have CW,WL, etc. and our support online group to get your stash. I would rather miss a great wine, than overpay and have remorse looking at the bottle in my cellar. How is weather in NYC?
@ WineCutter. Maybe you can find someone on the boards here or in your local area who would split a shipment with you, that would save you some $.
@Wine Cutter. First I do not know if you have a family, kids pets etc..(I’ll assume you do) if your financial condition is such that it makes it difficult to do both, buy your favorite wine or take care of the people around you, I think you most likely know the right thing to do. Family, responsiblities first, wine later. There will always be wine and I am sure you’ll develop a fondness for another winemaker’s style after your financial condition improves.
Question for the forum: After several years of waiting, I was finally able to get onto the mailing list for a very highly rated, well respected winemaker. I really like their wines and you really can’t get them anywhere else, but I’m on a much tighter budget these days and they aren’t exactly cheap (particularly when you throw in shipping). I wouldn’t mind passing on my allocation this year, but if I do I’m afraid I will got to the back of the line for future allocations and I don’t want to cut myself out of being able to buy the wines in future years (when I hope my financial situaiton will improve). Do I buy now just to keep my spot?
Here’s my problem with scores and ratings (rant alert). Its all supposed to be subjective, but there has to be a certain amount of comparison that a taster is doing. As in this 91 pt wine is better than that 89 pt wine because I rated it higher. But why did you rate it higher? Can you tell me why the 89 pt’r didn’t achieve 90 pts? What was it lacking to give it that 1 pt edge? What did the 90 pt’r have that the 89 pt’r didn’t? Body? Fruit? Taste descriptors are just as subjective as points and ratings. How useful are they really if you can’t taste the pencil shavings? It doesn’t mean you can’t appreciate the wine. I can list 50 descriptions about a wine and you can’t tell me they aren’t in there.
And since you are basing this off a 100 pt scale, how many wines have you rated 100 pts? If the answer is none, then how do you know where to start your rating scale? Which wine do you base it all off of?
Ok off my soapbox.
“PASS”over is right. Can’t do it tonight. Saving my money to see what else comes up this week.
As for the Palomero question, I have had the ‘99, but only the Vendimia Seleccionada (the special selection or reserve offering) and it is excellent and not yet ready, so the ‘00 normale might be drinking better right now.
If this was under 20 bones I might be willing to give it a try…I’ve got enough cab on hand right now..
@WineEcon: With all due respect, I have an ‘insiders scoup’ on this. There is a local cigar manufacturing company that would beg to differ on the WS/Cigar Aff issue. That said, maybe things have changed over the past 6-8 years since I was informed of this. Then again, maybe not…
@ r-dawg:
i would like to know about the palomero too-
it seems the ‘00 is the lowest rated of the several vint’s… the ‘05 scored a 93, and is also priced considerably higher-
dont know what to make of it, but 90+ says the ‘00 and ‘01 are available for $59 online, and the ‘04 @ $79(also a 93pt.) and finally the ‘05 for not less than $116-
i would be more interested in that ‘04 for my money-
@WineLou – My email is cellofello at care2 dot-com. I don’t know how many other here would be interested in halachah geeking.
In response to some earlier posts about the unreliability of WS ratings and suspect bias favoring advertisers (e.g., BuffLou et al.), recent published research does not support your suspicions (which, admittedly, I have shared):
Journal of Wine Economics, Volume 4, Number 2 (latest issue):
Does Advertising Bias Product Reviews? An Analysis of Wine Ratings
Pages 125-151
Jonathan Reuter
Abstract Full Text (PDF)
Also, to my knowledge, the last kosher wine I had was a reasonably good Hagafen Napa Cabernet ‘50 (that’s 5750 in the Hebrew calendar or ‘89 Gregorian). That would make tonight’s offering a ‘65. In my experience, one pays a premium for kosher, holding quality constant (but that begs the question of measuring quality and whether kosher actually represents a quality differential).