01438 741177         thewinesociety.com

They Didn't Like It…

I read it and my takeaway was similar to what I thought @SteveSlatcher was meaning in the above post in that for this specific case it shows no effect. I thought the choice of wine made it less likely, the style seeming to me to be rather robust and possibly less prone to any such effect. However needs must if you want to control as many variables as possible. I’m not sure you could really do a definitive study that proves it never happens.

That seems to me the wrong way round. If you think it does happen - provide some evidence.

1 Like

That’s the issue. The evidence is subjective, and I fear always will be. Lots of anecdotal evidence but no real way to definitively prove either point conclusively. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence cuts both ways.

Not a big deal either way though…

1 Like

I think it is like that with many things in wine - if you think it is important then it becomes important, and it can affect your perceptions.

Personally I take the attitude that it is fine if people feel that way providing they don’t start being evangelical about it. I’m sure it happens to me too in some regard, but I am pretty relaxed about many things that winelovers get worked-up about.

Whatever you think and do, if it enhances your enjoyment and doesn’t hurt anyone else, why not?

5 Likes

This was posted in another thread. Not a scientific study with evidence, but I trust to some degree a wine professional who has taken the time to write all this! (That’s not to say I stand my wines up a month before decanting :joy: I’m just providing a counter argument for the discussion)

https://www.chambersstwines.com/Articles/12757/john-gilman-on-serving-wine

Back on topic, I’m looking forward to trying this tonight

I have been a customer for over twenty years and I can say that this Reisling is by far the worst wine that I have ever bought . Such a disappointment and not so cheap either. Tried it with my guests yesterday and they agreed… Bought having read the reviews so oh dear!!

7 reviews, 3 are poor and one is mediocre. Will report back on the weekend drinking thread!!

11 Likes

Be interested in your thoughts on this one. It’s on my wishlist, but I do like a limey aussie riesling with a bit of jet fuel on the nose now and again.

1 Like

FWIW, I thought TWS notes described it accurately so here’s hoping you enjoy it as much as I did back in March !

Yes I enjoyed it too. I have a few more bottles and I’m happy about that.

i liked it…but I do like a reisling

Haven’t touched Mac Forbes since the 2012 Pinot Noir. My tasting note three years ago.
“Light in colour, light in body. Nose is weak violet, overall nothing special.”

1 Like

Sounds like my sort of thing, one to add to the wish list!

1 Like

Having opened it before the recommended drinking date, I found this wine not ready to drink:

14 Likes

I wish TWS could post a reply to some of these reviews - in this case “We know. That’s why we suggested that you shouldn’t drink it yet.”

3 Likes

I know what you mean but it’s really not advisable. I see companies doing this on trust pilot and it generally smacks of trying to wriggle out of it and can degenerate into a slanging match. The same thing happens with books and authors are generally advised to never respond to bad reviews. Again slanging match follows.

5 Likes

Does the Act referred to come into play? Possibly, if the wine is faulty I suppose. But the reviewer must have missed the Society’s Promise.

It’s been largely replaced by the Consumer Rights Act, and if the goods are not fit-for-purpose, as-described and of satisfactory quality, the Act applies. It covers more than just faults.

But with any problems, the obvious first step should be to contact the seller - whether they have a satisfaction promise or not.

Not always easy to demonstrate with something that is so subjective as wine, of course, but the point is well made.

1 Like

Having worked in the restaurant industry long ago and having been big into the real ale ‘scene’ (still a CAMRA member for my sins), I find the concept of replacement of drinks when not faulty a little bit grating to be honest. I don’t think it’s pedantic.

I have returned countless beers due to being faulty/off (mostly off - oxidised, vinegar, yeast faults, storage/line faults), sometimes with an argument with staff. At a real ale pub I was a regular at, the landlord was a bit eccentric and defensive. If a customer complained about a beer, he’d often give me a free taster and take it off if I agreed with complaints that it was faulty or turning (nothing had ever turned, standards were too high, so quite subtle - usually end of cask).

I think my point is - I would never ask for or expect a refund or replacement for something that I dislike, if I know for a fact it’s not faulty. That’s my error for buying something I don’t like, trying something new or not asking for a taster/trying before I buy. It is what it is. It happens with food. It would make me reluctant to write negative reviews when a wine isn’t corked/faulty etc. Are TWS wrong to refund? Of course not. I personally wouldn’t want a refund for simply having a difference in taste though. I like exploration and the price of that is experiencing duds for your palate.

15 Likes

I feel the same way, but this policy is in place to give confidence to others who may not be so keen on exploration to join you in your inquisitive purchasing habits. I suspect there might be a lot of members who are a little more rigid in their approach.

6 Likes