Cost vis-a-vis Disappointment

[JohnS]

On the flipside...when I get a box of minutos or perlas or similar regular production cigars (such as Partagas Shorts, San Cristobal de La Habana El Principes, El Rey del Mundo Demi Tasses or Rafael Gonzalez Perlas)  which are not costly or much sought-after, and they are brilliant from the box one after the other, that is when I derive the greatest satisfaction.

[fitzy]

I get the comments about the loss of time on a bad cigar but let me ask you this. 

Lets say there's this supposedly amazing meal for $500 (hotel near my office has a breakfast for $500 that's supposed to be great) and you're let down by the meal. Are you now upset at the time wasted or the fact you paid $500 for a shitty meal and you could have a great meal elsewhere for $10. 

 

If I bought a box of Talisman for example and they were crap it wouldn't be the time I'd be upset about. I would be kicking myself and saying "I could have bought 5 or 6 boxes of BPC for that money" lol

[Wailbait]

54 minutes ago, JohnS said:

On the flipside...when I get a box of minutos or perlas or similar regular production cigars (such as Partagas Shorts, San Cristobal de La Habana El Principes, El Rey del Mundo Demi Tasses or Rafael Gonzalez Perlas)  which are not costly or much sought-after, and they are brilliant from the box one after the other, that is when I derive the greatest satisfaction.

This.

[fitzy]

2 hours ago, FatherOfPugs said:

 

I'd be upset about both in that particular scenario; however, with cigars, I have a limit as to how much I will spend per cigar, just my own personal hiccup I guess, but I can't spend over a certain dollar amount per cigar. It may help mitigate the cost-loss, but it still does nothing for the time-loss. Truth be told, I just don't see the point of spending such an exorbitant amount of money on a consumable good, cigars, wine, beer, whiskey, etc. I have a limit as to how much I can justify on something that will ultimately either be turned to ashes or piss.

I'm right there with you. I definitely have a limit as to what I would consider paying for a cigar. Sorry Talisman I'll never smoke you unless some how I find one rolling down the street. 

[El Presidente]

3 hours ago, fitzy said:

I'm right there with you. I definitely have a limit as to what I would consider paying for a cigar. Sorry Talisman I'll never smoke you unless some how I find one rolling down the street. 

I have a limit as to what I will pay for a bottle of wine.  Penfolds Grange is sold out at $600 a bottle before it is released. There are wines where you need to pay $2000+ a bottle and you will be buying  a future vintage. I would never consider either. I have mates who line up. 

The "Top end" market is far bigger than most people realise.  They may smoke a cigar once a week and wish it to be a Behike/Talisman/LE/Regional only. Others  smoke daily and only want the best (be it perceived). To them cigars are inexpensive (even at $70). Time is expensive. 

HSA were relatively late to the party as wine companies have been targeting this market for an age. They have both found it to be a deep market. 

To try and turn back the clock is akin to King Canute. 

[Ken Gargett]

2 hours ago, El Presidente said:

I have a limit as to what I will pay for a bottle of wine.  Penfolds Grange is sold out at $600 a bottle before it is released. There are wines where you need to pay $2000+ a bottle and you will be buying  a future vintage. I would never consider either. I have mates who line up. 

The "Top end" market is far bigger than most people realise.  They may smoke a cigar once a week and wish it to be a Behike/Talisman/LE/Regional only. Others  smoke daily and only want the best (be it perceived). To them cigars are inexpensive (even at $70). Time is expensive. 

HSA were relatively late to the party as wine companies have been targeting this market for an age. They have both found it to be a deep market. 

To try and turn back the clock is akin to King Canute. 

grange has never sold out before release and it is now $800 plus but i know what you mean.

the $2k plus per bottle is the en primeur system (though very very few are at $2k - a couple of top burgs would be it and possibly petrus and one or two others). it allows those who want those wines to secure an allocation and if a good vintage, secure them at a price that will look good when the wine is made (it is sort of "future" in that the vintage has already occurred but it will be in barrel and not yet bottle, so critics have a good idea). so it is a bit of a gamble. 

not sure it would work for cigars. they do not have the same limits on them as wines. a certain vineyard in a certain vintage can produce only X bottles. cigars seem more 'flexible'. 

[fitzy]

3 hours ago, El Presidente said:

I have a limit as to what I will pay for a bottle of wine.  Penfolds Grange is sold out at $600 a bottle before it is released. There are wines where you need to pay $2000+ a bottle and you will be buying  a future vintage. I would never consider either. I have mates who line up. 

The "Top end" market is far bigger than most people realise.  They may smoke a cigar once a week and wish it to be a Behike/Talisman/LE/Regional only. Others  smoke daily and only want the best (be it perceived). To them cigars are inexpensive (even at $70). Time is expensive. 

HSA were relatively late to the party as wine companies have been targeting this market for an age. They have both found it to be a deep market. 

To try and turn back the clock is akin to King Canute. 

Absolutely there are people that are more than happy spending that kinda dough. 

I’ll stick to mostly regular production stuff. Is that regular production stuff not as good? Is there a ratio of price to quality? 

[El Presidente]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

not sure it would work for cigars. they do not have the same limits on them as wines. a certain vineyard in a certain vintage can produce only X bottles. cigars seem more 'flexible'. 

There is a parcel of 3 hectares on th eastern edge of San Luis that internally is described as the holy grail of Cuban tobacco. The wrapper leaf upon drying is oily, thin, red and stretches like spandex. 

What would the market pay for a box of puro's guaranteed to be  from this terroir ?  There could only be maybe 2000 boxes a year of a 109.  $3000-$4000-$5000?  Boxes numbered, the growing climate summary on the back, a CD of the growing process for that year with interviews from the farmer (who is relatively unknown) and his farm hands all the way down the process to the half dozen master rollers. Each signs the box they rolled. 

Simply the finest cigars from the finest harvest in Cuba. What price in Shanghai, Hong Kong, Abu Dhabi, London or New York?

When I go there for a visit I pay 3 CUC each. 

What is their true value?

[El Presidente]

20 minutes ago, fitzy said:

Absolutely there are people that are more than happy spending that kinda dough. 

I’ll stick to mostly regular production stuff. Is that regular production stuff not as good? Is there a ratio of price to quality? 

Chicken or the egg argument. 

The Talisman Ken and I had was the best Cohiba we have likely had in the past 6 months. So to us , that example on that day was  an immensely enjoyable experience. We were unlikely have received  the same experience from a fresh CORO or Siglo VI.   Is it 3 times better than a Siglo VI? Well that is up to the individual to decide.  Mind you, the market looks to have already decided that it is. 

I don't run to Penfolds and demand that they stop making Grange because they are forgetting the core market.  They would say that they cater for the core market, it is called  Penfolds Koonunga Hill and it costs $15.   

I can imagine the response if I get if I then asked Penfolds if the Grange was really 53.33 times as good?  They would say that if you  have to ask the question then you shouldn't be drinking Grange. 

By the way, I don't drink Grange 

 

[Ken Gargett]

54 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

There is a parcel of 3 hectares on th eastern edge of San Luis that internally is described as the holy grail of Cuban tobacco. The wrapper leaf upon drying is oily, thin, red and stretches like spandex. 

What would the market pay for a box of puro's guaranteed to be  from this terroir ?  There could only be maybe 2000 boxes a year of a 109.  $3000-$4000-$5000?  Boxes numbered, the growing climate summary on the back, a CD of the growing process for that year with interviews from the farmer (who is relatively unknown) and his farm hands all the way down the process to the half dozen master rollers. Each signs the box they rolled. 

Simply the finest cigars from the finest harvest in Cuba. What price in Shanghai, Hong Kong, Abu Dhabi, London or New York?

When I go there for a visit I pay 3 CUC each. 

What is their true value?

that is more like the burgundy v bordeaux argument and you are spot on.

for burgundy/your 3 ha, think DRC or Leroy or Rousseau or Roumier. and yes, people beg to be able to pay thousands of dollars per bottle for these wines. the bordeaux is a little more like where those leaves form part of an excellent cigar but are not quite so focused on that piece of dirt. they can be the first growths or second growths. 

it is part of the reason why i have always loved burgundy - though what has amazed me is that, bar a few exceptions, it is really only the last decade where the market has decided that those are the wines that are really worth the dosh. 

of course, both can be stellar and the danger of that 3 ha plot is if it is a poor year, if someone stuffs up fermentation, if a roller does not do a great job or if they are not stored well. then it is serious hooter for a bog average smoke. 

[Ken Gargett]

44 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

Chicken or the egg argument. 

The Talisman Ken and I had was the best Cohiba we have likely had in the past 6 months. So to us , that example on that day was  an immensely enjoyable experience. We were unlikely have received  the same experience from a fresh CORO or Siglo VI.   Is it 3 times better than a Siglo VI? Well that is up to the individual to decide.  Mind you, the market looks to have already decided that it is. 

I don't run to Penfolds and demand that they stop making Grange because they are forgetting the core market.  They would say that they cater for the core market, it is called  Penfolds Koonunga Hill and it costs $15.   

I can imagine the response if I get if I then asked Penfolds if the Grange was really 53.33 times as good?  They would say that if you  have to ask the question then you shouldn't be drinking Grange. 

By the way, I don't drink Grange 

i'm sure the same can be said for watches. i am really only interested in something that tells the time. if it happens to be a terrific watch, all the better. but i'm not going to fork out heaps for it. and yet, so many do. 

penfolds would argue that grange is only a tiny % of its production, which it is, but the value it receives from grange, in publicity and also profit (they would make so much more on grange than any other wine as all up, it is really hard to see the cost to them of a bottle of grange being more than $50 - be generous and say $100). so it is great for their shareholders, the company and they'd argue the other wines as that profit and press allows them to do so many other things. but they make a huge range of wines at all price levels. their core market is well covered, because i'm not sure that there is a core market. there are many. they can charge that price because of its story, quality, history, demand - all the usual things. plus, quite a few wineries upped their prices considerably a decade or so ago because they found that there was a heap of speculation on their wines. people were buying just to flick to the auction houses. giaconda was another. the increases mean that penfolds make the profit, not some speculator. which seems fair. there is far less price appreciation after release now, at the higher prices so they have taken that out of the market and those who buy these wines ultimately want to drink them. 

as to the question of whether a wine is fifty times better if it is fifty times the price, i can assure you they have heard that a thousand times. up to the individual. but almost always, of course not. but if you want a small increase in the quality of the wine you drink, you have to pay for that. 

and you should drink grange (it really is an exceptional wine). provided someone else is paying. 

[CaptainQuintero]

On 13/03/2018 at 9:10 PM, FatherOfPugs said:

Mostly this ^^^ for me as well. If I'm smoking a cigar and it's just not panning out, I'll let it die out and if I have time, grab another. Also a little bit of a time thing, you only get a finite amount time on this earth, spend it wisely.

A strange thing the I've noticed over the years is that if a cigar is just not nice; to the point where it gets chucked, then any subsequent cigars that I light up to try and salvage the smoking time are always poor too. I'm guessing it's a mental block where I'm not coming from the right place to relax, so now if I get a bad one I pitch it and leave it until another day.

Strange when you think about it though

[Wailbait]

2 hours ago, El Presidente said:

Chicken or the egg argument. 

The Talisman Ken and I had was the best Cohiba we have likely had in the past 6 months. So to us , that example on that day was  an immensely enjoyable experience. We were unlikely have received  the same experience from a fresh CORO or Siglo VI.   Is it 3 times better than a Siglo VI? Well that is up to the individual to decide.  Mind you, the market looks to have already decided that it is. 

I don't run to Penfolds and demand that they stop making Grange because they are forgetting the core market.  They would say that they cater for the core market, it is called  Penfolds Koonunga Hill and it costs $15.   

I can imagine the response if I get if I then asked Penfolds if the Grange was really 53.33 times as good?  They would say that if you  have to ask the question then you shouldn't be drinking Grange. 

By the way, I don't drink Grange 

 

I've actually never had a problem with diminishing returns - in that exponentially higher prices correspond (if at all) to smaller advances in quality.  I have sort of noticed among my friends (the worlds least scientifically selected control/focus group out there) that everyone settles in a basic framework for day to day life where quality and cost have a really comfortable intersection.  Significant higher quality to cost than your "pre-existing" ratio and you end up screaming "Deal!!!" from the tops of mountains.  This I believe is where the fervor on these boards for RG Perlas and PLPC come into play.  If the cost is too much higher than a presumptive rate of return or even "enjoyment" factor, we might sigh a collective Harumph and move on.  But if you throw terms like "rarity" and "desirability" in the mix, all bets are off . . . 

I work across the street from a store called "Supreme."  Kids sleep on the streets in tents to buy a sweatshirt.  Then they wear it to show their friends.  Or they flip it.  It's a 150$ sweatshirt on release (which I would call expensive) and a $500 sweatshirt two days later on eBay (which I would call NUTS).  But at the end of the day, I'm sure the kids in line are enjoying a camaraderie not unlike all of us that get together over a couple of Fundies.  And they are part of an elite group of folks who know the best that this market has to offer.  This elite sweatshirt was never designed for the likes of me.  But I'm super glad that a bunch of folks are into it.  Makes this crazy world an even more interesting place. 

[Colt45]

17 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

that is more like the burgundy v bordeaux argument

the bordeaux is a little more like where those leaves form part of an excellent cigar but are not quite so focused on that piece of dirt.

Way off point I know, but I've come to think it's also a matter of varietal. Over time, I've come to the personal belief that great pinot is far more expressive than great cab or merlot....

[cigaraholic]

Pinot is the king of wines.....just ask Napoleon....or as my father used to say..Bordeaux is for lunch, Burgundy is for dinner....unless we’re having lamb?

And of course I’m much madder at the roller who rolled my under filled Siglo VI than my under filled PLPC

[Colt45]

16 minutes ago, cigaraholic said:

Pinot is the king of wines.....just ask Napoleon....

Ahem....

Great nebbiolo kicks them both to the curb

(Napoleon's syphilis may have warped his mind)

P.S. more toward the original topic, In my experience, Cuban cigars are a bit of a crap shoot. I personally don't believe, at this point, that they should be compared to the great, or even very good wine producers.

[Ken Gargett]

3 hours ago, Colt45 said:

Way off point I know, but I've come to think it's also a matter of varietal. Over time, I've come to the personal belief that great pinot is far more expressive than great cab or merlot....

ah colt, i envy you. you still have the inordinate joy of discovering just how great burgundy/pint can be, if you still have nebb a notch above (as good as it can be). 

[earthson]

While I understand the sentiment that cigars are essentially free once they're stored with the rest of my collection, I am absolutely incensed when a higher-dollar premium performs poorly.  Sure, we're discussing a handmade product comprised of agricultural stock, so variety is the only constant, but there is no excuse for an underfilled, overfilled or otherwise poorly-rolled special release.  It makes them less special.

Once I realized that seemingly all Havanas have the same variation in quality, I have largely stuck with the regular production Marevas, Minutos, Robustos and plehthora of long 'n skinnies and never looked back.  Are Gran Reserva releases "worth it?"  I couldn't careless.

[Colt45]

23 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

ah colt, i envy you. you still have the inordinate joy of discovering just how great burgundy/pint can be, if you still have nebb a notch above (as good as it can be). 

I SAID KICKS TO THE CURB SIR!