And the winner is.............

[RAD]

Drew and Winecollector, I agree with you.

My name is Ric, and I'm a WS subscriber. [img]http://www.wines.com/ubb2/biggrin.gif[/img]

I've found some articles helpful, and others a complete waste of time (the recent cover story on the Rothchilds comes to mind). But I cannot understand why so many self-proclaimed enophiles lambaste it. Sounds more like Nietzschean _ressentiment_ to me. If your palate is so much better than WS or Robert Parker, get out and say it! Put out a new publication, if that's what it takes! Of course, that is why we're all here... [img]http://www.wines.com/ubb2/wink.gif[/img]

We all agree that our own palates should be our guide. But why should I believe Roberto or Foodie or CCK in their respective establishments any more than WS? Not to offend any of you three, but do any of you have the time to cultivate and/or know my own likes and dislikes? I believe that any suggestions that you'd make would indeed be genuine and even altruistic, but would they be any closer to the mark than those offered in WS?

Of course, in a sense, I, too, have "graduated" from WS, even though I still keep my subscription. But if someone is adamant about wanting to buy a wine because of a rating, so be it! Who cares? If a customer wants to proselytized, allow him to be--but don't force him. Enough of the puritanical pontificating!

I just returned from a business trip to Asia. In Japan, there is a saying: "o kyaku sama wa kami sama", which means, "the customer is a god." If retailers took this to heart, perhaps WS's opinions would be just that.

RAD

[This message has been edited by RAD (edited 12-05-2000).]