> > Tom,
> > That's a *highly* disingenuous comment. An aged wine is not the
> > same as a young wine, pure and simple. The fact that there's a constant
> > supply of young wines is irrelevant to the issue of whether they're
> > ageworthy. While you may decide that you're not a fan of older wines,
> > surely you can understand the attitude of those for whom an older wine
> > offers pleasures simply not found in young wines.
>
> OK, OK. Maybe I was being a little hyperbolic (again). I, too, enjoy
well
> aged wines for the bottle aged flavors and aromas, but if it's possible to
> get there in ten years instead of thirty, I'm all for that.
>
> Consider this:
> If fine wine requires an investment of several decades to reach
perfection,
> one will either have to spend the money when young and lay the wine away,
or
> spend a lot _more_ money to acquire well aged wines when one is older.
> Young people usually don't have enough disposable income or patience to
> cellar fine wines for decades, and most senior citizens live on fixed
> incomes and can't easily afford to buy well aged wines. IOW, fine _old_
> wine appreciation is mainly for the wealthy.
>
> OTOH, if the time to reach plateau can be shortened to say ten years, the
> accessability to it within the mainstream population becomes considerably
> broadened. Can that be so bad?
>
> I'm only in my mid 50s, but I can see that the day is not that far off
that
> it will be pointless for me (having no children) to lay down young vintage
> Port. I have a mixed case of 1994s, and I sure hope I live to taste _all_
> of them at maturity! :^/
>
> Tom S

I agree,, A 20 or 30 year old bottle of wine costs big $, no matter how you
look at it.
The days are over when only wealthy elitist can enjoy fine wines.
This is a good thing,, unless you are a wealthy elitist.