Abstract
AbstractWine consumers and producers make decisions partly on ratings of wine critics. Research into reliability (correspondence of repeated ratings of the same wines by one critic) and consensus (correspondence of ratings between critics or competitions) have yielded low estimates. However, Ashton (2013), looking at the consensus among only prominent critics of red Bordeaux, vintages 2004–2010, found a correlation of around 0.60. Here, I revisit these data, and extend the analyses to the years 2011–2016 for the same wines, but with additional new critics. Agreement among the critics (r = 0.57) of these new years is comparable to those found by Ashton (r = 0.60), with a slight upward trend. Overall, critics agree more about what they do not like. Regarding prices and ratings, wines score below-average ratings when they cost less than 35 euro, and higher ratings between 35 and 100 euro. In wines more than 100 euro there is no correlation between ratings and price. (JEL Classification: C99)
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Horticulture,General Business, Management and Accounting,Food Science
Reference9 articles.
1. Cohen J. (2016). Wine tasting, blind and otherwise: Blindness as a perceptual limitation? https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b678/d8b5316a2d43204eb19d7d95cce061700640.pdf (accessed 20 August 2017).
2. Reliability and Consensus of Experienced Wine Judges: Expertise Within and Between?
3. The value of expert opinion in the pricing of Bordeaux wine futures;Ashton;Journal of Wine Economics,2016
4. Is There Consensus Among Wine Quality Ratings of Prominent Critics? An Empirical Analysis of Red Bordeaux, 2004–2010
5. Bolomey D. , and Van der Put W. (2017). Bordoverview. http://bordoverview.com/ (accessed 10 August 2017).
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献