Can this be for real? (Caution: Parker content)

Can this be for real? Mouton Cadet receiving a score in the 90's?

The Wine Advocate The dense ruby/purple-hued, fresh, vivacious 2004 Mouton-Rothschild offers hints of new saddle leather, truffles, cassis, and pain grille, zesty acidity, a touch of austerity, and a medium-bodied, streamlined, restrained personality. This rich, pure claret will require patience as it needs a decade of cellaring to shed its lofty tannins. Anticipated maturity: 2015-2045. Score: 91-93. —Robert Parker, June 2006.

Is Mr Parker having us on? Or is the Wine Buyer?

[Robin Garr]

Can this be for real? Mouton Cadet receiving a score in the 90's?

The Wine Advocate The dense ruby/purple-hued, fresh, vivacious 2004 Mouton-Rothschild offers hints of new saddle leather, truffles, cassis, and pain grille, zesty acidity, a touch of austerity, and a medium-bodied, streamlined, restrained personality. This rich, pure claret will require patience as it needs a decade of cellaring to shed its lofty tannins. Anticipated maturity: 2015-2045. Score: 91-93. —Robert Parker, June 2006.

Is Mr Parker having us on? Or is the Wine Buyer?

Isaac, the Bob appears to be reviewing Chateau Mouton-Rothschild 2004 Pauillac, a first-growth of Bordeaux that's rare and justifiably expensive. Mouton-Cadet comes from the same company, but that's about the only connection. As an analogy, albeit a poor one, if Ch. Mouton-Rothschild is akin to Mondavi Reserve Cabernet, then Mouton-Cadet is Mondavi Coastal.

Can this be for real? Mouton Cadet receiving a score in the 90's?

The Wine Advocate The dense ruby/purple-hued, fresh, vivacious 2004 Mouton-Rothschild

I don't know if there is a typo in one of your entries, but Mouton Rothschild is definitely not Mouton Cadet, and 91-93 points for M Rothschild sounds like the appropriately low score for a first growth that one might expect Parker to give in a vintage like 2004. But, that's from someone (me) who doesn't read the Wine Advocate, so, others may have more insight.

The tip off is the drinking window. "Good" Cadets can hold a month or two.

If there is an error, it is not mine.

http://www.thewinebuyer.com/182583?id=5oC3dern

The tip off is the drinking window. "Good" Cadets can hold a month or two.

That's somewhat more in line with what I thought, but who am I to argue with one of Robin's advertisers? Indeed, not only an advertiser, but "The ONLY place to buy wine online!"

[Robin Garr]

If there is an error, it is not mine.

http://www.thewinebuyer.com/182583?id=5oC3dern

Whoa! They've definitely got the wrong description on the wrong wine!

I suspect it's an honest if careless mistake, though. I know the folks at WineBuyer.com - in fact, they periodically advertise with us. That's not their style. I'll drop a note to my contact there and point it out.

That kind of error must drive Parker nuts.

I must be missing something. I do not see a rating....

Maybe the website got the word from Robin Garr or someone and corrected the listing. The description and rating for Mouton Rothschild were attached to ad for Mouton Cadet previously.

I must be missing something. I do not see a rating....

The original text, contained in my first post, includes the rating 91-93 points. It has since been removed.

As an aside, I love 'pain grille' (presumably should be 'grillé') when they could have said 'toast.'

Glad you are non-snobbish that way, Oliver.

I must be missing something. I do not see a rating....

The original text, contained in my first post, includes the rating 91-93 points. It has since been removed.

Clearly a mistake by the wine merchant, who has since corrected it. But if you click on the words "Mouton Cadet" on that page, you're taken to another page that has some icons with numeric ratings from various critics, and it still says there that The Wine Advocate gave it a 91, so they haven't completley corrected themselves yet.

I'm not sure I would buy anything from a merchant who can't tell the difference between Mouton-Rothschild and Mouton-Cadet. As mistakes go, this one's a real howler.

-Paul W.

Clearly a mistake by the wine merchant, who has since corrected it.

So you're saying I won't be able to pay for my Daughter's college education with the 30 cases of '04 Cadet I just picked up!? Who do I sue? I think Parker has the deepest pockets.

[Jenise]

If there is an error, it is not mine.

http://www.thewinebuyer.com/182583?id=5oC3dern

Whoa! They've definitely got the wrong description on the wrong wine!

I suspect it's an honest if careless mistake, though. I know the folks at WineBuyer.com - in fact, they periodically advertise with us. That's not their style. I'll drop a note to my contact there and point it out.

You might suggest they check the rating on the 2003 Guigal Cotes du Rhone too, Robin. I've tasted the wine, and no way would Parker have given it a 90 ("exceptional character and complexity") rating.

You might suggest they check the rating on the 2003 Guigal Cotes du Rhone too, Robin. I've tasted the wine, and no way would Parker have given it a 90 ("exceptional character and complexity") rating.

Another wine site has a Parker 88 for the wine -- "Dense, medium-bodied, and lightly tannic, it is a surprisingly big, substantial Cotes du Rhone in keeping with the finest efforts of the vintage." The Guigal CdP is rated 90.

Someone is either sloppy or deliberately trying to mislead the consumer. One would hope it is the former.

These mistakes have the smell of an untrained staff person having been given the job of creating the catalog--untrained in wine labels and maybe in wine too.

What should I do with the 100 cases I bought right after the first post?

[Jenise]

What should I do with the 100 cases I bought right after the first post?

Sell them on ebay?

What should I do with the 100 cases I bought right after the first post?

Sell them on ebay?

Not a bad idea--look how much that old sandwich grabbed a little while ago. You can say it's the wine that was served at the marriage feast at Cana, where the guests gave it a 91.