this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2024
289 points (97.4% liked)

Memes

45727 readers
803 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 46 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well for 750 mega liters that seems like a reasonable price. About 28 m³ per unit of money! Buy buy buy!

[–] xpinchx@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

For context 28 CBM is about the volume of a 20' container.

Or a stacked pallet is about 1.8 CBM so about 15 standard height pallets.

[–] SeekPie@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Proof that Americans will use literally anything but metric:

[–] xpinchx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Sorta. CBM is cubic meters and the entire world uses feet for shipping containers. For Intl logistics CBM and kg are the standard for volume and weight but they get loaded into containers measured in feet.

You'll see similar stuff in other industries. Machining a lot of measurements are in mm but tolerances in "mils" or 1/1000 of an inch. Or medical where volume is in mL or drams.

When it comes to distance though I only really know miles.

[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 43 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, thank goodness it wasn't 27,000.

That would be way too much!

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I'll wait for the * price tag... And a winning lottery ticket.

But seriously, a Scotch barreled in 1948? I didn't know they aged anything that long.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Remy Martin's Louis XIII is a blend of cognacs all aged between 40 and 100 years.

[–] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I've been lucky enough to try some, truly a flavour worth experiencing at least once if you can and like cognac. I still babble about it happily to strangers all the time...

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 7 points 1 month ago

Strictly speaking it's "only" aged 51 years, these were released in 1999

[–] makuus@pawb.social 38 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I know everyone’s general focus is on the cost of the thing and how ridiculous it seems, completely ignoring that it’s a Scotch that was aged longer than the overwhelming majority of us—me included—have been alive, and that there are some people for whom that taste is very much worth it.

Me, I’ve wrangled with exactly how you’re meant to pay for the thing and walk out the door with it. Am I bringing $27K—plus tax—worth of cash—three straps of hundos?—to Costco and having the cashier count it? Do I get pulled into the manager’s office instead? Or, do I put this on my Costco Citi Visa? Will they decline it, even if I have the credit limit? Can I sub in another Visa, since that’s all they take? Do I get walked out the door, or do I get a receipt for the checker to sharpie a line through?

[–] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If you have to ask you can’t afford it.

People buying 30k bottles of wine are generally the kinds of people that don’t have a “credit limit” like we’re used to. They probably also have people that go get that wine for them, and likely pay by credit card or check.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

They also seem unlikely to shop at Costco

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

People that shop at Costco skew far wealthier than the average American. Given that only a few Costcos, in very wealthy areas, are going to have even a single bottle of $28,000 whiskey, it's entirely reasonable to expect that they're going to be able to sell it.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Sure, but in those stats we're talking households making $100-$150K a year, who are not going to drop $27K on a bottle of whiskey lol

[–] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

There's a subset of drinkers that would aspire to it though - some ppl's passion is booze, and will spend the same price as a nice car on it and sip it over a decade. Whether or not it's sane is up to you though lol

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

If the customer base skews wealthier, you're going to have more people shopping there that are pulling in $500k+ annually, and probably a handful that are pulling in over $1M. If you only have one bottle in that price range, but you have 100 members at a given location that have enough income where that seems like a reasonable purchase, then you're probably going to be able to sell it.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The very wealthy do shop at warehouse clubs, Walmart, etc. You won't see them being walking advertisements for clothing lines, either. They do buy quality clothing, but they aren't overtly branded, unless they're casual, work or sports clothing. They may drive nice cars, many will own a regular 90s model Pontiac or something. They also don't plan their money for years, rather in centuries. There's a difference in behavior and attitude between old money and nuveau riche, as well.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They like to push this narrative but based on the global yacht and luxury real estate I am not buying it.

Sure there are some high netwoth individuals who live like this esp under 100m type. But people over that live lavishly and they don't hide it really.

And they all seem to go to diddy and Epstein parties on top of it ...

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think there are kind of two different groups that get conflated, actually: the wealthy, and the "professionally wealthy." The wealthy are often discrete and not showy, but the "professional wealthy" are those whose wealth or fame itself is central to their empire, even if not as directly as the influencer wealthy. But these are the Kardashians and the socialites and tech bros, all of those who serve as sort of aspirational versions of wealth. There is no shortage of them, no doubt, and I'm sure even the quietly wealthy have a lavish indulgence or two (a yacht being very likely), but based on my experience I really think there are sort two clear and distinct communities of wealth.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Regime whores are deff more flashy but it ain't like "titans of the industry" don't party with them.

I guess there is definitely a differences there tho since celebs went to p diddy's party's while the owner political class went to Epstein parties. So there is clearly two camps.

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Yeah to be clear, if it sounded like anything I said was meant as absolution, it was not. Regardless of which camp they fall into or how they display their wealth, it is impossible, to the best of my reasoned understanding, to acquire mass wealth ethically. I assume all of the ultra-wealthy are morally compromised in some capacity or another until proven otherwise.

[–] SoJB@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The very wealthy are also petulant little pigs who clad themselves in designer clothing, diamonds, and gold. Who literally clutch pearls and hiss at minorities. Who support genocides and drive drunk on public roads after their racist little evening gatherings.

Let’s stop pretending these ghouls are valid human beings. Entire Royal families have been terminated for having less relative wealth to the workers than todays ruling class.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 1 month ago

They are human beings, these are human behaviors, and it's not "no true human would..." Of course they would, and easily, too. My only point was to highlight differences in our concepts of wealth, and theirs.

Entire Royal families have been terminated for having less relative wealth to the workers than todays ruling class.

Indeed.

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

I've known some disgusting rich people (born and raised in the wealthiest county in the entire country) - for some reason they love Costco. They don't even do their own shopping but they insist on Costco. Unless they're aggressively right-wing.

[–] makuus@pawb.social 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Oh, I acknowledge that.

However, there are two things I get hung up on. One, can’t pay by check—Costco doesn’t accept checks. And, two, the traditional no-limits cards are generally Amex, which they don’t accept—only Visa.

So, yes, while nothing else you said was wrong per se, I’m still left to ponder just how the transaction would go down.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I assume they accept debit cards right?

[–] makuus@pawb.social 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You know, I don’t actually know. Have been conditioned to avoid using them that I don’t even think about them.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago

I'm curious why not? Other than cash it's all I use

[–] sushibowl@feddit.nl 23 points 1 month ago (2 children)

there are some people for whom that taste is very much worth it.

You are correct, but to be clear, it's not so much that tasting this scotch is a life changing experience; it's more that to these people, 27k is just chump change.

[–] mwproductions@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Also, stuff like this is often purchased not to drink, but as an investment.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago

It's also about knowing that it's so exclusive that regular people can't experience it. Take away the pricetag and it's isn't nearly so appealing.

Veblen product, innit

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 13 points 1 month ago

there are some people for whom that taste is very much worth it.

That's just not true, though.

  • Things rich people buy are often about scarcity/vanity, not how good they are
  • Diminishing returns for increasing quality
  • You can overpay for anything and people/companies are ready to profit off that

Supposed expert "connoisseurs" haven't been able to tell famous high-priced wines apart in controlled taste tests.

[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Doesn't mean it's worth 30k. There are whiskies just as old and better that aren't sold at that price.

This item is not sold 30k because its old, or even rare. It's sold at that price because there's always a rich sucker who wants something expensive.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Maybe they have financing plans.

[–] TotallyNotSpezUpload@startrek.website 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

27 Grand and the bottle just sits on the shelf?

[–] ililiililiililiilili@lemm.ee 26 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Ah, thanks. Wasn't wearing my glasses. :)

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And there’s starving homeless in this world but 30k for a bottle ? Fuuuuuuuuuuu

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

They should start selling $30k bottles of booze.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (12 children)
[–] sirico@feddit.uk 4 points 1 month ago

The I've run out of diversity in my portfolio one

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 4 points 1 month ago

What a deal! I'll probably never taste it.