Let’s start with a familiar assumption: the more expensive the wine, the better it must be. It’s the logic behind the hesitant splurge on a dinner party bottle, the justifications made in the wine aisle, and the occasional humblebrag over a well-aged Bordeaux. But how true is it, really?
There’s no denying that price and critic ratings often walk hand in hand. In fact, the correlation is well-documented. Economists and wine academics have poured over thousands of bottles and found a statistically significant relationship: as expert ratings go up, so too does the price tag. In one major study of over 13,000 wines from around the world, each additional point on a 100-point rating scale translated into an average 8% increase in price. That’s a substantial leap for what might seem like a barely perceptible difference in quality. In other studies, particularly those using hedonic pricing models (which attempt to isolate the value of individual wine traits), critic scores accounted for as much as half of the variation in price.
But here’s where things get more complicated. Ratings don’t just reflect quality—they help create perceived value. Take the example of Robert Parker, the critic who arguably changed the shape of the wine world. His high scores could catapult a relatively obscure Bordeaux estate into the luxury stratosphere. A 95-point rating was enough to double or even triple bottle prices overnight. In some cases, wineries were said to have added millions to their valuation purely on the back of a Parker rave.
It’s not just Parker anymore. Today’s wine economy has evolved to include a host of critics and scoring systems—Wine Spectator, Wine Advocate, Vinous, Decanter, and Wine Enthusiast among them. Each outlet shapes demand and, in turn, market price. The logic seems sound: high ratings mean better wine, and better wine costs more.
But here’s the curveball. When researchers remove price tags and branding from the equation—when they pour wines blind—things start to unravel. In a number of blind tasting studies with hundreds of casual wine drinkers, participants routinely failed to prefer the more expensive wines. In many cases, they actually enjoyed cheaper bottles more. One particularly well-known experiment found that people correctly identified the more expensive wine only slightly more than 50% of the time—essentially a coin toss.
Even more revealing are studies in neuroeconomics that show our brains are wired to enjoy wine more if we believe it’s expensive. In one Caltech experiment, participants were told they were drinking five different wines at varying prices. In reality, they tasted just three wines, with two repeated at different price labels. When drinkers believed the wine was more expensive, brain activity in the pleasure centres surged—and they reported it tasted better. The same wine, marked cheaper, elicited a duller response. Their palates didn’t change—their perception did.
This price-placebo effect is powerful and well-documented. In another study conducted in Germany, MRI scans confirmed that participants rated the same wine as more pleasant when told it cost more. The mere expectation of quality altered not just their opinion but their actual brain chemistry.
So what’s happening here? For one, there’s the simple influence of branding. Price is a proxy for quality in nearly every consumer category, and wine—being nuanced, unfamiliar, and often confusing—is particularly susceptible. For novice drinkers, a higher price can be comforting. It suggests legitimacy, refinement, or at least a lower risk of embarrassment when pouring for others.
But experienced tasters—sommeliers, wine buyers, critics—don’t seem to fall for the same tricks. In blind tasting settings, professionals are far better at decoupling price from performance. They’re trained to detect structure, balance, complexity, and typicity—the hallmarks of wine quality that go beyond label hype. And yet, even for them, critic consensus and the industry echo chamber still create feedback loops that shape pricing, availability, and even the kinds of wines being made.
This all leads to one of the most overlooked dynamics in wine today: the exponential nature of wine pricing. The jump from an 85-point wine to an 87-point wine might result in a moderate price increase. But from 90 to 92? That’s where things get wild. Prices can double or triple over just two or three points. The higher you climb up the score ladder, the more dramatic the pricing becomes—even if the quality gains are subtle at best.
It’s not necessarily a con. Many wines that score above 92 or 95 are stunning—crafted with obsessive attention to detail, using low-yield fruit, aged in custom oak, and often produced in tiny quantities. These elements cost money. But does that make them more enjoyable? For the collector, the connoisseur, or the brand loyalist, often yes. For the average wine drinker? Not always.
There’s good news in all this. It means you don’t have to spend a fortune to drink great wine. In fact, the so-called “value zone” for wine quality sits roughly between 87 and 91 points. Wines in this band often deliver serious craftsmanship without the prestige markup. These are the bottles that might not land on the critics’ year-end lists but will wow your dinner guests—and your taste buds—without draining your bank account.
At the end of the day, wine is deeply personal. Ratings and prices are useful signposts, but they shouldn’t dictate your entire journey. Some of the most rewarding wines are those discovered off the beaten path—affordable, under-rated, and perfect for your palate.
So should you pay more for a higher-scoring wine? Sometimes. Especially if you know what you’re looking for. But if you’re chasing pleasure, curiosity, or the thrill of discovery, don’t be afraid to zig when the price tags zag. After all, your mouth doesn’t care what the label says.
Drink what delights you. Everything else is just window dressing.