Cohiba Talisman - Dark vs Light Wrapper

[SigmundChurchill]

1 hour ago, Psiman said:

light or dark it doesn't matter. they are both over priced and over rated .amazing how people are swayed by hype and will over pay for something ala Pappy bourbon. 

Yes, there are always going to be people who say this isn't worth it, and that is overpriced, etc, etc, etc.  It is a little odd to me when it comes from someone in the cigar community, or any community where personal taste is so heavily involved.  Like with foodies, wine connoisseurs, etc.

But this can only be a true statement when comparing two or more of the exact same thing.  If you pay more for a car at one car dealer than the same exact car, with the same exact options, at the other dealers, then the car wasn't worth what you paid.  The car was overpriced.  Can a cigar be overpriced?  Sure.  But it is only overpriced if you paid more for it than you could have otherwise paid somewhere else, assuming the same quality, year, etc.  Can Pappy be overpriced?  Sure, if you paid more for it than they are charging for the same bottle down the street.

Barring the above conditions, there is no such thing as over priced or over rated in a general sense.  The market is fluid.  I am not a Pappy fan, myself.  But I can't say that it is over priced and over rated, because we are all different.  I can say it is overpriced for me, because I don't like it, but I am aware that there are people who love it.  

What makes me so special that I can decide what tastes good and what doesn't, for everybody else?

If someone loves it, and they have the money to pay for it, then it is not over priced or over rated for them.

Then to complicate things even more, there is the relativity of the value of money.   $1000 to some people is a whole week's salary, while other people make that much in an hour.  The person who works for a whole week to make $1000 is going to place a completely different value on $1000 than someone who makes it in an hour.  And someone who makes it in an hour of work is going to place a totally different value on it than someone who makes it in an hour passively.  

In other words, to some people, paying the price of an "over priced, over rated" box of cigars, is like paying the price of a pack of cigarettes to other people.

 

[SigmundChurchill]

39 minutes ago, Psiman said:

and with that logic go pay $20 a gallon for gasoline. Rationale is not what I'm speaking of. there is a think called warranting and if not then charge whatever for whatever. Try winning that case in a court. It's not about who can afford something it's about what is called ACV in the real world and that's how it works. Actual Cash Value and not what ever you can get away with charging for something. Are you familiar with diamonds and what the actual value is in business and not what someone will pay for it ? The thing with Cohiba is the ends don't justify the means when you can hold it up to many other brands. They maybe should be priced 20% at most over other brands of Habanos and to me I will take a Trinidad 9 time out of 10 over Cohiba. Crystal Rose is $600 a bottle in U.S. and it's not $600 wine but that's the price and that doesn't mean it's justified. That is why there is assessments and judges to determine if something warrants it's price regardless of what it is and who can afford it or not. People seem to enjoy purchasing what they believe is some mystique that is usually a racket for suckers. Did I mention what diamonds are actually valued at and what someone will pay for it ? 

You seem to be missing the point.  

A gallon of gas does the same exact thing whether I pay $20 a gallon or $4 a gallon for it.  So you would be overpaying for it if you spent $20 a gallon.  I covered this already.   When you are comparing two absolute equals, then yes, you can make a generalized statement about overpaying if one costs more than the other.  That doesn't work with matters of taste.

The difference is, you are dictating taste for other people.  There is no actual cash value when it comes to taste, because 1. Everybody tastes things differently. 2. Everybody places a different value on the experiences they want to have while on this earth.  3. Everybody places a different value on money.  So when it comes to taste, there is no actual cash value.  The value is dictated 100% by supply and demand.  

Your post makes me believe that you think because Trinidads taste better than Cohibas to you, that they should taste better to everybody.  Well, if that were the case, and the number of boxes produced were similar, then Trinidads would cost more than Cohibas.  And rightly so.  

Same thing with your $600 Crystal Rose.  If paying $600 and drinking bottles of Crystal Rose makes someone happy, who are you to tell them they are "not justified" in buying it for that?  If enough people pay it, the price will stay at $600, and that price is justified.  If people stop buying it, they will have to lower the price in order to sell it, and the new price is justified.  If more people want it than is available, the price will rise, and that is justified.

[Bijan]

On the topic of overpriced products, I think there's merit to both arguments.

I don't think people are so entirely stupid as to pay much more for something that they don't enjoy more. So there's something to be said for the more expensive product being better.

On the other hand if something costs 10x, do people enjoy it 10x more? Some will but does the average buyer feel that way?

You can argue subjectiveness and relative value of money, but that doesn't answer that entirely. Ok if someone can afford to use $100 bills to heat their house, then maybe they don't mind paying 10x or 100x for cigars that are 10% better. Makes sense for them as you only live once, but to normal people that's still a raw deal.

I can't say if super high end cigars are 10% better or 10x better or incomparably better than "good" cigars. But even if it is subjective, that subjectivity is objective. That is the buyers have actual preferences, which they might not quantify themselves but could be quantified. If that were done, we could tell if people are getting a good value (10x price, 10x or more enjoyment) or simply overpaying to get the best (10x price, 10% more enjoyment) or something in between. Again back to the people with lots of money compared to an average person, it makes sense for them to pay whatever the going rate is for the best cigar. You can only smoke so many cigars a day. Even if they are objectively overpriced, it is still a rational decision from that point of view to smoke the absolute best.

What I know is there is an incomparable difference at the bottom end. The cheapest cuban cigars I don't enjoy smoking (generally the short fillers, but not a big fan of vegueros, though not that cheap). The ones at the lower end but not off the charts (Mille Fleurs, Super Partagas and such) I still enjoy but definitely not near as much as the ones slightly up from there (BPC, RGPC, Monte 4, Party Shorts, etc.). Then there are the Cohibas, Trinidas, Sir Winstons, etc (as well as a number of vintage cigars I have). Better for sure, but not enough to ruin the last category of bread and butter smokes for me.

All that to say that to me the cheapest cuban cigars are overpriced to me, even though they are the cheapest, because I basically don't enjoy smoking them. Of the next two categories, I think you get what you pay for or more in terms of BPC or Party Shorts vs Super Partagas or MF. To me the next category after that you still get what you pay for (or at least that was the case at the prices I paid at the time), as in general I'd probably get as much additional enjoyment from those vintage smokes or Cohiba, Trinidad, etc as the price difference. Though not being made of money I often would rather smoke twice as many cigars that are half as good and half as expensive (at least between these two categories). The other issue for me would be that I like variety and aside from the vintage cigars there's not much variety at the top end of CCs, it's basically Cohiba, Trinidad and a handful of other vitolas.

[Chibearsv]

8 hours ago, Psiman said:

when it comes to taste things get debunk frequently when they are consumed blind. Whisky and rum is a huge example of that . $25 R.L. Seale's can and has destroyed rums that are $100's and I know of single malts that wipe the floor with hundred's of dollar malts and they are between $50 and $100. Same can be said for a lot of wines. Macallan is decent stuff but I can show a bunch of malts that are cheaper that are far superior but a person may insist on Macallan because of brand recognition and in a blind they will pick the Macallan far from the top. Branding only carry's so much weight and can get knocked out cold in blind tastings. Dalmore is another example of a decent malt but not in the league of some stuff that is cheaper and presented better with no color added of chill filtration. Perception is a strong thing. I showed up a few guys at a cigar lounge with a Wild Turkey 101 bourbon that was scoffed at and put it against a 3 other bourbons that were all big brands and much higher priced and the Wild Turkey won on taste alone. I have blown minds with cheap rums like R.L Seale's being much superior and it has left people scratching there heads on how could something that cheap be that much better. Same with a bunch of Hamilton rums that are dirt cheap and presented well with no sugar added and non chill filtered. I have cask strength Hampden Estate from 2015 that is $19 that mops the floor with some other Hampton Estates that are over three times the price. It's an indy bottling and people have thought it would be some cheap trash only to find out it's world class high ester Hampden Estate. People need to get over silly mystique and not be so swayed by brand and perception. Cigars are no different. All that glitters isn't gold and there are plenty of diamonds in the rough in all kinds of things and they out preform much higher priced items. My books are assessed on their content and not their cover. Pappy's and Macallan's collected dust until they were over hyped and both are good products. they just aren't that good. Same with Cohiba in general. It's all primarily over hyped branding that can get exposed if one is not hung up on brands and their perceptions. Just Sayin !!!

If you can find me a Churchill sized cigar that tastes to me like an Esplendido and was cheaper, I'd buy it no matter the brand name or label color.  Until then, I'll "overpay" for Esplendidos.  The packaging and name's got nothing to do with the equation for me.  Why would it, I smoke alone.  For me, it's a unique cigar in every respect and it happens to be the cigar I enjoy smoking more than any other.  While they're priced where I can afford them, I'll buy them; but I'm not willing to go into debt to buy them.  So right now, for me, they aren't overpriced.  I think that's the point @SigmundChurchill was trying to make.  Nothing to do with market economics or law, simply price for flavor.

Sorry boys, back to the business at hand.  I cheated a little and chose the lighter of the wrappers for the Talisman last night.  It was still pretty dark and darker than I remembered.  It was smooth, rich, and complex with coffee, chocolate, and musty earthiness.  Not much Cohiba twang. It was both different and delicious.  I may pull from one of the darker boxes tonight for a fresh comparison.  We'll see how I feel about it after work.

[SigmundChurchill]

On 1/21/2022 at 2:35 AM, Bijan said:

On the topic of overpriced products, I think there's merit to both arguments.

I don't think people are so entirely stupid as to pay much more for something that they don't enjoy more. So there's something to be said for the more expensive product being better.

On the other hand if something costs 10x, do people enjoy it 10x more? Some will but does the average buyer feel that way?

You can argue subjectiveness and relative value of money, but that doesn't answer that entirely. Ok if someone can afford to use $100 bills to heat their house, then maybe they don't mind paying 10x or 100x for cigars that are 10% better. Makes sense for them as you only live once, but to normal people that's still a raw deal.

I can't say if super high end cigars are 10% better or 10x better or incomparably better than "good" cigars. But even if it is subjective, that subjectivity is objective. That is the buyers have actual preferences, which they might not quantify themselves but could be quantified. If that were done, we could tell if people are getting a good value (10x price, 10x or more enjoyment) or simply overpaying to get the best (10x price, 10% more enjoyment) or something in between. Again back to the people with lots of money compared to an average person, it makes sense for them to pay whatever the going rate is for the best cigar. You can only smoke so many cigars a day. Even if they are objectively overpriced, it is still a rational decision from that point of view to smoke the absolute best.

What I know is there is an incomparable difference at the bottom end. The cheapest cuban cigars I don't enjoy smoking (generally the short fillers, but not a big fan of vegueros, though not that cheap). The ones at the lower end but not off the charts (Mille Fleurs, Super Partagas and such) I still enjoy but definitely not near as much as the ones slightly up from there (BPC, RGPC, Monte 4, Party Shorts, etc.). Then there are the Cohibas, Trinidas, Sir Winstons, etc (as well as a number of vintage cigars I have). Better for sure, but not enough to ruin the last category of bread and butter smokes for me.

All that to say that to me the cheapest cuban cigars are overpriced to me, even though they are the cheapest, because I basically don't enjoy smoking them. Of the next two categories, I think you get what you pay for or more in terms of BPC or Party Shorts vs Super Partagas or MF. To me the next category after that you still get what you pay for (or at least that was the case at the prices I paid at the time), as in general I'd probably get as much additional enjoyment from those vintage smokes or Cohiba, Trinidad, etc as the price difference. Though not being made of money I often would rather smoke twice as many cigars that are half as good and half as expensive (at least between these two categories). The other issue for me would be that I like variety and aside from the vintage cigars there's not much variety at the top end of CCs, it's basically Cohiba, Trinidad and a handful of other vitolas.

In economics, there is a principle called the law of diminishing returns.  I have taken that, and adapted it's meaning to apply to luxury items.  Once an item, whether it be a car, or a type of stone for a counter top, or a cigar, or whatever, reaches a point of maximal value, the upgrades get smaller in scope and more expensive.  Why?  Because as you are moving into the higher echelons, the "customer base" is getting smaller and smaller, and involving less and less people to whom price is an issue.  Until you finally reach the top buyers, who only want the best and they don't give a rats ass what the cost is.  Everything is inexpensive to them.  

So no, a luxury item that costs 10X more, is not going to be 10X better.  But if it is 10% "better" than the "2nd best", there are people who are willing and able to pay 10X more, just to have "the best".  And that extra cost means absolutely nothing to them.  And that is why the masses are priced out of certain items.  

Then, some of the people priced out, complain that those items are over priced because the increased value is too small to justify the big price difference.  But they don't realize, not everyone is in their financial position, and to some people, the small increase in value is not over priced at all.  It is priced just right.

After smoking thousands of cigars over the last 30 years, I have a very firm grasp on the cigars I like and the cigars I don't like.  I have long since stopped buying boxes randomly to "try them".  Like you, I have a handful of cigars I absolutely love.  And I have a handful of cigars I like a lot.  My humidor is filled with boxes of the same 5 cigars, the ones I love.  Then I have 2 or 3 boxes of each of the cigars I like a lot.  I don't want to smoke any cigars that do not fall into one of those two categories. I spent years of doing that, just to get a wide variety of experience, and to see if there is any other cigars I can add to those two categories. I still occasionally add cigars to the rotation, but unless it is something expected to be excellent, I don't buy a box without trying one first.

On 1/21/2022 at 5:25 AM, Psiman said:

when it comes to taste things get debunk frequently when they are consumed blind. Whisky and rum is a huge example of that . $25 R.L. Seale's can and has destroyed rums that are $100's and I know of single malts that wipe the floor with hundred's of dollar malts and they are between $50 and $100. Same can be said for a lot of wines. Macallan is decent stuff but I can show a bunch of malts that are cheaper that are far superior but a person may insist on Macallan because of brand recognition and in a blind they will pick the Macallan far from the top. Branding only carry's so much weight and can get knocked out cold in blind tastings. Dalmore is another example of a decent malt but not in the league of some stuff that is cheaper and presented better with no color added of chill filtration. Perception is a strong thing. I showed up a few guys at a cigar lounge with a Wild Turkey 101 bourbon that was scoffed at and put it against a 3 other bourbons that were all big brands and much higher priced and the Wild Turkey won on taste alone. I have blown minds with cheap rums like R.L Seale's being much superior and it has left people scratching there heads on how could something that cheap be that much better. Same with a bunch of Hamilton rums that are dirt cheap and presented well with no sugar added and non chill filtered. I have cask strength Hampden Estate from 2015 that is $19 that mops the floor with some other Hampton Estates that are over three times the price. It's an indy bottling and people have thought it would be some cheap trash only to find out it's world class high ester Hampden Estate. People need to get over silly mystique and not be so swayed by brand and perception. Cigars are no different. All that glitters isn't gold and there are plenty of diamonds in the rough in all kinds of things and they out preform much higher priced items. My books are assessed on their content and not their cover. Pappy's and Macallan's collected dust until they were over hyped and both are good products. they just aren't that good. Same with Cohiba in general. It's all primarily over hyped branding that can get exposed if one is not hung up on brands and their perceptions. Just Sayin !!!

You can't claim that you like Trinidad more than Cohiba in one post, and then claim that people don't know the difference between cigars in the next post.  I have only ever been in one blind cigar tasting, with a bunch of guys from this board, in Cuba.  I knew what the cigar was immediately, but that is because it just happened to be one of the cigars in my ever diminishing rotation of cigars.  I remember when I told him that I was smoking a Hoyo Epi 2, the person who handed out the cigars said to me, are you sure it's not a CoRo?  I said, "Yes, I am sure."  He responded "How can you be sure?"  And I said, "Because I know what a CoRo tastes like, and this doesn't taste anything like a CoRo."  That was my 1 experience with a blind tasting.  I would bet a box of Siglo VI that I could pick out a Siglo VI in a blind tasting.  I would bet a box of CoRo's that I could pick out a CoRo in a blind tasting.  I would bet a box of Esplendidos that I could pick out an Esplendido in a blind tasting.

Here is the thing, when I drink scotch, I like Laphroaig.  I don't care that it is not the most expensive, I love the strong, smoky, peaty combination.  And I would never mistake that for Macallan.  It is no different for me and Cohiba vs other cigars.  The only difference is a lot more people agree with me on Cohiba, which is why the price is higher, vs Laphroaig, which is why the price is more reasonable.

[Bijan]

6 hours ago, SigmundChurchill said:

In economics, there is a principle called the law of diminishing returns.  I have taken that, and adapted it's meaning to apply to luxury items.  Once an item, whether it be a car, or a type of stone for a counter top, or a cigar, or whatever, reaches a point of maximal value, the upgrades get smaller in scope and more expensive.  Why?  Because as you are moving into the higher echelons, the "customer base" is getting smaller and smaller, and involving less and less people to whom price is an issue.  Until you finally reach the top who only wants the best and they don't give a rats ass what the cost is.  Everything is inexpensive to them.  

Yes, I've definitely noticed this with cars (at least super cars).

Oddly enough houses don't seem to follow this logic. At least here in Canada from the bottom to the top (in any given neighborhood, as the prices betwee the cheapest location and the most expensive do vary), you get proportionally more for more money (or even a better than even return). I guess it's because of housing being both a necessity (or at least universally desired), and the limited supply even at lower levels and the recent upward trajectory in prices, but there's many more people competing for the somewhat affordable houses at the bottom, than the "luxury" houses at the top.

At the top end $40-$60 million range (I don't think any houses have been put on the market in this country) the houses are basically unsellabe, as people spending that much on a house want to build their own dream home and not buy someone else's idea of dream home.

6 hours ago, SigmundChurchill said:

After smoking thousands of cigars over the last 30 years, I have a very firm grasp on the cigars I like and the cigars I don't like.  I have long since stopped buying boxes randomly to "try them".  Like you, I have a handful of cigars I absolutely love.  And I have a handful of cigars I like a lot.  My humidor is filled with boxes of the same 5 cigars, the ones I love.  Then I have 2 or 3 boxes of each of the cigars I like a lot.  I don't want to smoke any cigars that do not fall into one of those two categories. I spent years of doing that, just to get a wide variety of experience, and to see if there is any other cigars I can add to those two categories. I still occasionally add cigars to the rotation, but unless it is something expected to be excellent, I don't buy a box without trying one first.

I do think that within regular production CCs, which I take to include any cigar under $40 or $50 a cigar, we really aren't "overpaying" in that sense for the cigars. At least there is no case of 10x price being only a 10% increase in quality. If you take RyJ Churchill vs Sir Winston and Esplendidos, I really think the Sir Winston and Esplendidos are better than the price difference. I think a lot of people (myself included) would rather get a box of Sir Winston and/or Esplendidos than receive the equivalent number of boxes of RyJ Churchills.

But beyond $50 a cigar I think you really and truly do hit the law of diminishing returns.

I'll quote you from an old thread on this (about Behikes):

Quote

All three sizes used to taste like overpriced Siglo VI's to me.

But ever since going to the EL factory and smelling the strong, sweet smell coming from the Medio Tiempo leaves, I have a new appreciation for the Behikes.

Now they taste like overpriced Siglo VI's with Medio Tiempo leaves mixed in.

And it sounds like I'm joking, but I am. not.  I taste the distinct Siglo VI profile, and now that my brain knows what to look for, the sweet flavors coming from the Medio Tiempo are mingled in with it.  I truly appreciate them more now.  

That said, at the price point, Siglo VI's are a bargain.  I don't think the Medio Tiempo is worth the extra $60 per cigar.  I will still buy them once in a while, but I do so knowing that I may not be getting my money's worth.  If I could get them at Cuba prices, I would smoke them every day.  Unfortunately for me, everybody else wants them too.

 

[SigmundChurchill]

4 minutes ago, Bijan said:

I do think that within regular production CCs, which I take to include any cigar under $40 or $50 a cigar, we really aren't "overpaying" in that sense for the cigars. At least there is no case of 10x price being only a 10% increase in quality. If you take RyJ Churchill vs Sir Winston and Esplendidos, I really think the Sir Winston and Esplendidos are better than the price difference. I think a lot of people (myself included) would rather get a box of Sir Winston and/or Esplendidos than receive the equivalent number of boxes of RyJ Churchills.

But beyond $50 a cigar I think you really and truly do hit the law of diminishing returns.

I'll quote you from an old thread on this (about Behikes):

 

That is the perfect example of using "overpriced" correctly.  It was my claim that the two cigars taste exactly the same, so it is like the Behike is the $20 gas vs the Siglo VI which is the $4 gas.

If you have a cheap cigar that tastes exactly like a Cohiba, I will buy as many as I can, and say that Cohibas are overpriced.  Because there is something identical, that costs less.  Unfortunately, nothing like that exists.

[Bijan]

1 hour ago, SigmundChurchill said:

That is the perfect example of using "overpriced" correctly.  It was my claim that the two cigars taste exactly the same, so it is like the Behike is the $20 gas vs the Siglo VI which is the $4 gas.

If you have a cheap cigar that tastes exactly like a Cohiba, I will buy as many as I can, and say that Cohibas are overpriced.  Because there is something identical, that costs less.  Unfortunately, nothing like that exists.

Well people are paying 3X Siglo VI prices for Behikes. Are they imagining things?

Or are they 1-10% better?

You did say you could taste the sweet flavours of the Media Siglo, and that you'd smoke them every day at a reasonable price. Would you pay any premium over Siglo VI?

Also I mean subjectively to you they may taste the same, but then to @Psiman Trinidad's may taste better than Cohibas and for him then it's like paying $20 for regular gas (Cohiba) or $4 for premium gas (Trinidad).

Edit: And back to the original topic, Talismans seem to be about 30-50% over Siglo VI for 2019 boxes, and 45-80% over Siglo VI for 2017 boxes. How does that stack up in your opinion?

[ha_banos]

You guys should come buy cigars in the UK. The meaning of overpriced is ... skewed.

Sig6 = £72.99 (£64 if buy a box of 25) - from where they are available in stock

Behike 52 = £199

 

 

 

 

[SigmundChurchill]

12 hours ago, Bijan said:

Well people are paying 3X Siglo VI prices for Behikes. Are they imagining things?

Or are they 1-10% better?

You did say you could taste the sweet flavours of the Media Siglo, and that you'd smoke them every day at a reasonable price. Would you pay any premium over Siglo VI?

Also I mean subjectively to you they may taste the same, but then to @Psiman Trinidad's may taste better than Cohibas and for him then it's like paying $20 for regular gas (Cohiba) or $4 for premium gas (Trinidad).

No, You have it backwards.  If they taste exactly the same, you can say "overpriced" in a general sense if one cost more than the other, but if you say they taste different than each other, then it is impossible to say one is overpriced (in a general sense) because they will each be priced based on demand.  

If they both taste the same, then they should be the same price.  If not, one is overpriced.  

Though in thinking about it, I do have to concede that it is possible that other people do not think they taste exactly the same, as I do, so it is not like buying two bottles of the same alcohol for 2 different prices.  So I am guilty of having misused the word myself here, though I did point out in the post that they taste exactly the same to me, so maybe on a lesser level.  Would I pay any premium over the Siglo VI for the added sweet flavor?  I don't know.  I still haven't decided if that makes them taste better to me.  It's not like an in-your-face kind of difference.  It takes concentration to taste it, so if I am smoking and watching a movie, I might miss it completely.

[CigarOgami]

I have about 30 boxes of Talisman from 2017-2019. Worth ? if one can afford, why not !

I do agree the light wrappers taste more Cohiba and the dark wrapper tends to be more LE. However, for a similar wrapper color, I like 2019 more than 2017 personally.

Edit: And back to the original topic, Talismans seem to be about 30-50% over Siglo VI for 2019 boxes, and 45-80% over Siglo VI for 2017 boxes. How does that stack up in your opinion?


2019 boxes is selling in UK with about £100 more than the 2017.

3 hours ago, ha_banos said:

You guys should come buy cigars in the UK. The meaning of overpriced is ... skewed.
Sig6 = £72.99 (£64 if buy a box of 25) - from where they are available in stock
Behike 52 = £199

The price in Hong Kong and China is even more expensive! Overpriced ? They are out of stock.

[Bijan]

34 minutes ago, SigmundChurchill said:

No, You have it backwards.  If they taste exactly the same, you can say "overpriced" in a general sense if one cost more than the other, but if you say they taste different than each other, then it is impossible to say one is overpriced (in a general sense) because they will each be priced based demand.

Yes if two things are exactly the same it is easy to say the more expensive one is overpriced. But that doesn't mean if two things are different you can't say one is overpriced. It's just that you can't easily prove it objectively. We all accept it subjectively in one's own case, as to say X is overpriced in my opinion.

An example of proving this would be having boxes of unbanded cigars and letting people pick whichever they prefer. If over time people ended up picking PSD4s over CoRos, or Esmeraldas over Siglo VIs we could say that those are overpriced.

I'm not saying that is what would happen. I'm just saying that it could conceivably happen.

In a more general sense gas is fungible (like pure gold or cash). Cigars aren't. People might be willing to pay more just to have get fancy behike boxes and bands, or because they like the vitolas, or because they think they can taste a difference.

34 minutes ago, SigmundChurchill said:

Though in thinking about it, I do have to concede that it is possible that other people do not think they taste exactly the same, as I do, so it is not like buying two bottles of the same alcohol for 2 different prices.  So I am guilty of having misused the word myself here, though I did point out in the post that they taste exactly the same to me, so maybe on a lesser level.  

Yes I think this is the difficulty. When we taste a difference, the price difference makes sense to us. When we don't it seems like paying more for nothing. If someone prefers the cheaper option, then nothing makes sense to them anymore and they think people are just crazy fools 🙂

[SigmundChurchill]

2 hours ago, CigarOgami said:

Edit: And back to the original topic, Talismans seem to be about 30-50% over Siglo VI for 2019 boxes, and 45-80% over Siglo VI for 2017 boxes. How does that stack up in your opinion?


2019 boxes is selling in UK with about £100 more than the 2017.

Back in 2017, for a while it was like they couldn't give them away.  The original price was around $750-$800, but I bought most of my boxes for $500 and change.

2 hours ago, Bijan said:

Yes if two things are exactly the same it is easy to say the more expensive one is overpriced. But that doesn't mean if two things are different you can't say one is overpriced. It's just that you can't easily prove it objectively. We all accept it subjectively in one's own case, as to say X is overpriced in my opinion.

An example of proving this would be having boxes of unbanded cigars and letting people pick whichever they preferred. If over time people ended up picking PSD4s over CoRos, or Esmeraldas over Siglo VIs we could say that those are overpriced.

I'm not saying that is what would happen. I'm just saying that it could conceivably happen.

In a more general sense gas is fungible (like pure gold or cash). Cigars aren't. People might be willing to pay more just to have get fancy behike boxes and bands, or because they like the vitolas, or because they think they can taste a difference.

Yes I think this is the difficulty. When we taste a difference, the price difference makes sense to us. When we don't it seems like paying more for nothing. If someone prefers the cheaper option, then nothing makes sense to them anymore and they think people are just crazy fools 🙂

Everything you are saying here just reaffirms what I have been saying.  I don't ever have any issue with someone saying "Overpriced, in my opinion."

That acknowledges that it is an opinion, not fact.  This is fine.  I only take issue when someone uses it as a general statement of fact, because they are making themselves the arbiter of taste/value for everyone else.

Your experiment would have to be pretty wide scale for it to have any validity.  It's not like you can take 20 subjects and come up with a "consensus" for the entire cigar community.

[Bijan]

5 minutes ago, SigmundChurchill said:

Your experiment would have to be pretty wide scale for it to have any validity.  It's not like you can take 20 subjects and come up with a "consensus" for the entire cigar community.

Yes you'd need something like 1,000 boxes of CoRo and various other Robustos, 1000s of participants spread around in a dozen locations throughout the world. I'd probably trust the results at that scale. Not something anyone is likely to do to win an internet argument but my point is it is possible (definitely reasonable with Coke vs Pepsi, that was the claim with the Pepsi challenge, that people chose Pepsi blind but bought more coca cola, a counter claim being that Pepsi was too sweet and was preferred in a small dose in that scenario but people didn't really want to drink it in quantity).

[Islandboy]

27 minutes ago, SigmundChurchill said:

Back in 2017, for a while it was like they couldn't give them away.  The original price was around $750-$800, but I bought most of my boxes for $500 and change.

Yeah, I bought an original release box for $500 and change. Seemed outrageous at the time, but looking at the current landscape, it was pretty reasonable. 

[ltte]

My friend saying:

Over priced does not exist - we do not earn enough money. 😄

Ltte