Coronavirus, how are you preparing for it and how it is affecting you so far?

[Trenchcoat]

One report out today from the UK on the many ways the UK Employees may lose out and the stuff that is likely to increasingly happen as we unfortunately head towards recession/depression:

http://www.building.co.uk/news/furloughed-staff-at-collapsed-builder-told-they-could-be-dumped-from-scheme-by-thursday/5105739.article

In addition like I said before I can see many companies laying off staff as the furlough scheme comes to an end. This will mean that the furlough scheme for many could end up little better that a one stop before unemployment situation.

This time so far it looks like me and most family close to me are lucky in looking like we may all avoid the dole pretty much. Knowing that it can end up as a long time out of work chasing scant jobs or those that don't exist I know it's no joy and one I would be happy to avoid.

[Trenchcoat]

The auction for the Lysol was taken down. Seller probably got death threats or the listing violated eBay's policy against profiting greatly during this crisis.

I was told of a couple of coronavirus deaths this weekend. One was a step aunt of mine. Although we are not related by blood, I knew her well. Sweet lady. She was in her early 80's but healthy. Her son was a logger. I worked with him 20 years ago in the woods. He's a party animal and my first guess was he brought the virus into their home since he takes care of his mom now. An employee of mine said a bar acquaintance of his passed away from COVID-19. The guy was in his 60's but didn't live a healthy life.

I have a friend in Arizona that's a maximum security prison guard. He is now tasked with watching over prisoners infected with the virus.

How do you see this virus situation panning out Billy?

I know they tried to find a cure for the common cold in the 60s/70s with no joy. Is it a case that unless they essentially accomplish what they have failed to do to date we are all eventually doomed?

[Maxx2]

Is it a case that unless they essentially accomplish what they have failed to do to date we are all eventually doomed?

The "cure" will bring down the world. It is much much worse than the virus.

[BC]

No worries Maxx, Trump said we'll be back roaring in the 3rd and 4th quarter.  He created the greatest economy in history with his own hands and will do it again.

Didn't mention though that much would be dependent on what is done between now and then.  A few big flareups could ruin the deal.

On top of it maybe he'll make China pay by increasing tariffs.  - He still pushes the line that tariffs are paid by China.  Guess the greatest economic advisors in the world haven't sat down with him yet to let him know who pays tariffs.  Or maybe it's just his bait and switch routine in action.

All will perfect like the response was, even greatly perfect, perfectly perfect!

[SteveInBoston]

Guys,

You do realize that tariffs are payed by US businesses, and usually passed along to the consumer, right?  I am a bit of a wine collector and I am paying 25% more on Bordeaux releases.  I am paying, not France.

Indirectly the tariff is to reduce the demand of imported goods and in theory adjust trade balances.  But the immediate monetary impact is to US companies and citizens, not to the foreign nation.


Edit:  I didn't read BC's post correctly.  He states the same.

[Trenchcoat]

The "cure" will bring down the world. It is much much worse than the virus.

Hmmnn, I fear your cartoon is right Maxx. In my opinion the UK made two crucial mistakes:

1). They paid out too much in the furlough payments (80 percent of salary etc). This is money that the government is going to have to find in the near future. Add to that extra borrowing and it's going to add up to a big burden to for the country to pay off.

2). They closed down industry when they should have kept most of it open (except gyms, restaurants, etc of course) but with strict government drawn up social distancing measures & PPE. This will cut revenue to companies drastically and will also mean the government take in less tax revenue.

This all means that economic disaster is all but certain in the coming months and unfortunately I don't see it going away soon, unless we are real lucky. That will likely be the prognosis for most countries globally and the more poorer ones are likely to suffer worse than us unless they specialise in supplying other countries with what they need most perhaps.

[tfcrew]

[msmob]

Dear Trench,

Your ability to post ignorant tosh knows no bounds...

If we hadn't had a lockdown, mostly obeyed by good citizens, our health services would have been overrun.

Boris has made it clear that we...that includes you...will not be undoing all that effort and risking a new spike.

[ML]

Guys,

You do realize that tariffs are payed by US businesses, and usually passed along to the consumer, right?  I am a bit of a wine collector and I am paying 25% more on Bordeaux releases.  I am paying, not France.

Steve, I disagree with you . . . in general . . . but not in the specific case of wine that you know about.

Steve, the statement you give, just follows from simple logic without considering other factors . . . mainly competition . . . long run strategies, etc.

i.e.  Sure . . . easy to think that if a cost increase shows up somewhere along the line . . . that a price increase for end buyer is certain to result.  But this is far from true . . . in general.

In general . . . most of the tariffs will not be paid by U. S. citizens because:
1) Businesses in China (and other countries affected) will reduce prices to U.S. businesses to offset part of the tariff.  It's all about trying to maintain volume, not lose market share, and take a long run viewpoint (orientals are great at this).
2) U.S. importers will absorb part of the tariffs.
3) U.S. wholesalers will absorb part of the tariffs.
4) U.S. retailers will absorb part of the tariffs.

I have not noticed any price increases at all.

Maybe a T shirt at WalMart will go from $3.34 to $3.35.

[BillyB]

In general . . . most of the tariffs will not be paid by U. S. citizens because:
1) Businesses in China (and other countries affected) will reduce prices to U.S. businesses to offset part of the tariff.  It's all about trying to maintain volume, not lose market share, and take a long run viewpoint (orientals are great at this).
2) U.S. importers will absorb part of the tariffs.
3) U.S. wholesalers will absorb part of the tariffs.
4) U.S. retailers will absorb part of the tariffs.

I have not noticed any price increases at all.

Maybe a T shirt at WalMart will go from $3.34 to $3.35.

You forgot to list the most important reason China is paying. As a trade war tool, they devalued their currency to make all their products cheaper for us to buy. Trump's trade war hurts them more than the American consumer. They are gambling they can hold out longer than Trump. They probably feel he's going to get re-elected so they gave in and agreed to a phase one deal to get immediate relief. Phase two will be interesting now with the virus in the mix. Trump can now get more. The better hope Biden wins.

How do you see this virus situation panning out Billy?

It will be back but not as fast. From the time it shows up in a country, it took two months to shut countries down putting millions out of jobs. With social distancing and other behavior and business changes, we can keep an outbreak from showing up as fast. Some individuals and businesses won't be able to cope with the changes. Economies around the world will continue to suffer. There's a huge medical cost and there's a huge cost just to test. Without a vaccine or lifetime immunity, we will have to live with these changes forever. Although a vaccine was never created for a coronavirus, we have every available lab in the world attempting to find one so who knows? If there is a moment in history to find a vaccine for a coronavirus, this could be it. Labs will try to push their product and use the media to get us excited about their work but most likely one vaccine will be chosen and even more likely, it's not going to work on 100% of the people but something is better than nothing.

[krimster2]

ok, Americans...
please stop killing your vets by injecting them with hydroxychloroquine and clorox


Scientists at NIH’s Rocky Mountain Lab inoculated 6 monkeys with single doses of Oxford vaccine.
The monkeys were then exposed to heavy quantities of the virus — exposure that had sickened other monkeys. But more than 28 days later all six were healthy!!!!

God Save The Queen!!
Hip!! Hip!

this is the beginning of the end for the virus...
BUT...
we'll have to get a new version of the vaccine each year, just the like the flu vaccine, maybe we'll even get both together!!
will it be ready before the fall peak is the main question now

if this pans out, then if you can survive on your own for the next year or so, then you might be able to get vaccinated
starting with front line essential workers, etc and then finally descending all the way down to Billy and Gator, et al...
then pets right after them along with farm animals, etc

I'm going to get an experimental Russian vaccine in August
this allows me to get a "Virus" stamp on my passport for the districts I'm allowed to be in (just 2)

looks like my kids will be allowed to keep their American passports while they are in Russia, so if they want to, they are free to leave Russia to return "home"
if they come back, there might not be much left...

[SteveInBoston]

Steve, I disagree with you . . . in general . . . but not in the specific case of wine that you know about.

Steve, the statement you give, just follows from simple logic without considering other factors . . . mainly competition . . . long run strategies, etc.

i.e.  Sure . . . easy to think that if a cost increase shows up somewhere along the line . . . that a price increase for end buyer is certain to result.  But this is far from true . . . in general.

In general . . . most of the tariffs will not be paid by U. S. citizens because:
1) Businesses in China (and other countries affected) will reduce prices to U.S. businesses to offset part of the tariff.  It's all about trying to maintain volume, not lose market share, and take a long run viewpoint (orientals are great at this).
2) U.S. importers will absorb part of the tariffs.
3) U.S. wholesalers will absorb part of the tariffs.
4) U.S. retailers will absorb part of the tariffs.

I have not noticed any price increases at all.

Maybe a T shirt at WalMart will go from $3.34 to $3.35.

I did state US companies and consumers, not just the end customer.  By companies I meant wholesalers, importers, distributors, etc.  It is a tax on the US side, whether companies or consumers.

The part about the source reducing prices is only true if there is competition for their product.  When the product only comes from China, or in my case France, and there is no competition, then there is no incentive for the source to reduce prices.

Tariffs work if there is a domestic producer offering a competing product.  Otherwise it is just a cost increase via a flat government tax.

In my case, I like and purchase French Bordeaux wine.  There is no option to buy bordeaux from anywhere else.  The release price is set by the winery when buying new releases.  Demand for bordeaux is such that they have no need to reduce the price - if US importers are cutting back, their allotment go to importers from other countries.  And it's such a niche market that the importer doesn't need to absorb the cost - the consumer will pay what they pay. 

As a side note, the more famous bordeaux wineries got tired of releasing their wines at reasonable prices and being horded by resellers and investors.  The 1982 Chateau Lafite was released at 170 francs per bottle.  A case was a reasonable $350 (after import markup).  The price increased to $20K to $40k per case.  Similar thing happened to the 1986 Lafite.  In early 2000's the wineries got tired of their wines increasing in price so drastically after release, so they started releasing them at high prices.  2005 Lafite price was set at 300 euros per bottle.   Due to great reviews that drove up demand, US importers set the price at $750 per bottle, which sold out almost immediately.  Importers that got some allotments later on sold them for $950 per bottle, and they still sold out within weeks.

[ML]

Steve, google some of the taste test results, even when French tasters were the decision makers.

Hint: California wines beat the French ones.

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/day-california-wine-beat-france

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/05/24/479163882/the-judgment-of-paris-the-blind-taste-test-that-decanted-the-wine-world

Excerpt: Patricia Gallagher, left, and wine merchant Steven Spurrier, middle, came up with the idea for the competition and participated in the tasting, although their ballots did not count; French wine editor Odette Kahn, on the other hand, did have her vote counted, and was infuriated when the American wines won.  When it was over, Kahn unsuccessfully demanded her scorecard back — according to Taber, "she wanted to make sure that the world didn't know what her scores were."

I have taken bottles of $3.00 Chardonnay and Pinot Grigio to informal taste testing wine parties.

They were ranked favorably when compared to bottles in the $15 to $80 range.

We drink a lot of Chardonnay and Pinot Grigio with shrimp, fish and chicken dinners.

[msmob]

ML. you do know that taste is a subjective thing ?

I've blind tasted a bottle of Châteauneuf-du-Pape with 7 other folk, in 1999 alongside 90 Euro cent Red Minervois - blends .. We all chose the Minervois over the Ch du P .. that cost 30 Euro

[Trenchcoat]

It will be back but not as fast. From the time it shows up in a country, it took two months to shut countries down putting millions out of jobs. With social distancing and other behavior and business changes, we can keep an outbreak from showing up as fast. Some individuals and businesses won't be able to cope with the changes. Economies around the world will continue to suffer. There's a huge medical cost and there's a huge cost just to test. Without a vaccine or lifetime immunity, we will have to live with these changes forever. Although a vaccine was never created for a coronavirus, we have every available lab in the world attempting to find one so who knows? If there is a moment in history to find a vaccine for a coronavirus, this could be it. Labs will try to push their product and use the media to get us excited about their work but most likely one vaccine will be chosen and even more likely, it's not going to work on 100% of the people but something is better than nothing.

Thanks Billy, it's good to have the inside track from someone who has got a clue. What you say sounds about right, so it may not end up in total wipeout but something that will change the way society is probably permanently. I tend to think it would be best for society to stay in this new detached way of working. If another virus cane along if we beat this one within a number of years then I don't think many countries economies would survive the cost of the economic upheaval again.

In the petrol station at the weekend they now have proper glass screens up all the way along here now. That to me looks good operating practice, in the previous week they had nothing other than a two only rule in kiosk. Other places have put similar measures in place some permanent like that while others is more make shift. I'm personally thinking though that longer term 'click & collect' & 'delivery only" will win out as the best way of operation for most businesses. Germany has eased their restrictions recently but seen a slight increase in cases of Coronavirus as a result up from 0.7 to 1.0 per person catching the virus so one person with the infection infecting 1 other person. That would mean no decrease in cases over time signalling that most businesses operating with a 2 metre social distancing measure would not in itself be enough but rather I think a removal of people from close proximity unless absolutely necessary and hence the two above models of business operation.

http://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/11505630/germany-bring-back-coronavirus-lockdowns-cases-surge/amp/

[BC]

From the North: Amarone della Valpolicella http://www.santasofia.com/santa-sofia-i-classici-vini-veronesi-i-vini.php
Local from the South:  Primitivo di Manduria http://www.winemag.com/2019/10/09/primitivo-puglia-italy-premiere-grape/

[Trenchcoat]

Dear Trench,

Your ability to post ignorant tosh knows no bounds...

If we hadn't had a lockdown, mostly obeyed by good citizens, our health services would have been overrun.

Boris has made it clear that we...that includes you...will not be undoing all that effort and risking a new spike.

Of course I would not my dear Mobers but as I've just put down many businesses are likely to not be operating in a format that is best for seeing of this virus when lockdown restrictions are lifted:

http://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/money/next-unveils-plans-reopen-stores-21943849.amp

To my mind all this clothes shopping is unnecessary to do in person and can all be done online with delivery or click and collect. It's something the high street was moving towards anyway with many high street sores and department stores disappearing, now is probably the best time to finish that transition. I'm sorry but I think the time has come to say bye, bye to the high street retail shopping as we have known it.

[SteveInBoston]

Steve, google some of the taste test results, even when French tasters were the decision makers.

Hint: California wines beat the French ones.

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/day-california-wine-beat-france

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/05/24/479163882/the-judgment-of-paris-the-blind-taste-test-that-decanted-the-wine-world

Excerpt: Patricia Gallagher, left, and wine merchant Steven Spurrier, middle, came up with the idea for the competition and participated in the tasting, although their ballots did not count; French wine editor Odette Kahn, on the other hand, did have her vote counted, and was infuriated when the American wines won.  When it was over, Kahn unsuccessfully demanded her scorecard back — according to Taber, "she wanted to make sure that the world didn't know what her scores were."

I have taken bottles of $3.00 Chardonnay and Pinot Grigio to informal taste testing wine parties.

They were ranked favorably when compared to bottles in the $15 to $80 range.

We drink a lot of Chardonnay and Pinot Grigio with shrimp, fish and chicken dinners.

Yep.  1976.  There's a good movie about it - Bottle shock. 

But the top rated wines are not new releases, but classics from great vintages.  1947 Cheval Blanc, 1961 Latour, 1982 Lafite.  Their rating went up not at wine release, but 20, 40, even 60 years later.

One of the most expensive wines was an imperial bottle of California's Screaming Eagle, 1992.  It was sold on charity auction for $500,000.  Screaming eagle typically fetches over $1000 per bottle in other vintages. 

So there are outliers - some top California wines and one Washington state wine.  And some French non-bordeaux, like Romanee Conti.  But for collections, nothing really comes close to Bordeaux.  Lafite, Latour, Mouton, Haut Brion, Margaux, Petrus, Ausone, LaFleur, Le Pin, Cheval Blanc. And they are not meant to drink at release, but years later.

In 1989, a wine merchant had a bottle of 1787 Chateau Margaux once owned by Thomas Jefferson.  It was on sale by consignment, with a list price of $500,000.  It was accidentally broken by a waiter at a wine dinner where it was on display.  The insurance payout was $225,000.

[msmob]

Of course I would not my dear Mobers but as I've just put down many businesses are likely to not be operating in a format that is best for seeing of this virus when lockdown restrictions are lifted:

http://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/money/next-unveils-plans-reopen-stores-21943849.amp

To my mid all this clothes shopping is unnecessary to do in person and can all be done online with delivery or click and collect. It's something the high street was moving towards anyway with many high street sores and department stores disappearing, now is probably the best time to finish that transition. I'm sorry but I think the time has come to say bye, bye to the high street retail shopping as we have known it.

Trench, that is an opinion, which you choose to accept. ..  I don't ..based on none of us know the end to this story.

[Gator]

There are many different wine rating systems.  Each usually progresses through 5 steps (referred to as the 5 S's) and partial scores for each step are  added to yield final rating.   

    1.  See
    2.  Swirl
    3.  Sniff
    4.  Sip
    5.  Savor

     -  "Taste" is determined in the 4th and 5th steps.
     -  Scoring is based on how the particular wine compares with the expectations for a particular grape variety.  A pinot noir thus could have a higher rating than a cab, yet the cab is preferred over the pinot noir and commands a higher price.

http://www.winemag.com/2020/04/28/washington-state-wine-guide/

http://www.marthastewart.com/7570223/how-taste-wine-five-s-tasting


Some systems use different S's.

http://winery101.com/blogs/news/winery-101-five-s-s-of-wine-tasting

Others use seven S's.

http://www.decant-this.com/seven-ss-a-path-to-better-tasting-skills/

Now you can be the ulitimate S of wine tasting - wine Snob.       Otherwise known as the universally disliked Mr. Know-it-all, of which we already number many at RWD.       

           

[BC]

Gator,

"Savour" does sound much more refined though...

[ML]

Of course taste of anything is subjective.

That's why in taste tests . . . several people are involved, the more the better.

In that way, the wines (or anything else) preferred by most of the testers will likely be preferred by the public at large also.

Simply follows the concept of any results from 'statistical sampling.'

- - - -

As separate note:

To me . . . it makes no sense to do taste tests with anything except the exact same grape.

e.g.  All the samples should be from Chardonnay or Pinot Noir or Cabernet Sauvignon, etc.

And this makes it impossible for French wines because they combine several different grape varieties, ox blood, etc., in their bottled wines, merely labeling them as to what region they came from.

[ML]

As a 'non-snob' regarding wines . . . I get a big kick out of the stories where someone pays a ridiculous price for a bottle, gathers his friends together for the big day . . . and they all find the bottle now contains vinegar.  And not even a good vinegar.

[BillyB]

I remember a study at an Oregon university done to learn if red or white wine was healthier. Red wine was determined to be heathier. The university didn't do the study for free. It was paid for by the makers of red wine.

Lots of studies and magazine articles are paid for by the people interested in promoting their products.

[SteveInBoston]

Wine tasting doesn't have to be nation to nation competition.  It is subjective, and ppl like different types of wines.

Some swear by italian wines, the barolos and super tuscans.  Some love burgundy, which actually is a single grape - pinot noir for red and chardonnay for white.  Some others love cabernet sauvignon, but even california cabernets are slowly turning to blends as the winery realize more complex flavor profiles can be developed with adding cabernet franc and merlot, which is the classic bordeaux profile.

Even wines from the same vineyard can change their blend from year to year.

I collect a few exceptional wines to enjoy in the future, but have a selection of everyday wines that includes rioja, zinfandel, malbec and cote du rhone.  I have not found any inexpensive cabernet that I enjoy.

I do my own taste test and buy a 1/2 case or case of what I like. 

For anyone interested, Alamos Malbec is pretty good at $7 per bottle at Costco. Also, for $38 the 2016 Ridge Zinfandel Geyserville is very good, my favorite so far this year.