Critics Average score from professional wine critics and publications.
90
/100
Reviews
7
professional
Vintages
1
2016
Other
90/100
Cabernet Sauvignon
NV
Community Reviews
88
Reviews
89.7
Avg Score
95
Highest
Taster #8514
· Aug 22, 2025
91/100
I agree with the comments below from the standpoint that this is better on Day 2. Day 1 was ok (88pts) but it exhibited a major improvement the next day. Day 1 seemed thin but had some good mid palate flavor but a short finish. Day 2 improved across the entire palate with a good mocha/coffee type finish. In general, I'm hot & cold on dN wines but this one is a QPR winner.
2016 vintage
Taster #7140
· Apr 23, 2025
87/100
Day 2: once again, dramatically improved. Still a subtle wine, and for some reason the palate wants to be a donut on day 1 but it fills out on day 2. I genuinely recommend decanting this for 1-2h then going back to bottle for a full 24h. It is easily 90 point wine on day 2, but on day 1 this just sucks. Will tuck a few away long term for science. Day 1: Decanted 2 hours. Honestly very meh. …
2016 vintage
Taster #0111
· Sep 23, 2024
91/100
Needed something inexpensive and worry free for just a glass or two. Double decant and let set for 30 min. Medium bodied, not quite opaque reddish/black. No bricking. Purple flowers, candied fruit, coffee, green tobacco, mint on the nose, dark fruited, black licorice and spiced tea notes on the palate. Not overly complex, but by no means linear. Still some tannic structure to resolve, oak was well managed. 91 today. Could use 5 yrs sideways for a run up to …
2016 vintage
Taster #7140
· Nov 24, 2023
88/100
Decanted for 20min and back to bottle for 6h. First pour. Really lovely nose. Dusty white rocks, pretty raspberry, hint of iron. Palate is medium body with true red raspberry, candied cherry, pronounced tannins and soft acidity. Finish is short and kind of watery—some cedar with dried dusty cherry. Needs time to open up—the tannins are a bit aggressive and the wine needs to flesh out some more. Not very impressed with this. Will update if Day 2 is better. …
2016 vintage
Taster #6907
· Apr 30, 2023
90/100
Written from memory, drank a week ago. This is a high quality Howell mountain cabernet, that took about 6 hours to wake up. After decant, a soft, elegant wine emerged with mountain fruit, anise, cigar box, and leather. All-in-all this is a great wine, but given the price point, I prefer other DN cabernets. Was back and forth on the rating here 89-90. Others may rate this much higher, I prefer slightly more concentrated valley fruit.
2016 vintage
Taster #0059
· Nov 4, 2022
95/100
Popped and poured sans food hours after delivery due to insurmountable excitement. What is head scratching are these prior reviews. At this price point, a terrific bargain, drinks like an $80-100 bottle. I bought this b/c I am a Howell Mountain fan. But generally, I am not a Napa Cab guy, I prefer Syrah and Paso GSMs, big fruit. Point is, this is not that, and it was still amazing. Quite the contrary in fact. A nice nose, not huge, …
2016 vintage
Taster #6932
· Jul 17, 2022
86/100
2 hours of air. Dark purple in glass with blackberry and oak aromas. Blackberry and blueberry on palate with some light oak influence. The tannins start fairly soft and grip a little more once it hit the 4+ hour mark. Long dark berry finish with a medium, crisp acidity. Overall, a little one-dimensional. If this was one of the cheaper bottlings, I would be more impressed. This was marketed as a higher dollar premium bottling, but I am just not …
2016 vintage
Taster #8663
· Jan 25, 2022
Inconclusive. I'm a fan of de Négoce and I grasp the concept but this wine was confusing. If you crack one, and I think you should, maybe give it six hours and see what happens. We popped and poured - for the first 30 minutes it was a jumble of impressions, clearly a well-made wine, but not something that tasted good yet. When it came together, the flavor profile was spicy and complex but not really something i'd recognize as …
2016 vintage