<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Marcus James Merlot</title>
	<link>http://antiwinesnob.com/2008/03/23/red/marcus-james-merlot/</link>
	<description>Bargain Wine Reviews, News and Clues</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 04:51:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Kimberly</title>
		<link>http://antiwinesnob.com/2008/03/23/red/marcus-james-merlot/#comment-118</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Kimberly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 03:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://antiwinesnob.com/2008/03/23/red/marcus-james-merlot/#comment-118</guid>
		<description>Just tonight I directly compared and contrasted Marcus James merlot (purchased today at 3 bottles for #9.99) against Target's house brand of BOXED merlot that costs $17.99 for the equivalent of four bottles.

The Target brand is 13% alcohol, the Marcus James is 13.5%. Believe me, the half-percent is noticable. It causes the Marcus James to have a more acrid aroma out of its plastic-corked bottle than the Target brand "cube." But allowing it a minute to "air out," the Marcus James is approachable but certainly not memorable. On the same hand, neither is the Target brand, which exhibits faint character but offers a nice mouth-feel. Given a few minutes in the glass, so does the Marcus James.

The Marcus James represents a substantial value at the sale price of 3 bottles for $9.99, and guarantees a nice buzz for those who haven't lost track of the (sometimes unadmitted) reason for imbibing.

When the economy improves, treat yourself to a wonderful Stag's Leap merlot and experience one of the best wines ever bottled (which is sayin' something!). Until then, we need to tighten our belts, eschew the unnecessarily expensive, and yet still find a way to enjoy "wine, women and song."

Marcus James merlot helps make that possible. Enjoy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just tonight I directly compared and contrasted Marcus James merlot (purchased today at 3 bottles for #9.99) against Target&#8217;s house brand of BOXED merlot that costs $17.99 for the equivalent of four bottles.</p>
<p>The Target brand is 13% alcohol, the Marcus James is 13.5%. Believe me, the half-percent is noticable. It causes the Marcus James to have a more acrid aroma out of its plastic-corked bottle than the Target brand &#8220;cube.&#8221; But allowing it a minute to &#8220;air out,&#8221; the Marcus James is approachable but certainly not memorable. On the same hand, neither is the Target brand, which exhibits faint character but offers a nice mouth-feel. Given a few minutes in the glass, so does the Marcus James.</p>
<p>The Marcus James represents a substantial value at the sale price of 3 bottles for $9.99, and guarantees a nice buzz for those who haven&#8217;t lost track of the (sometimes unadmitted) reason for imbibing.</p>
<p>When the economy improves, treat yourself to a wonderful Stag&#8217;s Leap merlot and experience one of the best wines ever bottled (which is sayin&#8217; something!). Until then, we need to tighten our belts, eschew the unnecessarily expensive, and yet still find a way to enjoy &#8220;wine, women and song.&#8221;</p>
<p>Marcus James merlot helps make that possible. Enjoy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frankallen</title>
		<link>http://antiwinesnob.com/2008/03/23/red/marcus-james-merlot/#comment-79</link>
		<dc:creator>Frankallen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://antiwinesnob.com/2008/03/23/red/marcus-james-merlot/#comment-79</guid>
		<description>This has to be one of the BEST cheap Wines I have ever tasted!! It is EXCELLENT!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This has to be one of the BEST cheap Wines I have ever tasted!! It is EXCELLENT!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
