I’ve been drinking some wines above my $10 limit lately, so I decided to make up for it by finding the cheapest wine I could find and still imagine myself drinking. That led me to the bottom shelf at Walmart and an interesting-looking shiraz by Lucky Duck. At $3.99, it was among the cheapest brands there, and I was impressed that the options included a shiraz (rather than the standard chardonnay = white and merlot = red).
The aroma is a little tart, a little jammy. The taste is, well, $3.99. It has a mossy quality that I’m not sure is intentional. The fruit is tart at first, then bitter on the back end. I’d describe it in more detail, but I really don’t want to drink anymore of it.
Interestingly, I can’t find a Lucky Duck Web site, so I don’t know who bottles it or where. Christopher Foundas, an I.T. consultant of all things!, blogged about it too. While I disagree with his assertion that it has “great taste,” he does a great job discussing Lucky Duck’s lack of online presence.
If you’re looking for a really cheap bottle of wine to just get the job done, this will work. But it won’t be making it onto my wine rack again.