CFH for Rare?

There was another thread about this somewhere.. Do a search for CFH threads and you should be able to find it

 

What side are you asking about?

I'd bet ISO: RARE FT: CFH would get done faster than ISO: CFH FT: RARE

 

I would think you would have to add on the CFH side. Rare averaged for $45 retail value vs. $30 for CFH (I believe) While there were less bottles of CFH, Rare was made just once while CFH is brewed every year. I don't think it's too one sided, but just think you have to add a little IMO. I've seen some trades with CFH for BCBVS.

Who knows though, it really doesn't matter what I say as long as both parties involved are happy.

 

A hype vs. hype cage match! Awesome!

If I had an extra Rare I'd trade if for a Churchill's. Not only do I really want to try the beer, but I'm a huge history buff, & I could put the label on the beer fridge next to the Cigar City Churchill label...

 

Though it is brewed every year, each vintage is a different blend. So no two years will be identical. Thus it has a bottle count that is around 2.5% of the bourbon county rare numbers, an event only release with a two bottle limit, and lastly a unique blend that will not be duplicated.


Anyone trading CFH for just a bourbon county vanilla is silly.

 

Even taking Senor Bubblers' comments into account, since we're talking approx. 300 bottles of CFH vs 10-12,000 of Rare, that would be some 30 years before CFH catches up. Nice vertical.

 

Having déjà vu in this thread. If you get this done Brandon, lemme know. Been thinking about trying the same trade.

 

Based on the last 4 or 5 people that have posted it that would be incorrect though.

 

i think [insert beer] would need to be added to, not because [insert other beer] is better, but because the people from [insert location] are greedy hoarders. [insert a bunch of feel good padding about how both beers are great, but (passive aggressive bullshit about people not trading with the speaker)]

 

I did a large trade with me sending a rare and recieving a CFH 12 as the centerpiece. I was glad to get a chance to try CFH 12 after having rare a few times. It was worth it as well. CFH 12 was excellent.

 

I think 1:1 Rare:CFH is fair. Actually, not having any CFH or Rare, I don't care. Just counting down the hours to celebrate the nation's independence.

 

All this talk of CFH has put me in the mood for one. I'm going to go have one.

 

I someone with a Rare wants a CFH, contact me.

 

There isn't a specific value to bottle count or limit per consumer. This stuff reminds meof basketball or baseball cards. A magazine can say this card is worth X amount because there are only 100 of them out there etc, but it's only worth the amount that someone is willing to pay for it. Beer value is what the individual considers the bottle to be worth (they can include whatever they want such as gas, hotel cost, bottle count etc) but it only worth that amount when trading if the other participant agrees and a deal gets done.

 

yeah gotta agree with that....the card shops would never give you 45 bucks for a 92 Topps Gold Shaq rookie card even though the Beckett said it was worth that...ayyyyyyyyyyy

 

I wouldn't trade my CFH for a Rare because i only have one. If I didn't have a CFH I would trade a Rare for one. I did have a CFh 12 recently and can say it is absolutely deserving of the praise.

 

you just reiterated the tenants of trading and bartering at large. I didn't have an issue with intersubjective valuations, in fact, I contributed my own just like everyone else here. However, pulling the shroud of subjectivity to retreat from some approximation of value seems to put too blunt a point on the issue, otherwise these threads would be robbed of the little point that they so assiduously cling to.

I did not ascribe an objective value to the 2 bottle per customer, I merely presented it as a subjective factor that one of the people who stood in line at 7 am on a Saturday would likely ruminate upon before giving away a CFH for a can of Daisy Cutter that is readily available off the shelf.

I did not include gas, hotel cost, and then oh wait- BOTTLE COUNT, that is not often lumped into the cadre of the other two. Cost and rarity are often controlling factors, the 4.6X rating doesn't hurt either. The latter two are soft margins lumped into "cost" and are highly objectionable. However, the bottle count is, along with cost, amongst the only objective factors that someone could SUBJECTIVELY decide to trade a beer away. The fact that someone has over 37 times the opportunity to obtain one bottle over another is often a consideration for some traders, a factor that glaringly would likely be relevant to "whether the other participant agrees and a deal gets done."

No one is advocating a Beckett's, Wizard, or any other objective valuation, we have Brewdex.com for that. I think it is gauche to present your own subjective valuation, then retreat under the obfuscation of "only worth that amount. . .if the other participant agrees" which is a mere truism of a bilateral exchange.

Ultimately, drink them. Who cares, I know Ehammond will just extra his and make threads like this look ridiculous in the end anyway. Just another thread trying to make static that which we both agree is inherently dynamic.

 

I shared a 2012 CFH today with a friend -- it's not even CLOSE to the same beer as Rare. Like CFH is a 3, and Rare is a 10. I can't taste rarity/low bottle count though, so I admit I didn't factor this into my opinion.