David Arnstein wrote:

> This gives me more confidence in my theory: Scharffen Berger is a
> sham. Here they are, announcing that they are being acquired by the
> king of mass market, low quality chocolate, and simultaneously
> claiming the high end of the market.
>
> I've tasted their packaged goods many times, and I find them lacking.
> The chocolate has a weird sour (not bitter) taste that is not
> pleasant.
>
> It is also quite expensive.

Yep. It doesn't hold a candle to Michel Cluizel or Valrhona. It's
decidedly one-dimensional. It's the typical American thing -- some
rich guys start a company in an area that interests them, learn as
much as they can, and hang out a shingle. European chocolatiers
have decades of experience, access to growers, etc. There's
just no substitute for the kind of knowledge in depth that comes
from growing up in what has been a hereditary craft.

Of course, that's what's great about America -- you don't have to
apprentice for seven years to become a sushi chef. OTOH that's
what's not so great about America -- you eat sushi made by guys who
didn't study for seven years to become a sushi chef.