Random and not particularly connected ceegar questions

So here goes - be gentle, I'm a piper more often than not.

Have a couple of marque questions for which I am interested in opinions, and something only tangentially related.

1. 7-20-4 cigars - they review well in print and online, but I rarely see mention of them on forums. Good, decent, just not hip, or underrated?

2. Nat Sherman - similar to the above. Cigarette maker that happens to make cigars, or maker that just isn't "in?" Review range from one-dimensional to amazing.

I know that the short answer is just "try the damn things and see if you like them," but that just isn't as much fun as kicking tires with a bunch of other people.

Finally, anybody actually read Cigar Aficionado? Yes, I know that it is basically one of a bunch of magazines (wine and guitar included) with the same content on Bugattis and vacation spots most of us can't afford with a few genre related articles thrown in, but I got a free subscription to it and am actually thinking of renewing. The interviews with people from PDR, Gurkha (don't ask), and others in the industry have actually been somewhat interesting.

1) only had the dog walker and IMO it was ok but wouldn't buy again.
2) nat Sherman timeless is good both Dominican and nica. I've tried a few of the others and didn't care much for them.
3) I don't read many articles in it. To me CA is a good coffee table piece to flip through when you want to feel poor. I do read the top reviewed cigars I enjoy reading up on the latest rich man gizmos and I really enjoy the pics in the back of smokers submissions.


Sent from outer space

7-20-4, I have only had a couple of them that I picked up off cbid. I enjoyed them, a good solid smoke but just didn't totally blow my mind.

Nat Sherman. The ones I have had have been on the mild side. I did not care for their Host/Metropolitan lines, just did not do anything for me. But I do enjoy their Epoca line of cigars. I picked up a box and are a nice cigar when I feel like changing things up a bit and want something on the mild side.

Cigar Aficionado, yes I too picked up a free subscription. For the price I paid, I am not complaining one bit. I do "RewardSurvey" and for a couple minutes of my time, can tack on additional time to my already existing subscription to the magazine.

7-20-4 No idea. Never had one, so no comment.

The only Nat Shermans I have had are the Metropolitan Maduros, which are decent at cbid pricing, and the .5 Cigarillos, which are fairly good for what they are.

I think the biggest problem for both is they fall into the price range that so many others fall in, including a lot of the more popular smokes on here. As such, you only see them mentioned occasionally.

Nat Sherman has experienced a strong revival in the past several years since hiring Michael Herklots away from Davidoff. The Timeless line generated tremendous buzz when Herklots introduced it, and the Joel Sherman 75th Anniversary LE released last year was viewed by many as one of the top cigars of 2014. In the years before Herklots, the company's cigar offerings had devolved into the discount-catalogue category and he's worked to change that image and have its new releases seen and judged as top-flight premium cigars.

Cigar Aficionado is without question the most important and influential cigar publication (just ask a shop owner or manufacturer). It also has unparalleled access in the cigar industry. In this respect, its only rival is probably Cigar Journal (formerly European Cigar Cult Journal). CA's power in the industry enables it to break a lot of industry news on its Web site and to write in-depth about cigar issues, personalities and products in the magazine. Yes, it is filled with upscale "lifestyle" coverage and that's undoubtedly helped it expand at least somewhat beyond the small premium cigar demographic.

1. 7-20-4 make solid cigars, but I've never smoked anything I'd consider to be spectacular.

2. I really enjoy Fuente cigars. I really enjoy Cubans. The Nat Sherman Sterling, to me, is a phenomenal NC. Take that however you wish. I did enjoy the Timeless Dominican, too.

I need to pay attention to Cigar Aficionado to keep up with what customers are coming in and asking for, but to me it isn't worth the weight of the paper it's printed on. They promote a lifestyle (yuck) and suck up a ton of advertising but I've never felt they used their station to do more than continue the hype machine of certain manufacturers... They don't make cigar smokers smarter, which is something that desperately needs to happen whether it's from seed to humidor or the legislative end. Just my two cents.

Two B&Ms that I used to buy from both used write-ups or clips of Cigar Aficionado ratings attached to shelves or to open boxes.
The owner of one B&M told me the practice boosted his $ intake by 20%.
The Counter Man in the other B&m (this guy knew cigars and he kept the place out of the red) said
regulars who spent 2-3 hundred or more every time they came in,
asked for,bought cigars that were given high ratings by C.A.
This was during the "Cigar Boom" years.

I definitely like the Timeless Dominican

Timeless Dominican was one of the cigars that really cemented my interested in the lifestyle/hobby.

Never had a 7-20-4

Never even picked up a copy of Cigar Aficionado

Yeah, wrong order-sorry

1) 7-20-4 lancero is a pretty good smoke. Not life changing but good.
2) Tried the Nat Sherman based on recommendation and didn't care for it.
3) Never been much of a fan of CA. I much prefer cigar forums. IMO you'll find more great cigars through reading the forums than CA will ever introduce you to. And don't get me started on their annual list.