ThePortForum.com

Andy Velebil wrote:Even the same producer (SFE) can't agree what to call these. Warre's is called a Colheita and Graham's a Single Year Tawny. What gives?? Maybe it's time the IVDP steps in and regulates this like what they did regarding "Bottle Matured", "Traditional", and "unfiltered" LBV labeling

It is inconceivable that these ports will have been released without the IVDP approving the labelling, so perhaps these descriptions must be considered to be within the rules? It could be that the shippers have used the argument that "Colheita" (Portuguese) does not have a one word equivalent in English so these descriptions are simply describing the wine in the same was as Colheita does to a Portuguese speaker?

But I agree, standard naming is a good thing to provide clarity to the consumer.

DRT wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:Even the same producer (SFE) can't agree what to call these. Warre's is called a Colheita and Graham's a Single Year Tawny. What gives?? Maybe it's time the IVDP steps in and regulates this like what they did regarding "Bottle Matured", "Traditional", and "unfiltered" LBV labeling

It is inconceivable that these ports will have been released without the IVDP approving the labelling, so perhaps these descriptions must be considered to be within the rules? It could be that the shippers have used the argument that "Colheita" (Portuguese) does not have a one word equivalent in English so these descriptions are simply describing the wine in the same was as Colheita does to a Portuguese speaker?

But I agree, standard naming is a good thing to provide clarity to the consumer.

They are all withing IVDP labeling regulations. What I am saying is, much like in the past with LBV's where various different names could be used which led to a lot of confusion. It would be far simpler if the IVDP also tightened up the regulations here and adopted one name for these. Either one would work with Colheita being the most used and most easily recognized world wide. Thus, I would suggest they stick with Colheita.

Since it seems there is really only one country which seems to have issue with the term Colheita and they present themselves as being highly educated and refined, I'm sure they won't have any issues learning one new word. Just saying

I think a degree of wonkiness and inconsistency in port naming is rather quaint and appropriate. Call it what you like.

My issue is one that has been highlighted by others that it is a bit naughty to write 'Taylors' over a 'Krohn' label. I hear what people are saying that this may not be exactly the case but to put Taylor on the outside and charge twice as much may be commercially understandable but to quote Derek; not cricket, or baseball or whatever is your metaphor.

To add some facts to the discussion, before venturing back into my opinion too:

Shortly, some of the W&K Colheitas that are currently available and at reasonable prices are going to be removed from the market. Not because of scarcity / stocks running low, but with intent. The bottles that are already labeled, will be allowed to be sold out, but at increased pricing.

I believe the oldest Colheita that will remain for sale in 2014, in the shop will be 1976. Certainly the 1964 White is already removed. Will it be next to be bottled next year?

Natasha Bridge (for those of you that are not aware of this) is no longer blending wood-aged wine for TFP. David and his team have taken that over.

So no big credit should be given for bottling W&K's lifetime achievements in Taylor bottles as that really is a non-sequitur. Blending? These Colheitas are already pretty much ready to go from cask with a very minimal amount of attention. Sure, some racking and possibly a drop of fining/filtration ... but like DRT, I am not one who finds taking credit for a lifetime of work, in a mere label swap, something that is an admirable business practice, albeit arbitrage does have its benefits.

As the new owner of Wiese & Krohn, the loyal fans of theirs across Scandinavia, where Port lovers look at W&K as the #1 name for wood-aged Ports ... Taylor could have continued to sell and profit from these old beauties while blending in other non-vintage designated wood-aged Ports to then bolster their constantly depleting stocks of 10/20/30/40 year old Taylor (possibly Fonseca/Croft Tawnies too) and using their own labels for those. Much more tasteful in my puritanical way of perusing this entire issue. Sure I understand that TFP is trying to remake its image ... as if ... they've always been a Colheita player. But those who know better, well, know better, regardless of our 5% of the Port buying public.

To be fair, I don't think this is being done to be deceptive with intent. But to prevent that perception, at the very least, it would be a very gracious move to include something on the front or even back label that gives credit to the Carneiro family who were the final owners of what we knew as Wiese & Krohn.

Thanks for the facts, Roy, which are always good to have in any debate.

I really do think this is a bad decision from TFP. My working life involves acquisitions so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of re-branding. But re-branding needs to add value, not take a step backwards. W&K have the upper hand in the Colheita market when compared with most other houses, especially Taylor as they have never produced one. It makes no sense to throw away a fantastic brand and replace it with one that has no market position. "The Fadgate Partnership's Krohn Colhieta 1964" would be a much more honest and powerful brand for this product, IMHO.

Roy thanks for the information. I may be being a little slow but I take it this moving up of the prices of existing W+K wines(softening up for the presumably larger hikes that occur when Taylor appears on the label) will occur across all the distributors for TFP and not just the US/scandinavia?

Roy Hersh wrote:To be fair, I don't think this is being done to be deceptive with intent.

As opposed to just being deceptive, which still doesn't sound great, actually it sounds kind of worse. Also I am not sure who you are thinking benefits from Arbitrage on this occasion? And I am intrigued by your comment that TFP are trying to remake their image; do you mean soley in the Colheita market? from the picture it looked like they are continuing on the wood-aged line, but I may be misunderstanding.

LGTrotter wrote:I am intrigued by your comment that TFP are trying to remake their image; do you mean soley in the Colheita market?

Roll forward 30 years: "what's the oldest Taylor Colheita you have tasted?" - "1964" - "Ah. A rich history of Colheita production spanning nearly eight decades".

LGTrotter wrote:

Roy thanks for the information. I may be being a little slow but I take it this moving up of the prices of existing W+K wines(softening up for the presumably larger hikes that occur when Taylor appears on the label) will occur across all the distributors for TFP and not just the US/scandinavia?

Correct, this will be in ALL markets. So my advice is to buy as soon as possible if you are looking to re-up your personal stocks of any W&K product. Price increases have already been put in place in Gaia, but they were minimal increases, as of last month.

As opposed to just being deceptive, which still doesn't sound great, actually it sounds kind of worse. Also I am not sure who you are thinking benefits from Arbitrage on this occasion? And I am intrigued by your comment that TFP are trying to remake their image; do you mean soley in the Colheita market? from the picture it looked like they are continuing on the wood-aged line, but I may be misunderstanding.

Maybe I phrased that wrong, because I do not believe TFP is trying to be deceptive, they are trying to re-brand and create a new line that has been all the rage. They see their chief competitor, SFE rolling out 1952, 1969, 1982 Single Harvest Reserves and also many others in recent years like Vallado's Adelaide "Tributa", a small run of W&K old Colheitas, Wine & Soul's 5G and their very own Scion to name just a few. I have been asked not to specifically mention several others that are known to be in the approval stages, but this is not going to be a fading trend any time soon. These "limited release" bottlings bring in the big bucks and neutralize some of the cash-neutral sales of things like LBV's in markets like the UK and even lower tier Ports in USA and elsewhere. Special Categories is the focus of the smart ... successful Port producers. It is where the vast majority of a Port company's profit is derived, unless we are talking huge bulk producers like Cruz or Rozes as examples.

The buyer benefited from the arbitrage. They wisely saw the end of an era, no family heirs to take over and were one of the first to approach the previous owners who were no longer willing or able to continue as is. The buyer had a ton to gain, including valuable real estate, very significant stocks with which to propel their own Tawny Ports with indication of age and create an entirely new market, Taylor Colheitas and Single Harvest Tawny Ports. This is a market in which they only played for a decade, during their relatively brief ownership of Delaforce. But, they learned quite a bit about those wines during those 10 years or so. I hope this clarifies my points for you.

To be entirely fair... The family knew what the deal was in selling to TFP, I'm sure. They accepted that W&K would no longer be the brand on the bottle. Taylor paid for the stock, not the name. This must have been clear to all who signed on the dotted line..

Derek wrote:

Roll forward 30 years: "what's the oldest Taylor Colheita you have tasted?" - "1964" - "Ah. A rich history of Colheita production spanning nearly eight decades".

We disagree here my friend. They own casks of 1863 and also both white and red Colheita pipas of 1896. Those are priceless and already sold for a king's ransom a year or so ago. Did you happen to notice the packaging of the 1863 and 1896 and see what they sold for as a dynamic duo? That was done before the sale of the company and was spearheaded by Cristiano van Zeller who helped the Carneiro family with that project.

But the profitability was not lost on Adrian, who is a brilliant CEO and will absolutely do limited edition bottlings of those three specific lots. Whereas Scion drew questions from those who were not satisfied as to who/where/what ... when it came to provenance of Scion, there is NO such questions to be raised about the "holy trinity" held in the W&K cellars since the 19th century.

Indeed it does clarify!

I notice you can't help showing a little leg with that reference to other wines you cannot mention, you little tease.

LGTrotter wrote:Indeed it does clarify!

I notice you can't help showing a little leg with that reference to other wines you cannot mention, you little tease.

Why so much focus on Roy's body here on - his leg, his bum... All very unhealthy...

To be entirely fair... The family knew what the deal was in selling to TFP, I'm sure. They accepted that W&K would no longer be the brand on the bottle. Taylor paid for the stock, not the name. This must have been clear to all who signed on the dotted line..

Pure speculation. Knowing the two key family members of the selling family, I do not agree with the above assessment whatsoever, but even this ... is speculation, not fact. There is no proof that it was ever discussed, nor has it been disclosed. In reading the PR piece when the deal was finally disclosed, the impression one gets from that is W&K's name would still be utilized moving forward. At least that was my read. I was in Portugal at the time this all took place and knew about the sale a week or so before it was announced. The FTLOP team was informed, but sworn to secrecy and a specific date given to them of when the public announcement would be made.

It would not be hard to find out the whole story, but honestly ... at this juncture, it is a moot point and I am just not that curious.

But my point is that it's a business agreement. The buyers were happy, sure, but so were the sellers. This sentimentality is all speculation too - nobody has actually been able to say definitively that this was not planned all along. So, Taylor have bought a lot of very good old stocks, and they realise they can make a lot of money from them - well, who'd a thunk it...?

Roy Hersh wrote:Derek wrote:

Roll forward 30 years: "what's the oldest Taylor Colheita you have tasted?" - "1964" - "Ah. A rich history of Colheita production spanning nearly eight decades".

We disagree here my friend. They own casks of 1863 and also both white and red Colheita pipas of 1896. Those are priceless and already sold for a king's ransom a year or so ago. Did you happen to notice the packaging of the 1863 and 1896 and see what they sold for as a dynamic duo? That was done before the sale of the company and was spearheaded by Cristiano van Zeller who helped the Carneiro family with that project.

Roy, we don't disagree. I know only too well the history of W&K and have seen the same casks you have. I was hypothesising about a conversation between two Port lovers 30 years from now who didn't know Taylor bought W&K. Read is again

My point is that this 1964 Taylor thing is simply trying to put a new footprint in snow that fell 49 years ago. Three decades from now the act will be forgotten and all that will remain is the 79 year old footprint in the snow with Taylor stamped on the sole.

Roy Hersh wrote:It would not be hard to find out the whole story, but honestly ... at this juncture, it is a moot point and I am just not that curious.

Now I don't want to accuse you of being disingenuous Roy but I find it hard to understand why you would not be curious. A deal of that size in the market which is your life blood? Moot I do see.
You seem to be fairly clear that your view on the deal and the PR stuff was that W+K would be around in one form or another after the deal but that now the position from TFP seems to have changed.
Fascinating stuff whichever way the mop flopped and I'm probably just being a very curious person.

From where I sit, as only a poor consumer of the products created by TFP or W&K, I can see a massive amount of value which TFP can generate from the old single harvest barrels which W&K would have struggled to release and that is simply from the global footprint the TFP marketing machine has. Taylor and Fonseca (and to a lesser extent Croft) are brands which are known pretty much world-wide where there is a wine culture. Anywhere port is drunk, Taylor will have a presence; perhaps small in Portugal and Brazil but pretty big in the Anglophone parts of the world.

On the other hand, W&K were known among the Port cognoscenti as producers of very fine colheitas with a good market profile in Denmark and Washington state but had nothing like the global market presence of TFP.

Put limited stocks of port in barrels out onto the market through the W&K footprint and you can sell it all into the limited demand for a decent price. Put those same stocks out through the TFP footprint with its much larger market and those same barrels should fetch a substantially higher price. Simple demand-side economics.

Having just gone and bought all that was left of the Krohn 2003 vintage port I am now wondering what the plan would be for Krohn vintage. Will it continue to be sold under this label or 'rebranded' as one of the lower tier TFP ports?

LGTrotter wrote:...I am now wondering what the plan would be for Krohn vintage. Will it continue to be sold under this label or 'rebranded' as one of the lower tier TFP ports?

That's an interesting question. What would be the benefit to TFP of adding another house to their range of vintage ports. They already have 3 + 1 - what is to be gained by making that 3 + 2?

AHB wrote:

LGTrotter wrote:...I am now wondering what the plan would be for Krohn vintage. Will it continue to be sold under this label or 'rebranded' as one of the lower tier TFP ports?

That's an interesting question. What would be the benefit to TFP of adding another house to their range of vintage ports. They already have 3 + 1 - what is to be gained by making that 3 + 2?

Do they still own Delaforce or was that sold on?

Delaforce belongs to Real Companhia Velha now.

AHB wrote:

LGTrotter wrote:...I am now wondering what the plan would be for Krohn vintage. Will it continue to be sold under this label or 'rebranded' as one of the lower tier TFP ports?

That's an interesting question. What would be the benefit to TFP of adding another house to their range of vintage ports. They already have 3 + 1 - what is to be gained by making that 3 + 2?

Very interesting question. Where as the Symington's have added brands The Fladgate Partnership in recent years hasn't seem too interested in expanding beyond the few they currently have. They've sold off Delaforce and are down to Taylor's, Croft, Fonseca, Romariz (Though, is that gone now too?). They've bought the lodges, of Real Compania Velha (RCV)* and now all of Krohn's. but it seems so far they are going to roll the stocks of Krohn into the Taylor label, raise prices, and discontinue the Krohn name. What has become of RCV?

*corrected from my earlier mistake.

Andy Velebil wrote:They've bought the lodges, and stocks of Royal Oporto and now Krohn's. but it seems so far they are going to roll the stocks of Krohn into the Taylor label, raise prices, and discontinue the Krohn name. What has become of Royal Oporto?

And more to the point their already bottled vintage port?

When did TFP buy Royal Oporto?

I remember them buying stock from the Casa do Douro and swapping something (a quinta?) for the Delaforce brand but can't recall any news that Royal Oporto is now part of TFP.

Have I missed something?