Is the secondary market price for Port changing?

[uncle tom]

Thousands of IVDP regulations, announcements, etc can be accessed here by someone with sufficient knowledge of Portuguese to be able to find them.

It's hard enough trawling through the UK's legislative jungle without the language barrier of Portuguese. Glenn however feels certain, so perhaps he can tell us where to look.

[MigSU]

When I have time I can try to wade through it. It's a bit of a pain, though, the site's not build with accessibility in mind.

[Andy Velebil]

Thousands of IVDP regulations, announcements, etc can be accessed here by someone with sufficient knowledge of Portuguese to be able to find them.

This. There are thousands of other regulations that come out in the form of announcements, etc. So while the "official" list may cover broad topics, it's these other ones that cover the small details and changes that have happened over the decades.

Example; where's the regulation that says you can add white grapes to red, co-ferment them, make a port out of the blend and sell it as a red port. I've never seen a regulation that says you can, but producers still do it. Or how about topping up or refreshing (whatever you want to call it) of tawny's. The IVDP says a Colheita must be from the same vintage, but we all know they are topped up with other younger ports at some point in their barrel life.

Again to be clear, this is not just a Portugal or IVDP thing. This is every wine region, and every type of commerce, that exists in the world.

[DRT]

In the absence of finding legislation and regulations setting out the detailed rules I think this statement on the Regulator's website gives us a clear indication of what SQVP is intended to be...

Except that no one can find the text of this alleged exception, and we can find the text that says it isn't allowed.

Where does it say it's not allowed?

The IVDP website...

Single Quinta Vintage Port
These Vintages are unique in that they are not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, or wine estate, which makes them truly exceptional.

[uncle tom]

Single Quinta Vintage Port
These Vintages are unique in that they are not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, or wine estate, which makes them truly exceptional.

We're going round in circles here - that is neither a regulation nor unambiguous.

- Where is the law that Glenn is so sure about?

[Glenn E.]

Except that no one can find the text of this alleged exception, and we can find the text that says it isn't allowed.

Where does it say it's not allowed?

What Derek said. I have found and linked the pertinent regulation before, in threads in which you were a participant, so I don't feel the need to look it up for you again. It's in Portuguese anyway.

A Quinta name is a brand name, if it does not explicitly say on the bottle that the wine comes exclusively from that Quinta it does not appear to breach EU product law if part or all of the content is sourced elsewhere. There is also a marketed Quinta port, the amusingly titled Quinta da Revolta, that neither appears to be located within the demarcated area nor (from a Google earth search) have any vines - unless there is a second property with the same name.

That is just your opinion. That is not legal precedent. According to the IVDP rules and regulations, a bottle of Port may not use "quinta" on the label unless all of the Port in the bottle comes from that estate.

[Glenn E.]

Example; where's the regulation that says you can add white grapes to red, co-ferment them, make a port out of the blend and sell it as a red port. I've never seen a regulation that says you can, but producers still do it. Or how about topping up or refreshing (whatever you want to call it) of tawny's. The IVDP says a Colheita must be from the same vintage, but we all know they are topped up with other younger ports at some point in their barrel life.

Again to be clear, this is not just a Portugal or IVDP thing. This is every wine region, and every type of commerce, that exists in the world.

Wrong question. Where is the law that says you can't?

It's not being sold as red Port it's being sold as Vinho do Porto which makes no reference to color.

The law says you cannot use Quinta on your label unless all of the grapes come from that estate.

[DRT]

Single Quinta Vintage Port
These Vintages are unique in that they are not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, or wine estate, which makes them truly exceptional.

We're going round in circles here - that is neither a regulation nor unambiguous.

- Where is the law that Glenn is so sure about?

We are going round in circles because you seem to prefer fake news rather than believing a clear statement directed at consumers on the website of the body responsible for regulating the product being discussed. The sentence is only ambiguous if you want it to be.

[DRT]

I have found and linked the pertinent regulation before, in threads in which you were a participant, so I don't feel the need to look it up for you again. It's in Portuguese anyway.

Is this the post you are referring to, Glenn?

[DRT]

Where is the law that Glenn is so sure about?

Perhaps you might believe that there is enough smoke coming from this gun to allow you to change your opinion...

I agree that as far as the IVDP is concerned, SQVP is VP. I also stand by my original assertion that the IVDP doesn't define or regulate the term "quinta" as far as I could tell. The above regulation still didn't mention "quinta" per se. If you go to the International Organisation of Wine and Vine, you can find the International Standard for Labelling Wines, which states:

3.1.3. Name of the viticultural holding
The name of the viticultural holding (château, quinta, finca, tenuta, Weingut, manor, estate etc):
- the wine must come solely from the said holding: grapes harvested and vinified in the holding as such designated;
- the description of the viticultural holding must correspond to the customs of the country and must not create confusion in the mind of the consumer;
- the wine must be entitled to a recognised geographic indication or recognised appellation of origin, and be mentioned as such.

I think there are other similar multi-national standards.

https://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopf ... 044#p85044

[MigSU]

Should I ring up the IVDP (or better yet, go there in person) and ask?

[DRT]

Should I ring up the IVDP (or better yet, go there in person) and ask?

That would be interesting, but good luck getting a straight answer!

[MigSU]

Yeah, good point. I still might, though, just for fun. Maybe next time I'm in Peso da Régua with time to waste I'll stop by.

[DRT]

Yeah, good point. I still might, though, just for fun. Maybe next time I'm in Peso da Régua with time to waste I'll stop by.

There is a nice little coffee shop just outside where you can wait for a few hours until they come out to tell that they can't give you the answer because it is commercially sensitive information and they would need all of the producers to agree before they could tell you.

[DRT]

Here is a link to the current version of the International Standard for Labelling Wines.

The Foreword says this...

The present standard is a recommendation from the OIV to the Member States. Its aim is to ease international exchange and to ensure fair information to consumers.
It is inspired by the standard established by the Codex Alimentarius for the labelling of prepackaged foods.1
The provisions concern the compulsory information which appears on the labelling of pre-packed wines in view of their sale to the consumer, as well as optional information left to the discretion of manufacturers or Member States. They have gradually been adopted through the progress of the group Wine Regulation and Quality Control and the Commission III, at the 63rd, 64th, 65th, 68th, 72nd, 73rd and 83rd General Assemblies of the International Office of Vine and Wine in 1983, 1984, 1985, 1988, 1992, 1993 and 2003 and the 3rd , 4th, 8th , 9th, 18 and 19th General Assemblies of the International Organisation of Vine and Wine in 2005, 2006, 2010, 2011, 2020 and 2021.
This 2022 edition therefore represents a consolidated version of the OIV International Standard for the Labeling of Wines.

Just saying...

Screenshot 2021-11-28 at 09.29.44.png (403.57 KiB) Viewed 3589 times

[Andy Velebil]

Single Quinta Vintage Port
These Vintages are unique in that they are not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, or wine estate, which makes them truly exceptional.

We're going round in circles here - that is neither a regulation nor unambiguous.

- Where is the law that Glenn is so sure about?

We are going round in circles because you seem to prefer fake news rather than believing a clear statement directed at consumers on the website of the body responsible for regulating the product being discussed. The sentence is only ambiguous if you want it to be.

Derek,
Hate to burst your bubble but the IVDP also says this on their website about Cohleita's...

Colheita Port
These single vintage Tawnies are aged in cask for a minimum seven years and present a wide range of colours from golden red to tawny, depending on their age. Their bouquet and flavour also develop over time to create different style Tawnies.

Too bad we know they are not always entirely single vintage. So that clearly settles their own website isn't 100% factually correct.

[MigSU]

I have reached out to the IVDP through backchannels, so hopefully I'll get a useful answer.

[Andy Velebil]

I have reached out to the IVDP through backchannels, so hopefully I'll get a useful answer.

Cool...let's hope!

[DRT]

Single Quinta Vintage Port
These Vintages are unique in that they are not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, or wine estate, which makes them truly exceptional.

We're going round in circles here - that is neither a regulation nor unambiguous.

- Where is the law that Glenn is so sure about?

We are going round in circles because you seem to prefer fake news rather than believing a clear statement directed at consumers on the website of the body responsible for regulating the product being discussed. The sentence is only ambiguous if you want it to be.

Derek,
Hate to burst your bubble but the IVDP also says this on their website about Cohleita's...

Colheita Port
These single vintage Tawnies are aged in cask for a minimum seven years and present a wide range of colours from golden red to tawny, depending on their age. Their bouquet and flavour also develop over time to create different style Tawnies.

Too bad we know they are not always entirely single vintage. So that clearly settles their own website isn't 100% factually correct.

Don’t worry, my bubble remains intact. These descriptions might not reference small exceptions, but they absolutely do not say “these are just brands, it doesn’t matter what wines go in the bottle.” The intent is clear. The exceptions are small. That is the point.

And the international labelling standard has absolutely nothing to do with the IVDP other than them being obliged to ensure compliance.

[Glenn E.]

I have found and linked the pertinent regulation before, in threads in which you were a participant, so I don't feel the need to look it up for you again. It's in Portuguese anyway.

Is this the post you are referring to, Glenn?

That's the most recent discussion that I can remember, but I feel like there have been many.

Too bad we know they are not always entirely single vintage. So that clearly settles their own website isn't 100% factually correct.

Except we do not, at least not officially. Sure, we hear stories of how this or that or the other has been topped off or refreshed, but that is never formally admitted. Because it isn't allowed.

The speed limit on most California highways is 65 mph, but if you're going 80 in the left lane on the interstate people are going to get pissed at you for driving too slow. Doesn't change the fact that the speed limit is usually 65 (or on the interstate, usually 70).

[Glenn E.]

Also just so that it's said out loud, part of my reluctance to look this up every time this topic rises from the dead is that the IVDP website seems to change in-between every zombie outbreak. Which means it's basically an all-new endeavor to find the information every time, and it has never been an easy task during any of the iterations.

For me, the matter is settled until the other side provides proof. Even once. Because that documentation has never been found.

[winesecretary]

In my own field, it is remarkably commonly the case (by which I mean I encounter it on a daily basis) that what the tax authority says on its website is the law, is not in fact the law. Sometimes the tax authority even argues that its statement of the law on its own website is not the law. Accordingly, the only authoritative statement of the law is the law. So: we need MigSu to parse the actual legislation.

[MigSU]

the IVDP website seems to change in-between every zombie outbreak.

I think they know of your feuds, and are now just messing with you lot.

[DRT]

the IVDP website seems to change in-between every zombie outbreak.

I think they know of your feuds, and are now just messing with you lot.

"You lot"? Oh dear. You do not realise you have been assimilated to the collective. Welcome to our world 123374.

[DRT]

the matter is settled until the other side provides proof. Even once. Because that documentation has never been found.

This.

Whilst it is difficult or impossible to find definitive laws covering all aspects of this debate, and acknowledging that there are exceptions and unusual circumstances to consider, the bottom line is that if the owners of a known and defined quinta that has been allocated a beneficio and subsequently registered a declared production quantity to its regulator, it's owners can't then punt out a wine sourced from somewhere else and name it after the quinta.

I look forward to reading the 5%, 10%, 15% per annum top-up and "it can come from anywhere" regulations. I am sure they will be a fascinating read.