Port for sale at auction

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 16:29 Thu 08 Jul 2010

Andy Velebil wrote:In regard to the 1967 Vargellas...From drinking experience, over the past 2-3 years all the bottles I've had have shown an excessive amount of heat and have been average at best.

The bottle I had started out that way with only 6-8 hours of decanting, but with significant time in the decanter (days 2 and 3, as I recall) the heat subsided and it turned into a very pleasant (and very Taylor) Port. That signature Vargellas pepper and spice was very prominent.

Mine was an Oporto 1970 bottling.

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 00:21 Sat 10 Jul 2010

The noval lot sure was intriguing,

Jay from the love of port forum sent me some pics.

These bottles look too clean to be true. They also have a surgeon general's warning about how it's bad to drink alcohol (including all the wines from the 60s)

I was thinking that at 150$/bottle it'd be a steal/200$ an okay deal but at 300$ for suspect bottles, I'm probably going to pass on this lot.

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 23:24 Sat 10 Jul 2010

g-man wrote:They also have a surgeon general's warning about how it's bad to drink alcohol (including all the wines from the 60s).

That just means they were imported after that label requirement became law. I have bottles with the required importer labels on them from companies that didn't exist when the Port was bottled.

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 02:06 Tue 03 Aug 2010

That nacional lot got put back onto acker's

clearly something is wrong with the lot .

mosesbotbol · Post by **mosesbotbol** » 12:36 Tue 03 Aug 2010

g-man wrote:That nacional lot got put back onto acker's

clearly something is wrong with the lot .

Do you think the winner backed out? Has anyone seen the bottles first hand? Very odd this has not sold in two rounds of auctions. There are a couple of vintages I am interested in, but will wait until the last minute to bid.

mosesbotbol · Post by **mosesbotbol** » 12:37 Tue 03 Aug 2010

Andy Velebil wrote:In regard to the 1967 Vargellas...From drinking experience, over the past 2-3 years all the bottles I've had have shown an excessive amount of heat and have been average at best.

Same here.

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 14:29 Tue 03 Aug 2010

mosesbotbol wrote:
g-man wrote:That nacional lot got put back onto acker's

clearly something is wrong with the lot .
Do you think the winner backed out? Has anyone seen the bottles first hand? Very odd this has not sold in two rounds of auctions. There are a couple of vintages I am interested in, but will wait until the last minute to bid.

me thinks the winner might have been the seller trumping up the bid!

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 15:02 Tue 03 Aug 2010

g-man wrote:me thinks the winner might have been the seller trumping up the bid!

This is a rather unscrupulous practice, though we've seen it go on for some time. Is there any regulation in bidding that prevents the auctioneer from bidding up their own property?

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 22:41 Tue 03 Aug 2010

SushiNorth wrote:
g-man wrote:me thinks the winner might have been the seller trumping up the bid!
This is a rather unscrupulous practice, though we've seen it go on for some time. Is there any regulation in bidding that prevents the auctioneer from bidding up their own property?

It's considered poor form and should not be financially rewarded for the seller as there was a sale completed so he should be having to pay out his seller's fees.

Of course, if there are no seller's fees then the seller has no incentive to behave in a fair and moral way...

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 01:23 Fri 06 Aug 2010

SushiNorth wrote:
g-man wrote:me thinks the winner might have been the seller trumping up the bid!
This is a rather unscrupulous practice, though we've seen it go on for some time. Is there any regulation in bidding that prevents the auctioneer from bidding up their own property?

Auctioneer, yes. Seller, no.

Though as AHB mentioned if the Seller bids on his own property and wins, he has completed a sale and will have to pay whatever fees that the auctioneer earns for the auction (whether seller's or buyer's).

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 13:30 Wed 01 Sep 2010

hart davis has a agood fair chunk of port coming up for auction.

good chance to pick up some from the 50s and 60s and for those of us looking to restock on fonseca 70s and grahams 63 =)

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 13:43 Wed 01 Sep 2010

Damn they pulled the f70 and the g63 lots!!!
booooooo

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 20:39 Wed 01 Sep 2010

This is a rather unscrupulous practice, though we've seen it go on for some time. Is there any regulation in bidding that prevents the auctioneer from bidding up their own property

Nope (not in the UK, at least..)

But the antique, fine art, and wine auctioneers are absolute saints compared to those who auction motor vehicles..

..but at least those buying a car or truck at auction know that they are dealing with the dodgier end of humanity (- or at least they should..!)

The wine trade loves to present itself as being a purveyor to the gods, and beyond reproach; yet in truth, the term 'reputable wine merchant' is pretty much an oxymoron..

- Caveat emptor!

Tom

Alex M · Post by **Alex M** » 23:34 Sat 26 Feb 2011

Something interesting popped up on ebay recently:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Cockburns-1966-Vi ... 27b8ea73ef

As far as I knew, Cockburns didnt declare a 1966?

Post by **DRT** » 00:53 Sun 27 Feb 2011

Alex M wrote:Something interesting popped up on ebay recently:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Cockburns-1966-Vi ... 27b8ea73ef

As far as I knew, Cockburns didnt declare a 1966?

They didn't declare 1966. But the description on Ebay says:

Seven bottles of 1966 Cockburns Vintage Port, given to me as an 18th birthday present by a relative who is a portshipper

Cockburn, like many other shippers, produce port in in years that they do not delcare and use it within the family for drinking.

RonnieRoots · Post by **RonnieRoots** » 04:49 Sun 27 Feb 2011

DRT wrote:
Alex M wrote:Something interesting popped up on ebay recently:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Cockburns-1966-Vi ... 27b8ea73ef

As far as I knew, Cockburns didnt declare a 1966?
They didn't declare 1966. But the description on Ebay says:
Seven bottles of 1966 Cockburns Vintage Port, given to me as an 18th birthday present by a relative who is a portshipper
Cockburn, like many other shippers, produce port in in years that they do not delcare and use it within the family for drinking.

Extremely interesting find, and worth a bid I would say!

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 07:32 Sun 27 Feb 2011

lucky owner of some rare and odd 70s American port style wines =)

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 08:14 Mon 28 Feb 2011

Alex M wrote:Something interesting popped up on ebay recently:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Cockburns-1966-Vi ... 27b8ea73ef

As far as I knew, Cockburns didnt declare a 1966?

Did anyone on this board win these (and is willing to 'fess up)?

Alex M · Post by **Alex M** » 13:39 Thu 07 Apr 2011

Dear all,

A quick question for those that buy at auction regularly. Are you dubious of buying cases of port when one or two bottles have been removed? Is this a sign that the wine was corked and likely that the rest of the case is?

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 14:14 Thu 07 Apr 2011

A quick question for those that buy at auction regularly. Are you dubious of buying cases of port when one or two bottles have been removed? Is this a sign that the wine was corked and likely that the rest of the case is?

When whole private cellars are sold, this is not uncommon, and not a major issue.

When odd lots are seen, 11 bottles must always be regarded as being a bit suspect (especially with white wines), 10 bottles less so..

Auctions are all about buying for less, and if a lot carries a degree of suspicion, the price should be lower still. If you pick the odd lame duck, you can always cut your losses and stick the rest back in the next sale..

Tom

Chris Doty · Post by **Chris Doty** » 15:26 Thu 07 Apr 2011

uncle tom wrote: When odd lots are seen, 11 bottles must always be regarded as being a bit suspect (especially with white wines), 10 bottles less so..

If you pick the odd lame duck, you can always cut your losses and stick the rest back in the next sale..

Tom

Based on the second comment, why should 10 bottles be any less worrysome than 11?

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 14:09 Mon 02 May 2011

Acker's is having their typical monthly inet auction:

http://www.ackerwines.com/onlineauctions/search.cfm

Some eye watering retail prices of some lots (pre buyer's premium) so i'm going to pass on most.

Bottom lots like the sandeman 77 for 50$ is not cheaper then retail either.

One did catch my eye and could be of interest:
For novel value unless people on the boards say otherwise, but I certainly would NOT want 12 bottles of a 1988 VP from GC.

New York (lot location)
8375
Gould Campbell Vintage Port - Vintage 1988
12lbsl, 12scl

12 bottles per lot $350-500

Minimum Bid: $ 280

Zelandakh · Post by **Zelandakh** » 18:05 Wed 11 May 2011

Those 66 on eBay would have been tempting if I'd seen them in time!

After way too many months unemployed, I'm finally working again so I may be in the market for a case of every day drinkers. If anyone knows of an auction with some likely suspects, please advise in this thread or via PM. Many thanks,
Nick

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 18:24 Tue 17 May 2011

g-man wrote:Acker's is having their typical monthly inet auction:

http://www.ackerwines.com/onlineauctions/search.cfm

Some eye watering retail prices of some lots (pre buyer's premium) so i'm going to pass on most.

Bottom lots like the sandeman 77 for 50$ is not cheaper then retail either.

One did catch my eye and could be of interest:
For novel value unless people on the boards say otherwise, but I certainly would NOT want 12 bottles of a 1988 VP from GC.

New York (lot location)
8375
Gould Campbell Vintage Port - Vintage 1988
12lbsl, 12scl

12 bottles per lot $350-500

Minimum Bid: $ 280

I think $30/btl for GC is decent, i lucked out with the GC80 a while back. However, we knew 80 was a good year. 88 is mediocre.

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 18:25 Tue 17 May 2011

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 20:17 Tue 17 May 2011

I would be surprised if any of that trio are still drinking well.

..historical curiosities only...

Tom

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 20:45 Tue 17 May 2011

uncle tom wrote:I would be surprised if any of that trio are still drinking well.

..historical curiosities only...

Tom

indeed, but it would make a good conversation piece when you come visit

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 21:43 Tue 17 May 2011

g-man wrote:
uncle tom wrote:I would be surprised if any of that trio are still drinking well.

..historical curiosities only...

Tom
indeed, but it would make a good conversation piece when you come visit

I was most amused by the Fine Tawny Hunting Port; though the murky brown color suggests it actually went on the hunt.
The left-most wine was described as a VP, though analysis of the label makes it clear that it is not. I've seen that so many times now... old port isn't automatically Vintage Port.

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 21:46 Tue 17 May 2011

FYI, I am bidding in a US auction tomorrow. If you are also bidding in a US auction tomorrow, you are welcome to send me a PM -- we can discuss how good port tastes.

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 19:12 Wed 18 May 2011

uncle tom wrote:I would be surprised if any of that trio are still drinking well.

..historical curiosities only...

Tom

it just hammered at 320$ pre buyer's .

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 20:52 Wed 18 May 2011

g-man wrote:it just hammered at 320$ pre buyer's .

And we watched a single D63 hammer at $520.

That's what happens when you auction off Bernie Madoff's port. Did we mention the 18% buyers prem and 10% tax? Someone paid an arm and a leg for that historical curiosity.

Chris Doty · Post by **Chris Doty** » 15:53 Mon 23 May 2011

How did you end up doing at Morrell, sushi?

I was interested in a few lots at Acker on Saturday, but got there a little late, so I only picked up 3 cases of 1970 VP (Taylor, Graham, and Dow).

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 16:28 Mon 23 May 2011

Chris Doty wrote:How did you end up doing at Morrell, sushi?
I was interested in a few lots at Acker on Saturday, but got there a little late, so I only picked up 3 cases of 1970 VP (Taylor, Graham, and Dow).

We were successful in 2 out of 3 of our pursuits. I needed more F94 to fill out that hole, and got 6 for 350 (+18%, =69ea), and went for the F70s as well and got 6 for 480 (+18%, =94ea). The 94's were a great price, the 70's a good price. The W66 we had our eye on went above a fair price and we passed on it.

Chris Doty · Post by **Chris Doty** » 16:39 Mon 23 May 2011

Excellent work!

I was also curious about the W66 lot, but agree that it went for more than I could justify.

It is amazing how wide a gap there is in the US between port prices at auction and port prices retail. I wonder if that is just because few american drinkers ever consider buying more than one bottle at a time? Curious...

Post by **DRT** » 18:07 Mon 23 May 2011

Chris Doty wrote:It is amazing how wide a gap there is in the US between port prices at auction and port prices retail. I wonder if that is just because few american drinkers ever consider buying more than one bottle at a time? Curious...

I have read elsewhere that US auctions once had a reputation of being a place where people dumped damaged stock, presumably heat damaged, so it was more of a risk to buy there than at UK auctions. Perhaps that reputation is no longer justified and you are just benefiting from the ignorance of others who think it still presents too much of a risk? If so, I wouldn't let too many people know the truth

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 18:27 Mon 23 May 2011

DRT wrote:
Chris Doty wrote:It is amazing how wide a gap there is in the US between port prices at auction and port prices retail. I wonder if that is just because few american drinkers ever consider buying more than one bottle at a time? Curious...
I have read elsewhere that US auctions once had a reputation of being a place where people dumped damaged stock, presumably heat damaged, so it was more of a risk to buy there than at UK auctions. Perhaps that reputation is no longer justified and you are just benefiting from the ignorance of others who think it still presents too much of a risk? If so, I wouldn't let too many people know the truth

don't get me wrong, between sushi and i, we've definitely had our misses and hits.

I find the younger stuff to be more hits then misses
with older stuff being 50/50.

you will always find more leakers in the states and when yer buying case lots there are always 3-4 bottels that are "Signs of seepage"

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 18:43 Mon 23 May 2011

Chris Doty wrote:How did you end up doing at Morrell, sushi?

One other point about this, btw. We've realized there are some folks on the forum (lurking, likely) that monitor this thread and the for-sale-by-retailer thread (and even the tasting organization threads) and scoop up decently priced port. Unfortunately, that means we can't mention where or what we've found until after doing our purchasing. It's sad, because sometimes these are short-term sales, or auctions with lots we won't be bidding on. It's why I was ambiguous about which auction we were bidding in, and why we now have to acquire missing ports for tastings before saying where we're getting them.

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 18:46 Mon 23 May 2011

Opening owcs in the 20-30 year age range, I find there are one or more bottles with a seepage issue in about two cases out of five. Mostly it's pretty trivial, and my policy of 'survival of the fittest' sees them drunk in fairly short order.

Old bottles can sometimes weep a little when subjected to the varying temperatures of being transported to a saleroom, but quite often the seepage stops after they have been tucked up in my cellar.

Tom

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 19:08 Mon 23 May 2011

uncle tom wrote:Opening owcs in the 20-30 year age range, I find there are one or more bottles with a seepage issue in about two cases out of five. Mostly it's pretty trivial, and my policy of 'survival of the fittest' sees them drunk in fairly short order.

Old bottles can sometimes weep a little when subjected to the varying temperatures of being transported to a saleroom, but quite often the seepage stops after they have been tucked up in my cellar.

Tom

I quite enjoy this survival of the fittest policy!

Post by **DRT** » 19:20 Mon 23 May 2011

SushiNorth wrote:
Chris Doty wrote:How did you end up doing at Morrell, sushi?
One other point about this, btw. We've realized there are some folks on the forum (lurking, likely) that monitor this thread and the for-sale-by-retailer thread (and even the tasting organization threads) and scoop up decently priced port. Unfortunately, that means we can't mention where or what we've found until after doing our purchasing. It's sad, because sometimes these are short-term sales, or auctions with lots we won't be bidding on. It's why I was ambiguous about which auction we were bidding in, and why we now have to acquire missing ports for tastings before saying where we're getting them.

That's exactly the sort of thing that Private Messages are for

Post by **jdaw1** » 11:50 Thu 09 Jun 2011

Piasa, Tue 14 June 2011, Paris, lots 41 to 47 being variously NN66, N66, NN63, Cr75.

Post by **DRT** » 14:13 Fri 10 Jun 2011

The estimates for the NNs are very low!

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 14:57 Mon 08 Aug 2011

FYI:
http://www.ackerwines.com/onlineauctions/Search.cfm

some run of the mill stuff, however the below lot warrants some attention.

I'm at my monthly budget so will be passing
@190 - which after buyer's comes to 230$ is a steal for these for bottles.

New York (lot location)
12743
Fonseca Vintage Port
- Vintage 1985 (2)
Graham's Vintage Port
- Vintage 1985 (1)
Taylor Fladgate Vintage Port
- Vintage 1985 lbsl (1)
Above 4 bottles per lot $240-320

Current Winning Bid: $ 180 (mouton55)
Next Winning Bid: $ 190
Number of

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 14:21 Tue 27 Sep 2011

Brits, there's some interesting things up for auction here; the mixed (un-listed) parcel lots at the beginning may be the best value, but there are some other lots which look interesting.

http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/sear ... leID=23159

Meanwhile, I did peruse the US auction list, and if anyone is interested please PM me.

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 15:44 Tue 27 Sep 2011

Duff link, I think...

Tom

Post by **DRT** » 16:25 Tue 27 Sep 2011

uncle tom wrote:Duff link, I think...

Tom

The format of the url looks like it's a secure area you can only see if you are a member and logged into the site.

SushiNorth · Post by **SushiNorth** » 18:08 Tue 27 Sep 2011

Sorry! my ctrl-c has not been working well recently. Link fixed: http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/sear ... leID=23159

RAYC · Post by **RAYC** » 18:27 Tue 27 Sep 2011

SushiNorth wrote:Sorry! my ctrl-c has not been working well recently. Link fixed: http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/sear ... leID=23159

Might be fun to try to pick a case or two up for an offline and see what comes out!

Post by **DRT** » 18:31 Tue 27 Sep 2011

RAYC wrote:
SushiNorth wrote:Sorry! my ctrl-c has not been working well recently. Link fixed: http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/sear ... leID=23159
Might be fun to try to pick a case or two up for an offline and see what comes out!

Might be fun for a few of us to throw in £100 each and let our auction expert buy the whole lot as team port?

RAYC · Post by **RAYC** » 19:54 Tue 27 Sep 2011

DRT wrote:
RAYC wrote:
SushiNorth wrote:Sorry! my ctrl-c has not been working well recently. Link fixed: http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/sear ... leID=23159
Might be fun to try to pick a case or two up for an offline and see what comes out!
Might be fun for a few of us to throw in £100 each and let our auction expert buy the whole lot as team port?

I'd be in.

Could be a bit of a crap-shoot without any listings - here's the link to last year's awards: everything from Morrison's b.o.b tawny and Churchill's Dry White to Dalva 1966 Colheita and Graham's 1980. I suppose these lots could contain a similar range!