Taylors 1992 Vintage port for sale

[olliestreek]

12 bottles of 1992 Taylors Vintage port for sale.
£1750.

[DRT]

Hi,

Without wishing to be rude I think your expectation is far too high.

This wine is available by the case from a number of very reputable wine merchants for around £400 less than you are asking and could be purchased at auction for even less.

Our normal advice to those looking for a private sale is to expect around 50% of the retail price. However, Taylor 1992 is a special wine and you could no doubt get more than that but I cannot imagine why anyone would pay the price you are asking.

Derek

[JB vintage]

DRT, may I ask what is so special with Taylor 1992? Taylor is of cause (almost) always a good port but is there anything special with 1992?

[RAYC]

DRT, may I ask what is so special with Taylor 1992? Taylor is of cause (almost) always a good port but is there anything special with 1992?

I don't think i've had it myself, but i understand T92 to be a fantastic wine.

However, bear in mind that it is also a wine that received 100pts from Robert Parker ("Taylor's 1992 Vintage Port is unquestionably the greatest young port I have ever tasted. It represents the essence of what vintage port can achieve.").

Certainly in the UK, and i suspect in the US as well, the combination of this 100pt rating and the Taylor brand make this a port that is sought after not just by port lovers, but also by wine aficionados looking to balance to their cellars. Hence the price compared to eg: Graham 1994, which is sub-£400 per 12 in bond but which i struggle to believe is only 1/4 as good!

[JB vintage]

Thank you for the information. I had the 1992 once ten years ago and it was good, but I would rather buy a 1977 or a 1980 which I believe to be much better. And lower price as well! The 1977 I had a month ago and the 1980 I had a couple of weeks ago and they are both fabulous ports. It is very astonishing that one tasting reference of 100 pts from Parker can bias the whole market price.

[LGTrotter]

I am unconvinced that Parker really gets port, others would seem to agree with me in that I do not see the same premium that 100 points makes in claret show up in port pricing.

[RAYC]

I am unconvinced that Parker really gets port, others would seem to agree with me in that I do not see the same premium that 100 points makes in claret show up in port pricing.

In terms of points on release, the only 100pt ports i know from Parker are:

Noval 1997
Noval Nacional 1997
Taylor 1992
Taylor Scion

He also gave Fonseca 1963 100pts recently.

The Taylor and Noval both have pretty hefty premiums by comparison to other ports from the same vintage (Noval pricing no doubt compounded by its rarity). Nacional 97 and Scion are in categories of their own in any event.

[g-man]

he compared the t92 to a young Chateau Latour along with the 100 pters.

but prices have certainly softened up stateside as I see this hitting the auction blocks around 110$/btl and selling as high as 150$/btl

I actually differ on taste JB: this is a fantastic wine and one i enjoy more than the 77 and 80 as I haven't had much luck finding a good bottle of the 77 and hte 80 while enjoyable is not going to last anywhere near as long as the 92 in my opinion

DRT gives a accurate market price of this particular wine.

[RAYC]

Thank you for the information. I had the 1992 once ten years ago and it was good, but I would rather buy a 1977 or a 1980 which I believe to be much better. And lower price as well! The 1977 I had a month ago and the 1980 I had a couple of weeks ago and they are both fabulous ports. It is very astonishing that one tasting reference of 100 pts from Parker can bias the whole market price.

Well...Jancis also gave it 19/20, Suckling at WS gave it 96. Cellartracker average of 94.9. So there's clearly a "hype" about this port.

1980 Taylor suffers from a poor reputation. Unjustified, in my opinion (and as demonstrated by numerous tastings with people on this forum), albeit i don't think i'd have it in my list of "Top 5" 80s ports.

1977 Taylor can be wonderful but also seems to have a fair few issues with bottle variability. Also i think market perception of 77s is not what it was - i get the feeling there has been a swing to regarding this as an "over-hyped" vintage that has not lived up to initial expectations (an opinion that seems to crop up a fair bit on wine-pages.com, for instance).

[DRT]

DRT, may I ask what is so special with Taylor 1992? Taylor is of cause (almost) always a good port but is there anything special with 1992?

As others have commented this received 100 points from Parker and shot up in value. The same happened to Dow 2007, but not quite as high a price.

Another factor in the hype is that 1992 was Taylor's 300 year anniversary and it received a huge push from the marketing boys and girls which will have heightened its profile.

As for the wine in the bottle, it was excellent on the one occasion I tasted it but needs another 20 years before it will be mature enough to compare properly with the greats.

[Glenn E.]

I actually differ on taste JB: this is a fantastic wine and one i enjoy more than the 77 and 80 as I haven't had much luck finding a good bottle of the 77 and hte 80 while enjoyable is not going to last anywhere near as long as the 92 in my opinion

As for the wine in the bottle, it was excellent on the one occasion I tasted it but needs another 20 years before it will be mature enough to compare properly with the greats.

I concur. I think it will easily out-last the '77 and '70 (and not just because it is 20-ish years younger). I don't agree with Parker that it is a 100-point wine, but maybe some day it will reach that plateau.

1980 Taylor suffers from a poor reputation. Unjustified, in my opinion (and as demonstrated by numerous tastings with people on this forum), albeit i don't think i'd have it in my list of "Top 5" 80s ports.

That is the poor reputation. In how many other vintages can you say the same thing? The T80 is a fine Port, but it is not excellent. Taylors are expected to be excellent, ergo this particular Taylor is (relatively) poor. It isn't a poor Port, it is a poor Taylor.

Re: the original post, I agree with what others have said. £1750 is too much to ask for a private sale, as you can get a case (in the US) for $1750 from a reputable wine merchant. Prices in the UK are generally lower than in the US, not higher.

[RAYC]

DRT, may I ask what is so special with Taylor 1992? Taylor is of cause (almost) always a good port but is there anything special with 1992?

As others have commented this received 100 points from Parker and shot up in value. The same happened to Dow 2007, but not quite as high a price.

Probably because Dow 07 was Suckling rather than Parker?

[DRT]

Oops! Yes, probably. But it does demonstrate the 100 point effect quite nicely.

[uncle tom]

At auction, a case of T92 realises around £800-£850 hammer, which nets to around £700-£750 for the vendor.

It comes up quite frequently.

[DRT]

At auction, a case of T92 realises around £800-£850 hammer, which nets to around £700-£750 for the vendor.

And available retail for £1380 including VAT here so our standard "50% of retail" is pretty close

[LGTrotter]

I am unconvinced that Parker really gets port, others would seem to agree with me in that I do not see the same premium that 100 points makes in claret show up in port pricing.

In terms of points on release, the only 100pt ports i know from Parker are:

Noval 1997
Noval Nacional 1997
Taylor 1992
Taylor Scion

He also gave Fonseca 1963 100pts recently.

The Taylor and Noval both have pretty hefty premiums by comparison to other ports from the same vintage (Noval pricing no doubt compounded by its rarity). Nacional 97 and Scion are in categories of their own in any event.

I think he also gave the 2003 Taylor 100pts too, I accept there is a premium with this however I don't think it is a much as it is in claret. Taylors also has a premium in the market in most vintages aside from Parker points.

[g-man]

I am unconvinced that Parker really gets port, others would seem to agree with me in that I do not see the same premium that 100 points makes in claret show up in port pricing.

In terms of points on release, the only 100pt ports i know from Parker are:

Noval 1997
Noval Nacional 1997
Taylor 1992
Taylor Scion

He also gave Fonseca 1963 100pts recently.

The Taylor and Noval both have pretty hefty premiums by comparison to other ports from the same vintage (Noval pricing no doubt compounded by its rarity). Nacional 97 and Scion are in categories of their own in any event.

I think he also gave the 2003 Taylor 100pts too, I accept there is a premium with this however I don't think it is a much as it is in claret. Taylors also has a premium in the market in most vintages aside from Parker points.

98

the other two 100 pters floating around are the wine spectator's dual wine of the year ratings to both fonseca and taylor 1994 (which both got 100s)

[LGTrotter]

My sources say 100. There may be a more recent score.

http://www.farrvintners.com/wine.php?wine=23672.

[g-man]

http://www.klwines.com/detail.asp?sku=1018203

http://taylor.pt/en/catalogue/vintage/p ... ssic/2003/

http://www.binnys.com/wine/Taylor_Fladg ... 30899.html

you figure if tfp got wind of another 100 pter they would have put it on their website.

but i think that might be a misprint on Farr's side

[LGTrotter]

A fine fighting response; 3 links to 1 is the score so far. OK who's got a subscription to whatever Parker calls himself on the web so this can be settled.

I am prepared to eat humble pie, or gloat (preferably).

[DRT]

Parker_7th_Edition.jpg (44.11 KiB) Viewed 14337 times

Parker_T2003.jpg (17.02 KiB) Viewed 14339 times

LGT_dinner.jpeg (31.29 KiB) Viewed 14339 times

[LGTrotter]

Well I suppose that I should do this gracefully;

I apologise humbly and unreservedly for the suggestion that the 2003 Taylors port garnered 100 points from Robert Parker. I would also like to take this opportunity to say what a fine and wise man g-man is and I have come to value his knowledge and henceforth will listen to his wisdom.

http://www.bbr.com/products-2987-2003-taylor-fladgate

[DRT]

http://www.bbr.com/products-2987-2003-taylor-fladgate

Interesting!

But there is also this...

Screen Shot 2013-09-18 at 20.45.12.png (58.56 KiB) Viewed 14334 times

[LGTrotter]

And this;

https://www.winelegend.com/Newsletter/HTM/884.htm

I just remembered seeing it as one of those wines on a 'Parker 100 point wine dinner'. Anyway it does not detract from the 98 points cropping up all over the place and as g-man says you would have thought that Taylors would be up to date with what their points are.

[DRT]

And this;

https://www.winelegend.com/Newsletter/HTM/884.htm

You could be onto something. That article says he rated it 100pts in 2008. His initial rating of 98+ would have been in 2005. Perhaps he revised his rating at a later tasting?

[LGTrotter]

And this after being depicted as a bearded paltroon complete with gingham napkin!

I am wondering what the response should be. To err is human, to forgive...

[DRT]

This is a blow...

Screen Shot 2013-09-18 at 21.16.43.png (44.57 KiB) Viewed 6656 times

There are definitely Parker-wise people there who would have noticed.

Don't worry about the gingham, your secret is safe here.

[g-man]

And this;

https://www.winelegend.com/Newsletter/HTM/884.htm

I just remembered seeing it as one of those wines on a 'Parker 100 point wine dinner'. Anyway it does not detract from the 98 points cropping up all over the place and as g-man says you would have thought that Taylors would be up to date with what their points are.

the note though is rivani's note but the score is this mysterious 100pt.
that note is the one given the 98.

[g-man]

And this;

https://www.winelegend.com/Newsletter/HTM/884.htm

You could be onto something. That article says he rated it 100pts in 2008. His initial rating of 98+ would have been in 2005. Perhaps he revised his rating at a later tasting?

Actually I vaguely recall an article written in the hedonist by Jay Miller acutally talking about the Taylor 2003 with a 100 pter while he had a scoop of ice cream or was it chocolate cake? in his mouth.

There was the mention of the 100 pts but no actual score and wasn't published in the WA as an official score.

That might potentially be the source of this 100 pt, my google search fails me in finding this particular write up though by Jay Miller.

[LGTrotter]

Have you had a look at the Berry's note, this does seem to be different to the one on wine legends. I have found Berry's late with updating their notes but not inaccurate.

However it seems rather churlish of me to try to back out of the earlier mea culpae with all these diversionary tactics.

[DRT]

rather churlish of me to try to back out of the earlier mea culpae with all these diversionary tactics.

That works here

I have gone fishing.

[LGTrotter]

I see you have had a nibble.

I'm still not sure what the answer is. If I have understood this aright it would seem that it has been rated officially as 98 by Robin (Rovani) and unofficially rated as 100 by Batman (Parker) more recently. I shall not suggest that as Robin has now been defrocked perhaps his score is undermined.

[DRT]

I have gone fishing.

We have the answer.

[idj123]

At a Dreweatts auction today, a case of Taylor's 92 sold for £700 (so £825 inc Buyer's Premium)-somewhat shy of the asking price here!

[jdaw1]

I suspect that Mr. ‟olliestreek” has left his mobile number because he has no intention of posting again on this forum. It is, in part, a testable hypothesis.

[Andy Velebil]

I have gone fishing.

We have the answer.

For future search reference (as posted )...

I will have to look. But iirc in an unofficial (official) hedonist gazette he scored it 100 at the end of some big wine dinner.

If not familiar with the HG it's when he rates wines at dinners. They are supposed to be unofficial and not used. But of course people do because, well, he scores them and publishes them on his website.

Found it. Pierre Rovani originally reviewed it for the Wine Advocate and gave it 98. In may 2008 Parker was at a dinner on the Great Wall of china and it was served at the end of the meal (which had many wines before). Parker gave it 100 points in his HG review after.

[g-man]

I have gone fishing.

We have the answer.

For future search reference (as posted )...

I will have to look. But iirc in an unofficial (official) hedonist gazette he scored it 100 at the end of some big wine dinner.

If not familiar with the HG it's when he rates wines at dinners. They are supposed to be unofficial and not used. But of course people do because, well, he scores them and publishes them on his website.

Found it. Pierre Rovani originally reviewed it for the Wine Advocate and gave it 98. In may 2008 Parker was at a dinner on the Great Wall of china and it was served at the end of the meal (which had many wines before). Parker gave it 100 points in his HG review after.

is this the one where jay miller gave the fonseca 92 a 98 with ice cream in his mouth
and i believe parker was having chocolate cake witht he taylor 92 with the 100 pter?