
Let the ranting begin.
Probably best with Krohnflakes.djewesbury wrote:I like that it'll be launched at 9.30 am, presumably with toast or granola. Which will it go with better?
DRT wrote:Probably best with Krohnflakes.djewesbury wrote:I like that it'll be launched at 9.30 am, presumably with toast or granola. Which will it go with better?
DRT wrote:Probably best with Krohnflakes.djewesbury wrote:I like that it'll be launched at 9.30 am, presumably with toast or granola. Which will it go with better?
This has an appalling greatness to it.DRT wrote:Probably best with Krohnflakes.
djewesbury wrote:!!
Glenn E. wrote:![]()
Such accolades are rare for one of my attempts at humour. I'm here all week.LGTrotter wrote:This has an appalling greatness to it.
Agreed. Port doesn't go well with fatty liquids (excluding gravy, custard, clotted cream and any sauce you can have with a steak).djewesbury wrote:Don't milk it.
That would be the old Krohn's, there is also an old white from around the same period. Taylor's is releasing a lot of these old Krohn's, as Krohn had plenty of old stocks when TFP acquired them.RonnieRoots wrote:I suppose this is what they will be launching. Yet another ultra-premium bottling for trophy hunters.
The white (plus a second Tawny) is 1896, as I recall. Krohn released a limited supply of those as a pair... for €8000 as I recall.Andy Velebil wrote:That would be the old Krohn's, there is also an old white from around the same period. Taylor's is releasing a lot of these old Krohn's, as Krohn had plenty of old stocks when TFP acquired them.RonnieRoots wrote:I suppose this is what they will be launching. Yet another ultra-premium bottling for trophy hunters.
There was a tasting on Wed with David Guimaraens at which the different aged varietal components of were to be present (was it T94 plus each individual component separately aged in bottle? I forget which year it was to be); unfortunately I was unavailable due to other work commitments, as I think that would have been a fascinating event. I have no idea whether the "new" 1863 release was to be present.djewesbury wrote:Did anyone taste this at the day with David Guimaraens? Was that yesterday? Who went? Review please.
Not wishing to be pedantic but is there a tasting note for this?Justin K wrote:I tasted the 64 recently and liked it so feck the pedants! That's what we Irish use when we want to be polite or when we are doing our Father Jack impressions.
I fear it is much too late for thatAHB wrote:stop being a bunch of grumpy old men
I shall watch the BAFTAs tonight to see whether you win the lifetime service to comedy award.DRT wrote:I fear it is much too late for thatAHB wrote:stop being a bunch of grumpy old men![]()
For the record, I was persuaded by your argument last time and my comment above was merely a world class joke that achieved much critical acclaim. I sense a British Comedy Award could be in the offing.
Agreed, but did you expect the longest and most intense rant to be in support of Taylor?jdaw1 wrote:The last sentence of the first post wasn’t wrong.
Only because I haven't had time to compose an apposite riposte.DRT wrote:Agreed, but did you expect the longest and most intense rant to be in support of Taylor?jdaw1 wrote:The last sentence of the first post wasn’t wrong.
Before you do, and I hope you will, I will say that having spent most of my career as a Project Manager it would be hypocritical of me to criticise this…LGTrotter wrote:Only because I haven't had time to compose an apposite riposte.DRT wrote:Agreed, but did you expect the longest and most intense rant to be in support of Taylor?jdaw1 wrote:The last sentence of the first post wasn’t wrong.
LGTrotter wrote:Taylor is taking the kudos for another man's work.
Sure. There’s inevitably going to be a project-manager type about, who has become rich off the back of the workers, etc etc.DRT wrote:Agreed, but did you expect the longest and most intense rant to be in support of Taylor?jdaw1 wrote:The last sentence of the first post wasn’t wrong.
The Graham tawnies were made by Graham. And are sold under that name.djewesbury wrote:Funny how nobody balks at the Symingtons releasing old Graham tawnies that they weren't responsible for making.
You're being over-literal (jdaw1 wrote:The Graham tawnies were made by Graham. And are sold under that name.djewesbury wrote:Funny how nobody balks at the Symingtons releasing old Graham tawnies that they weren't responsible for making.
If they had been sold as “Symington Old Tawny”, then ranting would indeed be likely.
Does not equal. Yes. Correct. Both examples involve a company being bought by another company, and in each the bought company's name is attached to the people who made the product being sold. The people using the name (in one instance) or putting it under their own name (in the other) are not those people. It seems that while this 'does not equal' it is proximate enough to raise similar questions. And the same answer: so what?jdaw1 wrote:The ranting was about things made by Krohn being labeled Taylor. Your counter-rant used the example of things made by Graham being called Graham. Huh? Does Not Equal.
Owen,LGTrotter wrote:I hope I haven't ranted too much and that Alex will forgive any unfair assumptions I may have made. I may think of more later...
My sentiments, more succinctly!uncle tom wrote:Who made what can be bit academic, the more so when you go back in time.
Historically, most growers got no credit for their efforts whatsoever, and many established brands had little or no input when it came to blending the wines they sold.
Better to not worry too much about the origins of a port, but hold to account those who put their name on the label..
?djewesbury wrote:majuscule.
And I had you down as one of the eruditer ones.LGTrotter wrote:Was I the only one who had to google?djewesbury wrote:majuscule.
+1!jdaw1 wrote:Echoing the thanks to Adrian. We like to hear truth from its source.
And it is also good the none of the Krohn staff were made redundant, especially given the state of the Portuguese job market.
And we like foot treading.
L'Assemblage has a sneak preview, I assume the small picture of the 1863 complete with your signature is what this launch is about. Hope you don't do a smiley face on the dot over the 'i' in your surname, I'm not sure I would buy one under such circumstances.AdrianBridge wrote:Happy to see lots of posts about a Port that we will launch in VinExpo HK next week, in London on 3rd June and New York on 4th June. We look forward to showing you the packaging and price when we launch.
I want to buy one now specifically to get Adrian to sign my bottle that way.LGTrotter wrote:L'Assemblage has a sneak preview, I assume the small picture of the 1863 complete with your signature is what this launch is about. Hope you don't do a smiley face on the dot over the 'i' in your surname, I'm not sure I would buy one under such circumstances.AdrianBridge wrote:Happy to see lots of posts about a Port that we will launch in VinExpo HK next week, in London on 3rd June and New York on 4th June. We look forward to showing you the packaging and price when we launch.
London is the “International” launch, so is the earlier Hong Kong launch merely domestic?AdrianBridge wrote:Happy to see lots of posts about a Port that we will launch in VinExpo HK next week, in London on 3rd June and New York on 4th June.