ThePortForum.com

DRT wrote: ↑22:33 Tue 30 Nov 2021

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.

This I agree with.

The next live tasting will be a tense affair.

MigSU wrote: ↑22:37 Tue 30 Nov 2021 The next live tasting will be a tense affair.

They always are. Think of a Game of Thrones war council and you'll be getting close

Have we gone off-topic yet?

DRT wrote: ↑22:41 Tue 30 Nov 2021

MigSU wrote: ↑22:37 Tue 30 Nov 2021 The next live tasting will be a tense affair.

They always are. Think of a Game of Thrones war council and you'll be getting close

That used to be only when some yank brought the brown sticky stuff and people were forced to confront their biases. Has the War Council found some other reason to convene now?

Is the secondary market price for Port changing? What do you guys think?

MigSU wrote: ↑23:38 Tue 30 Nov 2021 Is the secondary market price for Port changing? What do you guys think?

Depends on how much we all drink before the auctions starts

Well. I've just spent a little time digging and may have found a roadmap. It's a Manual of Certification and Control that is bang up to date (Oct '21) and lists on its second page all current legislation, but not all of it with links. The dates on the documents go back only to 2009 which suggests that older statutes and circulars may no longer be current.

https://www.ivdp.pt/media/zeglzfi0/manu ... o_2021.pdf

The only possible fly in the ointment here is that the introduction to the list of legislation requires compliance by all people who wish to trade in Port (etc) - whether manufacture is subject to additional and separate rules is not clear at this point.

As can be seen from the list of documents, it will take a little time to work through them.

That's a good find. I'll take a closer look at it later.

uncle tom wrote: ↑12:38 Wed 01 Dec 2021 Well. I've just spent a little time digging and may have found a roadmap. It's a Manual of Certification and Control that is bang up to date (Oct '21) and lists on its second page all current legislation, but not all of it with links. The dates on the documents go back only to 2009 which suggests that older statutes and circulars may no longer be current.

The last few times I’ve looked at the IVDP regulations in any detail, I got the impression that they overhauled them in 2010 which might explain why the references don’t go back much earlier than that. I think the previous major revision was the one in the 1980s.

For what it is worth, I think one of the problems with these discussions and why they tend to go round and round in circles with very little citing of the regulations is the way the IVDP categorises the different categories. Whenever I have read the regulations, I think they set out the main categories (VP, LBV, Crusted, TWOIA etc.) but then there are at least five additional designations: single quinta, unfiltered / traditional, leve seco, rose and organic. Since these are additional designations, I think their definitions are not set out in the main regulations but somewhere else. The problem is that whilst a definition of, say, an organic Port is highly technical; SQVP & unfiltered LBV are really proper categories in their own right.

Well here’s the reference to not being allowed to mix “black” grapes with white grapes to make wine in the demarcated region.

http://www.governodosoutros.ics.ul.pt/i ... &accao=ver

Should we invite the Head of the IVDP to a tasting, having provided detailed questions prior for him to clarify over some appropriately lovely Port? Then maybe we can put this thread drift to bed

@ JacobH and @ Doggett - ideally we would put to bed the thread drift not only by assessing what port properly is allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) now but also what was properly allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) at any one point in the last 100 years. A bit like the function on LexisNexis that allows you to look at what the legislation on many things was as well as what it is.

winesecretary wrote: ↑17:30 Wed 01 Dec 2021 @ JacobH and @ Doggett - ideally we would put to bed the thread drift not only by assessing what port properly is allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) now but also what was properly allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) at any one point in the last 100 years. A bit like the function on LexisNexis that allows you to look at what the legislation on many things was as well as what it is.

This strikes me as an excellent follow-up project for Julian: “Port Regulations: The Chronicle of Port Regulations, from the Beginning”.

JacobH wrote: ↑17:38 Wed 01 Dec 2021

winesecretary wrote: ↑17:30 Wed 01 Dec 2021 @ JacobH and @ Doggett - ideally we would put to bed the thread drift not only by assessing what port properly is allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) now but also what was properly allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) at any one point in the last 100 years. A bit like the function on LexisNexis that allows you to look at what the legislation on many things was as well as what it is.

This strikes me as an excellent follow-up project for Julian: “Port Regulations: The Chronicle of Port Regulations, from the Beginning”.

I can hear him deleting his TPF account as we speak.

Alex Bridgeman wrote: ↑14:50 Wed 01 Dec 2021 Well here’s the reference to not being allowed to mix “black” grapes with white grapes to make wine in the demarcated region.

http://www.governodosoutros.ics.ul.pt/i ... &accao=ver

Hmm... it is probably my browser, but the word "branco" does not appear on the page that comes up with that link.

Edit: Ah nevermind... "uva" is feminine so I should have searched for "branca". This doesn't look like a law that prevents their mixing, but rather a complaint (or documentation of a complaint?) that someone else did that. Which does imply that you're not supposed to...

MigSU wrote: ↑18:03 Wed 01 Dec 2021

JacobH wrote: ↑17:38 Wed 01 Dec 2021

winesecretary wrote: ↑17:30 Wed 01 Dec 2021 @ JacobH and @ Doggett - ideally we would put to bed the thread drift not only by assessing what port properly is allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) now but also what was properly allowed to be made (and allowed to be sold) at any one point in the last 100 years. A bit like the function on LexisNexis that allows you to look at what the legislation on many things was as well as what it is.

This strikes me as an excellent follow-up project for Julian: “Port Regulations: The Chronicle of Port Regulations, from the Beginning”.

I can hear him deleting his TPF account as we speak.

It would be more likely that the IVDP would be calling their lawyers, again.

DRT wrote: ↑17:27 Tue 30 Nov 2021

MigSU wrote: ↑17:24 Tue 30 Nov 2021Should 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!

It has worked for me.

Watched something very interesting in relation to the secondary market today, which made me think of this thread and i believe a few others watched what happened.

First port lot of 2x Dow 1927 with an estimate of £600-800, the price realised was £2,695, due to being 1927 I thought fair enough price, if on the high side of things. not sure which country the buyer was bidding from.

Then i was just blown a way with the next lot,

Quinta do Noval 1931, 9 bottles, with an estimate of £14,000-18,000, I was surprised when the auctioner opened with £40,000 on his book. The hammer went down at £80,000 to a buyer in Thailand, with BP total price realised was £98,000 (base on figure on website), just wow, £10,888 per bottle of vintage port.

There was generally more normal prices being reached even if they where a little on the higher side than normal. until there was a case of Graham's 1963 around £310 per bottle, you can buy this cheaper retail.

I believe that what happened above was a one off with a few very hungary bidders.

It depends on your view of what a bargin is but I felt there was a few around the place today and picked up a couple of things including another mag plus a few more 84's and a couple of other things. I feel that the slow price rises are around to stay for the longer term and it seem there there is a few other areas of world joining the port market (please correct me if wrong about them being new markets).

hadge wrote: ↑23:14 Thu 02 Dec 2021 Quinta do Noval 1931, 9 bottles, with an estimate of £14,000-18,000, I was surprised when the auctioner opened with £40,000 on his book. The hammer went down at £80,000 to a buyer in Thailand, with BP total price realised was £98,000 (base on figure on website), just wow, £10,888 per bottle of vintage port.

That's actually about right, at least from the last few (very few) sales that I've heard of. The last sales of NN31 that I knew of had all been in the $10,000 range per bottle, but those were also 5+ years ago. Given the ever-decreasing supply of both Ports, this lot at around $14,400 per bottle including BP doesn't seem all that out of character. For comparison, the 1875 D'Oliveiras Malvasia Family Reserve has gone from around $840/bottle to $1450/bottle during the same time frame.

Since I've heard arguments about which is better, I've always lumped them together in my head. So perhaps part of the surprise in this sale comes from the fact that it is "regular" Noval and not Nacional?

£2,695 for 2 x D27 doesn't seem high to me at all. I've been trying to find the "next 4" Grahams for my vertical, those being 1942, 1935, 1927, and 1924, and they start around $1500-$1800/bottle and reach $2500-$3000/bottle for the two older bottles. At those prices, my vertical will probably never extend beyond its current end point of 1945.

The thing about the Dow 1927 which struck me was that one bottle was amended by saleroom notice to be low shoulder, so effectively the hammer price of £2,200 (+ bp of 27% if you're in the UK) meant a price to a UK buyer for the one good bottle of about £2,500.

And Glenn - you just have to invite the right people to take part in your Graham vertical tasting to be able to easily extend it back beyond 1945. Particularly those who have decided not to work any more and so can drop everything to jump on a plane to fly to the west coast with only a little bit of notice,

So perhaps part of the surprise in this sale comes from the fact that it is "regular" Noval and not Nacional?

The NN vineyard was still very young in '31. I'm not sure there's been a note on this wine from a reliable source that hasn't included some element of disappointment in the past forty years. It's reputation seems to stem almost entirely from it's endorsement by the late Michael Broadbent.

N31 vs N34 seems a much more interesting contest today.

The “straight” 1931 Noval gets consistently good reviews: is it possible that Michael Broadbent switched them by mistake in a note?

is it possible that Michael Broadbent switched them by mistake in a note?

He was pretty diligent, but of course, when offered a wine like that by a host, he would often have to take their word for it as to its identity.

JacobH wrote: ↑16:58 Fri 03 Dec 2021is it possible that Michael Broadbent switched them by mistake in a note?

Port Vintages, p305 wrote:
► Michael Broadbent in 1991 described the Noval 1931 as “the Everest of vintage ports”, but in 2002 this accolade was for the Nacional. From The Great Vintage Wine Book II (1991):

      1931 … good wine was made, but the towering reputation of this vintage rests on Noval, a wine I have long thought of and described as the Everest of vintage ports. …

Noval Nacional … Some of the above Novals might have been made from the 10% of the vineyard traditionally planted, ungrafted, with the local fruiting varieties. Usually however, “Nacional” appears somewhere on bin label, wax seal and/or cork. This particular bottle came from a Nacional wooden case, had a black wax seal and its cork branded “Noval 1931 bottled 1933”.

And from Vintage Wine (2002):

      1931 … good wine was made, but the towering reputation of this vintage rests on Noval, whose ’31 Nacional I have long since considered as the ‘Everest’ of vintage ports.

Noval, Qda do … I have been privileged to note this on no fewer than 18 occasions … A variety of bottlings, all good, some unstated on cork or capsule but including Justerini & Brooks and, perhaps the most superlatively typical, by Fearon, Block, Ridges, Routh …. Also … shipped by Averys and imported from Bristol, where it had been bottled in 1933 by Louis Glunz, Lincolnwood, Ill.: … But an excellent example, the bottler’s seal embossed ‘Sandeman & Co, Glasgow, vintage 1931’

I watched the Christie's sale. The prices seemed at times very high, but the wines were originally bought well and stored well, with a long history, which makes them worth a premium. That much premium? Not for some, no. Not for the amended to low shoulder D27. Those bidders were nuts. But for the W63, say, I think maybe. Provenance is important. One would only know on popping the cork.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

One would only know on popping the cork.

Indeed. Poorly cellared stashes are relatively rare when case quantities are sold but are much more common with odd old bottles that may have been found in a cupboard during a house clearance.

Paying a significant premium instead of opening a bottle to try does not often make sense when you're buying by the dozen, and sometimes when the entire contents of large house's cellar comes to auction, with the promise of some excellent provenance to hand, the results can be disappointing. Looking at the entire stash pre-auction can sometimes set off alarm bells.

Common bad signs include dust round the necks of bottles, indicating vertical storage, faded labels with shading, indicating light exposure, or excessive numbers of ullaged or leaky bottles, indicating poor housekeeping and storage conditions.

Another concern is evidence of glue streaking on labels, which can be heat induced. Some labels are prone to streaking in the best of conditions, but if it turns up unexpectedly, it's a big red flag - the bottles may have been stored in a hot shed or even an attic.

When auction lots say that bottles have been stored in a 'temperature controlled room' I look closely at the levels. Some chilling systems seem very good at provoking ullage, possibly through repeated stop/go chilling or excessively low humidity.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:20 Fri 03 Dec 2021

Port Vintages, p305 wrote:
► Michael Broadbent in 1991 described the Noval 1931 as “the Everest of vintage ports”, but in 2002 this accolade was for the Nacional. From The Great Vintage Wine Book II (1991):

      1931 … good wine was made, but the towering reputation of this vintage rests on Noval, a wine I have long thought of and described as the Everest of vintage ports. …

Noval Nacional … Some of the above Novals might have been made from the 10% of the vineyard traditionally planted, ungrafted, with the local fruiting varieties. Usually however, “Nacional” appears somewhere on bin label, wax seal and/or cork. This particular bottle came from a Nacional wooden case, had a black wax seal and its cork branded “Noval 1931 bottled 1933”.

And from Vintage Wine (2002):

      1931 … good wine was made, but the towering reputation of this vintage rests on Noval, whose ’31 Nacional I have long since considered as the ‘Everest’ of vintage ports.

Noval, Qda do … I have been privileged to note this on no fewer than 18 occasions … A variety of bottlings, all good, some unstated on cork or capsule but including Justerini & Brooks and, perhaps the most superlatively typical, by Fearon, Block, Ridges, Routh …. Also … shipped by Averys and imported from Bristol, where it had been bottled in 1933 by Louis Glunz, Lincolnwood, Ill.: … But an excellent example, the bottler’s seal embossed ‘Sandeman & Co, Glasgow, vintage 1931’

Thanks for this. At least, in my mind, the comment about the Nacional in the 2002 books appears to be an anomaly and probably a mistake. He definitely isn’t lauding the 1931 Nacional over normal blend.

Incidentally, I have set my eyes on Everest once after several days sitting on a mattress in the back of a landrover. I had attitude sickness; it was freezing; and despite being in a tourist “hotel” on the Tibetan plateau there was no hot water. It might be suggested that a bottle of Port would have relieved the experience but it firmly reinforced my view that the only metaphorical us of Everest should be to mean “the tallest”!