ThePortForum.com

DRT wrote:

RAYC wrote:Most of the "names" on the labels are nowadays "brands" rather than the producer. Exhibit (A) is the Symington stable: all (apart from Vesuvio / Capela / Roriz) are - so far as i am aware - technically produced by the "Symington Family Estates" legal entity that is named as the bottler in the label small-print.

Not true. The wines are made and owned by the individual shipping companies. They are bottled and shipped by SFE.

Zzzzzzzz.........

Dow is a "port house".

Dow Quinta do Bomfim is a wine produced by the port house known as Dow.

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

RAYC wrote:Most of the "names" on the labels are nowadays "brands" rather than the producer. Exhibit (A) is the Symington stable: all (apart from Vesuvio / Capela / Roriz) are - so far as i am aware - technically produced by the "Symington Family Estates" legal entity that is named as the bottler in the label small-print.

Not true. The wines are made and owned by the individual shipping companies. They are bottled and shipped by SFE.

Zzzzzzzz.........

Shhhh! Can't you see I'm just getting him back for all that spurious nonsense about 1972?

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

RAYC wrote:Most of the "names" on the labels are nowadays "brands" rather than the producer. Exhibit (A) is the Symington stable: all (apart from Vesuvio / Capela / Roriz) are - so far as i am aware - technically produced by the "Symington Family Estates" legal entity that is named as the bottler in the label small-print.

Not true. The wines are made and owned by the individual shipping companies. They are bottled and shipped by SFE.

Zzzzzzzz.........

Shhhh! Can't you see I'm just getting him back for all that spurious nonsense about 1972?

ZZZZZZZZ kerplonk *falls out of bed*

DRT wrote:Dow is a "port house".

Dow Quinta do Bomfim is a wine produced by the port house known as Dow.

That's very ill-defined. "Dow" is the brand. Silva & Cosens LDA is the legal entity that owns the IP, potentially the Quintas (but who knows...?). "Symington Family Estates" is the legal entity that is the "bottler" (somehow even for ports that were bottled before it existed...but nowadays at the Quinta do Sol facility) and distributes the port.

"Port house" essentially means nothing if you actually look at the way these groups are structured.

RAYC wrote:"Dow" is the brand. Silva & Cozens LDA is the legal entity that owns the IP

I'll give you that one. A bad example from me, and one that is quite unique in the trade.

RAYC wrote:"Port house" essentially means nothing if you actually look at the way these groups are structured.

I disagree. It is a very easy leap to interpret "port house" as the primary name of the brand. Fonseca, Taylor, Warre, Vesuvio, Noval, Sandeman, Ferriera, etc. The sub-brands of those companies are not "port houses". The groups to which most of these "port houses" now belong have never sought to establish themselves as a brand in the context of individual wines.

Is there a term of art for a major diversion from a minor diversion?

RAYC wrote:Is there a term of art for a major diversion from a minor diversion?

I'm sure there's a Greek word for it. Paraphrasis? Hyperperissologia?
(I've made those up.)
Perhaps "Turnbullism" is best.

I'm impressed with RAYC's ingenuity; I'm quite happy with the use of the quinta name by itself when the wine is sold independently as Quinta do/da XXX, though I think that Vau and Tua fail that test. However, building on RAYC's example, we could have: to get 5 (Noval, Nova, Dow, Dalva, Adam) if "Adam" is allowable

I think it would need to be Adams, not Adam.

DRT wrote:I think it would need to be Adams, not Adam.

My gut would agree, but we use Warre and Graham, rather than Warre's and Graham's; I'm not sure what Adam/Adams/Adam's says on the bottle though; I noted that our tasting note index uses Adam in 4/5 cases (ref) which is why I though there might be a chance of acceptability.

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:I think it would need to be Adams, not Adam.

My gut would agree, but we use Warre and Graham, rather than Warre's and Graham's; I'm not sure what Adam/Adams/Adam's says on the bottle though; I noted that our tasting note index uses Adam in 4/5 cases (ref) which is why I though there might be a chance of acceptability.

Obviously the central position in the grid needs to be occupied by an apostrophe

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:I think it would need to be Adams, not Adam.

My gut would agree, but we use Warre and Graham, rather than Warre's and Graham's; I'm not sure what Adam/Adams/Adam's says on the bottle though; I noted that our tasting note index uses Adam in 4/5 cases (ref) which is why I though there might be a chance of acceptability.

The bottle we had with Alex says "Adams" on the label. I had it in mind that this was a port shipping company named after a man with the surname Adams rather than Adam. So the possessive would be Adams's.

DRT wrote:The bottle we had with Alex[/url] says "Adams" on the label. I had it in mind that this was a port shipping company named after a man with the surname Adams rather than Adam.

In that case Adam would not be allowed in this quiz, so still only scoring 4, and tasting note index should be updated (in either case since it uses both) to the determined correct version.

I will check my books when I get home. That label could be a crime.

DRT wrote:I will check my books when I get home. That label could be a crime.

Any news?

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:I will check my books when I get home. That label could be a crime.

Any news?

Sorry, forgot, and not near my books until Friday.

I can only find a few references to this shipper in books and all of them say "Adams".

DRT wrote:I can only find a few references to this shipper in books and all of them say "Adams".

thanks for the confirmation. Proposed 5 invalid then, 4 still highest 3x3. Tasting note index will also need correction.