ThePortForum.com

uncle tom wrote:We are probably looking at a two bottle event here.

That edges away from ‘tasting’ and towards ‘party’.

Is there a date?

uncle tom wrote:We are probably looking at a two bottle event here.

No matter how many times I read that sentence I keep hearing the word "Magnum" in my head

DRT wrote:I keep hearing the word "Magnum" in my head

1. The voices of any respectable gentleman would keep saying ‟Imperial”.

2. Magnums of Rs88, WC84, FG76, O72, TV68, NN64, G48? Cool: well found.

3. Imperials of Rs88, WC84, FG76, O72, TV68, NN64, G48? Cool: very well found.

I am extremely happy to report that the date and venue for this event has now been confirmed with the help of our good friend Oscar Quevedo....thanks Oscar....I am sure this will be a very memorable occasion.

I think it is worth an early mention that there is a very small chance that we may have to rearrange the date if by chance there is a governmental meeting or other unmoveable event at the embassy on this date....we are assured that this will be avoided if at all possible but you never know and we should have plenty of notice if this becomes the case....388 days and counting

Cookie wrote:I am extremely happy to report that the date and venue for this event has now been confirmed

We know the venue. What is the date?


Edit: seen in first post.

Cookie wrote:Date now confirmed 25th July 2012.

A draft of the placemats.

• Please check that these are the correct ports.
• Please check that ‟H.E. Dr João de Vallera” is correctly titled, within the space limits of the medium.

Until about a month before the tasting, updates to this file will not be accompanied by a new post in this thread.

Cookie wrote:Date now confirmed 25th July 2012.

I think this is also the first day of Olympic competition - the football starts before the opening ceremony. What chance a game involving Portugal v GB that night?

Would it be too much of an ask to include the names of the past host cities and their national flags on the placemats?

- Full colour printing on photographic paper perhaps..?

Tom

You haven’t looked carefully, have you. The cities are already there.

Colour flags? Is there room? And I dislike colour on placemats: I don't want red/green/blue interfering with my perception of the hue of the liquid.

I don’t have all the flags to hand in appropriate format, but some have been added as an experiment. Please comment. To me there are two problems:
1. Too cluttered.
2. Do we really want our Port tasting in the Portuguese embassy to feature lots of flags, none of which are Portuguese?

Please agree that the flags can be deleted.

Having taken a look at the draft placemats, I tend to agree that the flags make the sheet look quite busy. My personal preference would to leave them off the glasses sheet but - perhaps - include them as a watermark on the tasting note sheet.

I don't see the references to the host cities on the glasses sheet. Where have you hidden them?

AHB wrote:Where have you hidden them?

In plain sight.

jdaw1 wrote:

AHB wrote:Where have you hidden them?

In plain sight.

Found it - I really like this design

AHB wrote:but - perhaps - include them as a watermark on the tasting note sheet.

Different flags have different width:height ratios, including 2:1, 19:10, 5:3, 18:11, 3:2, and 10:7. So if each flag is left-aligned and the height of that Port’s TN rows, the most obvious features would be the non-consistent lengths. But if the lengths are consistent, the variations in heights would be obvious. They could be arranged diagonally across the page, evenly horizontally spaced, but I don’t like that either.

Other opinions? Tom requested flags, so perhaps he could comment?

Separately, as a result of this task I have noticed that in the official specification of the Australian flag the drawing is inconsistent with the marked measurements. It’s as bad as a port shipper not knowing whether it produced 1844.

Considering the inclusion of flags, it’s a good thing that the you decided to stop at 1948 and didn’t try going back to the first London Olympics, or even the games before 1948...

JacobH wrote:Considering the inclusion of flags, it’s a good thing that the you decided to stop at 1948 and didn’t try going back to the first London Olympics, or even the games before 1948...

Are you suggesting that it is easy to find a vector description of the flags of Canada and the USSR? (Mexico and Spain are forfeiting their heraldry.)

jdaw1 wrote:

JacobH wrote:Considering the inclusion of flags, it’s a good thing that the you decided to stop at 1948 and didn’t try going back to the first London Olympics, or even the games before 1948...

Are you suggesting that it is easy to find a vector description of the flags of Canada and the USSR? (Mexico and Spain are forfeiting their heraldry.)

Oh, no, just that the historically-accurate flag of the host of the 1936 Olympics is not one that is particularly acceptable today...

jdaw1 wrote:Please agree that the flags can be deleted.

Agreed.

Would there be any chance to attend or be placed on the reserves for this event?

Thanks

Carl

jdaw1 wrote:[Separately, as a result of this task I have noticed that in the official specification of the Australian flag the drawing is inconsistent with the marked measurements. It’s as bad as a port shipper not knowing whether it produced 1844.

jdaw1, to the appropriate Australian authorities, wrote:I wish to draw, accurately, the Australian flag. To be accurate I am working from the specification at
www.itsanhonour.gov.au/publications/sym ... l_flag.pdf

That says that the centre of Gamma Crucis is 1/6 of the fly below the top, and that the centre of Alpha Crucis is 1/6 of the fly above the bottom. Yet in that PDF the distances of those centres to the nearest edges are not equal, Alpha Crucis being closer. Indeed, the bottom of the blue of the Cross of St. Andrew should be below the top of the flag by one third of the hoist of the Union Jack, so one sixth the height of the whole flag. But extensions of those St Andrew lines do not go through the marked centre of Gamma Crucis, and Alpha Crucis is a different distance again.

So at least one of the following is true.
• The words are correct, the drawing is wrong;
• The words are wrong, the drawing is correct;
• I have mis-understood.

Please, which? Please, what is correct?

A representative of those Australian authorities wrote:We have found that there is some distortion of the flag elements in the pdf file so please go by the words.

Regards

Webmaster

Whoops! How very embarrassing.

At the risk of being 'Mr Reserve' at the moment (Oct, Dec) could I be added as a reserve for this also, in case (unlikely though it may be) a place becomes available?

Thanks,

PhilW.

For those asking to be placed on the reserve list, your request is duly noted, however, I do know that the venue can accomodate 24 but I do not know if the Ambassador has any other dignitaries or sports officianados that he would like to attend.

Enquiries are being made at this time and I will update the attendees list as and when I have an answer.

Cookie wrote:For those asking to be placed on the reserve list, your request is duly noted, however, I do know that the venue can accomodate 24 but I do not know if the Ambassador has any other dignitaries or sports officianados that he would like to attend.

Enquiries are being made at this time and I will update the attendees list as and when I have an answer.

Thanks!

Hi Guys...now it is 2012 I thought I would bring this subject back to the top of the list.

I will start to finalise details with Oscar when I meet with him in Porto in February. He is acting as our liason with the Ambassador and I will get him to confirm the number of places available for the tatsing at The Embassy.

With regards to the wine, it appears most of the years we need are available except 1956 which I shall try to source when I am in Porto. I have appointments with Ramos Pinto, Sandemans and Andressen, so perhaps one of these shippers would be kind enough to help us in our quest.

Once the number of places available has been set I will update/open the guest list again. Meanwhile it may be a good idea to start to put together the wines available from those on the list so far.

I will advise on progress as we move this forward.

Thank you.

Ray

The planning for this tatsing is moving forward very niceley so please be advised that it has been confirmed that we can accomodate 24 people at the Embassy and The Ambassador has aked for 5 places to be reserved for him and his guests.

This means there is a maximum of 19 places for TPF members and guests. I would take advice on whether 24 is too many and maybe we should cap the number at 18...either way it still means 2 bottles of wine from each year....I know we are capable of hosting a tasting of up tp to 24 because we did that at the RAF Club for the Malvedos tatsing. Shall we go for 24 or cap it at 18...the choice is yours.

I will now open the gust list again and add those who previously expressed an interest.

Perhaps it would be quite good fun if we did a draw for who brings which year...all names go into one hat and all years into another...draw masters decision is final...thoughts please.

I will update further as we move forward but meanwhile can we start thinking of the wine list please.

I would argue against d r awing lots for years - I am not sure I would want to provide 2xG48 or Nacional 64 by myself...

It would be useful to get a vague idea on costs - a 2x16 vintage vertical that includes duplicate G48, Ni56, NN64 and T92 supported by 13 paying TPF members (if we go for an 18 limit) might end up quite expensive. In terms of room/food/glass arrangements, would we be paying for this or is it just the wines that need to be purchased?

I thought that may invoke a reaction..which is good because that was the intention...the cost is for wine only as the Ambassador is kindly providing food etc..we will, however, need to provide glasses as they would not have anywhere near the number required.
Once we have decided on the wines I think we should divide the cost equally between TPF members but limit the cost to £200 each...thus compensating those providing the '48's and '56's and allowing a good quality of later years.

The first thing though is to decide on the wines...we can put a firm cost on the evening when this is known.

I am still waiting to hear from the Ambassador as to whether he has anything to contribute...my bet is that he has.

This is an event at which TPF costs should be shared. The required bottles will be of very different costs, so expecting somebody to adopt a year would be unfair.

Cookie wrote:I know we are capable of hosting a tasting of up tp to 24 because we did that at the RAF Club for the Malvedos tatsing.

No, we didn't. I decanted every bottle of Port for the Malvedos tasting and can confirm that there was only one bottle of each vintage, and the Organisation Thread shows 14 attendees.

As far as I can recall, we have never had more than 14 glasses of each wine at a tasting. We have not been inundated with applications to join recent large tastings and have invariably been scrambling around in the few days before the event trying to fill vacant seats. Are we perhaps being too ambitious here?

If we have to fill 20ish seats, then 15 are paying for 20, so 1⅓ each. If we restrict to the usual 14 seats, thereby avoiding double-bottles, then 9 will be paying for 14, so 1.555 each, a factor of 1â…™ times more. That’s tolerable.

Agreed and therefore guest list amended....reserve list based on order of request.

DRT wrote:

Cookie wrote:I know we are capable of hosting a tasting of up tp to 24 because we did that at the RAF Club for the Malvedos tatsing.

No, we didn't. I decanted every bottle of Port for the Malvedos tasting and can confirm that there was only one bottle of each vintage, and the Organisation Thread shows 14 attendees.

As far as I can recall, we have never had more than 14 glasses of each wine at a tasting. We have not been inundated with applications to join recent large tastings and have invariably been scrambling around in the few days before the event trying to fill vacant seats. Are we perhaps being too ambitious here?

We already have 13 paying people who have registered interest (assuming Oscar is a 6th guest). If all were ready to commit, does that make the 2-bottle line-up work?

To reduce that to 8 seems to be a bit of a departure from the spirit of how TPF events are organised on the board, though I understand if it has to happen.

On the money side, 200 per paying person gives us a working budget of 1600gbp. Glass-hire, if we go that route, will be 250-300. Does that leave the fighting funds we need if we are starting to talk about 60s nationals and 40s grahams?

I've no doubt that this will be a great event and the details will work itself out, and am very keen if there's a space for me.

RAYC wrote:We already have 13 paying people who have registered interest (assuming Oscar is a 6th guest). If all were ready to commit, does that make the 2-bottle line-up work?

To reduce that to 8 seems to be a bit of a departure from the spirit of how TPF events are organised on the board, though I understand if it has to happen.

I didn't check the first post before suggesting limiting to 14. If the 13 TPF attendees are willing to commit now then this might work. But, as this is a fixed line-up, and in order for it to be safe for the organiser to proceed to buy these wines, I would suggest that the 13 should commit on the basis of coughing up £200 by 28 Feb to put the organiser in funds. If anyone pulls out they would lose their £200 unless they find someone to take their seat. A settling-up against real cost can happen neared the time.

Does that sound fair?

DRT wrote:

RAYC wrote:We already have 13 paying people who have registered interest (assuming Oscar is a 6th guest). If all were ready to commit, does that make the 2-bottle line-up work?

To reduce that to 8 seems to be a bit of a departure from the spirit of how TPF events are organised on the board, though I understand if it has to happen.

I didn't check the first post before suggesting limiting to 14. If the 13 TPF attendees are willing to commit now then this might work. But, as this is a fixed line-up, and in order for it to be safe for the organiser to proceed to buy these wines, I would suggest that the 13 should commit on the basis of coughing up £200 by 28 Feb to put the organiser in funds. If anyone pulls out they would lose their £200 unless they find someone to take their seat. A settling-up against real cost can happen neared the time.

Does that sound fair?

I think this is a very fair way to proceed. I would be happy to pay up sooner than that if it helps.

I am willing to pay sooner. Or, if the list needs to be shrunk, I could stand aside. Me = Mr Flexible.

I've been doing some thinking about this event - the first thing I realised is that I am going to have to drop out as I will not be in the UK on 25th July Please remove me from the list of attendees.

Secondly in terms of the practicalities of the event. Have you seen the room? Is it really big enough to accommodate 24 people for a sit down tasting? Will there be space for glasses and tasting notes and food or is the 24 person limit based on a normal sit-down dinner and the space required for everyone to eat in comfort?

Does the room have air conditioning? If it is a really hot day in July, can the room and the ports be kept cool? Or are lots of ice and ice buckets easy to procure?

The cost could be underestimated. My experience is that if we supply ports for a tasting from our personal cellars then we usually beat Wine Searcher prices by about 20%. Wine searcher has a line up similar to the one suggested by Tom priced at £2,750 for the 16 bottles. Take off the 20% and add on glass hire and you get an cost estimate of £2,500. If this is a one bottle tasting with 6 guests and 8 TPF paying attendees then this works out to be £312.50 per TPF member. Fill the table with 24 attendees, of which 18 are TPF paying members and have two bottles of each wine and the cost works out to be about £280 per TPF member.

I would be happy to pay up front if there is a place for me once numbers/cost discussions are resolved.
One thought on numbers; Since this is a port-tasting event I guess the likely answer is "yes", but has it been confirmed that the Ambassador and all four of his guests will be wanting port? It would be a shame to drop a TPF port spot if any of the Ambassador's guests are non-port-drinking partners, for example.

AHB wrote:The cost could be underestimated. My experience is that if we supply ports for a tasting from our personal cellars then we usually beat Wine Searcher prices by about 20%. Wine searcher has a line up similar to the one suggested by Tom priced at £2,750 for the 16 bottles. Take off the 20% and add on glass hire and you get an cost estimate of £2,500. If this is a one bottle tasting with 6 guests and 8 TPF paying attendees then this works out to be £312.50 per TPF member. Fill the table with 24 attendees, of which 18 are TPF paying members and have two bottles of each wine and the cost works out to be about £280 per TPF member.

AHB is normally quite accurate in his estimations for such events. If this is indeed going to cost in the region of £300 per head I am sorry to say that it is not for me as most of these wines are likely to be curiosities. If others are more keen that I am them please drop me down to a possible attendees and allow someone lower down the list to take my place.

DRT wrote:

AHB wrote:The cost could be underestimated. My experience is that if we supply ports for a tasting from our personal cellars then we usually beat Wine Searcher prices by about 20%. Wine searcher has a line up similar to the one suggested by Tom priced at £2,750 for the 16 bottles. Take off the 20% and add on glass hire and you get an cost estimate of £2,500. If this is a one bottle tasting with 6 guests and 8 TPF paying attendees then this works out to be £312.50 per TPF member. Fill the table with 24 attendees, of which 18 are TPF paying members and have two bottles of each wine and the cost works out to be about £280 per TPF member.

AHB is normally quite accurate in his estimations for such events. If this is indeed going to cost in the region of £300 per head I am sorry to say that it is not for me as most of these wines are likely to be curiosities. If others are more keen that I am them please drop me down to a possible attendees and allow someone lower down the list to take my place.

Whilst I agree Alex is usually correct in his estimation of cost, I am assured that there will be a 'considerable' contribution by our host and his guests...once I know the full details I will then be able to advise on actual cost nearer the time...meanwhile attendees remain as posted.

Hi Cookie,

after reading this thread I think whatever happens we likely have still too many people being interested to attend (limit to 14people=9TPF+5embassy). After having a careful look into the calendar I realised that there is quite a high likelihood that I will not be able to make this tasting, I decided to pull out . Especially due to the fact that comittment is needed now I think this is only fair.

cu Monday

WS1

I would be needing some time in advance. I guess Andy, too, since we need to book flights and they do not seem to get cheaper getting closer to the date.

Axel

I do not want to dump the organiser in difficulty. But it seems to me that expense will exceed pleasure. If I can run away without causing a problem, I would do so.

While I'm only on the reserve list, I most likely will not be able to get over there for this. You can remove my name from the list, so as not to cause any issues with others wanting to wait for an open seat.

Speaking to Ray last night, I would urge people not to take my note above too seriously. Ray has a cunning plan that should deliver this tasting closer to his cost estimate than to mine. Please be patient and see what happens.

I appreciate there are still issues to resolve; if it is possible to provide an update the planned attendance on whether people are/aren't dropping out and number of spaces determined that would be appreciated, so I can sort accommodation as early as possible if needed (this would be much harder/more expensive nearer the time given the olympics!) - I almost booked last week given the sign-offs, but given Alex's last post I held off for now.

I have made an executive decision regarding this tasting in that....I will increase the attendees list to 16...this will mean that we will have 1 bottle per person, a formula we have used successfully in the past.

I am striving to keep the cost of this tasting down to a bare minimum and I believe this can be achieved by the generous contributions expected over the coming months. This along with the Ambassadors contribution of dinner and Oscar arranging the glasses through the IVDP, I believe this tasting is achievable for all those originally interested.

I have amended the attendee list to reflect this decision and kept in those who have expressed concern over cost in the hope that the tasting will fall within budget for everyone.

Cookie wrote:1. His Excellency Dr Joao de Vallera

Don’t rob our host of his accent: ‟His Excellency Dr João de Vallera”.

jdaw1 wrote:

Cookie wrote:1. His Excellency Dr Joao de Vallera

Don’t rob our host of his accent: ‟His Excellency Dr João de Vallera”.

I can see the squiggly line for such occasions but I have no idea on how to get it on top of the 'a'...perhaps you could enlighten me please.

Copy-paste. Perhaps from the page www.jdawiseman.com/cp.html.

I've been chewing this one, and aside from a heartfelt plea to the trade to find something - anything..! - from '56, I think it's do-able without breaking the bank..

Possible line- up:

2008 - Quevedo - need to source, but readily available, cost for 2 btls c.£40

2004 - Noval - need to source - cost maybe £70 (2btls)

2000 - Delaforce - can supply @ £50/2

1996 - Vesuvio - can supply @ £35/2

1992 - Eira velha - can supply @ £35/2

1998 - Fonseca Guimaraens - can supply @ £25/2

1984 - Warre Cavadinha - can supply @ £30/2

1980 - Dow - can supply @ £70/2

1976 - Graham Malvedos - have one bottle only - anticipated cost for 2 c. £80

1972 - Have Dow, but good slot for Sandeman - anyone have stock?

1968 - Niepoort colheita - can supply @ £110/2

1964 - Have Nacional, but good slot for Taylor Vargellas - anyone have stock?

1960 - Croft - can supply @ £120/2

1956 - Problem!!

1952 - Niepoort colheita - can supply @ £130/2

1948 - Martinez - Can supply @ £190/2btls

..before I send a begging missive to the trade for a '56 of some description - any other thoughts??