Is the secondary market price for Port changing?

[MigSU]

I agree with you, Glenn. Raise the price of LBV to a level that befits the wine inside the bottle, and open up space for a proper quality Ruby Reserve.

[uncle tom]

My conclusion is that producers should be charging more for their LBV. If it contains as much VP-quality juice as you seem to be implying, then its price should be higher to make that point.

They should be charging more, but as the market for LBV is currently glutted, the supply side of LBV needs to be curtailed to make way for more VP.

The route to getting people to spend more money overall on port is to provide comfortable stepping stones - reserve to LBV is currently an awkward hop, then from LBV to vintage is a bridge too far.

Ruby > Reserve > LBV > SQVP/Crusted > VP

- In easy steps that lead the consumer on a voyage of discovery

[JacobH]

I’ve mentioned before that something that frequently surprises me about Port is that, beyond Fonseca Guimaraens, no-one has produced a second-label Vintage Port over a sustained period of time. To me it would make much more sense to me if products like the Warre unfiltered LBV were bottled after 2 or 3 years and then sold as a “Junior Vintage Port”, justifying the premium over the filtered LBVs. But since the Warre LBV seems to exist happily in the same portfolio as the Symingtons’ filtered LBVs, I guess that consumers just aren’t that bothered about these distinctions. A Junior VP would avoid the strange situation, though, that a Taylor de Vargellas is a (very good) supermarket Port whilst the Vargellas VV is a super-premium one.

Remember that - according to the IVDP - the volume of VP sold is something like 2-3% of total production. Not 15%. Not even 9%. This is where taking numbers from a small house causes problems, because in years that they declare they probably use a significant portion of their juice to make VP. But that's still barely a drop in the bucket overall.

Admittedly that 2-3% number is a rolling average, but it's the appropriate number to use for this calculation because it incorporates both declared and undeclared years.

Yes. I was thinking of the smaller companies and independents that are focused on quality Ports, rather than the industry as a whole since I think the overall numbers are distorted downwards by the vast quantities of cheap Port sold in certain markets. For example, if Cálem sells 3,000,000 bottles of Velhotes to the Portuguese market each year, I imagine that their ratio of VP to other Ports is somewhat small than Noval.

[Doggett]

Having read and thought about all of the points made, I think we are very lucky and don’t have much to complain about. Prices have been going up, but probably not by the same factors as other quality wines. Despite that, we can still readily buy a lovely Ruby Reserve for £10-15, LBV for £10-15, ‘premium’ LBV for £18-30 and Crusted for the same amount. Single Quinta ports at approx £30 and VP for £60-80 on release before case discounts etc. Tawny and Colheitas are much more available than ever and the price points by no means reflect the quality or the time and effort that goes into the wine making to produce them. The secondary market still has bargains to be had on the mature port front albeit that members here have contributed to increasing scarcity.

So my conclusion is that as consumers we are very lucky and that Port as a market seems pretty healthy at the moment (Harper’s reports this month that from 2019 to 2020 Port sales by value rose 5.86% in the UK to €46.8m and that was on top of an increase in 2019 from 2018 of 7.36%) with lots of innovation and products. Things like Churchill’s Port Club and all the Quevedo virtual tastings have also engaged people with some of the smaller brands and increased the desire to explore. Hopefully these initiatives and the efforts of the b.f.t. and Wines of Portugal will continue to drive port sales and provide the producers to keep making the amazing juice they do [at very reasonable prices] for generations to come.

[Glenn E.]

I’ve mentioned before that something that frequently surprises me about Port is that, beyond Fonseca Guimaraens, no-one has produced a second-label Vintage Port over a sustained period of time.

Graham's Malvedos was a second label Port for decades. It didn't become a single-quinta Port until, IIRC, 1998 or 1999. But that's the only other example I can think of, so your point still stands.

[MigSU]

Noval Silval was also a similar thing (quinta name, but a de facto second Port).

[uncle tom]

Graham's Malvedos was a second label Port for decades. It didn't become a single-quinta Port until, IIRC, 1998 or 1999.

Malvedos has been regularly bottled as an SQVP since 1950, but is not often seen prior to '61

[PhilW]

Graham's Malvedos was a second label Port for decades. It didn't become a single-quinta Port until, IIRC, 1998 or 1999.

Malvedos has been regularly bottled as an SQVP since 1950, but is not often seen prior to '61

It might have been produced as an SQVP prior to 1997, but it was labelled as a secondary brand "Graham's Malvedos" until '96, and only labelled as an SQVP "Graham's Quinta dos Malvedos" from 1998.

[uncle tom]

It might have been produced as an SQVP prior to 1997, but it was labelled as a secondary brand "Graham's Malvedos" until '96, and only labelled as an SQVP "Graham's Quinta dos Malvedos" from 1998

I'm not sure that change was very significant. If you ask the producers whether an SQVP is made entirely from the grapes of the named quinta, they tend to reply in terms of 'in theory, yes'

If the wine of a single quinta proves a bit mono-dimensional one year, what happens in practice may be slightly different.

[JacobH]

Noval Silval was also a similar thing (quinta name, but a de facto second Port).

The other two that come to mind are Niepoort Secundum and Sandeman Vau. I think these three are quite interesting because they were often made in the same years as a full declaration rather than just in secondary years (like the FG) so are proper second labels.

The first Port I bought en premieur was the 2007 Silval- I wanted to buy the 2007 Noval but couldn't afford it and so bought the Silval as an alternative which is why I think there might be a place for this.

[Alex Bridgeman]

It's been interesting reading through the debate and catching up on the points being made.

The one point we don't seem to have considered is the boom in demand for Tawny Ports, especially the 10YO and 20YO and the growing interesting and demand for White Ports with indication of age. The IVDP annual beneficio has not changed much over the last 20 years so the juice to support the growth in Tawny / White sales must be coming from somewhere. I once asked a producer what was happening to the juice that would have been going into VP a couple of decades when VP volumes were 10 times what they were today, and whether the reduction in VP volumes meant increased volumes of LBV. The answer I got was that different parcels were now being vinified as Port (all within the beneficio volumes permitted) but that much, much more of the volume was being retained and matured in barrel to be used to support future tawny production. He also observed that white grapes parcels were now being picked, vinified separately and used for Port production rather than for table wine production.

[jdaw1]

and Sandeman Vau.

Vau was meant to be a quicker-maturing VP, produced in general-declaration years such as 1997, 2000, 2003 and 2011 (as well as in 1996, 1999, and 2002).

[DRT]

Graham's Malvedos was a second label Port for decades. It didn't become a single-quinta Port until, IIRC, 1998 or 1999.

Malvedos has been regularly bottled as an SQVP since 1950, but is not often seen prior to '61

Malvedos was originally used as a brand name by Graham with much of the wine coming from the Rio Torto. It then seemed to change into a wine made from the Malvedos quinta and surrounding properties that were subsequently acquired by the Symingtons and merged into what we know as Quinta dos Malvedos today. It is only in the last 10 years or so that the name on the bottle changed to Quinta dos Malvedos because all of the wine now comes from the quinta.

[JacobH]

and Sandeman Vau.

Vau was meant to be a quicker-maturing VP, produced in general-declaration years such as 1997, 2000, 2003 and 2011 (as well as in 1996, 1999, and 2002).

I think that was also the aim of Niepoort Secundum which they also put out in a mixture of years: 2003, 2001, 2000 and 1999. Pity there doesn’t seem to be a year where the SV, NS, QdNS & FG were all made so we could do a comparative tasting!

The one point we don't seem to have considered is the boom in demand for Tawny Ports, especially the 10YO and 20YO and the growing interesting and demand for White Ports with indication of age. The IVDP annual beneficio has not changed much over the last 20 years so the juice to support the growth in Tawny / White sales must be coming from somewhere. I once asked a producer what was happening to the juice that would have been going into VP a couple of decades when VP volumes were 10 times what they were today, and whether the reduction in VP volumes meant increased volumes of LBV. The answer I got was that different parcels were now being vinified as Port (all within the beneficio volumes permitted) but that much, much more of the volume was being retained and matured in barrel to be used to support future tawny production. He also observed that white grapes parcels were now being picked, vinified separately and used for Port production rather than for table wine production.

I wonder whether the other aspect of this has been what appears to me an increasing appetite for Douro table wines? I appreciate that received wisdom is that grapes in the Douro are—with only one or two exceptions—more valuable for Ports than table wines, but I am seeing more and more producers making table wines that are not particularly cheap. Again, I am speculating widely, but I assume if you want to make the archetypal Douro tinto reserve, you are probably looking at similar grapes to what might otherwise be suitable for ruby Port production. So if you can vinify more of those into a decent table wine, you could use more of your beneficío allowance to make tawny ports.

[Glenn E.]

Graham's Malvedos was a second label Port for decades. It didn't become a single-quinta Port until, IIRC, 1998 or 1999.

Malvedos has been regularly bottled as an SQVP since 1950, but is not often seen prior to '61

As Derek explained, this is not true. It wasn't even arguably an SQVP until at minimum the 1970s, and that argument isn't all that strong until the 1990s shortly before it actually became what we call an SQVP.

If you want to argue about what really is or is not an SQVP that's a different discussion. But through the 1995 vintage, "Malvedos" was a second label for Graham's Ports and starting with the 1998 vintage "Quinta dos Malvedos" became an SQVP.

[uncle tom]

If you want to argue about what really is or is not an SQVP that's a different discussion. But through the 1995 vintage, "Malvedos" was a second label for Graham's Ports and starting with the 1998 vintage "Quinta dos Malvedos" became an SQVP.

The quinta names are brand names and need to be seen as brand names more than geographic constraints.

In a competitive market, the winemakers need the leeway to make the best wine possible from all the stocks available to them. You don't make a better wine by shackling your winemaker, so whilst there are probably SQ wines that are 100% made from the quinta on the label, we shouldn't expect a producer to spurn the opportunity to make a better wine on the altar of keeping the source to a single estate.

[Glenn E.]

The quinta names are brand names and need to be seen as brand names more than geographic constraints.

Not historically, and not according to current Portuguese law. In layman's terms if it says "Quinta" on the label, the wine must come from the quinta in question.

If you are arguing that the law is silly and that it should be changed, I won't argue. But if you're arguing that this isn't true, you're just wrong.

[DRT]

The quinta names are brand names and need to be seen as brand names more than geographic constraints.

Not historically, and not according to current Portuguese law. In layman's terms if it says "Quinta" on the label, the wine must come from the quinta in question.

If you are arguing that the law is silly and that it should be changed, I won't argue. But if you're arguing that this isn't true, you're just wrong.

+1

[uncle tom]

and not according to current Portuguese law. In layman's terms if it says "Quinta" on the label, the wine must come from the quinta in question

Aside from the fact that the southern european nations are so awash with rules and regulations that compliance is selective, and seen through the prism of that which is enforced, or is enforceable; where exactly is this law laid down?

The official labelling manual seems to prohibit the use of the word 'Quinta' in the name of the registered producer and also seems to outlaw a number of terms, such as 'wood aged' - or words to that effect, which have, at least until fairly recently, been quite widely used. It appears to be silent on this matter however.

https://www.ivv.gov.pt/np4/%7B$clientSe ... L_2017.pdf

The 2008 Consumer Protection Regulations, a feeble and complex EU replacement for the UK's old Trade Descriptions Act, could probably be invoked if the label claimed the wine was made exclusively from the one property when it was not; but in the absence of that explicit claim there does not appear to be an offence.

The IVDP, in its guidance, states that single quinta vintage ports are:

"not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, or wine estate"

This would appear to acknowledge the option of using wine from other quintas owned by the producer, when blending an SQ port.

[MigSU]

I think you're misreading it. "Or wine estate" seems to me to be explaining what a "Quinta" is. I read it as "not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, i.e., a wine estate".

[DRT]

I think you're misreading it. "Or wine estate" seems to me to be explaining what a "Quinta" is. I read it as "not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, i.e., a wine estate".

Exactly right. That sentence is setting out the two conditions that must be met in order to use the term "single quinta vintage port".

[uncle tom]

I think you're misreading it. "Or wine estate" seems to me to be explaining what a "Quinta" is. I read it as "not only the product of a single harvest but also of a single quinta, i.e., a wine estate".

Possibly. As 'Quinta' translates into English as 'Thursday', the obvious synonym to translate is vinhedo which translates as vineyard. The choice of the words 'wine estate' has a wider meaning.

[DRT]

Screenshot 2021-11-26 at 10.58.13.png (66.33 KiB) Viewed 2351 times

[JacobH]

This has encouraged me to look at etymology which is quite interesting. I think quinta-feira--Thursday--comes from the Latin “quintus” meaning “fifth” and “feria” which classically meant a “festival” but later a “weekday”. So “Fifth Day”.

The word “quinta” meaning “estate” seems to have the same route but via. the word “quintana” which seems to have meant the street in a Roman military camp which separated the fifth and sixth units’ tents and containing the marketplace. Still a bit of a stretch to get to it meaning a villa or estate, although I suppose one see where it might come from. I’ve also never quite understood whether there is a difference between quinta and herdade beyond regional usage but that’s a separate point!

[MigSU]

This has encouraged me to look at etymology which is quite interesting. I think quinta-feira--Thursday--comes from the Latin “quintus” meaning “fifth” and “feria” which classically meant a “festival” but later a “weekday”. So “Fifth Day”.

The word “quinta” meaning “estate” seems to have the same route but via. the word “quintana” which seems to have meant the street in a Roman military camp which separated the fifth and sixth units’ tents and containing the marketplace. Still a bit of a stretch to get to it meaning a villa or estate, although I suppose one see where it might come from. I’ve also never quite understood whether there is a difference between quinta and herdade beyond regional usage but that’s a separate point!

It's a regional thing. They are basically the same.