ThePortForum.com

On Tuesday 29th July 2014 a group of us gathered for an informal evening in The Bung Hole, each having brought a bottle to share blind.

1994 Tesco (double dagger, MPM)
1980 Gould Campbell (RPA)
1970 Fonseca (THRA)
1970 Warre (CPR 1)
1970 Taylor (MPM)
1963 Gould Campbell (AHB)
1958 Martinez (MW)
1983 Barca Velha (MW)

Erroneously guessed to be V92 by me. Dark ruby, 70% opaque. Nose of warm, slightly stewed fruit and some caramel. Palate with ripe black fruit, toffee and then a nice warming heat. This is a very pleasant port which should hold up well over the next 10 years at the very least. 89 points with some room for upward movement.

You have inverted date and shipper in the title of this TN - this will cause the TN compilers no end of extra work. Mr B will have to get a form signed in triplicate from Mrs W and T, and then they will have to take it for approval by the Trustees, submitting reasons for their special pleading. Do you really want that to happen?

djewesbury wrote:You have inverted date and shipper in the title of this TN - this will cause the TN compilers no end of extra work. Mr B will have to get a form signed in triplicate from Mrs W and T, and then they will have to take it for approval by the Trustees, submitting reasons for their special pleading. Do you really want that to happen?

Fixed, thanks for spotting. Best to minimise the bureaucratic churning of the TPF millstone.

Can I just point out my own mistake before someone else does; the plural of Mr is not Mrs but Messrs. I know. Sharing the sackcloth.

djewesbury wrote:Can I just point out my own mistake before someone else does; the plural of Mr is not Mrs but Messrs. I know. Sharing the sackcloth.

I noticed this but thought you implied a curious relationship among the moderators...

PopulusTremula wrote:

djewesbury wrote:Can I just point out my own mistake before someone else does; the plural of Mr is not Mrs but Messrs. I know. Sharing the sackcloth.

I noticed this but thought you implied a curious relationship among the moderators...

PopulusTremula wrote:a curious relationship among the moderators...

It is not the first time this has been said.

It has been hypothesised that there are two batches of the Tesco 1994, one excellent, one rubbish. We need a means of distinguishing them.

So, a request. Please could very good photographs of these always be taken.

jdaw1 wrote:It has been hypothesised that there are two batches of the Tesco 1994, one excellent, one rubbish. We need a means of distinguishing them.

So, a request. Please could very good photographs of these always be taken.

Is there anything in particular that might be photographed? The labels? The marks on the bottom of the bottle? Anything that might distinguish the putative batches?

djewesbury wrote:

jdaw1 wrote:It has been hypothesised that there are two batches of the Tesco 1994, one excellent, one rubbish. We need a means of distinguishing them.

So, a request. Please could very good photographs of these always be taken.

Is there anything in particular that might be photographed? The labels? The marks on the bottom of the bottle? Anything that might distinguish the putative batches?

I think the first batch had a white label and was stated to be Quarles Harris. The second batch has a black label with no specific shipper stated. There might have been white labels on early versions of the second batch.

I think we could therefore hypothesise that Tesco 94i was bona Quarles Harris (pardon my palare) and that they just substituted a totally different blend when this was sold through and there was a need for Tesco 94ii. If it had two different labels it's not such a mystery really, is it? To94ii never claimed to be QH.

There are at least 3 labels, a white one and then a black one and then another slightly different black one, with some gold with the 'tesco finest' strip round the bottom of the capsule.

djewesbury wrote:I think we could therefore hypothesise that Tesco 94i was bona Quarles Harris (pardon my palare) and that they just substituted a totally different blend when this was sold through and there was a need for Tesco 94ii. If it had two different labels it's not such a mystery really, is it? To94ii never claimed to be QH.

The second label was merely a result of Tesco changing the branding of their Finest range. It is the absence of the QH description (and perhaps cork branding?) that is the real differentiator.

LGTrotter wrote:There are at least 3 labels, a white one and then a black one and then another slightly different black one, with some gold with the 'tesco finest' strip round the bottom of the capsule.

I think there must have been four because I don't think my white ones say Quarles Harris anywhere so there must have been another label that did have this on.

I am not sure about the corks, I think they all just say "port 1994" but there were some longer and some shorter, the shorter ones being in the earlier bottling.

Mine came in 1 litre polybottles with plastic screwtops. Is this unusual?

djewesbury wrote:Mine came in 1 litre polybottles with plastic screwtops. Is this unusual?

Well I'm finding it quite interesting to talk about the various corks and labels of Tesco 94. And perhaps you'd like to come down the front of the class and explain to everybody what's so funny.

LGTrotter wrote:

djewesbury wrote:Mine came in 1 litre polybottles with plastic screwtops. Is this unusual?

Well I'm finding it quite interesting to talk about the various corks and labels of Tesco 94. And perhaps you'd like to come down the front of the class and explain to everybody what's so funny.

I'd love nothing more!
I do think it's an interesting discussion. Very erudite.

Deep red, young with a dark rim and and an opaque centre. Sweet and fruity nose, very attractive but just a hint of remaining stink. Sweet and fruity on entry, rich and flavoursome. Very impressive and with tannins still quite firm. Rich finish with a touch of heat but very much a port that is drinking today but is also promising for the future. Served blind this was guessed to be Graham 2000. 90/100. Drunk 29-Jul-14. Decanted 21 hours.

What label and cork did this example have - seems one of the better ones?

Front label

Back label

The cork was simply marked 'Vintage Port'. It looked like it had just been done, so potentially a recork.

Thanks. Encouraging - looks similar to ones I bought recently (I'm not at home so can't immediately check). I wonder: does buying from Tesco Wine Direct improve the odds of getting better bottles?

DaveRL wrote:I wonder: does buying from Tesco Wine Direct improve the odds of getting better bottles?

I don't think so, because I don't think the different batches typically co-exist; is that not the case? If one source is available, no other is required by the buyers. And whilst Tesco Wine Direct would presumably have its own logistics centre, I doubt that the warehousing operations are differentiating batches in this way.

djewesbury wrote:

DaveRL wrote:I wonder: does buying from Tesco Wine Direct improve the odds of getting better bottles?

I don't think so, because I don't think the different batches typically co-exist; is that not the case? If one source is available, no other is required by the buyers. And whilst Tesco Wine Direct would presumably have its own logistics centre, I doubt that the warehousing operations are differentiating batches in this way.

Tesco will buy in batches from SFE. If bottle variation is experienced over time, it is most likely because of different batches at the SFE end of the supply chain. Given how the back label is vague about how the port is created, I'm not even sure you could be confident that the blend SFE adopts for Te94 is consistent across batches. This stuff was all bottled in 1996, but presumably the blends going into bottle could be varied by SFE depending on what grapes they had available across all styles of port at that point in time. As it is a private label bottling one could hypothesise that there is a more relaxed view about maintaining precise blend consistency across bottles, as compared to say Graham 1994.

Edit: tweaked wording above to make point more clearly.

flash_uk wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

DaveRL wrote:I wonder: does buying from Tesco Wine Direct improve the odds of getting better bottles?

I don't think so, because I don't think the different batches typically co-exist; is that not the case? If one source is available, no other is required by the buyers. And whilst Tesco Wine Direct would presumably have its own logistics centre, I doubt that the warehousing operations are differentiating batches in this way.

Tesco will buy in batches from SFE. If bottle variation is experienced over time, it is most likely because of different batches at the SFE end of the supply chain. Given how the back label is vague about how the port is created, I'm not even sure you could be confident that the blend SFE adopts for Te94 is consistent across batches. This stuff was all bottled in 1996, but presumably the blends going into bottle could be varied by SFE depending on what they had available across all styles of port consuming juice at that point in time. As it is a private label bottling one could hypothesise that there is a more relaxed view about maintaining precise blend consistency across bottles, as compared to say Graham 1994.

Then I'm going to argue against myself, in the light of what you've said. The stuff was all bottled in 1996 but it wasn't necessarily known that it would all be Tesco 1994. I think they've worked their way through a number of batches by now, and the labelling may, irritatingly, have absolutely no bearing on which batch is which - since that would be done in the UK, and Tesco might have one batch sitting around unfinished when a new lot turns up, and the Syms might decide that they need to shift palette 785 this month, and might make up quantities with lot Z8r9 and so on; how narrow is the spec set by the buyers - did they say we want this blend and this blend only, or did they say we'll take all your blends at this price mark? The thing is that Tesco 94 could be any number of different blends. I expect that the 'Quarles Harris' was sold through ages ago.

djewesbury wrote:how narrow is the spec set by the buyers

I think this is the key really. Unless the buyers were specific along the lines of "I want port which adheres to the blend of the sample I have just tasted", then there is some leeway for SFE to ship varied blends in Te94 bottles. How long have Tesco stocked own brand port from the 1994 vintage? I would be surprised if they agreed purchase contracts in 1996 for the stuff on our shelves today, and therefore more likely they contracted a few years back with SFE to have a supply of a blend which is "broadly consistent" with "X". SFE are then able to use a variety of blend stocks which are already in bottle awaiting label.

djewesbury wrote: The thing is that Tesco 94 could be any number of different blends. I expect that the 'Quarles Harris' was sold through ages ago.

I'm not so sure, shoot me down about this if you wish but as an avid follower of this wine over the years I am not convinced that it is all that different, whatever the colour of the label. Sure you do get variation but no more than one would expect from a twenty year old port which has been through a number of not too specialised supply chains. Tesco have a reputation for being tough negotiators and I would be surprised if they just said 'send us whatever from 94' to the Syms.

Not that we will ever know, unless there are insiders about who know what the Syms sold and what Tesco bought. Doubt they would announce it here anyway.

The TNs here suggest that the QH version was on the shelf more than six years ago. It is likely that the Syms chose to re-label what remained of their QH94 stock as Tesco's BOB. When that ran out Tesco will have said something like "give us more of that stuff or we will strike you from our supplier list please can we have some more of the 94, it was really nice and our customers loved it". The the Syms would have pulled out whatever generic 94 VP they had in the cellars and labelled it Tesco's Finest.

DRT wrote:The TNs here suggest that the QH version was on the shelf more than six years ago. It is likely that the Syms chose to re-label what remained of their QH94 stock as Tesco's BOB. When that ran out Tesco will have said something like "give us more of that stuff or we will strike you from our supplier list please can we have some more of the 94, it was really nice and our customers loved it". The the Syms would have pulled out whatever generic 94 VP they had in the cellars and labelled it Tesco's Finest.

+1.

And when that runs out, we'll see Tesco 1997 VP on the shelf.

flash_uk wrote:

DRT wrote:The TNs here suggest that the QH version was on the shelf more than six years ago. It is likely that the Syms chose to re-label what remained of their QH94 stock as Tesco's BOB. When that ran out Tesco will have said something like "give us more of that stuff or we will strike you from our supplier list please can we have some more of the 94, it was really nice and our customers loved it". The the Syms would have pulled out whatever generic 94 VP they had in the cellars and labelled it Tesco's Finest.

+1.

And when that runs out, we'll see Tesco 1997 VP on the shelf.

We have already seen Tesco 1995 on the shelf (in 2008?) which quickly disappeared. I was wondering if they have run out of QH, or whatever it was. Due to poor stock rotation I still have some white label and 2 different black label Tesco 94, all I need now is a gas spectrometer.

It might not be quite that linear. It depends what is available at the price Tesco demand.

DaveRL wrote:I wonder: does buying from Tesco Wine Direct improve the odds of getting better bottles?

If you look at the Tesco website, the bottle looks similar to the one pictured on TPF:
http://www.tesco.com/wine/product/detai ... =250266878
And by the way, there is a "Get 20 % off if you buy two cases"-offer at the moment. So that would be 16 Pounds per bottle. I really envy you guys over in the UK!

Right; having had a bit of a sweep through the notes on this wine (this is not the first time this question of attribution has raised it's head) I see that reference to Quarles Harris was being made in 2010, but on the website rather than on the bottles. I also note the following quote from Jancis on the Tesco website;

Of the 1994 vintage, Jancis Robinson said: "Treacle and dried herbs and lots of throat-soothing stuff. A little harsher than a great vintage port but it's a seriously silly price. Apparently Tesco selected this years ago, and the Syms keep supplying new shipments."

Jancis Robinson - Financial Times 22/12/2012.

Whist not clear that this is all one batch it does hint that this is the case.

AW77 wrote:And by the way, there is a "Get 20 % off if you buy two cases"-offer at the moment. So that would be 16 Pounds per bottle. I really envy you guys over in the UK!

It's wicked isn't it, here I am with a 94 port for 16 quid a bottle and I can't even be bothered to drive 2 miles down the road to get some. We get so bored of cheap port in the UK. I'm going to hold out until Tesco start coming round and pushing it through the letterbox, free of charge.

LGTrotter wrote:Jancis Robinson - Financial Times 22/12/2012.

Whist not clear that this is all one batch it does hint that this is the case.

Now then Owen, we know how much you admire wine journalism so we are not going to allow your tendency to believe everything you read influence our view.

I have a case of this stuff at Seckfords, deposited in late 2008 and marked on the inventory as "Tesco's Finest (Symington)". That tells me that the QH had already disappeared by then otherwise I would have instructed "Quarles Harris (Tesco)" when I popped it into storage. Also, I think I am right in saying that the QH version was just Tesco's Vintage Port, not Tesco's Finest Vintage Port.

LGTrotter wrote:I'm going to hold out until Tesco start coming round and pushing it through the letterbox, free of charge.

That reminds me of a deal I once benefited from when buying Champagne. I bought six bottles at full price to get the triple Club Card points on offer. A week or so later the points vouchers arrived and I went back to see what was on offer. The same Champagne was half price and everything had 25% off if you bought six. The vouchers paid for the six bottles

DRT wrote:

LGTrotter wrote:I'm going to hold out until Tesco start coming round and pushing it through the letterbox, free of charge.

That reminds me of a deal I once benefited from when buying Champagne. I bought six bottles at full price to get the triple Club Card points on offer. A week or so later the points vouchers arrived and I went back to see what was on offer. The same Champagne was half price and everything had 25% off if you bought six. The vouchers paid for the six bottles

Which in turn reminds me of my experience trying to purchase 2 bottles of 2003 Quinta do Portal (not Portal+) from a store in New York. I'd been searching for a while and so knew that most stores weren't aware of the difference, and that in fact most stores only had Portal+ in stock and not Portal. So I called them and confirmed that it was Portal. Blue capsule with gold printing, right? Not yellow capsule with red printing? Right, right, it's the Portal. Okay, great, I'll take 2 at $30 each. Great price. Love it.

The box arrives... and contains 2 pristine bottles of 2003 Quinta do Noval Vintage Port.

*dial* *dial* *dial*

The package arrived but you shipped me Noval by mistake. What? No, I specifically told the warehouse Portal, not Portal+. No, no... NOVAL with an 'N' not Portal. You know, the Nacional folks. Huh? How'd that happen? Well tell you what, you can keep those for the $30 price if you want, or I can send you a label and you can return them. (Uh... $30/bottle for 2003 Noval? DUH!!!) Um... well, sure I suppose I can take a couple bottles of Noval. I already have a case, though. But sure, it'll save the hassle of shipping them again. Ok, great... and I'll go down and make sure they box up the right bottles this time. So sorry for the confusion.

Another box arrives... and contains 2 pristine bottles of 2003 Quinta do Noval Vintage Port.

*dial* *dial* *dial*

Hey I just sent you a picture of the box that just arrived... you sent me 2 more bottles of Noval, not Portal. What?!? How is that possible??? Well I don't know because I'm not in your warehouse, but I really do want Quinta do Portal if you have it. Could you *please* go select the bottles yourself, take a picture of them, and send it to me before you ship this time? Sure, I'll call you back.

*wait* *wait* *wait*

*ring* *ring*

Um... I'm very sorry to tell you that we do not have any 2003 Quinta do Portal. Please keep the last shipment as our error, but unfortunately we cannot fulfill your order.

So I snagged 4 x 2003 Quinta do Noval for $15/bottle all told. I did eventually find the 2003 Portal elsewhere, so all ended well.

Why didn't you want the +? Had it a couple of times. Jancis preferred it.

djewesbury wrote:Why didn't you want the +? Had it a couple of times. Jancis preferred it.

I was putting together a specific tasting: Roy's Top 12 Vintage Ports, based on the article of the same name on FTLOP.

Nothing wrong with the +, it just wasn't on the list.

Well, Glenn's story reminds me of when I bought a very large Stanley toolbox on wheels to store my Telescope. There was a 50p nut missing. I called them. They sent all my money back and told me to keep the box, which had cost me the price of a case of Claret.

Can anyone guess what happened next?

DRT wrote:Well, Glenn's story reminds me of when I bought a very large Stanley toolbox on wheels to store my Telescope. There was a 50p nut missing. I called them. They sent all my money back and told me to keep the box, which had cost me the price of a case of Claret.

Can anyone guess what happened next?

You cursed them for lubbers and moved all the anecdotes to 'meaningless drivel?

You found the nut?

Not your guess

You bought a case of claret. Come on people, keep up.

djewesbury wrote:You bought a case of claret. Come on people, keep up.

Actually, I bought a nut for 50p from Amazon.

...followed by a case of Claret.

Are we off topic yet?

What topic? TOPIC?

Better add a TN then.

Decanted 20 hours. 80% opacity, deep red, very minor bricking. Some fruit on the nose, also a bit earthy, faint hints of hospital. Nice smooth entry, nice balance, mild tannin in the finish. Lots of fruit - plums. Nice drinking today, and has all the ingredients to further evolve, so should be interesting to try for the next 10 years, provided one can hold off drinking it!