2014: the TPF blend

[g-man]

So,

who's acutally interested in doing this?

[DRT]

An open question to those who are keen on this idea:

Would you be happy for the shippers to amend your status from "Enthusiastic Consumer" to "Member of the Trade"?

[g-man]

Would it matter what the shippers label us for what will be an amateurish hobby?

[jdaw1]

Would you be happy for the shippers to amend your status from "Enthusiastic Consumer" to "Member of the Trade"?

No.

[Glenn E.]

Would you be happy for the shippers to amend your status from "Enthusiastic Consumer" to "Member of the Trade"?

No.

+1

[DRT]

Two out of three respondents get it. Good.

[g-man]

As you're directing that jab at me Derek, looks like i'm not privy to something that has been discussed offline.

And as it seems you have an issue with my other posts on this particular forum, I shall save you the trouble and simply no longer be a part of this particular forum.

To friends I've made on the forums, you can reach me personally if you wish to share some port.

[jdaw1]

As you're directing that jab at me Derek, looks like i'm not privy to something that has been discussed offline.

Derek doesn’t like the idea, for reasons he has given here. His jabs—in general—are directed at those pursuing this idea. There has been no separate discussion, other thank general shaking of his head at the recent ’94.

[DRT]

Certainly no offence intended to g-man or anyone else and no back room conversations. As JDAW rightly points out, I just don't like this idea.

[Andy Velebil]

Would you be happy for the shippers to amend your status from "Enthusiastic Consumer" to "Member of the Trade"?

No.

+1

+2

[DRT]

By PM someone has suggested that I explain my dislike for this idea. Here goes...

1. I think the idea of a group of amateurs thinking that they can improve on what producers with hundreds of years of experience behind them can produce is somewhat arrogant and insulting to those who have shown us great friendship and unconditional hospitality.
2. We have zero chance of improving these wines by doing what is suggested. At best we would average them out, but more likely end up with something worse than the worst of them.
3. The analogy of Avery 1963 is fundamentally flawed. Avery used bulk-shipped wines and their decades of experience of blending and bottling. We would be uncorking already bottled wine and re-bottling them without knowing what we were doing.
4. Irritating the IVDP and a group of major shippers doesn't seem to be the best idea I have ever heard. Imagine you are the master blender of a Grade A producer reading this thread or the back label on one of the proposed bottles. After spending significant effort creating a fabulous 2014 VP you read that we tried to improve it by blending it with three other VPs in random quantities determined by something we read that Avery might or might not have done 50 years ago. Are you pleased that a few cases of your fabulous port has been adulterated? Are you pleased that we didn't like your wine enough to drink it as you intended it to be drunk?
5. Moving from consumer to embrionic-producer/shipper/merchant causes shippers to think of you differently. I want them to think of me for what I am, a consumer - not a potential competitor or business associate.

Is that enough?

[AW77]

Derek, you are quite right.
This TFP blend is what we in German call a "Schapsidee", which is a (crackpot) idea conceived while drinking too much distilled beverages or hard liquour. ( No offence intended though)

[DRT]

This TFP blend is what we in German call a "Schapsidee"

I used 272 words and now find out that Germans have one which describes it perfectly. German efficiency is not a myth

[RAYC]

By PM someone has suggested that I explain my dislike for this idea. Here goes...

1. I think the idea of a group of amateurs thinking that they can improve on what producers with hundreds of years of experience behind them can produce is somewhat arrogant and insulting to those who have shown us great friendship and unconditional hospitality.
2. We have zero chance of improving these wines by doing what is suggested. At best we would average them out, but more likely end up with something worse than the worst of them.
3. The analogy of Avery 1963 is fundamentally flawed. Avery used bulk-shipped wines and their decades of experience of blending and bottling. We would be uncorking already bottled wine and re-bottling them without knowing what we were doing.
4. Irritating the IVDP and a group of major shippers doesn't seem to be the best idea I have ever heard. Imagine you are the master blender of a Grade A producer reading this thread or the back label on one of the proposed bottles. After spending significant effort creating a fabulous 2014 VP you read that we tried to improve it by blending it with three other VPs in random quantities determined by something we read that Avery might or might not have done 50 years ago. Are you pleased that a few cases of your fabulous port has been adulterated? Are you pleased that we didn't like your wine enough to drink it as you intended it to be drunk?
5. Moving from consumer to embrionic-producer/shipper/merchant causes shippers to think of you differently. I want them to think of me for what I am, a consumer - not a potential competitor or business associate.

Is that enough?

Personally, i find these "reasons" all a bit melodramatic and overblown....i hardly think anyone is going to take great offence at using a few cases to try to come up with an homage to Avery 1963

[DRT]

Personally, i find these "reasons" all a bit melodramatic and overblown....i hardly think anyone is going to take great offence at using a few cases to try to come up with an homage to Avery 1963

Go for it. Roll the dice and see what happens - but please don't do it in a way that would be perceived to be associated with those of us who think it is a ridiculous idea, even if that is only me.

[Glenn E.]

Personally, i find these "reasons" all a bit melodramatic and overblown....i hardly think anyone is going to take great offence at using a few cases to try to come up with an homage to Avery 1963

Go for it. Roll the dice and see what happens - but please don't do it in a way that would be perceived to be associated with those of us who think it is a ridiculous idea, even if that is only me.

Perhaps 2014: the RAYC and g-man blend?

Is it available for pre-order yet? I would like to reserve a bottle. Purely for scientific reasons, of course.

[Andy Velebil]

By PM someone has suggested that I explain my dislike for this idea. Here goes...

1. I think the idea of a group of amateurs thinking that they can improve on what producers with hundreds of years of experience behind them can produce is somewhat arrogant and insulting to those who have shown us great friendship and unconditional hospitality.
2. We have zero chance of improving these wines by doing what is suggested. At best we would average them out, but more likely end up with something worse than the worst of them.
3. The analogy of Avery 1963 is fundamentally flawed. Avery used bulk-shipped wines and their decades of experience of blending and bottling. We would be uncorking already bottled wine and re-bottling them without knowing what we were doing.
4. Irritating the IVDP and a group of major shippers doesn't seem to be the best idea I have ever heard. Imagine you are the master blender of a Grade A producer reading this thread or the back label on one of the proposed bottles. After spending significant effort creating a fabulous 2014 VP you read that we tried to improve it by blending it with three other VPs in random quantities determined by something we read that Avery might or might not have done 50 years ago. Are you pleased that a few cases of your fabulous port has been adulterated? Are you pleased that we didn't like your wine enough to drink it as you intended it to be drunk?
5. Moving from consumer to embrionic-producer/shipper/merchant causes shippers to think of you differently. I want them to think of me for what I am, a consumer - not a potential competitor or business associate.

Is that enough?

I agree with Derek 100%. It's not melodramatic in any way, just reality.

[RAYC]

I agree with Derek 100%. It's not melodramatic in any way, just reality.

Well i call both of you out for being ridiculous then!

Perhaps 2014: the RAYC and g-man blend?

I think this is a mischaracterisation of my position upthread. I've given advice to jdaw on the way i think he would need to do it to make it worthwhile (the phrasing "you", not "we", was deliberate), expressed admiration for Avery's 63, and the fact that i think DRT's reaction to this idea is OTT. But i don't think i've ever said that i believe this is a worthwhile endeavour in terms of money / effort.

[RAYC]

But i don't think i've ever said that i believe this is a worthwhile endeavour in terms of money / effort.

That said, i've also never attempted to become an importer/distributor when frustrated by the lack of local availability of a particular wine i like! Perhaps that type of big idea, together with the wherewithal to see it through, is what sets g-man apart from small-minded folk like me...

[jdaw1]

JDAW folds

Avery did this, and did it well. It is not impossible. It was then what happened, and Port companies and Port people knew it, and at least tolerated it, some perhaps liking it.

But that ended almost half a century ago. Derek might be right that the current generation of Port people might not see it as “what happens”, instead seeing it as something new and unwelcome.

For which reason, despite my still liking the mischief, I have been dissuaded.

But g-man is trade rather than pure consumer, so his position might be different.

[DRT]

I agree with Derek 100%. It's not melodramatic in any way, just reality.

Well i call both of you out for being ridiculous then!

And I find your reaction to my reaction and Andy's agreement with my reaction to be unnecessarily provocative.

Perhaps agreeing to disagree at this point is the best way to avoid further unpleasantness.

I agree to disagree.

[Chris Doty]

This thread is too long for me to read entirely, but I think I get the idea and would like to propose instead:

1.) A representative from TPF who is understood to have a more commercial bent but who is also just a generally likeable hobbyist (Christopher, perhaps?), makes some overtures while placing a reasonable order with each (or at least discussing doing so) and says that we would like to buy a few kilos of their grapes at the 2014 harvest for the purposes of a personal port project (we should be fully transparent). We aggregate these grapes from across a range of producers/sites, take them to over to Oscar's, crush them, allow them to be port together, and basically boss the _ out.

We would then offer first (before even paying out ourselves) a few bottles to each of the grape givers, in the humble and sincere hope that what they taste doesn't feel like an insulting waste of otherwise perfectly elegant grapes.

We don't need excessive quantities. The experience/memory will more than justify the experience, IMHO.

I'm in!

[DRT]

Do you mean something a bit like this but on a smaller scale, without the celebrity treading team and not for charity?

[Chris Doty]

Do you mean something a bit like this but on a smaller scale, without the celebrity treading team and not for charity?

Yes

[jdaw1]

On the subject of UK bottlings, the following comes from the Wine Society catalogue of April-September 1988.