Standardised House Names

[jdaw1]

The latest list.

• Abbrev.; Sortable; Display Name

{Moved to the top of page 5.}

[DRT]

• Br: Barros, Barros

It is a bad day.

[jdaw1]

It is a bad day.

An extra space in a spreadsheet: it happens. Fixed.

Answering the questions on the previous page would be more useful!

[DRT]

• “A Pinta dos Santos†?

Yes, but A. Pinta dos Santos may be more accurate.

Source please.

Described by Suckling as "the weakest of the vintage ports produced by the Barros, Almeida group"

My list also has a port “Pintas†, from this TN. Does “A. Pinta dos Santos† = “Pintas†?

No. Pintas is owned by Wine & Soul Lda and have only existed since 2001.

OK. But google finds not a single reference to "A. Pinta dos Santos", which is a mite disconcerting. And it doesn’t obviously appear on www.porto-barros.pt.

Mayson lists it as A. Pinto dos Santos but in his text on Barros brands refers to A Santos Pinto. Godfrey Spence also has it as A Santos Pinto, again in the context of it being a Barros brand.

It seems it is only derek T. who has ever referred to it as A. Pinta dos Santos, which may have confused google slightly

[DRT]

Replacing the a with an o allowed google to help me find this picture. Check out the bottom left decanter label...

[img]http://vinotheque1847.org/images/sixSil ... L13[1].JPG[/img]

Derek

[DRT]

• “Quinta das Licieras†? Not well known to google.

I have 24 x 375ml and 1 x 750ml bottles to prove existence. It belongs to the owners of Quinta da Romaniera. Apologies, the proper spelling is Liceiras. Here is a picture of their Ruby. The VP has a green label with gold writing, which is too awful to show on a public forum.

Please hold your nose and show it: we are choosing names here, and the bottle of VP is the natural place to start.

Here it is in all it's green, white and gold glory...



What on earth is going on here? If nothing else, it proves to the world that 1993 VP does exist.

Derek

[jdaw1]

• “Quinta das Licieras†? Not well known to google.

I have 24 x 375ml and 1 x 750ml bottles to prove existence. It belongs to the owners of Quinta da Romaniera. Apologies, the proper spelling is Liceiras. Here is a picture of their Ruby. The VP has a green label with gold writing, which is too awful to show on a public forum.

Please hold your nose and show it: we are choosing names here, and the bottle of VP is the natural place to start.

Here it is in all it's green, white and gold glory...

Derek: why are you putting that on a public forum? It’s a green label with gold and white writing, and hence far too awful. Really: you have no taste, no judgment, no self restraint.

[DRT]

• “Quinta das Licieras†? Not well known to google.

I have 24 x 375ml and 1 x 750ml bottles to prove existence. It belongs to the owners of Quinta da Romaniera. Apologies, the proper spelling is Liceiras. Here is a picture of their Ruby. The VP has a green label with gold writing, which is too awful to show on a public forum.

Please hold your nose and show it: we are choosing names here, and the bottle of VP is the natural place to start.

Here it is in all it's green, white and gold glory...

Derek: why are you putting that on a public forum? It’s a green label with gold and white writing, and hence far too awful. Really: you have no taste, no judgment, no self restraint.

{sackcloth and ashes emoticon}

[jdaw1]

[Rant] Annoying wine to boycott: http://www.quintadomourao.pt (deliberately not shown as a link), has been written by a web-designer keen on browser-crashing cool scripts, but with little interest in content. The email I was writing myself containing port websites (whilst sitting at wife’s computer) is lost. Idiot webmaster. Users want content, not flashy technology. Really: look at Amazon or the BBC: high content, little high-graphic script-using clutter. Or even www.jdawiseman.com: says useful stuff (that is, stuff useful to somebody), and isn’t a demo lab for some incompetent’s attempt at programming dynamic content. [/Rant]

[DRT]

Annoying wine to boycott: http://www.quintadomourao.pt (deliberately not shown as a link), has been written by a web-designer keen on browser-crashing cool scripts, but with little interest in content. The email I was writing myself containing port websites (whilst sitting at wife’s computer) is lost. Idiot webmaster. Users want content, not flashy technology. Really: look at amazon or the BBC: high content, little high-graphic script-using clutter.

I think a Geoffrey is in order.

Damn and blast those pesky browser-crashing webmasters

[jdaw1]

List updated.

Outstanding questions

• We have a TN for a Mitcheltombs port (misspelt in earlier post), about which google has little to say except AHB’s TN, saying that it was Cockburn. Any objections to deleting name?

• “São Pedro das Aguias† or “Quinta do Convento de São Pedro das Aguias†? Which I’m guessing are different to Senhora do Convento.

• “Porto Poças†? Or “Poças Junior†? Are they different or are they the same? Have both ever been declared in the same year? Do they come from the same vineyards? Are they really the same? (I am very reluctant to discard information that might be relevant.) [I have emailed the Poças authorities on this one.]

• Because Quinta do Bragào’s association with Sandeman is new, they are to be called “Quinta do Bragào†. Objections?

• “Hunt, Roope†? Did they bottle somebody else’s port (like Hedges & Butler’s bottling of Noval 1963), or is this a separate name?

• “Graham Quinta das Lages†, because it all goes to Graham. Objections?

• “Quinta do Noval Silval†? “Silval†? “Quinta do Noval Quinta do Silval†? “Noval Quinta do Silval†? Yuck. The best version of what’s on the one bottle I have is “Quinta do Noval Silval†. Objections?

• Vale de Mendiz:

• “Vale de Mendiz† or “Sandeman Vale de Mendiz†?

Vale de Mediz (pronounced Val de Mendeesh) is now owned by Niepoort as is the facility that they use to produce all of their VP and the Douro red Charme. Although Nieeport do not produce a VP which uses this Quinta's name, I think we need Sandeman in the name on the index to make the distinction.

I think we don’t need Sandeman on the name, for the same reasons.

• Van Zeller:

Is Van Zeller the same as JMF & Van Zeller? Have there been previous and different Van Zeller ports, that should be distinguished from this new partnership?

[DRT]

• We have a TN for a Mitcheltombs port (misspelt in earlier post), about which google has little to say except AHB’s TN, saying that it was Cockburn. Any objections to deleting name?

Yes. The name exists. Leave it alone.

• “São Pedro das Aguias† or “Quinta do Convento de São Pedro das Aguias†? Which I’m guessing are different to Senhora do Convento.

That is my guess too.

• “Porto Poças†? Or “Poças Junior†? Are they different or are they the same? Have both ever been declared in the same year? Do they come from the same vineyards? Are they really the same? (I am very reluctant to discard information that might be relevant.) [I have emailed the Poças authorities on this one.]

I bet a Farthing they are the same?

• Because Quinta do Bragào’s association with Sandeman is new, they are to be called “Quinta do Bragào†. Objections?

Agreed

• “Hunt, Roope†? Did they bottle somebody else’s port (like Hedges & Butler’s bottling of Noval 1963), or is this a separate name?

No idea. In which case, suggest we leave it in for now.

• “Graham Quinta das Lages†, because it all goes to Graham. Objections?

Not from me.

• “Quinta do Noval Silval†? “Silval†? “Quinta do Noval Quinta do Silval†? “Noval Quinta do Silval†? Yuck. The best version of what’s on the one bottle I have is “Quinta do Noval Silval†. Objections?

You have mentioned at least 2 completely different wines in your question. We need "Quinta do Noval Silval*" and "Quinta do Noval Quinta do Silval" in the index. They are different. (*It may just be Noval Silval, no "Quinta do", as it is with their NV wines. Let me check tomorrow)

• Vale de Mendiz:

• “Vale de Mendiz† or “Sandeman Vale de Mendiz†?

Vale de Mediz (pronounced Val de Mendeesh) is now owned by Niepoort as is the facility that they use to produce all of their VP and the Douro red Charme. Although Nieeport do not produce a VP which uses this Quinta's name, I think we need Sandeman in the name on the index to make the distinction.

I think we don’t need Sandeman on the name, for the same reasons.

Suggest we compromise for this one wine on "Vale de Mendiz (Sandeman)" - which is almost identical to the presentation in Broadbent.

• Van Zeller:

Is Van Zeller the same as JMF & Van Zeller? Have there been previous and different Van Zeller ports, that should be distinguished from this new partnership?

They are different. JMF&VZ opperated separately and then partnered recently in a few new ventrues then, I believe, separated amicably to pursue individual interests.

Derek

[jdaw1]

• Van Zeller:

Is Van Zeller the same as JMF & Van Zeller? Have there been previous and different Van Zeller ports, that should be distinguished from this new partnership?

They are different. JMF&VZ opperated separately and then partnered recently in a few new ventrues then, I believe, separated amicably to pursue individual interests.

The JMF website says “The first vintage port produced and declared by José Maria da Fonseca in partnership with renowned winegrower, Cristiano van Zeller†. As is usual with Flash websites (presentation over content—growl!) the picture isn’t clear enough for the year to be visible. How do we distinguish the various Zeller wines?

[jdaw1]

• “Quinta do Noval Silval†? “Silval†? “Quinta do Noval Quinta do Silval†? “Noval Quinta do Silval†? Yuck. The best version of what’s on the one bottle I have is “Quinta do Noval Silval†. Objections?

You have mentioned at least 2 completely different wines in your question. We need "Quinta do Noval Silval*" and "Quinta do Noval Quinta do Silval" in the index. They are different. (*It may just be Noval Silval, no "Quinta do", as it is with their NV wines. Let me check tomorrow)

I thought there was only one Silval connected to Noval, and another not so connected. Live and learn, eh?

[Alex Bridgeman]

Apologies for coming into this discussion so late in the day, but internet connectivity was unavailable in the depths of Bodmin. Some specific answers to specific questions follow below, but first my overall concerns as I wade through the past postings are these:

1) If we allow input to be sloppy but create nargy output, will this still allow sloppy input for searching purposes? (I ask based on practical experience, having dropped all modifiers in my personal tasting notes database in order to be able to facilitate searches.)

2) The naming convention developing for Quintas worries me. Quintas change hands, they reach the end of exclusive grape arrangements and they become adandoned. We should be able to trace the history of a Quinta through the name on the label regardless of the owner or vigneron. For example, I would like to see tasting notes for Vesuvio as
Quinta do Vesuvio (Ferreira) 1958
Quinta do Vesuvio (Symingtons) 1989
or similar for Vargellas showing the change in ownership from Ferreira to Taylor Fladgate around the turn of the 20th century.

I think we might lose some of the power of the data that is being collated if we fragment the Quinta names across the various owners unless we are also able to recombine the fragmented information.

There endeth my main concerns.

List updated.

Outstanding questions

• We have a TN for a Mitcheltombs port (misspelt in earlier post), about which google has little to say except AHB’s TN, saying that it was Cockburn. Any objections to deleting name?

Delete the name. Mitcheltombs were the UK merchant who shipped some of the wine over in cask and bottled it in the UK. This is Cockburn 1912 and was identified as such from the cork.

• “São Pedro das Aguias† or “Quinta do Convento de São Pedro das Aguias†? Which I’m guessing are different to Senhora do Convento.

No idea

• “Porto Poças†? Or “Poças Junior†? Are they different or are they the same? Have both ever been declared in the same year? Do they come from the same vineyards? Are they really the same? (I am very reluctant to discard information that might be relevant.) [I have emailed the Poças authorities on this one.]

I have no idea if these are different blends, different quality standards or simply different marketing names (cf. Dalva and Presidential). My suggestion would be to keep the data separate for the moment and this will allow us to analyse further in the future.

• Because Quinta do Bragào’s association with Sandeman is new, they are to be called “Quinta do Bragào†. Objections?

See my major concern above - I would see the ability to trace a single Quinta's grapes through the past 2-3 centuries as being one of the great strengths of this database.

• “Hunt, Roope†? Did they bottle somebody else’s port (like Hedges & Butler’s bottling of Noval 1963), or is this a separate name?

Hunt, Roope were a shipper in their own right. Keep the name as their blends are unique.

• “Graham Quinta das Lages†, because it all goes to Graham. Objections?

Yes. See major concerns above.

• “Quinta do Noval Silval†? “Silval†? “Quinta do Noval Quinta do Silval†? “Noval Quinta do Silval†? Yuck. The best version of what’s on the one bottle I have is “Quinta do Noval Silval†. Objections?

I think Derek has addressed this one. It is even more confusing than Derek has laid out as the grapes from Quinta do Silval are also vinified by the owner of the vineyard (who is not AXA) and sold under the name of Quinta do Silval. Therefore (over the past century or so) there is a Noval Silval, Quinta do Silval (Noval) and a Quinta do Silval.

• Vale de Mendiz:

• “Vale de Mendiz† or “Sandeman Vale de Mendiz†?

Vale de Mediz (pronounced Val de Mendeesh) is now owned by Niepoort as is the facility that they use to produce all of their VP and the Douro red Charme. Although Nieeport do not produce a VP which uses this Quinta's name, I think we need Sandeman in the name on the index to make the distinction.

I think we don’t need Sandeman on the name, for the same reasons.

My view is consistent with those given above. I believe that we need a way in which to be able to trace the grapes from Mendiz where these have gone into bottles that carry the Mendiz name on the label. I would suggest "Vale de Mandiz (Sandeman)" and "Vale de Mendiz (Niepoort)" to differentiate between the two.

• Van Zeller:

Is Van Zeller the same as JMF & Van Zeller? Have there been previous and different Van Zeller ports, that should be distinguished from this new partnership?

As far as I am aware, there has only been Van Zeller ports made in the 70s, 80s and perhaps 90s and that these have all been made by Cristiano Van Zeller. I would suggest that we have just a single Van Zeller name.

I will review the entire list and post specific comments later in the day.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Adam was a UK merchant and not a shipper. I do not believe that they made any blends of their own. I recommend that Adam be removed from the list.



Here are some specific comments based on a review of the list above:

Avery are a UK merchant and not a shipper, but their own label ports were a blend of the main shippers. As their wines are unique, I would recommend that we keep them in the list.

Berrys do and did not blend any wines of their own, merely selected the wine of a single shipper and put their own label on the bottle. I would recommend that they are removed from the list.

Davy's are a UK merchant who do and did not blend. I recommend they be removed from the list.

Add Harvey's in their own right, as I note that in some years they produced a blend under their own name based on the wines of two or more shippers in the same way as Avery did.

Mitcheltombs were a UK merchant who merely bottled and did not blend. Remove.

Is there is a difference between Offley and Offley Boa Vista?

How do we differentiate between Portal and Portal+?

Carvalhas is only a marketing name of Royal Oporto. Carvalhas is used as the marketing name in Iberia and Royal Oporto in Northern Europe. I suggest we treat in a similar way as for Dalva (Presidential).



There is an overall theme coming out of this review with regard to the merchants. A lot of UK merchants sold port under their own label and not under the label of the shipper, despite not doing anything other than bottle the shipper's wine.

For example, the Berry Brother's 1983 is the same port as the Warre 1983. Should we include the Berry name as a shipper, or should we aim as stage 2 in this project to build up a list of which shipper relates to a particular merchant's own label in a particular year?

I would prefer to leave out the names for those merchants who did not blend from this list and deal with the question of who bottled what as stage two.


Also - we desperately need to get Tom's input as we are recreating a lot of the work that he has already done.

Alex

[DRT]

Alex,

I will leave Julian to respond to the specific naming issues you have raised as he currently has the data in his court.

On the UK merchants, now that we have the data (or at least some data) we can easily separate them out and do some further work to attempt to map their bottlings to the correct shipper. Definately a Stage 2 task!

I think there is a difference between Offley and Offley Boa Vista. The latter is described by Suckling (somewhere) as a Single Quinta wine. "Offley" was presumably a blend. To date, I have only seen evidence of Offley being produced in one year, 1987. OBV was also produced that year. This should be a fairly easy one to resolve with an email to the shipper.

I have been aware all along that Tom previously started a similar project but in the absence of his response to the original question and with four free days to avoid doing the garden I just blasted on. Once Tom returns from chasing bulls around northern Spain I will talk to him about amalgamating the data.

Thanks for your help.

Derek

[jdaw1]

AHB’s comments have crystalised one of my concerns. If a wine is bottled as a Single Quinta, who cares who owns it? Why not just call it Quinta do Tiddlyposh, and that’s that. If, by happy life-simplfying chance, it has been bound to a particular blender for at least a century, then perhaps we could call it Graham Malvedos. But if the association is newer, why not have just the Quinta name?

As for Berry’s, which house is their 1958? 1952? Typically we won’t know. So it should be called Berry’s.

Please allow a question from a lover of port. Are "Porto Pocas" and "Pocas Junior" the same vintage ports? Are they the same juice, but a label that varies? Or are they different? Have both ever been bottled in the same year?

Thank you for your e-mail and your interest on our Port Wines. In fact PORTO POÇAS is a trade mark of our Company which name is Manoel D. Poças Junior Vinhos S.A.. POÇAS JUNIOR is also a trade mark of our Company but we are not using it to label our Port Wines since many years ago (more than 20 years) only for commercial reasons.

As far as the label is concerned it varies depending on the type and quality of the Port Wine as under the brand PORTO POÇAS we have different types, qualities and vintages (White, Tawny, Ruby, Special Reserve White, Special Reserve Tawny, Special Reserve Ruby, Aged Tawnies (10, 20, 30 and 40 years old), Colheita Ports, LBV and Vintage).

Being so, if you have a bottle of a Port Wine labeled POÇAS JUNIOR, this port Has to be bottled at least for 20 years.

If you send us a photo we can help you with information regarding quality
and type of Wine in it.

How should I reply?

[Alex Bridgeman]

AHB’s comments have crystalised one of my concerns. If a wine is bottled as a Single Quinta, who cares who owns it? Why not just call it Quinta do Tiddlyposh, and that’s that. If, by happy life-simplfying chance, it has been bound to a particular blender for at least a century, then perhaps we could call it Graham Malvedos. But if the association is newer, why not have just the Quinta name?

I wholeheartedly agree. Quinta do Tiddlyposh as the naming convention sounds good to me. Stage 3 of Project Derek might be to track the varying ownership over time.

As for Berry’s, which house is their 1958? 1952? Typically we won’t know. So it should be called Berry….

While I concede on the general point that we won't be able to know every wine labelled by every merchant in every vintage, I still don't like the idea of having a list of "declared vintages" that also includes "vintages that were declared by someone else but which the merchant didn't want you to know what he was bottling". I feel that there is a difference between a merchant simply buying a pipe or two from Taylor and then bottling that under his own name and a merchant who buys a pipe from Taylor, one from Fonseca and two from Sandeman and then carefully blends them together to create his own unique port. I will attempt to illustrate with a question - the Wine Society have bottled the Martinez 1985 under their own label. We all know this to be the Martinez and I believe that it even says so on the label. Do we now include "The Wine Society" as a shipper on the list? (I would recommend not.)

Again, I would urge the list only to include ports that are unique and have been blended into existence, rather than simply bottled and labelled.

However, you have triggered an interesting question in my mind. Are the Tesco (etc.) BoBs a unique blend or do we dismiss these along with the merchants who simply BoB under their own label? I vote that we do not include the BoB owner, but do include the BoB supplier - which would commonly be Quinta and Vinyard Bottlers Lda or The Symington Family Lda (names are only approximations to illustrate my thoughts).

Please allow a question from a lover of port. Are "Porto Pocas" and "Pocas Junior" the same vintage ports? Are they the same juice, but a label that varies? Or are they different? Have both ever been bottled in the same year?

Thank you for your e-mail and your interest on our Port Wines. In fact PORTO POÔ¡AS is a trade mark of our Company which name is Manoel D. Poças Junior Vinhos S.A.. POÔ¡AS JUNIOR is also a trade mark of our Company but we are not using it to label our Port Wines since many years ago (more than 20 years) only for commercial reasons.

As far as the label is concerned it varies depending on the type and quality of the Port Wine as under the brand PORTO POÔ¡AS we have different types, qualities and vintages (White, Tawny, Ruby, Special Reserve White, Special Reserve Tawny, Special Reserve Ruby, Aged Tawnies (10, 20, 30 and 40 years old), Colheita Ports, LBV and Vintage).

Being so, if you have a bottle of a Port Wine labeled POÔ¡AS JUNIOR, this port Has to be bottled at least for 20 years.

If you send us a photo we can help you with information regarding quality
and type of Wine in it.

How should I reply?

Thank her most sincerely for her kind reply and for clearing up a question that we had when we drank a bottle of Pocas Junior 1970 VP together.

And ask her if she is ever in London / New York to let us know and we would be delighted invite her to share some port with us.

And give her a link to TPF.

And I can't think of anything else.

[DRT]

AHB’s comments have crystalised one of my concerns. If a wine is bottled as a Single Quinta, who cares who owns it? Why not just call it Quinta do Tiddlyposh, and that’s that. If, by happy life-simplfying chance, it has been bound to a particular blender for at least a century, then perhaps we could call it Graham Malvedos. But if the association is newer, why not have just the Quinta name?

I wholeheartedly agree. Quinta do Tiddlyposh as the naming convention sounds good to me. Stage 3 of the Derek project might be to track the varying ownership over time.

I agree.

As for Berry’s, which house is their 1958? 1952? Typically we won’t know. So it should be called Berry….

While I concede on the general point that we won't be able to know every wine labelled by every merchant in every vintage, I still don't like the idea of having a list of "declared vintages" that also includes "vintages that were declared by someone else but which the merchant didn;t want you to know what he was bottling". I feel that there is a difference between a merchant simply buying a pipe or two from Taylor and then bottling that under his own name and a merchant who buys a pipe from Taylor, one from Fonseca and two from Sandeman and then carefully blends them together to create his own unique port. I will attempt to illustrate with a question - the Wine Society have bottled the Martinez 1985 under their own label. We all know this to be the Martinez and I believe that it even says so on the label. Do we now include "The Wine Society" as a shipper on the list? (I would recommend not.)

Again, I would urge the list only to include ports that are unique and have been blended into existence, rather than simply bottled and labelled.

However, you have triggered an interesting question in my mind. Are the Tesco (etc.) BoBs a unique blend or do we dismiss these along with the merchants who simply BoB under their own label? I vote that we do not include the BoB owner, but do include the BoB supplier - which would commonly be Quinta and Vinyard Bottlers Lda or The Symington Family Lda (names are only approximations to illustrate my thoughts).

No supermarket BOB's, please. We would never know what they really are. I think we need to carve out the merchants BOBs into a separate list/chart where we can add the name of the real shipper as and when we uncover it.

Please allow a question from a lover of port. Are "Porto Pocas" and "Pocas Junior" the same vintage ports? Are they the same juice, but a label that varies? Or are they different? Have both ever been bottled in the same year?

Thank you for your e-mail and your interest on our Port Wines. In fact PORTO POÔ¡AS is a trade mark of our Company which name is Manoel D. Poças Junior Vinhos S.A.. POÔ¡AS JUNIOR is also a trade mark of our Company but we are not using it to label our Port Wines since many years ago (more than 20 years) only for commercial reasons.

As far as the label is concerned it varies depending on the type and quality of the Port Wine as under the brand PORTO POÔ¡AS we have different types, qualities and vintages (White, Tawny, Ruby, Special Reserve White, Special Reserve Tawny, Special Reserve Ruby, Aged Tawnies (10, 20, 30 and 40 years old), Colheita Ports, LBV and Vintage).

Being so, if you have a bottle of a Port Wine labeled POÔ¡AS JUNIOR, this port Has to be bottled at least for 20 years.

If you send us a photo we can help you with information regarding quality
and type of Wine in it.

How should I reply?

Thank her most sincerely for her kind reply and for clearing up a question that we had when we drank a bottle of Pocas Junior 1970 VP together.

And ask her if she is ever in London / New York to let us know and we would be delighted invite her to share some port with us.

And give her a link to TPF.

And I can't think of anything else.

Thank her for her answer and then ask the question again but this time making it clear that we are only interested in Vintage Port. Mention to her that we have seen examples of writers referring to wines from the same vintage being described as "Pocas" and "Pocas Junior" and we want to know whether the company made just one or two different Vintage blends in those years.

Derek

[jdaw1]

Thank you for your email which is very helpful about recent vintages. Thank you.

But we are also interested in older vintage ports: e.g., 1985, 1977, 1975, 1970, 1966, 1963, 1955, 1945, 1935, 1927, and older. We have seen examples of writers referring to wines from the same vintage being described as "Pocas" and as "Pocas Junior". Were both names ever used in the same vintage? And if both names were used, were they the same wine, or were they -- somehow -- different?

You might be interested in our discussion of this question
viewtopic.php?p=11776#11776

Thank you again,

Julian Wiseman.

As and when a reply comes, it will be posted here.

[jdaw1]

Sometimes writers confuse the name of the brand with the name of the Company. When they refer Poças Junior they really want to say Porto Poças

This is our experience talking...

Our First Vintage was made in 1960... and it is sold out since many years ago...

Maria Altina Sarmento
Secretary

Manoel D. Poças júnior - Vinhos S.A.
Rua Visconde das Devesas 186 - P.O. Box 1556
Tel: + 351 223 771 070
Fax: +351 223 771 079
http://www.pocas.pt

I propose replying along the lines of “Thank you again. One final question: please do you have a complete list of years in which Porto Poças was declared?†. Objections?

And we’ll call it plain “Poças†. Objections?

[DRT]

Sometimes writers confuse the name of the brand with the name of the Company. When they refer Poças Junior they really want to say Porto Poças

This is our experience talking...

Our First Vintage was made in 1960... and it is sold out since many years ago...

Maria Altina Sarmento
Secretary

Manoel D. Poças júnior - Vinhos S.A.
Rua Visconde das Devesas 186 - P.O. Box 1556
Tel: + 351 223 771 070
Fax: +351 223 771 079
http://www.pocas.pt

I propose replying along the lines of “Thank you again. One final question: please do you have a complete list of years in which Porto Poças was declared?†. Objections?

And we’ll call it plain “Poças†. Objections?

None.

[jdaw1]

Thank you again. One final question: please do you have a complete list of years in which Porto Poças was declared?

Which suggests writing to other port makers, asking them the same question. As with Poças, post their replies in the forum—after redacting any confidential pieces—to be a public record of their claim. Port nargs like that kind of thing. Perhaps such correspondences should have their own thread.

[Alex Bridgeman]

No supermarket BOB's, please. We would never know what they really are. I think we need to carve out the merchants BOBs into a separate list/chart where we can add the name of the real shipper as and when we uncover it.

Good idea - but would you support the inclusion of merchants who blended their own?

I also like the idea of emailing each producer in turn the question of a complete listing of their declared vintages.