2015 vs 2016 Vintage Ports

[Roy Hersh]

If you were a betting person ... which vintage do you believe will be generally declared, 2015 or 2016? Reason?

[Eric Menchen]

2015. The vibe felt pretty positive when I was there last year. I'm not there this year, but I've heard more troubling reports about the weather. Some vineyards might be fine, but across the board? (And I want to buy the 2015 that I stomped.)

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

[Jasper A.]

If you were a betting person ... which vintage do you believe will be generally declared, 2015 or 2016? Reason?

2015, nothing with quality but 4 years is a nice gap

[Frederick Blais]

2016 is not yet made... but I'd put my dices on 2015. It was an easier year with good quantities, while 2016 is much more complex and heterogeneous on the viticulture side. Quantities are dramatically lower too, 20-30% depending on who you talk too. Only negative point on 2015 was the rain in September that diluted a little bit the wines, but still, many of them remain beautiful and you need different style of Ports to make the blend in the end.

[Thomas V]

From what information I have gathered during my trip in Porto & Douro and the importers I know, I will bet on the 2015 vintage.

The volume is bigger which means more bottles and higher earnings.

However I do believe that 2016 for some houses, certain Quintas will have higher quality than what was obtained in 2015. Quinta do Bomfim comes to mind. If Dow declares 2015 I will for sure buy a couple of cases of 2016 Bomfim And if Vesuvio or Noval declares back to back I will buy mostly the 2016 vintage.

[Andy Velebil]

having just spent 12 days there the answers regarding 2016 were all over the map. First, everyone I spoke to was very clear they had not decided, one way or the other, on 2015 yet and would not do so for some time. So reports of 2015 being a no brainer (declared) are not correct at the moment.

2016 saw a ton of rain over the past winter and earlier this year. Then, later, some extreme heat that shut the vines downs. The rain earlier caused some major mildew issues for those who did not properly treat for it. And this year up to 2+ times the normal amount of treatments were needed. I heard reports of up to 75+% crop loss for some. Saw one small vineyard with hanging fruit and cover crop between the vine rows with chest high grass. Appeared someone just abandoned them and walked away this year, one could assume the mildew took over. Most who sprayed had far less issues. That said, while the ripening was behind normal schedule the past week has seen some very good weather and if it holds for another week or two, which it is forecast to do, there will be some fantastic stuff coming in. However, no doubt the crop this year is reduced from normal.

So 2015 and 2016 are still an open book IMO. The next couple weeks are key for 2016 and if all holds could turn out to be better than 2015.

[Glenn E.]

I haven't seen anything first hand, but just based on what I've heard about both vintages I'd say that only 2015 has any chance of being generally declared (but even that's still up in the air).

2016 was just too uneven. There will probably be some great SQVPs released, and may even be some scattered full declarations, but it really doesn't sound like it will qualify as a general declaration year.

[Tom Archer]

First, everyone I spoke to was very clear they had not decided, one way or the other, on 2015 yet and would not do so for some time. So reports of 2015 being a no brainer (declared) are not correct at the moment.

That's a big row-back. Both in April at the BFT in London, and in June at Sao Joao in Porto; a 2015 declaration was being talked of as a certainty (and very prematurely, IMO)

After the commercial success of the 2011 vintage, the trade would have loved 2014 to have come right, but it didn't. 2015 looks to have ticked all the right boxes to be 'declarable' so they pretty much banked it. However, if 2016 has the makings of being a better year, there's an echo of '91/'92 in the air, when the prospect of a seven year gap between declarations persuaded several producers to call '91 when they would have been better advised to defer to '92.

The timeline is not as stretched this time, but the hunger to have a declaration is palpable. I really don't think the trade would react badly if some of the 'three times a decade' producers broke with past practice and called both years..

[Al B.]

From what I heard although the volume is down in 2016 compared to a normal harvest, it is not the grapes which are grown by the major port houses which have been badly affected but principally grapes which are bought in to make the lower quality ports. I picked up a story of one grape farmer who lost 95% of his crop to mildew - which will be desperately difficult for him and his livelihood for the next 12 months. The impression I formed was that if 2016 turns out to be a declared year that we will see quantities available that will be not much different to 2011 and the quality could well be there because of the very, very long and slow harvest which allowed grapes to be picked at optimum physiological ripeness.

Who knows, maybe we'll see the first widespread back-to-back declaration in my lifetime or a great split declaration like 1947/48 or 1966/67 which we can debate for years to come as to which vintage is better.

[Roy Hersh]

More poignant than ever to bring this back to life. Just a few months more and we'll see the other side of the coin. Fun to read back a year though.

[Tom Archer]

First indications on the 2017 vintage suggest the producers may find themselves on the horns of a dilemma..

Not sure how widespread the view is, but some producers are 'more than pleased' with their 2017s..

[Andy Velebil]

2016 was an interesting year due to such a long drawn out harvest. If one had the means to keep and pay for labor over that drawn out harvest and the patience to pick only the grape bunches that were ripe and coming back again and again to continue that cycle, then one probably produced some fantastic musts.

2017 is it's own story...perhaps I'll start a thread on it.