2005 Declarations of VP

[Andy Velebil]

I found a list of who has declared, here it is. I'll try and keep updating this as I find more.

Niepoort.
Taylor’s Quinta de Vargellas.
Taylor’s Q. de Terra Feita.
Fonseca Guimaraens Q. do Panascal.
Guimaraens.
Croft Q. da Roêda.
Burmester.
Kopke.
Krohn Quinta do Retiro Novo.
Pintas (Wine & Soul).
Q. Nova de Nossa Senhora do Carmo.
Q. do Passadouro.
Q. de Ventozelo.
Dow’s Q. da Senhora da Ribeira.
Q. do Vesuvio.
Q. de Roriz (jointly with João van Zeller)
Vale Dona Maria
Quinta da Gricha by Churchill's
Quinta do Noval Silval
Romaniera

[Raj Patil]

Andy,

THank you very much, my daughter was born in 2005!!!

Raj

[JanTore]

Thanks for the list. No Noval?

[Robin L.]

Andy,
Your list should contain also Vale Dona Maria, but this is the only's missing according to my personnal list.
Rob

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

So mostly second names: consistent with longstanding rumour.

[Steven Kooij]

You can add the Symington SQVPs to the list as well, but they will not be released for several years.

[Roy Hersh]

Andy's list is good and solid in terms of his information.

The 2005 Quinta da Gricha by Churchill's has been bottled and declared.
But there are others like Quinta do Crasto which have also declared. There is no Noval or Nacional, but there is a Noval Silval bottled as well as a Romaneira. There is also Vista Alegre and also 2005 VP from Quinta de Valle Longo. Additionally, the Symingtons (as Andy listed) have indeed declared Quinta do Vesuvio, Senhora da Ribeira and Quinta de Roriz ... all 3 of which will be sold on an en primeur basis. Malvedos and others are already in bottle and those will be held, only to be released when mature.

There are others too, but you get the idea.

Just the facts ma'am.

[Luc Gauthier]

Roy , you say that there are others who have declared , was 2005 a General declaration ?

[Todd Pettinger]

It does seem like an awful lot of producers have declared 2005, but Luc, I believe the answer to your question is "no" as the majority of the 'big houses' did not declare a mainstream VP, only their SQs and 2nd labels, which I am guessing is now more about marketing and getting their dollars, even in the "off years" than about a true VP-quality product. Most likely these 2005s, with the odd exception as always seems to be the case, will not be the blockbusters that a 'generally declared' year would be.

Todd

[Roy Hersh]

Luc,

Listen to Todd, who has learned much from his time here.


There has not been a single generally declared vintage since 2003. 2004 and 2005 are in the books. 2006 won't be commented on "officially" for awhile and I have serious doubts given the small yields and also crop damage that afflicted a small number of producers on June 14th of last year.

So, I am keeping my fingers crossed for 2007. So far things are going well in the Douro. Actually that does not mean very much as the difference between a great and generally declared vintage and an '04/'05 situation can hang in the balance until the very point at which the grapes are picked.

More importantly, with the VP inventory levels on hand today in Gaia and the Douro, 2007 is far more likely to have a general declaration than the three vintages which followed 2003, imo.

Besides lucky #7 has been good to the trade & consumers in:

1927 VP, (1937 maybe greatest ever for Colheita, lousty for VP) 1947 VP, 1957 weak, 1967, 1977, 1987, 1997. So for four straight decades we are on a roll, given that only two were generally declared and the 1967 and 1987 are "secondary" vintages but account for some very well made Ports.

[Luc Gauthier]

It does seem like an awful lot of producers have declared 2005, but Luc, I believe the answer to your question is "no" as the majority of the 'big houses' did not declare a mainstream VP, only their SQs and 2nd labels, which I am guessing is now more about marketing and getting their dollars, even in the "off years" than about a true VP-quality product. Most likely these 2005s, with the odd exception as always seems to be the case, will not be the blockbusters that a 'generally declared' year would be.

Todd

I would hate to think that marketing and making a buck in off years overrides quality . ( Isn't that why LBV exist . . . )

[Al B.]

would hate to think that marketing and making a buck in off years overrides quality . ( Isn't that why LBV exist . . . )

Luc,

I would have said that it was more to do with a demand from consumers - I love VP and in those years where there is little VP made and shipped I will happily buy and consume Single Quinta port. In some years, the quality of this wine will be outstanding (Vargellas 1987, for example) and in other years it will be enjoyable but not special (Cavadinha 1989, my next on Death Row).

However, I don't see it as exploitative or the port companies wanting to make a quick buck. I see it more as offering a product that the consumer wants as often as the producer is able to without the producer compromising his standards. If the standards are compromised then the consumer loses confidence in the producer and turns to one of the competitors.

The best analogy that I can come up with is Yquem. They make a wine most years and make the best wine in those years when they do release a wine under the Yquem label. They vary the quantity offered significantly from year to year to ensure that they maintain their quality standards and occasionally will declassify their entire production if they are unhappy with what has been achieved.

In the port world the producers make a vintage almost every year when they are happy that the quality is there. Most years this will be a single quinta vintage port but once every (roughly) three years then they will blend across their vineyards to produce a fully fledged VP that is designed and intended for long term maturing.

For me, this is perfect. I like being able to buy a combination of slightly cheaper ports 2 years in every 3 and only have to find the cash for the expensive VPs every 3rd year. My pocket would hurt far more if every year was a VP year and I would not be able to afford to consume as many bottles as I can at present.

Just my

Alex

[Todd Pettinger]

I would have said that it was more to do with a demand from consumers - I love VP and in those years where there is little VP made and shipped I will happily buy and consume Single Quinta port. In some years, the quality of this wine will be outstanding (Vargellas 1987, for example) and in other years it will be enjoyable but not special (Cavadinha 1989, my next on Death Row).

However, I don't see it as exploitative or the port companies wanting to make a quick buck. I see it more as offering a product that the consumer wants as often as the producer is able to without the producer compromising his standards. If the standards are compromised then the consumer loses confidence in the producer and turns to one of the competitors.

I couldn't have said this better myself Alex.

The best analogy that I can come up with is Yquem. They make a wine most years and make the best wine in those years when they do release a wine under the Yquem label. They vary the quantity offered significantly from year to year to ensure that they maintain their quality standards and occasionally will declassify their entire production if they are unhappy with what has been achieved.

In the port world the producers make a vintage almost every year when they are happy that the quality is there. Most years this will be a single quinta vintage port but once every (roughly) three years then they will blend across their vineyards to produce a fully fledged VP that is designed and intended for long term maturing.

For me, this is perfect. I like being able to buy a combination of slightly cheaper ports 2 years in every 3 and only have to find the cash for the expensive VPs every 3rd year. My pocket would hurt far more if every year was a VP year and I would not be able to afford to consume as many bottles as I can at present.

Just my

Alex

Very accurate. Probably the best explanation I have seen of the SQ/2nd label vs general-declaration VP comparisons that I have seen yet, anywhere. Excellent!

Todd

[Roy Hersh]

Bravo Alex!!!

[Luc Gauthier]

So general declarations every year are definitely counter productive .

[Roy Hersh]

Luc,

The Port trade certainly thinks so and rightfully so.

What makes Vintage Port so special?

Many things actually. But first and foremost is the fact that it is only generally declared 3x per decade on average. If Port was generally declared every year instead, it would lose its prestigious place as one of the greatest dessert wines in the world, imo. In other words, it would be about as "special" as Pinot Noir from Oregon.

To bring it closer to home for you Luc, even Canadian Icewine has more cache because the best of them come from the occasional great years where there are natural conditions, (read: not using artificial means to replicate nature's work) and thereby a few years can pass in which temperatures or acidity levels are not conducive to Icewine production.

This creates the illusion (real or imagined) of scarcity, or better put, a rarified wine. Pick any true 1st growth Bdx or a wine thought to be truly scarce ... like DRC and then check how much is sold throughout the world. Then look back to the production numbers of, say, 1994 Quinta do Vesuvio (in a nod to Al B.) and you will understand scarcity. Better still, Nacional with its 3,000 bottles for the world in most vintages.

But I digress. Financial instability re: capitalization, is a major force in the Port trade and any business. If you were a Port historian, you'd see that throughout the past few hundred years of the Port trade there have been economic cycles which brought an ebb and flow to the Shippers. This in turn has led to companies folding, others being purchased or "consolidated" as the current term is used.

We can look to many of these periods in time, say the 1950s into the early 1960s. The latter part of the 1980s. 2001-present is a great and current example, when many companies have fallen out and have been taken over. More than a dozen and there are a couple of established firms (I won't name names) that are right on the precipice today. The economic realities and political spheres have changed too!

* Douro wine production being subsidized by Port
* Robotics versus human treading
* Influence of the cooperatives
* The "5 families"
* The rise of the SQ as an independent "shipper"
* Fall of the Casa do Douro
* The "participation" in the Factory House
* The labor shortage in the Douro and inherent increase in labor costs
* IVDP's role in marketing Douro wines & Port

I can go on listing but I think you get the point. All of these have a direct effect on the viability of ongoing Port Shippers. So, although there are many a SQVP, 2nd label and even single vineyard Ports being produced or introduced ... which are sold year in and year out ... having generally declared VPs every harvest would be killing what is left of the golden goose.

On a more positive note, natural progression or "the survival of the fittest" in the Port trade, brings along some new players. Whether a wealthy family buys into the business, an indivdual gathers investors to refurbish a Douro quinta/property, or a small grower becomes a Port producer (after decades of selling their grapes or finished wines to large Shippers or local coops) the small and independent Port producers (some making nice Douro wines too) will be around as long as they can sustain their existence, by bringing a quality product at a fair price to the marketplace. Those that fail become tomorrow's Graham's, Vesuvio, Kopke, Barros, Ca'lem, Croft, Delaforce, Sandeman, Cockburn's etc.

Long live the "classic" Vintage Port!

[Todd Pettinger]

The economic realities and political spheres have changed too!

* Douro wine production being subsidized by Port
* Robotics versus human treading

Roy,
Would it be the Douro wine being subsidized by Port, or the other way around (I would have placed it as the Port revenues being subsidized by the Douro wines myself...) I think this is because I am under the impression that the production of dry reds are a fairly new thing and a recent addition to some producer's portfolios... am I way off here??

Todd

[Roy Hersh]

Todd,

Yes, your way of thinking is natural and I really don't want to get into the heavy duty politics of this issue, as it is not germaine to the discussion at hand. But I will provide some basic insight and answer your direct question:

A little known fact is that due to IVDP regulations and Beneficiao issues ...
the cost of a hectoliter (a metric unit of volume or capacity equal to 100 liters, although I know "tons" better ) of grapes varies depending on its use. In reality, to spur the growth of Douro wine production the cost of a HL of Touriga Nacional grapes for table wine would cost about 20% of what the same grapes would cost if slated for Port production. Amazing yes.

Does this mean that PORT is supporting the growth of the Douro wine explosion? Yes, it does to me. Is that a good or a bad thing? That is up to you to decide. This is where I must avoid a tendency towards the "soap box" and will just choose to not go there.

[Michael Ferrier]

I see that Adnams of Southwold is offering Quinta do Vesuvio 2005 at £145 ex duty VAT & shipping per 6 bottle case

[Todd Pettinger]

Todd,

Yes, your way of thinking is natural and I really don't want to get into the heavy duty politics of this issue, as it is not germaine to the discussion at hand. But I will provide some basic insight and answer your direct question:

A little known fact is that due to IVDP regulations and Beneficiao issues ...
the cost of a hectoliter (a metric unit of volume or capacity equal to 100 liters, although I know "tons" better ) of grapes varies depending on its use. In reality, to spur the growth of Douro wine production the cost of a HL of Touriga Nacional grapes for table wine would cost about 20% of what the same grapes would cost if slated for Port production. Amazing yes.

Does this mean that PORT is supporting the growth of the Douro wine explosion? Yes, it does to me. Is that a good or a bad thing? That is up to you to decide. This is where I must avoid a tendency towards the "soap box" and will just choose to not go there.

Well, I do try to learn something new every day. Thanks for enlightening me Roy - although I am utterly shocked that this would be the case. I can see why you chose the particular wording that you did.

Almost shameful. Touriga Nacional grapes should be the same price, whether for use in port, table wine, or me eating whilst I swing in a hammock on a hot day! I can't say that I would agree with ANY "governing" body's right to tell me what I have to pay based upon what I intend to use something for. Throws the concept of supply and demand right out the door, don't you think?

Or… perhaps this may be why we see more and more producers starting to produce table wine. Is it possible that they buy the grapes, earmarking them for use in table wine and then perhaps move them into a lager that "happens to have ended up having its fermentation cut short… perhaps by the use of some type of grape spirit, maybe??" :twisted:

Just 'thinking' here…

Todd