Port value for money

[Roy Hersh]

In terms of investment grade Port, what do you feel is the best "brand" or shipper to put your money behind? For example, you buy 2011 VP on release and put it away for 20 years ... which VP will have increased in value the most in those 2 decades? Then again, it could be a Colheita too. :)

[Eric Menchen]

The one that Parker scores a 100.

[Tom Archer]

The answer depends on the market being considered.

In the UK, the best known brand is probably Cockburn, but it's association with ports at the cheap end of the spectrum makes it hard for merchants to sell Cockburn VP. The association of the name Croft with cheap sherry also has an adverse impact on Croft VP.

The brand that routinely commands the top price for VP on the secondary market is Taylor, but not by a huge margin.

The Symingtons are not only producing very good ports under the Graham label, but are also investing quite heavily in presenting the brand as a marque of quality. If the TFP don't match their effort in support of the Taylor brand, they could easily find themselves on the second rung.

Noval, meanwhile, seem a little too quiet for their own good at the moment. Their market reputation for excellence needs a little reinforcement, I think..

[Rob C.]

The brand that routinely commands the top price for VP on the secondary market is Taylor, but not by a huge margin.

92 and 94 vintages of Taylor aside (& Nacional), does Fonseca edge it for post-war vintages?

Taylor still seems to be the go-to port in the UK for a non-port aficionado who wants to add to their wine cellar. A manager at one very large retailer who offers "managed" monthly plans recently told me that they simply couldn't put anything else in their clients' portfolios without getting complaints. For that reason i think any well-rated Taylor is particularly worth getting hold of early and suffering the storage fees for.

Niepoort seems to be produced in relatively small quantities but with large worldwide demand, so something like the Bioma also worth getting hold of early rather than waiting.

But looking at secondary market prices, i suspect in the majority of cases you'd have been better putting your money elsewhere if you're just assessing it from a capital appreciation angle. If you'd put money aside in 96 rather than into 94 port, your money would have just about doubled now if you had achieved 4% interest annually over the period. How many 94 ports have done the same if you look at secondary market prices? (and that's before storage costs....)

[Tom Archer]

does Fonseca edge it for post-war vintages?

F45 is hardly ever seen, and was fiercely fought over when it last came to auction.

T48 sells for about 40% more than F48

T55 & F55 - Ditto

T60 sells for about 20% over F60

T63 and F63 - level

T66 generally topped by F66, but not by a great margin

T70 sells for around 10-20% more than F70

T75 sells for far too much, over 50% more than F75

T77 and F77 - difficult to compare, as so much T77 is leaky, and F77 is scarce - a pristine case of T77 went for crazy money last year

F80 is very rarely seen, T80 went very high when last offered

T83 consistantly sells for 30-40% more than F83

Despite the reputation of F85, T85 almost always sells for more

- and of the younger vintages, Taylor is always ahead of Fonseca

[Andy Velebil]

The brand that routinely commands the top price for VP on the secondary market is Taylor, but not by a huge margin.

The Symingtons are not only producing very good ports under the Graham label, but are also investing quite heavily in presenting the brand as a marque of quality. If the TFP don't match their effort in support of the Taylor brand, they could easily find themselves on the second rung.

Would generally agree for my area. With the exception that Fonseca often equals or beats Taylors in price. Just depends on the vintage and who's selling it. So I'd have to say those two are about equal in commanding top price.

Otherwise Noval Nacional commands the top price here in the states. Even for poor vintages like the 70's and 80's.

Very true what you mention about Graham's. The Sym's have done a great job in the advertising department. I can't think of any other Port company which has put that much into promotion recently. Though it's mainly focused on one brand. I wish they would spread that out to some other houses. Then again, maybe not. Keeping those a bit under the radar keeps pricing down for those of us in the know

[David Spriggs]

From what I see at auction - both here and in the UK - Taylor's is the best for resale.

[Marc J.]

From what I see at auction - both here and in the UK - Taylor's is the best for resale.

I'm in total agreement. In some vintages Fonseca, and sometimes Graham, may come close to the prices commanded by Taylor but Taylor's large following pretty much ensures it as being the benchmark.

[Eric Menchen]

I agree that Taylor is the go-to brand. I tell my computer geek friends that picking Taylor is like a computer person in the last century picking IBM. Even if there were some clunkers in there, no one could really fault you for buying IBM (Taylor).

But Roy's question was about appreciation, and while Taylor will certainly appreciate with time, it also commands a very high price at release. Here in the US, $80 and up was typical for 2009. I bought some at release, so I can have well cellared bottles of my own in 20+ years, not because I expect it to appreciate in price a lot.

My purchases are an investment in my future drinking pleasure. If I were purchasing bottles with a plan to sell them in the future, I would give some other labels a look before Taylor, Fonseca, and Graham, which all start pretty high. Quinta do Noval, and QdN Nacional if available might be worth a look. Taylor VVV would be a consideration as well if I could get a good deal (e.g. the $150 I paid for 2000), although I wonder if it has enough of a following. And of course the real issue for appreciation is which non-premier brands really stand out in tastings?

[Moses Botbol]

That one is easy...

1. Nacional - easy first place
2. Fonseca - plenty of room to nitpick from here down...
3. Graham
4. Taylor
5. Dow-Warre-Croft-Niepoort

[Paul Fountain]

The Taylors VP is certainly a solid performer over the longer term over here, but I think the Fonseca ports tend to go for a bit more, largely due to scarcity.
The Noval Nacional may command the top price here, but given how much of a premium we pay for this over a Taylors, Fonseca, Grahams or the standard Noval I think you would be better off with with the Taylors overall. There is a bit of difference in the auction prices between Melbourne and Sydney too. Sydney tends to be more expensive. Grahams also holds its value well - the Dow and Warres don't seem to do quite as well for whatever reason. I think that secondary market prices will get higher in Australia for port in coming years because nobody much is buying it on release at the moment.

[Frederick Blais]

Don't forget Taylor Vargellas VV, low quantities, high price and scores.

Noval will generate somes surprices, AXXA is pushing hard on this one and it delivers very high quality since 94.

[Alan Gardner]

Absolute price isn’t (?shouldn’t be?) the criterion.

If I can invest $1000 (say) now – what gives me the best overall return in 20 years.
If it’s an IRA investment (where security may be paramount) then it’s hard to go wrong with Taylor.

BUT, returns will vary depending on the vintage – so we also need to predict what vintages will be desirable 20 years hence.
Rule-of-thumb ‘it will end with a 7’!

Specifically though, assuming this is an investment (not for personal drinking, where I would choose Fonseca), if I’m investing for 2033 (approx.) then I’d buy and lay down ports from 1977 (almost any premium producer) for intended sale in 2032 when those fat-cat merchant bankers will be looking to buy wines for their 55th birthday celebration and able to pay premium bucks for the scarce supply. Back-up plan would be 1994’s for sale in 2034 to a similar demographic except for the 40th birthday!

My guess is that Graham (and possibly Warre, even Dow) will give a higher return than Taylor or Fonseca. You'd get more bottles of that now for your $1000, but given the potential saarcity of supply in 2032 buyers will be less picky. But again, Taylor will still be up there and less risky.

[Eric Menchen]

Absolute price isn’t (?shouldn’t be?) the criterion.

By mentioning the high starting price of Taylor, I didn't intend to suggest that the absolute price ruled it out. My argument is that because it has such a good reputation, it is already priced high and the upside potential is smaller. $80 Taylor today will likely be worth $120 at some point in the future, at which point the $50 Smith Woodhouse or Quinta do Vesuvio might be worth $100. But it might not ...