Vintages... Best?

[Red Aaron]

Hi all!
I've been looking around winebid some, focusing on the cheaper bottles as I'm new to the game.
I've been reading a lot of posts and its clear there is a lot of knowledge in this forum group.
Curious to know if there are any sort of general suggestions for buying ports.
Are their decades that are standout decades, or only specific years, also things like seepage issues in a bottle, or neck fill leverl being an indicator to wave off a bottle.

I see the 2016's and 2017's are 100 bucks a bottle about, is that an indication that vintage is really great, whereas a 1975-1980 VP is only 50 dollars a bottle or so. Any idvice would be great.

[Lucas S]

Decades don't matter much by themselves, the vintage and producer matter. For example, people will tell you that 90s Niepoort bottlings tend to have VA issues so its probably best to avoid them.

Others can chime in on the quality but from the perspective of pricing alone, it is not really correlated with quality per se.

In terms of auction prices alone,
The 1940s, specifically 1945 and 1948 which were legendary vintages, cost way more than anything afterwards, like $750 a bottle of Taylor.
The 1950s cost a bit more than the 1960s, although that is tempered by the fact that 1963 and 1966 were so good and are also expensive.
The 1960s cost more than the 1970s, of which 1970 and 1977 probably have the most reputation.
The 1970s cost more than the 1980s, the 80 VPs are very specific producer dependent and are still modestly cheap. Glenn made this good summary of the 80s: http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 97#p127697. (you should do one for the 70s and 90s too Glenn )
The 1990s are only a little cheaper than the 1980s EXCEPT for the few headline brands from 1994 like Taylor and Fonseca which are at least over $100.
2000s ports are probably the cheapest at auction right now because they are young and there is good supply, 2000, 2003, 2007 and to a lesser extent the smaller vintages of 2009 and 2005.
2010s ports have not come down much as they haven't hit the auctions much yet, and 2011 was a very hyped up vintage with the Dow winning Wine of the Year.

Retail pricing seems to always be around $90-120 for VPs going back 30 years, which is generally too much imo. I saw you bought the 2016 Romaneira for $30 at WineBid, that's great and this is the way.

[Red Aaron]

Decades don't matter much by themselves, the vintage and producer matter. For example, people will tell you that 90s Niepoort bottlings tend to have VA issues so its probably best to avoid them.

Others can chime in on the quality but from the perspective of pricing alone, it is not really correlated with quality per se.

In terms of auction prices alone,
The 1940s, specifically 1945 and 1948 which were legendary vintages, cost way more than anything afterwards, like $750 a bottle of Taylor.
The 1950s cost a bit more than the 1960s, although that is tempered by the fact that 1963 and 1966 were so good and are also expensive.
The 1960s cost more than the 1970s, of which 1970 and 1977 probably have the most reputation.
The 1970s cost more than the 1980s, the 80 VPs are very specific producer dependent and are still modestly cheap. Glenn made this good summary of the 80s: http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 97#p127697. (you should do one for the 70s and 90s too Glenn )
The 1990s are only a little cheaper than the 1980s EXCEPT for the few headline brands from 1994 like Taylor and Fonseca which are at least over $100.
2000s ports are probably the cheapest at auction right now because they are young and there is good supply, 2000, 2003, 2007 and to a lesser extent the smaller vintages of 2009 and 2005.
2010s ports have not come down much as they haven't hit the auctions much yet, and 2011 was a very hyped up vintage with the Dow winning Wine of the Year.

Retail pricing seems to always be around $90-120 for VPs going back 30 years, which is generally too much imo. I saw you bought the 2016 Romaneira for $30 at WineBid, that's great and this is the way.

Thank you for that information! There is so much to learn about which vintages are really great, vs just good. I'm ok with good, as great is going to beyond my pocketbook. LOL. I'm all for trying lots of things, especially if those bottles are like 30-50 dollars a bottle. But yeah a 100 dollar bottle I also have to hold for 20-30 years is tough.

[Eric Ifune]

I haven't met a 1970 that I haven't liked.
1980 is a very underpriced vintage. The Symingtons knocked it out of the park in 1980.
2011 is one of the all time greats.

[Glenn E.]

Roy's ratings of vintages can be found here. Those ratings will give you a general idea of which vintages are good, which are great, and which should be avoided.

The most notable recent vintages ("recent" by Port standards ) have already been mentioned and are 2011, 1994, and 1970. But really any vintage that Roy has rated "Classic" or "Excellent" is going to have a wide variety of superb Port, and for those vintages you're pretty safe buying just about anything. More well-known names are always safer, but there are lots and lots of superb Ports from producers you've probably never heard of.

Oddly, you'll find that pricing varies not so much based on the vintage itself, but on the ratings of the various wines. If a Port gets a 100-point rating from any even semi-recognizable critic, its price basically doubles overnight. But otherwise prices are fairly consistent based primarily on age, with a certain amount of variability based on rarity. Note that "rare" does not necessarily mean "good"! Port gradually gets more expensive until it is roughly 35-40 years old, after which the prices starts to climb more steadily. Somewhere around 50-60 years old it starts to spike sharply.

One big problem for the Port trade, historically, is that Port's value tends to drop for a while after release, then slowly rise back to release price, and then slowly increase further. For at least the last 10 years it has been possible to buy a recent release for roughly $80-$100 per bottle... or you could buy a nicely-aged Port from the 1980s for the same $80-$100. (Those prices on older Ports have risen recently, so now you'd have to look at the early 1990s to get the same effect.) Unless you really like extremely young Port, or you want to guarantee the provenance of your Port in 40 years' time by keeping it in your own cellar for 40 years, why would you buy a new release?

[Moses Botbol]

I see the 2016's and 2017's are 100 bucks a bottle about, is that an indication that vintage is really great, whereas a 1975-1980 VP is only 50 dollars a bottle or so. Any idvice would be great.

Advice would be to buy both the $100 and $50 bottles. You'll be waiting a heck long time on the current stuff before it's in its prime. The $50 stuff will hold you over.

Port wine is just better made no, in cleaner conditions with a generally higher grade of spirit than 30 years ago. Back then it varied a lot even for the same producers on the spirit; not so much on how they made it. The vintage itself had bigger impact back then, than now as they are smarter how to deal with what nature serves.

Another suggestion is look at LBV's and Ruby Reserve ports. They age just well. Had plenty of 25+ year old from both styles that were fine.

[Red Aaron]

Roy's ratings of vintages can be found here. Those ratings will give you a general idea of which vintages are good, which are great, and which should be avoided.

The most notable recent vintages ("recent" by Port standards ) have already been mentioned and are 2011, 1994, and 1970. But really any vintage that Roy has rated "Classic" or "Excellent" is going to have a wide variety of superb Port, and for those vintages you're pretty safe buying just about anything. More well-known names are always safer, but there are lots and lots of superb Ports from producers you've probably never heard of.

Oddly, you'll find that pricing varies not so much based on the vintage itself, but on the ratings of the various wines. If a Port gets a 100-point rating from any even semi-recognizable critic, its price basically doubles overnight. But otherwise prices are fairly consistent based primarily on age, with a certain amount of variability based on rarity. Note that "rare" does not necessarily mean "good"! Port gradually gets more expensive until it is roughly 35-40 years old, after which the prices starts to climb more steadily. Somewhere around 50-60 years old it starts to spike sharply.

One big problem for the Port trade, historically, is that Port's value tends to drop for a while after release, then slowly rise back to release price, and then slowly increase further. For at least the last 10 years it has been possible to buy a recent release for roughly $80-$100 per bottle... or you could buy a nicely-aged Port from the 1980s for the same $80-$100. (Those prices on older Ports have risen recently, so now you'd have to look at the early 1990s to get the same effect.) Unless you really like extremely young Port, or you want to guarantee the provenance of your Port in 40 years' time by keeping it in your own cellar for 40 years, why would you buy a new release?

Thank you!

[Tom Archer]

I see the 2016's and 2017's are 100 bucks a bottle about, is that an indication that vintage is really great, whereas a 1975-1980 VP is only 50 dollars a bottle or so. Any idvice would be great.

There's a massive disconnect between release prices and secondary market prices, especially in the UK. It's a crazy situation, and I don't think it benefits the producers' bottom line.

At present you are best off buying vintage on the secondary market at around 15 to 20 years old - or later if you have to pay for storage.

Do look beyond vintage however. With the market starved of volume with recent vintage declarations, a lot of excellent juice is going into LBVs. Cast a wide net on that field, and check out the LBVs made by some of the smaller producers - there's some really good product out there, often very reasonably priced.

[Thomas V]

Sound advise have been given already. As I am a big QPR guy myself and like my VPs with around 40 years of age or more I would suggest buying into:

1983
1985
1997
2003
2011

Especially the last 3 I mention is highly undervalued at the moment. The 1997 will soon begin to creep up in price substantially, but still bargains to be made. Look out for Graham's, Vesuvio, Dow's and Warre's.

2011 which is highly highly rated is forgotten atm cause it is in those early teen years. Get your hands on some as nobody made bad VP in 2011. Stand out bottles would be Graham's, Noval, Taylor's. Warre's, Alves de Sousa etc. (I omit Fonseca and Dow's cause of the high prices)

The 80's are getting pricy but keep your eyes open and pounce if you find them at a good price. Could be bottles such as Gould Campbell, Smith Woodhouse, Croft, Ferreira and such which are way cheaper than Dow's, Fonseca, Taylor's, Graham's etc in those vintages.

[Tom Archer]

Don't be blind to events at the Fed and other central banks.

Wine is a classic 'alternative investment' and has had a very long bull run borne of conventional cash investments returning negative real returns.

There seems to be some resolve now to get the financial markets back to the old normal - the formula that prevailed for quarter of a millennia with only brief deviations - that cash should gain 2% p.a. in value from being invested, over and above risk and anticipated inflation.

We simply don't know how much wine is currently stockpiled and owned as investments, by people who have no intention of ever drinking it, but fully intent on moving their money wherever the grass is greenest.

All we do know is that when the last alternative investment bubble burst, forty years ago now, it did so very badly - with spectacular bargains in the forced sales that followed..

[Lucas S]

That analysis may make sense for high-end Burgundy and other "investment" wines. But it doesn't make sense for Vintage Port.

First, because Vintage Port prices are already so low that many are below the release cost and the even the cost to produce. With prices as low as $20-35 for VPs, many casual buyers who would be priced out will be absorbing excess supply.

Second, dollar inflation is here to stay, particularly as this wave of inflation is driven largely by shortages in both goods and energy, as well as labor. These supply shortages must be resolved with investments which have a lag of a couple of years and are further stymied by the now-higher interest rates. When there is persistent inflation, real goods like a bottle of Port will hold value.

Third, the real estate and equity markets have been in a bubble as well, and the developing situation of those two will be the key determinant of the fate of all other markets, including the wine market.


I have been reading into the CBs like a hawk for two years now and I will give you my friends here this brief summary:
Nearly every central bank in the world is pursuing the same objective, namely CBDC.
What does this mean?
For starters, with such matters they can never explicitly say because they have to avoid a run on the banks. But the documents that have been released so far from orgs like the BIS, BoE, ECB, and even the NSCAI, make it clear what some of the real objectives are 1) programmable money, 2) phase-out of cash, 3) ID-tied use of currency, 4) enforcement of climate policy, and 5) reduction in the overall number of banks.

Those are the openly-stated facts. You can interpret them however you like.

My own interpretation is that what is coming is a veritable nightmare of capital controls, financial surveillance, and even movement controls that would make the Soviet Gosbank system pale in comparison. And that if 100+ supposedly "independent" central banks around the world are all pursuing same policy objective, perhaps they are not so independent after all and are in fact under direction from one nexus.

[Moses Botbol]

That analysis may make sense for high-end Burgundy and other "investment" wines. But it doesn't make sense for Vintage Port.

First, because Vintage Port prices are already so low that many are below the release cost and the even the cost to produce. With prices as low as $20-35 for VPs, many casual buyers who would be priced out will be absorbing excess supply.

Which vintage ports are $20?

[Lucas S]

There's '03 Infantado VP for $15 on WineBid this very moment. There's always some below $30 if you dig enough. And around $30-35 its not hard to find, especially if you buy a full case.

[Tom Archer]

That analysis may make sense for high-end Burgundy and other "investment" wines. But it doesn't make sense for Vintage Port.

The pricing of fine wines is all relative, and wine investors often include a percentage of VP in their portfolios. I don't buy the idea that Burgundy prices could crash while Claret prices stayed steady, unless some scandal emerged that tarnished the integrity of the product. Similarly I don't buy the idea that VP could emerge unscathed while all around crashed and burned.

The only crumb of comfort, when comparing the current wine boom with that of half a century ago, is that much of the investment then was corporate, to counter the culture of high corporation taxation that prevailed at the time, buy buying wine as 'stock'. Some of the liquidations at the end of the last boom completely overloaded what the market could absorb.

However, no-one likes to catch a falling knife. It won't take much of a trend for investors to offload stock, to see buyers holding off and waiting for the market to bottom out.

[Andy Velebil]

There's '03 Infantado VP for $15 on WineBid this very moment. There's always some below $30 if you dig enough. And around $30-35 its not hard to find, especially if you buy a full case.

But would any knowledgeable Port lover want to buy '03 Infantado is the real question? There's a reason it's $15, just saying.

[Moses Botbol]

There's '03 Infantado VP for $15 on WineBid this very moment. There's always some below $30 if you dig enough. And around $30-35 its not hard to find, especially if you buy a full case.

But would any knowledgeable Port lover want to buy '03 Infantado is the real question? There's a reason it's $15, just saying.

Count me in for at least two if I saw it at a B&M. I've spent more on less plenty of times.

[Lucas S]

There's '03 Infantado VP for $15 on WineBid this very moment. There's always some below $30 if you dig enough. And around $30-35 its not hard to find, especially if you buy a full case.

But would any knowledgeable Port lover want to buy '03 Infantado is the real question? There's a reason it's $15, just saying.

That's fair. I bought two of them to try it and have a spare.

Overall, the VP market strikes me as not that efficient/knowledgeable. If we take this thread where there was a discussion about tiers.
viewtopic.php?t=43483&hilit=tier

Let's say we go with this approximate tierlist Thomas posted. The market prices don't line up with this very well.

Tier 1: Quinta do Noval, Fonseca, Graham's, Dow's, Taylor's, Warre's, Quinta do Vesuvio (some might disagree with this one)

Tier 2: Gould Campbell, Smith Woodhouse, Sandeman, Ferreira, Cockburn's, Niepoort, Quarles Harris, Ramos Pinto

Tier 3: Churchill's, Delaforce, Offley, Quinta do Portal, Quevedo, Quinta da Romaneira, Quinta Vale de Maria, Veira de Sousa, Alves de Sousa

Taylor is the most expensive, Fonseca a little below, then Graham's and Noval at Tier 2, then Dow a little below (except 2011), then just about everything else is at the middling tier 3 with some variation based on the vintage year of course. And then there is what falls to bargain bin Tier 4.

But a lot of what consists Tier 4 are Ports that get dumped randomly on the market and may have some label bias but are not necessarily bad. Like, for example, $300 & $320 cases of 1994 & 1992 Delaforce that were passed on this week at auction. Based on the notes here and theportforum those are both perfectly good ports, and yet at $25/bottle + bp there were no takers for ports nicely approaching that 30 y.o. maturity level.

It seems that Vesuvio and post-'83 Warre's are both somewhat underpriced at auction. And also anything that you personally like from Tier 2 and 3 above. Although some may be rare to actually hit the auction block, the big spenders simply won't bid those up when they do get on the block and would rather bid up Taylor and NN no matter the vintage. I don't know if this is because restaurants are buying all the Taylor or what exactly, but it doesn't seem very rational.

[Moses Botbol]

But a lot of what consists Tier 4 are Ports that get dumped randomly on the market and may have some label bias but are not necessarily bad. Like, for example, $300 & $320 cases of 1994 & 1992 Delaforce that were passed on this week at auction. Based on the notes here and theportforum those are both perfectly good ports, and yet at $25/bottle + bp there were no takers for ports nicely approaching that 30 y.o. maturity level.

It's not fair to lump auction and retail into the same scale. Different buyers, sellers, and intent.

[Thomas V]

Prices also vary between different vintages as reviewer scores makes quite the impact as in the still wine scene.

Also some producers make quite a few more bottles than the other and scarcity has a great impact on prices as well.

Another factor is that you are based in the US and price points in the US differ from those in the UK or main EU.

1985 Fonseca is best in class and more sought after than all other brands in the year
1994 Noval got 100 points and is more expensive than the Taylor's
2011 Dow's got 100 points is far beyond any other brand in price.

If I were to redo my tier rankings in order of typical prices on the retail market it would be like this. So QPR latter in each tier list

Tier 1: Taylor's > Graham's > Noval > Fonseca > Warre's > Dow's > Vesuvio

Tier 2: Sandeman > Niepoort > Croft > Ramos Pinto > Ferreira > Smith Woodhouse > Gould Campbell > Cockburn's > Quarles Harris

Tier 3: Romaneira > Alves de Sousa, Vale de Maria > Churchill's > Quevedo >Vieira de Sousa > Delaforce > Offley > Portal

[Tom Archer]

If I were to redo my tier rankings in order of typical prices on the retail market it would be like this. So QPR latter in each tier list

Tier 1: Taylor's > Graham's > Noval > Fonseca > Warre's > Dow's > Vesuvio

Tier 2: Sandeman > Niepoort > Croft > Ramos Pinto > Ferreira > Smith Woodhouse > Gould Campbell > Cockburn's > Quarles Harris

Tier 3: Romaneira > Alves de Sousa, Vale de Maria > Churchill's > Quevedo >Vieira de Sousa > Delaforce > Offley > Portal

Niepoort trades very much in the top tier now, both at release and auction (although not so 15 years ago). Sandeman wants to be in top tier and now releases for 50% more than the price of Vesuvio, but the secondary market has yet to agree. A dozen Sa82 went for just £300 hammer recently.

At auction Vesuvio attracts a premium over other SQs, but not that great a premium. It tends to sell for much the same as Smith Woodhouse.

Vesuvio had something of a cult following in its early days, but that seems to have cooled. There may be just too many of them now - it's some time since I last saw a full vertical of them planned.