Tawny’s True Age Under Fire

[Andy Velebil]

As I’ve said before, and here’s my $0.02 which may or may not be correct (someone correct me if you think I’m wrong). I think the bigger issue that is finally coming to bear is older IVP (now IVDP) rules that may not be in complete alignment with current EU (and any other countries) modern labeling/advertising/or any other regulation or law.

How to correct this issue may be rather simple or complex, depending on which option is taken.

The easiest is just put a little explanation on the back label.

Or just wait for the controversy to blow over and people forget, LOL.

[Frederick Blais]

Andy, I know you can buy stocks and sell on the 1st year, but my example was within your own production, just to point out that IVDP still cares about the age of your stocks to produce a Tawny with indication of age. This is also why they just created the new categories of 50 year old and Very Old Tawnys, it is not to create a Port that looks old.

Like you mention, can't wait to see which option they take to fix the issue and save the repuration of the majority of the honest producers.

[Andy Velebil]

Andy, I know you can buy stocks and sell on the 1st year, but my example was within your own production, just to point out that IVDP still cares about the age of your stocks to produce a Tawny with indication of age. This is also why they just created the new categories of 50 year old and Very Old Tawnys, it is not to create a Port that looks old.

Like you mention, can't wait to see which option they take to fix the issue and save the repuration of the majority of the honest producers.

Ah, got ya.

Is it still generating issues within the producers?

[Glenn E.]

As I’ve said before, and here’s my $0.02 which may or may not be correct (someone correct me if you think I’m wrong). I think the bigger issue that is finally coming to bear is older IVP (now IVDP) rules that may not be in complete alignment with current EU (and any other countries) modern labeling/advertising/or any other regulation or law.

I agree. 30+ years in people are finally pointing out the misalignment between the IVDP regulations and the EU laws, in a semi-official context, so it can no longer just be ignored.

How to correct this issue may be rather simple or complex, depending on which option is taken.

The easiest is just put a little explanation on the back label.

I don't think this would suffice for the EU law's requirements. It can't say "10 years old" on the front label if it isn't, in fact, 10 years old. It doesn't matter whether or not you try to explain it away on the back label... the front can't say that per EU law.

I think the simplest change would be to simply remove the "years old" part of the front label. Just call it a "Tawny 10" and then on the back label explain that it passes muster with the IVDP tasting panel which certifies that it has the organoleptic characteristics of a 10 Year Old Tawny Port. I'm not even certain that would be allowed under EU law... you may not be able to say "10 years old" anywhere on the bottle unless it is, in fact, 10 years old.

[Al B.]

We are all ignoring the fact that the regulations in force when Portugal joined the EU might have been grandfathered in as part of the conditions of joining. In which case the conflict was recognised at the time and deemed acceptable.

So then it becomes a matter of consumer choice. If customers are happy buying 3 year port at 10 year old tawny prices producers will continue to make them.

[Glenn E.]

We are all ignoring the fact that the regulations in force when Portugal joined the EU might have been grandfathered in as part of the conditions of joining. In which case the conflict was recognised at the time and deemed acceptable.

This is an excellent point, and one that hadn't occurred to me. I wonder how one would go about determining whether or not this is in fact the case?

[Frederick Blais]

I thought it was interesting to share. On the back label of a 10 years old Moscatel de Setubal from Jose Maria de Fonseca, here is what we can read :

''...is a blend of more than one Vintage where the youngest one is at least 10 years old...''

[Eric Ifune]

I believe the rules for Moscatel de Setubal and Port/Madeira are different. Don't know why.

[Jasper A.]

Small update, Eurofins found no traces of synthetical ethanol in the port of Kopke. https://mcusercontent.com/818fee525e441 ... -198221111

[Andy Velebil]

Small update, Eurofins found no traces of synthetical ethanol in the port of Kopke. https://mcusercontent.com/818fee525e441 ... -198221111

Thanks for the update.

Has there van any response or changes from the producers who fell onto the “less than listed” list?

[Roy Hersh]

That is only true if you already have stocks of Port with at least 75,000 liters or you do not get the rights to open your company at all.

But to a different point:

Roy wrote:
So have you seen any newborn LBV bottling that can show or fool one into believing that it is a 10 Year Old TWAIOA? Yeah, me neither!


Andy wrote:
Roy, you like Madeira, how do you think they age those cheap ones so fast. They even admit to how it's done. Just saying...


Roy writes today:
In Estufa(gem) where the temperature is greatly elevated, typically for 90 days. "Almost like" Pasteurization. It replicates what aging in Canteiro equates to approximately five years. If you are speaking of the bad old days of Madeira having caramel coloring added, sure. But that doesn't go on anymore.

Andy writes:
The bigger issue here is truth in advertising. The trade has used "average age" as the easy explanation to the general public. Trying to explain the real regulation and definition is difficult for the masses to understand. Most companies have kept their blend "average" above the stated age for many reasons, but it is clear some don't because the IVPD rules don't require it and it saves them money by artificially aging younger Ports and using those instead of older ones. So either change the labeling and how you sell it (don't call it an average age), or change the regulations to state it must be an average age and keep labels and the story the same.

This isn't a new issue, it's just now front page news world wide. It should have been addressed by the IVDP a long time ago.


Roy writes: We were on a PHT post-Covid and were at a small property near Niepoort in Douro. :)
We were given the winemaker for the tasting, but only a "decent" guide for a pretty quick tour, talking down to us in terms of thinking we were a group of no-nothing Americans visiting Douro. Not his fault, the person we were supposed to have was called away last minute. SO, he went on to explain the "average age" BS line re: TWAIOA. I stopped him mostly politely and took the time to explain the real truth about what the IVDP regs state and what most industry people say, (but yes, that simple and incorrect "average" story needs to be removed forever when explaining to visitors). I completely agree, a simple meeting with the leaders of the Port trade can simplify the verbiage, but give factual information. Very similar to what Andy stated. There has to be some sort of uniformity about how this is handled and shared ... all over the world when it comes to teaching and writing articles and books on Port wine. But ESPECIALLY in Port lodges, visitor centers in Porto/Gaia and up in Douro too.

[John Danza]

I just caught up on this old thread that reemerged. Ultimately, the truth should be followed by adding "style" to the label instead of misleading the consumer that the wine in the bottle is 10 years old. Remember that lots of regulations are written to help support industries and not necessarily to protect consumers.

I'll stick with Colheitas. Hopefully the year on the bottle is accurate.

[Moses Botbol]

I am fine with the way it is. Comes down to whether I like the tawny and think it's priced accordingly. Call it 10, 20, or whatever.

[John Danza]

I am fine with the way it is. Comes down to whether I like the tawny and think it's priced accordingly. Call it 10, 20, or whatever.

But the issue with that is that the producers clearly price based on the stated age on the bottle. The average consumer, the people not using this forum, judge that older must be better but they don't know how that designation was actually arrived at on the bottle.

[Moses Botbol]

I am fine with the way it is. Comes down to whether I like the tawny and think it's priced accordingly. Call it 10, 20, or whatever.

But the issue with that is that the producers clearly price based on the stated age on the bottle. The average consumer, the people not using this forum, judge that older must be better but they don't know how that designation was actually arrived at on the bottle.

Why does that matter if they know it or not?

Did they enjoy what they bought? Would they buy it again? Those two are the most important things.

Two sentences on the back label could explain it if producers thought it was worth mentioning.

[John Danza]

I am fine with the way it is. Comes down to whether I like the tawny and think it's priced accordingly. Call it 10, 20, or whatever.

But the issue with that is that the producers clearly price based on the stated age on the bottle. The average consumer, the people not using this forum, judge that older must be better but they don't know how that designation was actually arrived at on the bottle.

Why does that matter if they know it or not?

Did they enjoy what they bought? Would they buy it again? Those two are the most important things.

Two sentences on the back label could explain it if producers thought it was worth mentioning.

Most consumers care that a producer is lying to them.

[Glenn E.]

I have to agree with Moses on this, but for a slightly different reason.

If the IVDP tasting panel has approved a Port to be labeled as a 30 year old, I don't really care how old it is. For me, that's a quality standard. If they can manage to produce a Port that good in 10 years... more power to them!

Average age doesn't solve the problem. There's a big difference between something made from 50% 10 year old and 50% 50 year old, compared to something that's 100% 30 year old.

That's why the trade has the tasting panel. They're there to ensure that the Port being sold meets the minimum organoleptic standards required for the category.

Would it be better if there were a less opaque (and less deceptive) way to label the Ports? Sure! But do you really understand the difference between VS, VO, VSOP, and XO? Didn't think so.