Candidate for best value red

[orpheus]

A long time since I've posted.

The Tyrells Rufus Stone Heathcote Shiraz 2008 has coaxed me back.

Would be a great wine at twice the price; perfectly balanced, poised, terrific purity and sense of place.

In particular, great mouthfeel and grip, and a lovely bed of spicey, fine-grained but particulate tannins to finish, terrifically long and lingering.

[via collins]

Not sure if you're looking to extend that list of candidates, but a few Kalleske Clarry's Blend GSMs have made the start of winter very dark, moody and mysterious for me. And at sub-$20, I reckon you're getting at least twice the value, maybe even 3 times. I've finished 09s now, onto 10s which are just as smart. Really ought to be cellaring, but the price-point says "drink me now"....

[ticklenow1]

Not sure if you're looking to extend that list of candidates, but a few Kalleske Clarry's Blend GSMs have made the start of winter very dark, moody and mysterious for me. And at sub-$20, I reckon you're getting at least twice the value, maybe even 3 times. I've finished 09s now, onto 10s which are just as smart. Really ought to be cellaring, but the price-point says "drink me now"....

I agree with you the the Clarry's are exceptional value. They benefit a lot from just 2 or 3 years in the cellar. We are currently drinking the 06's and they are amazing. I have never had a poor Clarry's. As for Rufus Stone's, I have found them a little hit and miss over the years. When they are good, they are a wonderful drink though.

As for the best value for money wine, I can't go past Noon Twelve Bells. I know they are not available unless you are on the mailing list, but at $10 it is just amazing value for money that would be judged as a good wine at 3 or 4 times the price.

Just my 2 cents worth which I am sure many others will disagree with.

[Rossco]

I have posted this before, but for me, you cant go past Tahbilk wineclub shiraz. $9.95 per bottle, 2003 vintage delivered to your door (have to buy a doz for free delivery)

8 years old and is an amazing wine for the price.

[orpheus]

Some excellent suggestions there, none of which I have tried.

Might give them a try.

You might be right about the Rufus Stone. I know that I was very unimpressed by an early example of it some years ago.

The 2008, though, is definitely hit, not miss.

[AndrewCowley]

Tyrrell's Brokenback Shiraz would be a candidate. Past couple of vintages have been pretty good.

If you knew nothing about vintages and otherwise took a punt then surely Taylors Promised Land Shiraz and Cabernet Sauvignon would be good ones too. Very cheap and often pretty good.

[cuttlefish]

I haven't tried it, but hasn't the Wynns Shiraz been really good in recent releases ?

[Sean]

deleted

[phillisc]

I haven't tried it, but hasn't the Wynns Shiraz been really good in recent releases ?

Indeed picked up the 08 last year for $9 and 3 dozen of the 09 last week for an outrageous $9:25c. The last 2 vintages of this wine have really over delivered.

Craig.

[Chad]

Hard to beat Mike Press Shiraz or Cab Sauv (any vintage) at about $10/bottle. I have never been anyting but blown away at the value for money. Only problem is that at this price I just keep drinking them without giving them a chance to get any hint of bottle age.

Chad

[Matt]

has anyone tried the 2009 cab sav from Mike Press? wondering whether to grab a case.

[Matt]

oh and i forgot, my vote would be for the 'footbolt' as an outstanding value red. even better with a bit of bottle age.

[orpheus]

Haven't had the last couple of vintages of the Footbolt, but having tasting previous vintages, I definitely agree that a bit of bottle age is called for.

[daz]

The Annie's Lane Shiraz 08 I had recently was very enjoyable but I paid more ($13-$14) for the bottle I bought to try than it can be found for when discounted to $10-$12. I noticed the 2009 on the shelf with the 2008 today. I've enjoyed the Footbolt in the past, Mike Press cab a bit more than his shiraz. Thorn-Clarke's Shotfire duo have rarely disappointed when found for under $20. I keep going back to Metala's White Label blend from time to time. Saltram's Shiraz Cab 2006 is good value when found for about $15-$16 and Mamre Brook is usually good if it's about $20. I'm having trouble remembering some of the labels/vintages I've drunk and enjoyed that have cost less than $20. Naturally, Wynns Black Label enters the field when about $20. I've not tried the Tahbilk Everyday Drinking Shiraz 2003 but the Tahbilk reds are generally very good value with the members 10% discount, even better value when in packaged offers.

[orpheus]

Daz, I agree about the Wynns BL, particularly if it is left for a few years, after which time most vintages improve markedly.

The 1998, which I've been tucking into over the last month, is drinking absolutely beautifully. Taking my own thread OT here, but it confirmed, for me, my preference for the 98 South Australians over the 96s. The 96s still seem undrinkable, and I don't know whether they will ever come into balance, whereas the 98s have poise. Horrible generalisations, I know, but this has been my fairly consistent experience.

[phillisc]

Hi all, just picked up a couple more cases of wynns 09 shiraz. $8:85C at 1C. this is getting really silly and TWE must be spitting chips.

I note the comments of 90 and 98 BL. Wish i bought a pallet of each.
hard to know with a 09 shiraz if it will be a real long termer but willing to take the risk.

I always smile when the QPR is less than a dollar a vintage.
I will drink plenty of these with a decade or more on them, so at 90c/year good value i reckon.

Cheers Craig.

[Mahmoud Ali]

Craig,

My idea of a dollar a vintage applies to the wine at the time of purchase, as in I'd happily pay $20 for a 1991 bottle. In 2001 when I was in Adelaide I didn't hesitate to pay $35 for a 1967 Stonyfell Port. Too bad there was only one bottle.

Using your method you could make almost any bottle 'a dollar a vintage' just by cellaring it the appropriate amount of time. And that would mean that by next year my 1982 Tahbilk Cabernet will have cost me $0.33 a vintage. I knew C$10 was a good price at the time (it was on sale) but not that good!

Cheers.......................Mahmoud

[orpheus]

Craig,

My idea of a dollar a vintage applies to the wine at the time of purchase, as in I'd happily pay $20 for a 1991 bottle. In 2001 when I was in Adelaide I didn't hesitate to pay $35 for a 1967 Stonyfell Port. Too bad there was only one bottle.

Using your method you could make almost any bottle 'a dollar a vintage' just by cellaring it the appropriate amount of time. And that would mean that by next year my 1982 Tahbilk Cabernet will have cost me $0.33 a vintage. I knew C$10 was a good price at the time (it was on sale) but not that good!

Cheers.......................Mahmoud

Mahmoud, When you open the Tahbilk, post a tasting note. It would be very interesting to know what it is like after 30 years.

[xsorxpire]

Hi all, just picked up a couple more cases of wynns 09 shiraz. $8:85C at 1C. this is getting really silly and TWE must be spitting chips.

Cheers Craig.

Given your faith in the drop i just grabbed the last six pack at my local for $8.90ea.

They had some 05 for $18.99 a bottle too. So i grabbed five.

[phillisc]

Yes sorry Mahmoud, the dollar per vintage thing can work both ways, the closest for me would be Wynns Oven Valley through an Elders Shareholder deal, the 86 vintage purchased as a 4 year old for $40 a case.
so at 25 years of age, 13 cents per vintage.

Sorry about banging the Wynns drum, but i am not nor never will have the buying power of Rockerfeller, so its a great buy and cellars well.
So, how come 128 which IMHO is a far inferior wine, and for the sole individual penfolds vineyards wine ( Magill accepted) is thin, green, overextracted and generally a poor keeper. Will we ever see it at sub $10??
Cheers Craig.
By the way Mahmoud, does 71 grange at $9 on release from a pub in North Adelaide qualify for a solid QPR?

[phillisc]

Gavin, I emailed Garry Walsh about the 09 Wynns shiraz.
He sat on the fence, but it was reviewed favourably on Winefront.
As such, he gives the wine a big thumbs up.

I am wondering if you can shed some light on this.
Is TWE stuffed, broke, bonkers....whatever!!
By Sunday (here in Adelaide and nationally I expect) because of the price war between DMs and 1C, the price of this wine will be$8-8:40pb.......sheer bloody madness.
One better hope like Bordeaux that 2010 is the vintage of the century in Coonawarra because the barstardisation of this proud label will see the price fall even lower.
Now I like a bargain as much as the next person, but when i put my card back in my wallet, I prefer not to have to wipe blood off my hands.
The cellar door price is $16ish and if folks from Melbourne and Adelaide get wind of the above barstardisation, the staff might as well do a buy 6 get 6 free.

Some will say stiff shit and TWE can die a quick death.
I am continually bemused at why Wynns is singled out for special treatment.
Black label is $18 and it is only the individual bottlings and the smaller case production of Riddoch and Michael that sees price sustain some sort of sensibility.
Why are other brands in TWE ( those that I buy such as Lindermans and Seppelt) not get the same thrashing. This would see St Peters at sub $30 and the Coonawarra trio at sub $25!

Or God forbid Grange at sub $300.

At the end of the day I will continue to purchase Wynns, because I have enjoyed their wines for many years .....but as someone once said...somethings gotta give.
If you are able to comment Gavin, i am sure that a number of us would be very interested.

Cheers
Craig.

[sjw_11]

Worth noting that TWE has significant owned vineyards in the Coonawarra that they don't have elsewhere, undoubtedly lowering the cost of fruit. Managing the brands has also not been their strong point so some marketer probably decided this was their "fighting brand" to attack on price. Hopefully this will begin to change now TWE is free from the brewery noose around its neck. The big retailers are clearly then be adding to this by using Wynns as a loss leader to drive traffic given the strong brand recognition.

[Michael McNally]

Worth noting that TWE has significant owned vineyards in the Coonawarra that they don't have elsewhere, undoubtedly lowering the cost of fruit. Managing the brands has also not been their strong point so some marketer probably decided this was their "fighting brand" to attack on price. Hopefully this will begin to change now TWE is free from the brewery noose around its neck. The big retailers are clearly then be adding to this by using Wynns as a loss leader to drive traffic given the strong brand recognition.

This is cogent analyisis.

Thanks sjw. Sometimes you wonder what is going on. This makes sense.

Cheers

Michael

PS though thinking about this as I read the post before submitting - a question popped into my head:

Doesn't owning the vineyards stop you from getting fruit below the cost of production as a lot of wineries/brands are doing? Just a thought

[odyssey]

I'm finding I'm really enjoying a lot of 2008s in the "old trusty" department whereas I have found them a bit lacking in recent times. Both the BL and Bin 28 (if you pick it up around the $20 mark) are very moreish. Seems to have been a good year for old favourites.

Worth noting that TWE has significant owned vineyards in the Coonawarra that they don't have elsewhere, undoubtedly lowering the cost of fruit. Managing the brands has also not been their strong point so some marketer probably decided this was their "fighting brand" to attack on price. Hopefully this will begin to change now TWE is free from the brewery noose around its neck. The big retailers are clearly then be adding to this by using Wynns as a loss leader to drive traffic given the strong brand recognition.

The unfortunate thing out of that, for the customer, being the prices will go back up...

[griff]

Would love to try the 2009 Wynns Shiraz as the 2008 was a corker at sub-$10. The rejuvenation of the vineyard is bearing very good fruit! Over here you can find the Cabernet discounted but haven't seen the Shiraz about much. A few vintages behind as well. Actually, aussie wine has really gone down in popularity in the UK marketplace between 2006 and 2011 (being the two times we lived here for an appreciable amount of time)

cheers

Carl

[TiggerK]

Brief note, rather enjoyed the Wynns Shiraz 2009 a few nights ago. Paid far too much for it though ($15AU)!!! Good wine, nice balance of acidity and if I could get it closer to $10, would be a multi-case buy no-brainer.

Cheers
Tim

Edit: Yes also really enjoyed orpheus' recommendation of the Rufus Stone Heathcote Shiraz 2008 last week. Went to buy more and all gone though...

[Mahmoud Ali]

Phillisc wrote:

Yes sorry Mahmoud, the dollar per vintage thing can work both ways, the closest for me would be Wynns Oven Valley through an Elders Shareholder deal, the 86 vintage purchased as a 4 year old for $40 a case. So at 25 years of age, 13 cents per vintage."


I do think that people today would pay $40 for a bottle of Wynn's Oven Valley Burgundy. However I don't think that your purchase is a QPR in the way you calculate it. A QPR is used to describe the value at the time of purchase. Both you and everyone else who bought the wine got the same QPR at the time of purchase. The only difference is that they drank their wines and you hung on to yours. They didn't get a poorer QPR just because they drank their bottles.

Sure, the 1971 Grange sold for $9/bottle, and the 1961 Latour was selling for C$6/bottle in Canada in the early 60's. They were expensive wines at the time and their QPR at the time would be based on the value and quality of other wines available at the time.

The 2008 Wynn's Shiraz is an excellent QPR at $9/bottle, it doesn't matter if people drink it or keep it, the QPR remains the same. Years from now you can say that it was a good QPR at the time, or that you got a good deal, or that it was a wise investment, but you cannot say that the QPR has increased.

By the way, I would love to know how the '86 Wynn's Oven Valley is drinking. I tasted a '92 Oven Valley at Wynn's cellar door and it was very nice. It was 2001 and they said that they found it somewhere in the winery and that it was probably the last vintage made.

Cheers...........................Mahmoud

[daz]

Phillisc wrote:

Yes sorry Mahmoud, the dollar per vintage thing can work both ways, the closest for me would be Wynns Oven Valley through an Elders Shareholder deal, the 86 vintage purchased as a 4 year old for $40 a case. So at 25 years of age, 13 cents per vintage."


I do think that people today would pay $40 for a bottle of Wynn's Oven Valley Burgundy. However I don't think that your purchase is a QPR in the way you calculate it. A QPR is used to describe the value at the time of purchase. Both you and everyone else who bought the wine got the same QPR at the time of purchase. The only difference is that they drank their wines and you hung on to yours. They didn't get a poorer QPR just because they drank their bottles.

Sure, the 1971 Grange sold for $9/bottle, and the 1961 Latour was selling for C$6/bottle in Canada in the early 60's. They were expensive wines at the time and their QPR at the time would be based on the value and quality of other wines available at the time.

The 2008 Wynn's Shiraz is an excellent QPR at $9/bottle, it doesn't matter if people drink it or keep it, the QPR remains the same. Years from now you can say that it was a good QPR at the time, or that you got a good deal, or that it was a wise investment, but you cannot say that the QPR has increased.

By the way, I would love to know how the '86 Wynn's Oven Valley is drinking. I tasted a '92 Oven Valley at Wynn's cellar door and it was very nice. It was 2001 and they said that they found it somewhere in the winery and that it was probably the last vintage made.

Cheers...........................Mahmoud

To paraphrase your comments Mahmoud, price at purchase is always relative to the alternatives at that time and is regardless of later vintages price escalation. And of course as been the conglomerates' propensity to deleting numerous labels so as to direct their fruit to the lables that provide higher returns. But these corporate beancounter cowboys have, at least in Australia, failed miserably to convert their machinations into profits, shareholder dividends.

[Mahmoud Ali]

Daz wrote:

"To paraphrase your comments Mahmoud, price at purchase is always relative to the alternatives at that time and is regardless of later vintages price escalation.'


I think it's an open secret that my comments can be easily paraphrased or summarized.

Mahmoud.

[daz]

Daz wrote:

"To paraphrase your comments Mahmoud, price at purchase is always relative to the alternatives at that time and is regardless of later vintages price escalation.'

I think it's an open secret that my comments can be easily paraphrased or summarized.

Mahmoud.

No secret there, waxing lyrical is endemic on any wine forum.