The Auswine Forum

Red Bigot wrote:Maybe point Penfolds to this prior saga re 86 Grange: http://www.winestar.com.au/forum/viewto ... ked+grange

Just chiming in on this, given my tale was referenced.

From my view my '86 was not a precedent to this tale. My bottle exhibited factors of TCA taint; as referenced by a another bottle opened. My issue was that the subsequent analysis and review found there was no taint, however this was explained by the proven effect of oxidation on perception of taint, and as such warranted exchange..

The issue in this case is different, it is one of oxidation, not taint, which brings in factors outside of the 'manufacturing process', particularly in a 20+ yo bottle.

As such the outcome here exceeds that in relation to my case and all credit to Sparky and the team at Penfolds for their response.

Sorry all,

Did I miss what the outcome was? I re-read most of the thread, and I don't think I could identify what the fair replacement was.

Are we allowed to know?

Cheers,

Monghead.

Hmmmm..............................................

I'm going to guess....

1st - Grange 2004
2nd - Grange 2001
3rd - Grange 1994

or something like that....?? Love to know, but probably not be able to say for fear of setting a precedent in 'public view'.

TiggerK wrote:I'm going to guess....

1st - Grange 2004
2nd - Grange 2001
3rd - Grange 1994

or something like that....?? Love to know, but probably not be able to say for fear of setting a precedent in 'public view'.

Yes, I'm still waiting as well. Your last comment if true, would be a worry.

I'd just like to say well done to Moira & the crew at Fosters Customer Relations (Are you seriously taking calls 24/7? I can only imagine some of the half-intelligible ones after hours ).

Cheers,
Ian

Ps. monghead - if Steve doesn't want to say what his fair replacement was, that's his business. I think you can safely bet it wasn't a current release Bin 389.

rooview wrote:Conclusion: If one doesn't rely on forums, writing for magazines or general public profile you'll be shafted by Fosters.

I think that's very harsh. If you call Moira, and have a valid case, we'd like to think you'll be looked after at least up to a reasonable point.

It's not like this forum is that 'public'... a few hundred yes, but hardly in the common view. Forums are a good way to find out about the world of wine and having people like Moira around make us all appreciate the efforts some companies make to address issues like corks and customer opinion in whatever small way they can, given the extraneous possibilities of circumstance.

Surely better than no help at all. Examples of recent comparison with another major Oz wine conglomerate perhaps??

I hate corks, BTW.

Cheers
TiggerK

rooview wrote:Conclusion: If one doesn't rely on forums, writing for magazines or general public profile you'll be shafted by Fosters.

And your point is based on how many confirmed cases
A very unfair statement and one I did not think you would make.
Mike.

rooview wrote:Conclusion: If one doesn't rely on forums, writing for magazines or general public profile you'll be shafted by Fosters.

Yes, that is my concern too.

n4sir wrote:I'd just like to say well done to Moira & the crew at Fosters Customer Relations (Are you seriously taking calls 24/7? I can only imagine some of the half-intelligible ones after hours ).

Cheers,
Ian

Ps. monghead - if Steve doesn't want to say what his fair replacement was, that's his business. I think you can safely bet it wasn't a current release Bin 389.

Well Ian,

If Steve was keen enough to put the whole saga on the forum, I only thought he would be happy enough to let us all know the conclusion.

Otherwise, it would be abit like the joke with no punch line... If that's the case.....

Monghead.

rooview,

I certainly appreciate that the process may not have been that customer friendly in the past and from your description I'd assume that you haven't had reason or inclination to contact us for a good couple of years. Fair enough. Things have and are changing though and I challenge the thought that we're not capable of improving what we do and providing a better service than in the past.

One more thing I feel the need to challenge - I'm not a faceless suit in the upper echelons of management. I'm just a regular gal with a passion for wine (and cycling) who's doing her bit with her team to provide customer support for some legendary Australian wine brands and I don't treat that role lightly.

I've also got a cartoon for you, but unfortunately I can't work out how to load just the image, so I'll just have to subject you to my twitter..
http://twitpic.com/mzqpb

rooview wrote:Conclusion: If one doesn't rely on forums, writing for magazines or general public profile you'll be shafted by Fosters.

Honestly, what a load of arse. I've never had even the slightest bit of a problem with Southcorp/Fosters customer service over years and years. They are very good.
GW

I must say my experience, albeit limited, was quite good too. No real issues.

Only 1 experience with Fosters but a good one. Corked 83 Grange replaced with 02 on the spot at Fosters head office in Melbourne.

Whilst I have never had a corked Grange any time Ive had a corked St Henri or 389 etc, they have always sent me a parcel to send it in and have replaced the wine straight away with the same label although from current vintage. Does sound as though Grange is a bit harder to get replaced though?

Gary W wrote:

rooview wrote:Conclusion: If one doesn't rely on forums, writing for magazines or general public profile you'll be shafted by Fosters.

Honestly, what a load of arse. I've never had even the slightest bit of a problem with Southcorp/Fosters customer service over years and years. They are very good.
GW

Hmmm. Without expressing an opinion on anything said in this thread, and noting that I've not had cause to contact SouthRoseFosters customer service is a few years - I've got to say that I think rooview's exclusions count you out. Unless you call them anonymously...
cheers,
Graeme

Having cracked a '97 RWT a few weeks ago that was corked, I got in contact with Penfolds. They sent out a box and sent it to them for testing. Received a phone call a few weeks later to let me know their tests confirmed it. 87 (ppm) was the level of TCA.

Today I received a package in the mail with a replcement current vintage RWT as well as another nice bottle of wine.

Hats off to Penfolds. The cost to them of just the postage etc would have been significant. Brilliant customer service.

As Ive always said. In business, things will go wrong. Its how you deal with it that counts. Penfolds have excelled

David

daver6 wrote:Hats off to Penfolds. The cost to them of just the postage etc would have been significant. Brilliant customer service.

As Ive always said. In business, things will go wrong. Its how you deal with it that counts. Penfolds have excelled

David

Could not agree more. I have had the misfortune of sending the Penfolds team about 5 bottles of TCA affected reds over the past 12 months. They ranged from a Bin 707, a few Bin 389s and one Bin 28. It's possible that I have now spoken to the entire team (with the exception of Moira who sent her regards in the background). These are good people to deal with. The problems are not of their making but they are tasked with fixing them and they do it well. I went ballistic with Penfolds purchases for about a decade so there is every chance that I'll be returning some more bottles over the next few years. I have every confidence that, as has been the case in every one I returned to date, the bottles will be objectively assessed and appropriate recompense will be made. Wish they were all like this.

We made the unfortunate discovery on Tuesday night that a bottle of 1986 Bin 707 which had a saturated cork and was oxidised... bugger! The wine level was at top of shoulder/base of neck. From the moment the tip of the Ah-so touched the edge of the cork it started bubbling and foaming out of the cork - not a good sign in anyone's book.

We put the Ah-so aside as it was clearly going to mush the edges of the wet cork into butter, and instead managed to get it out with a good corkscrew... it came out in parts and the cork was saturated from base to tip. Decanting was obviously of no help but we had to try.

Storage conditions were reasonable (passive sydney cellar then moved into a wine fridge)... we've been pulling 70s granges out of the same cellar for the last 20 years which have been exceptional.

We've kept the wine, bottle and cork remains and have contacted the funship. Not sure what the policy is on totally saturated corks, but will find out pretty soon.

I have had 2 experiences with getting faulty wines replaced

1. AFWAC wine club tasted a vertical of Wynns ranging from 1965 to 2005 with winemaker Greg Tillbrook.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8360&p=61289&hilit=afwac#p61289

When opening the bottles for this tasting with Greg we came across several corked wines 2 x 1990, purchased on release and from the same carton, and a 1 x 1986, (not tasted on the night due to fault) again purchased on release.

At Gregs suggestion I took the offending bottles up to Penfolds Magill Cellar Door to give them the bottles to check. The response at the CD was effectively "We are a Penfolds CD and cannot help you with other brands. No use giving these to me." (a much condensed version).
It was then suggested, by the CD staffer, I ring the Fosters Help Line as he could not help me.
While standing outside the Magill CD admiring the view I explained we had a Wynns winemaker at a function and he could verify the bottles were faulty and it was at his suggestion I bring them to Magill CD.
The response from the Help Line was to send the wines to Coonawarra CD.
This seemed ridiculous to me as I thought there could be several winemakers/helpers nearby who could asses the bottles without the expense to Fosters or myself of sending these wines several hundred km south to arrive at the same conclusion.
The Help Desk people then suggested I drop off the wines at the Reception desk at Magill and they would arrange for the wines to shipped to Coonawarra CD.

Eventually I made my way to the Reception desk at Magill and the receptionist was most helpfull and a pleasure to deal with.

As I entered reception the phone rang and it was the Help Desk ringing to let her know a bloke was coming in with some bottles and to, and I do not joke, "throw them in the bin". The look on her face was incredulous, but it seemed on par with my morning so far. She was most apologetic and I left wondering how a large corporation with wines ranging from the everyday to the once-in-a-lifetime was managing their reputation. While from a winemaker/assesor position this may seem fair, it makes the punter feel unwanted and unappreciated.

On the bright side I did receive a month later, 2 or 3 (can't remember) bottles of 2005 Black Label, a nice letter (which I still have) from Ray Coan which in part says "As a gesture of our appreciation for bringing this matter (TCA fault) to our attention, please find enclosed some complimentary wine which we trust you will enjoy" and 3 of the Wynns History Booklets. (the first was was a good read but the next 2 had no new information - meow).

2. Recorking Clinic 2008, a bottle of 1962 bin 60A was deemed faulty by PG, AC and JB. I did ask the question and I was pleased to receive a bottle of Grange as replacement.

Anyway congratulations again, based on the compliments in this thread, to Sparky and her team for restoring my confidence.

cheers
Phill

Geez Phill, you scared me there for a minute until I realised that your first experience was a couple of years back!

Not that we're out of the woods yet, but as you'd appreciate, getting past some of those wonderfully inefficient, unfriendly, cost creating corporate silos is an on-going game. (Can't treat it any other way or I'd end up taking shards of broken bottles to both wrists )

odyssey wrote:We made the unfortunate discovery on Tuesday night that a bottle of 1986 Bin 707 which had a saturated cork and was oxidised... bugger! The wine level was at top of shoulder/base of neck. From the moment the tip of the Ah-so touched the edge of the cork it started bubbling and foaming out of the cork - not a good sign in anyone's book.

Unfortunately no luck from Fosters, cork was ruled to be within norms for that age and we received a commiseratory Bin 407 (thanks anyway, more than many others would give).

Bugger, the old man has been hiding this baby away for 25 years but was foiled by corks again. I guess you need to be well connected in the industry for non-TCA closure failures.

I realise some have had issues with Fosters (I had one case where I felt hard done by & jhave another in the works), but most of the time these guys have been great (both In Australia and Napa). I just want to reiterate an early point I've made - we are very fortunate to have Sparky on the site. Its made life easier for a number of us. Thanks Moira.

odyssey wrote:

odyssey wrote:We made the unfortunate discovery on Tuesday night that a bottle of 1986 Bin 707 which had a saturated cork and was oxidised... bugger! The wine level was at top of shoulder/base of neck. From the moment the tip of the Ah-so touched the edge of the cork it started bubbling and foaming out of the cork - not a good sign in anyone's book.

Unfortunately no luck from Fosters, cork was ruled to be within norms for that age and we received a commiseratory Bin 407 (thanks anyway, more than many others would give).

Bugger, the old man has been hiding this baby away for 25 years but was foiled by corks again. I guess you need to be well connected in the industry for non-TCA closure failures.

You've actually lucked out a bit here odyssey. I vividly remember a phase many years ago when I and some friends with Penfolds reds from the 1986 vintage found a high proportion of them to be tainted. We didn't know how to deal with the situation then and just wore it. I lost a couple of 707s, a friend poured a Grange into Lake Burley Griffin via his sink (very unhappy chap for a while) and we drank some less than optimal 389s. I thought at the time that Penfolds had been sold a batch of poor corks but we just got on with it and appreciated the good ones. If you had opened your bottle say 10 years ago, you may have experienced a different outcome. I can understand Penfold's position when presented with a 25 year old bottle of uncertain (to them) provinence but, as you say, they at least sent a conciliatory gift. Life's not fair but at least the processes now in place leave me confident that even if I don't get the outcome I'm after in the future, at least the system is open and objective.

Thanks to Moira who has gone above and beyond again. I posted on here that I had had a couple of dud bottles of 2002 Ingoldby Golden Vine Reserve Shiraz and had not had a lot of luck, actually none, dealing with Fosters. Well Moira PM'ed me and the problem has now been sorted with replacement bottles sent out.

Well done Moira and without you I think TWE/Fosters would be in the poo customer service wise. I hope they appreciate the effort you put in.

Once again, thanks Moira

Cheers
Ian

Phoned Felicty from Sparky's team on Monday advising another poor 1998 Bin 389. Low level (but definitely offensive) cork taint, musty nose and stripped fruit. Haven't had one with this many faults before. Got a second opinion from a friend whose palate I respect who confirmed that what I was smelling/tasting was actually there. We opened a second bottle from the same 6 pack and this was fine. No hint of TCA although it took its own sweet time to open up later. So today I received a replacement current vintage 389 and poured the remaining 730 mls in the offending bottle into Lake Ginninderra via my sink. While the carp won't be pleased, at least I can again thank Moira and her team for their professionalism and courtesy. BTW - I am really developing a phobia about corked 1998 Bin 389s. I bought about 4 dozen on release and a disconcerting number have come up corked. I haven't had anywhere near the same issues with any other Penfolds Bin reds, either before or after 1988, and I have a heap. It's either bad luck or a batch of bad corks.

Cheers, Peter

Peter Schlesinger wrote:Phoned Felicty from Sparky's team on Monday advising another poor 1998 Bin 389. Low level (but definitely offensive) cork taint, musty nose and stripped fruit. Haven't had one with this many faults before. Got a second opinion from a friend whose palate I respect who confirmed that what I was smelling/tasting was actually there. We opened a second bottle from the same 6 pack and this was fine. No hint of TCA although it took its own sweet time to open up later. So today I received a replacement current vintage 389 and poured the remaining 730 mls in the offending bottle into Lake Ginninderra via my sink. While the carp won't be pleased, at least I can again thank Moira and her team for their professionalism and courtesy. BTW - I am really developing a phobia about corked 1998 Bin 389s. I bought about 4 dozen on release and a disconcerting number have come up corked. I haven't had anywhere near the same issues with any other Penfolds Bin reds, either before or after 1988, and I have a heap. It's either bad luck or a batch of bad corks.

Cheers, Peter

Bloody hell, now you've got me worried about Bin 707 '98 and Lehmann Stonewell '98. Wasn't much impressed by the couple of '98 Bin 389's I had, one young, the other earlier this year. Both were excessively tannic so it may need another 10 years or more for the tannins to soften but by then the fruit will be long gone, Every time I buy a cork-sealed wine that I'd like to leave for a few years I fret over the cork demons that can pounce destructively, more for the palate than the ego.

daz wrote:

Peter Schlesinger wrote:Phoned Felicty from Sparky's team on Monday advising another poor 1998 Bin 389. Low level (but definitely offensive) cork taint, musty nose and stripped fruit. Haven't had one with this many faults before. Got a second opinion from a friend whose palate I respect who confirmed that what I was smelling/tasting was actually there. We opened a second bottle from the same 6 pack and this was fine. No hint of TCA although it took its own sweet time to open up later. So today I received a replacement current vintage 389 and poured the remaining 730 mls in the offending bottle into Lake Ginninderra via my sink. While the carp won't be pleased, at least I can again thank Moira and her team for their professionalism and courtesy. BTW - I am really developing a phobia about corked 1998 Bin 389s. I bought about 4 dozen on release and a disconcerting number have come up corked. I haven't had anywhere near the same issues with any other Penfolds Bin reds, either before or after 1988, and I have a heap. It's either bad luck or a batch of bad corks.

Cheers, Peter

Bloody hell, now you've got me worried about Bin 707 '98 and Lehmann Stonewell '98. Wasn't much impressed by the couple of '98 Bin 389's I had, one young, the other earlier this year. Both were excessively tannic so it may need another 10 years or more for the tannins to soften but by then the fruit will be long gone, Every time I buy a cork-sealed wine that I'd like to leave for a few years I fret over the cork demons that can pounce destructively, more for the palate than the ego.

I think it has been well documented by TORB or Brian (either here or on their own websites) some time ago that there is indeed a higher than usual occurrence of cork taint with the 1998 Bin 389, a rather large batch of faulty of corks being the prime suspect - I might also add it's amazing how crappy they look in comparison to corks after the nineties. As far as I'm aware of I don't think the other Penfolds 1998 releases have as bad a strike rate - Sparky might have more of an idea if there's any truth to it.

Cheers,
Ian

daz wrote:

Peter Schlesinger wrote:Phoned Felicty from Sparky's team on Monday advising another poor 1998 Bin 389. Low level (but definitely offensive) cork taint, musty nose and stripped fruit. Haven't had one with this many faults before. Got a second opinion from a friend whose palate I respect who confirmed that what I was smelling/tasting was actually there. We opened a second bottle from the same 6 pack and this was fine. No hint of TCA although it took its own sweet time to open up later. So today I received a replacement current vintage 389 and poured the remaining 730 mls in the offending bottle into Lake Ginninderra via my sink. While the carp won't be pleased, at least I can again thank Moira and her team for their professionalism and courtesy. BTW - I am really developing a phobia about corked 1998 Bin 389s. I bought about 4 dozen on release and a disconcerting number have come up corked. I haven't had anywhere near the same issues with any other Penfolds Bin reds, either before or after 1988, and I have a heap. It's either bad luck or a batch of bad corks.

Cheers, Peter

Bloody hell, now you've got me worried about Bin 707 '98 and Lehmann Stonewell '98. Wasn't much impressed by the couple of '98 Bin 389's I had, one young, the other earlier this year. Both were excessively tannic so it may need another 10 years or more for the tannins to soften but by then the fruit will be long gone, Every time I buy a cork-sealed wine that I'd like to leave for a few years I fret over the cork demons that can pounce destructively, more for the palate than the ego.

I'd be alert but not alarmed Daz. Can't comment on the Stonewell because I don't have any or the 98 Bin 707 because I haven't opened one of that vintage. However, we drink about 2-3 Bin 707s each year (my daughter in law loves them and my eldest son prefers them to Grange - and I'm with him on that). Since that patch about 20 years ago, I've only had one bad experience with a seriously TCA tainted early 90s vintage Bin 707 which was promptly replaced by Moira's team after assessment. We are working our way through the 90s, 91s and 92s now and the corks have behaved themselves to date. It's the 389s from 1998 that have me twitchy - mostly because I haven't had any TCA issues with ones from later vintages or other Bin numbered reds. I also bought a heap of 2001s and while I think the wood in these overshadows the fruit, none have shown up as corked. The bizarre thing with the 98s is that on each occasion I have found a bottle to be corked, I've opened a second from the same 6 pack carton and it's been fine. I can cope with patterns but this randomness is disconcerting. At the end of the day though, I'm confident that when a bottle turns up corked, I can contact Moira's team and have the matter resolved.

Cheers, Peter