The Auswine Forum

I discover this website when a bit earlier today I google: Rosemount Balmoral 2002...
Just back from DM were I bought 2 caisses…
Thinking it's amazing! How do they do that!!! Wanted to find the tasting note (that I still didn't find btw, if somebody know where to find it…)
Now, I'm a bit worried… Was planning to open one bottle on a "special occasion" and keep the others in cellar… Think the special occasion will be this weekend…
What make me think that it's an amazing good value without worried about: It's a bit too cheap now?… Is that every others Rosemount are also is SUPER special: Mountain Blue 2002: $18,50 ; GSM 2003: $12,30 ; Hill of Gold 2004: $9,40… I don't know the Mountain Blue (but bought a case…) but I think that GSM and Hill of Gold (especialy the Shiraz) are pretty good value wines…

Well there is an old saying

"If you think it's too good to be true then it probably is"

That saying certainly applies to the 2002 Balmoral.

Yet another friend of mine bought a six pack then realised the same as most of us on trying it, it's just ok as a $10 wine but well outclassed as a $20 wine. He took his 5 bottles back where Dan's gladly took them back, still idiots queueing up to buy a label for $20 apparently, these buyers obviously don't know anything about wine.

There is a reason Fosters held it back an extra two years , they were hoping like hell that more time would cover up the crap it is. IT HASN'T!

I too bought a few cases of this wine, and maybe I'm a fool like a few others have suggested, but I'm not sure. I have followed some of the online commentry which basically fueled my doubts about the wine too after the initial couple of bottles were dissapointing. If it's too good to be true, then it probably isn't!

However, having basically decided to return my cases too, I thought I'd give it one more chance over a meal. I opened the a bottle late in the afternoon, let it slowly breath for an hour, then decated it and let it breath again for a couple of hours. When we drank it with a superbly cooked loin of pork, it was actually a great match, and showed some of its potential for the future.

I am not a great judge of wine in regards to predicting a wines future. However, I've decided to bank on this one rather than return my cases. I remember the 1995 Wynns Black Label Cab Sav which was universally lauded as a bad vintage, and was discounted off at $15 a bottle and in other cases given away as a bonus. I bought quite a bit of this on the strength of J Halliday's rating, and was still drinking it 10 years later and it was fantastic.

I don't think the 2002's going to equal the agreed great vintages of this wine, however, I have some confidence that it will still settle down and present itself as a bargain after a couple of years. And who knows, it may suprise us all.

Cheers to all.

Nick G

nickandbeck wrote:I too bought a few cases of this wine, and maybe I'm a fool like a few others have suggested, but I'm not sure. I have followed some of the online commentry which basically fueled my doubts about the wine too after the initial couple of bottles were dissapointing. If it's too good to be true, then it probably isn't!

However, having basically decided to return my cases too, I thought I'd give it one more chance over a meal. I opened the a bottle late in the afternoon, let it slowly breath for an hour, then decated it and let it breath again for a couple of hours. When we drank it with a superbly cooked loin of pork, it was actually a great match, and showed some of its potential for the future.

I am not a great judge of wine in regards to predicting a wines future. However, I've decided to bank on this one rather than return my cases. I remember the 1995 Wynns Black Label Cab Sav which was universally lauded as a bad vintage, and was discounted off at $15 a bottle and in other cases given away as a bonus. I bought quite a bit of this on the strength of J Halliday's rating, and was still drinking it 10 years later and it was fantastic.

I don't think the 2002's going to equal the agreed great vintages of this wine, however, I have some confidence that it will still settle down and present itself as a bargain after a couple of years. And who knows, it may suprise us all.

Cheers to all.

Nick G

Thanks Nick - I'm glad somebody has brought a little reality back to this thread. No, the 2002 Bamoral is not an outrageous bargain at $18.50 a bottle, but nor is it a mislabelled $10 bottle as some in this forum were arguing! In my opinion, a $30 price tag might have been acceptable, but not the original asking price.

Personally, I think the biggest mistake was marketing. They should have changed the labels and flogged it off to one of the wine clubs under those spurious special bottling names they come up with and let it be known on the quiet that it is the Balmoral delabelled (etc, etc). The punters would go crazy at about $25.

Bottom line, though, is that I did not return my six pack and I'm quite comfortable with that decision (as with the six pack of Mountain Blue 2000 which I thought was a very good drop for the money).

nickandbeck wrote:I too bought a few cases of this wine, and maybe I'm a fool like a few others have suggested, but I'm not sure. I have followed some of the online commentry which basically fueled my doubts about the wine too after the initial couple of bottles were dissapointing. If it's too good to be true, then it probably isn't!

However, having basically decided to return my cases too, I thought I'd give it one more chance over a meal. I opened the a bottle late in the afternoon, let it slowly breath for an hour, then decated it and let it breath again for a couple of hours. When we drank it with a superbly cooked loin of pork, it was actually a great match, and showed some of its potential for the future.

I am not a great judge of wine in regards to predicting a wines future. However, I've decided to bank on this one rather than return my cases. I remember the 1995 Wynns Black Label Cab Sav which was universally lauded as a bad vintage, and was discounted off at $15 a bottle and in other cases given away as a bonus. I bought quite a bit of this on the strength of J Halliday's rating, and was still drinking it 10 years later and it was fantastic.

I don't think the 2002's going to equal the agreed great vintages of this wine, however, I have some confidence that it will still settle down and present itself as a bargain after a couple of years. And who knows, it may suprise us all.

Cheers to all.

Nick G

Nick, welcome aboard.

If you liked the 1995 Wynns Black Label than I can sort of understand you liking the 2002 Balmoral. I bought a 6-pack of the 95 Wynns against my better judgement on the same recommendations, but I can't say I really enjoyed any of the bottles, last one a couple of years ago. Likewise the Balmoral, I adore the 98's but after trying a bottle of the 2002 over 2 days and with food I wasn't at all tempted to go back and buy some more.

qwertt, I don't think anyone really suggested it was a mis-labelled $10 wine (maybe I missed a post or two), if you like the style $20 may be fair value, but not for me.

It will be interesting to see if those who flipped their DM buys to Langtons current auction will actually sell the wines. By the look of some of the bids they may actually do so and make a small profit after seller's commision. Given the craziness of the current auction scene with people seemingly incapable of determining a reasonable price I guess it's a form of re-distribution of wealth from the lazy or ignorant rich to the cunning opportunist.

[quote="Red Bigot
qwertt, I don't think anyone really suggested it was a mis-labelled $10 wine (maybe I missed a post or two), if you like the style $20 may be fair value, but not for me.[/quote]

Brian, mislabelled was my term, but I was responding to 707's post above. I fully respect your right or anyone else's to dislike the wine, but I find the vehemence of some comments a bit unsettling, especially where someone may not have full confidence in their own judgement of wine.

My view (and a personal one only) is that this was a totally substandard Balmoral, but one that I was happy to pay $18.50 for.

I suppose that what I'm really getting at is the risk that those who have a reputation of knowing their wine very well go over the top in a way that really intimidates intermediates and newbies from accepting that their taste is as valid as anyone else on this forum.

jb

I opened a 98 Balmoral last week, and it was corked.
Rang Fosters, and the replacement has just arrived............
yes, its an 02 Balmoral. Terrific, especially when I paid $55 for the 98.
Anyway, thats how it goes. Will open it shortly.
Bruce

Is it possible to get a refund in these circumstances Brucer?

Alex,
I very much doubt it. I did mention to her about the low price the 02 was being sold at, and was told that the retailers can sell for whatever they like. I told her that was totally unlikely, as retailers like to sell stuff for more than they buy it for, but she was just doing what she was told to.
I have ever only got a refund from a winery once, due to my persistance about a well below par wine.
Bruce

Assuming you kept proof of purchase though, would you be entitled to a refund?

I guess it's fairly rare that the price of the wine now is less than the price a few years ago... but in these circumstances, I really would want a refund

Brucer wrote:Alex,
I very much doubt it. I did mention to her about the low price the 02 was being sold at, and was told that the retailers can sell for whatever they like. I told her that was totally unlikely, as retailers like to sell stuff for more than they buy it for, but she was just doing what she was told to.
I have ever only got a refund from a winery once, due to my persistance about a well below par wine.
Bruce

Don't hassle them too much, they might send you 2 or 3 of the 2002. Then you could sell them at Langton's for $30 or so less commission.

You never know, you might enjoy the wine...

FWIW, had the 2000 Balmoral on the weekend. Actually pretty nice wine, on the big side of course but with some elegance too. Probably not worth $50ish but then I paid about half that at the time.

Alex,
More chance of flying to the moon than get a refund.
Where would I get it from? The retailer I bought it from years ago? They would only replace it with a wine replaced to them from Fosters. I would not expect a retailer to refund a corked bottle of wine after 6 years or so.
No way Fosters would give me a refund, its not their place to refund at retail, when they sold at wholesale to the shop.
No, I have just copped it on the chin. Worse things have happened.
Bruce

I believe consumer law is replace or refund at the vendor's discretion.

Glen

vendors? I thought from following discussions about this it was the consumers choice on whether to exchange or refund.

Ages ago I had a similar problem with another Southcorp wine that had been discontinued. They replaced it with a wine of similar value.

On a number of occasions where I have had a wine from the Hardy's portfolio that has been defective, and the current vintage has been below the standard of the wine being replaced, they have been able to replace it with another wine of the same value from the portfolio. You have to ask nicely and be pretty insistent, but they will do it.

anyone got any comments on the 95 Balmoral?

Glen (GRB) had a 1995 Balmoral in February of this year, remarking "lovely complex wine with length to burn".

If you click on the search function above, and enter 'Balmoral and 1995' you will find at least that note from GRB.

I have had a couple over the last 12 months or so and they have been lovely.

Glen

GRB wrote:I believe consumer law is replace or refund at the vendor's discretion.

Glen

No,

The vendor offers the refunds or exchange; the customer determines whether it is satisfactory.

HOwever the customer has to be fair about this. You can't got expecting 707 for a faulty 128.

Since this thread has been resurrected, I thought I'd put in my 2c worth, given that it is different to most people's opinions.

I picked up a bottle of the Balmoral '02 from DM's as well, brought it home and cracked it that night, half expecting disappointment, half hoping for something better (this was before reading any negative comments here or elsewhere).

Like most other people, I found the wine was thin and angular. I was disappointed, however I had had a very similar experience with a 2002 Rousseau Charmes Chambertin GC about a month earlier, which opened thin and angular and stayed like that for the next few hours. However, given the price I paid for it, I stuck with it, and 4 hours later it had opened up just enough to suggest that more was to come. Sure enough, by the next day, it had opened up completely, and while still too young, was enjoyable and showed its quality.

So, I did the same with the Balmoral. I left it in the decanter for the rest of the night, then put it back into 1/4 bottles with screw caps and popped them in the fridge. The last bottle I opened, fully 13 days later, was what you would expect from a quality McLaren Vale wine from a good vintage. Sweet oak, ripe reddish berry flavours, plenty of tannin and power. Still some bitterness which I didn't like, but otherwise great.

So, my suggestion to anyone who still has some, give a bottle a very good decant before writing it off.

I opened my 02 Balmoral last week, which was a replacement for a corked 98.
I found it just as you said a-kean. I left it for the next night, and my bottle got worse. I tipped it down the sink.
No time for crap wines like that anymore.
B