The Auswine Forum

Hi all,

Wondering if anyone knows how to decipher the code on bottles of Billecart-Salmon to determine the disgorgement date/year?

This leads me on to another question. Why the heck are champagne houses so cagey and cryptic about this? Even Krug who now have a mechanism via their website to decode the date from the code on the bottle. Why not just put the date on the bottle itself?

Dave

A good champagne is like a woman, its terribly rude to ask its age!

(obviously I am just kidding, I have always wondered the same thing as you...)

I know Tyson Stelzer and Jancis Robinson are pushing to have disgorgement dates printed on bottles - Obviously on-sellers/retailers don't want it - it'd be like buying milk. Who buys the milk that expires on 17 September when the bottle next to it goes until 20 September? NVs sit on shelves for years sometimes and they aren't meant to be sitting upright and living that long.

I would have thought the houses themselves would want to pro-actively advertise dates - I've had NV recommendations from people I respect and the bottles have been flat, boring, insipid and just uninspiring - I'd imagine a lot is to do with the amount of time it takes to go from bottling to unbottling. If the DG date is printed, the Houses can rest on the fact that people will buy the 20th of September milk - the bottle that has the greatest chance of being in the best condition, and the House can therefore give the best account of itself.

Just my $0.02

Good points. However, the counter argument to the retailers not wanting it this. I buy the NV fizz. It's rubbish because its been sitting there. I take it back due to not being up to scratch. Hassles/work for the retailer now. So it hasn't really worked out in their favour.

daver6 wrote:Good points. However, the counter argument to the retailers not wanting it this. I buy the NV fizz. It's rubbish because its been sitting there. I take it back due to not being up to scratch. Hassles/work for the retailer now. So it hasn't really worked out in their favour.

Only good retailers listen when you say that the fizz wasn't up to your expectations - and they are generally the ones with better turnover of bottles anyway. I know my local Woolworths chain store don't always respond positively unless there is a discernible fault I can take to them to prove my point.

If that were the case, it would a) be my last purchase at that store and b) illegal. Surely selling a product that isn't up to standard and "past its best" must break some law?

I recently cracked a 2002 Moet. No cork taint, but just dull and lifeless. Wasn't flat and no obvious cork flaw, but well off what it should have been. I log where I buy my wine and what I paid on cellartracker. Immediately called the store (Vintage Cellars) and told them my story. They said just bring it in for a refund. They took my word for it on the cost and were happy to provide a full refund (I instead grabbed a cold bottle of something else) without trying the wine themselves. I'm far from a regular in that store yet they did the right thing.

daver6 wrote:If that were the case, it would a) be my last purchase at that store and b) illegal. Surely selling a product that isn't up to standard and "past its best" must break some law?

I recently cracked a 2002 Moet. No cork taint, but just dull and lifeless. Wasn't flat and no obvious cork flaw, but well off what it should have been. I log where I buy my wine and what I paid on cellartracker. Immediately called the store (Vintage Cellars) and told them my story. They said just bring it in for a refund. They took my word for it on the cost and were happy to provide a full refund (I instead grabbed a cold bottle of something else) without trying the wine themselves. I'm far from a regular in that store yet they did the right thing.

It isn't 'illegal' in the sense that you have 'drunk the evidence'. It's bad PR, but if you can't prove something wasn't of merchantable quality, why should they believe you?

Anyway, that's their argument, and it would prevent people from abusing the system - however it doesn't help those who behave honestly.

dan_smee wrote:It isn't 'illegal' in the sense that you have 'drunk the evidence'. It's bad PR, but if you can't prove something wasn't of merchantable quality, why should they believe you?

Well hopefully you've only had 10-15% of the wine and decided it was crap, sealed it somehow and taken it back fairly quickly with the receipt. I've done this quite a few times at my local DM and they barely bat an eyelid before asking if I want to exchange it for another bottle. Haven't yet asked for a refund, maybe that helps, but there's always a bottle I want to try.

But if you drink the bottle first....

^^^ WHS - Obviously if you consume the entire contents then you have no recourse.

But it was only after the whole bottle was gone I realised the wine gave me a headache... so it must have been no good right??

Had a 375 of Isabella Tokay (excuse me - topaque) from Dan's like that - we (in stunned disbelief) kept tasting, thinking something was off with our palates - finally, when all gone we agreed it must have been heat affected ... somewhat too late to seek a refund. Pity someone can't develop a simple, cheap test (e.g. akin to litmus paper that changes colour or a pool chemistry multi parameter tester strip if required) for wine to determine if it has gone off - surely there must be some smart chemist out there somewhere ? A definitive technical test would remove the subjectivity from the issue at the retailer when seeking a refund.

MarKofQuality wrote:Pity someone can't develop a simple, cheap test (e.g. akin to litmus paper that changes colour or a pool chemistry multi parameter tester strip if required) for wine to determine if it has gone off - surely there must be some smart chemist out there somewhere ? A definitive technical test would remove the subjectivity from the issue at the retailer when seeking a refund.

I know they can test for TCA, but I assume that's a complex process - great idea if it was possible to make a cheap/easy test litmus-style - I'd buy a packet & test any high-value or suspect bottles!

http://www.etslabs.com/display.aspx?cat ... &pageid=68

Looks like cork quality is a big player in the whole affair ....

We can start the debate on Australian cork quality anytime about now as you all please ....
Screwcap advocates are also free to throw darts