The Auswine Forum

I'm not going to name any names this is more a general theme piqued by an actual auction. I am more concerned about the after effects of sales like this for all auction houses in the future.

From their site.

If the wine bottle has been submerged in flood water potentially containing pathogens then they will remain on the bottle, label and closure. The wine poured from the bottle may therefore come into contact with the pathogens. This means that the outside of the bottle and closure, as well as the neck and rim of the bottle should be thoroughly cleaned with ethanol prior to pouring the wine and drinking it. In addition, the pourer’s hand should be cleaned. Regarding the disinfection of contaminated surfaces, 70% ethanol or isopropanol (isopropyl alcohol) diluted in water is regarded to be effective and should not taint the wine.

My concern/question is, are the bottles being marked in anyway to stop flicking as this would be a real danger as they are now 'clean' bottles with no prior provenance issues if the seller is unconscionable. So the cheap 96 Krug they got for $150 is now reborn as a normal 96 Krug which will fetch $500 through another auction house and potentially have god knows what bacteria on it.

I'd say that they probably mark each bottle with the relevant disclosure to protect themselves. I've seen it done before.I'd be very surprised if they didn't.

dave vino wrote:My concern/question is, are the bottles being marked in anyway to stop flicking as this would be a real danger as they are now 'clean' bottles with no prior provenance issues if the seller is unconscionable.

You should ask them what their policy is as it would just be speculation otherwise.

if you are referring to a particular auction that finishes tonight (Sunday), my very strong advice is to stay away.
let's be completely fait, the auctioneer has done exactly the right thing in disclosing the items are significantly damaged. Forget the flooding, which is bad enough, these wines were subject to temperatures above 30C for longer than a week. The chances of them being not significantly heat-affected are very, very low.
anyway, caveat emptor.... BTW, if anyone does but something, please post notes here, I would be fascinated to see.

Got this yesterday....

Gee, better get me a job in the airline industry...perhaps as a cleaner.
Would have thought one would be on top of a bottle worth $7g.

If sold, would the vendor declare?

Cheers
Craig

dave vino wrote:I'm not going to name any names this is more a general theme piqued by an actual auction. I am more concerned about the after effects of sales like this for all auction houses in the future.

From their site.

If the wine bottle has been submerged in flood water potentially containing pathogens then they will remain on the bottle, label and closure. The wine poured from the bottle may therefore come into contact with the pathogens. This means that the outside of the bottle and closure, as well as the neck and rim of the bottle should be thoroughly cleaned with ethanol prior to pouring the wine and drinking it. In addition, the pourer’s hand should be cleaned. Regarding the disinfection of contaminated surfaces, 70% ethanol or isopropanol (isopropyl alcohol) diluted in water is regarded to be effective and should not taint the wine.

My concern/question is, are the bottles being marked in anyway to stop flicking as this would be a real danger as they are now 'clean' bottles with no prior provenance issues if the seller is unconscionable. So the cheap 96 Krug they got for $150 is now reborn as a normal 96 Krug which will fetch $500 through another auction house and potentially have god knows what bacteria on it.

Good point Dave! I hadn't initially considered that this might happen, but upon reflection, it probably will. I put some low value bids on at the outset given the risks and have been outbid on nearly all of them. I hope Langtons have marked the labels.

Brisbane, summer, no electricity four days, probably no electricity for more than a week to non-vital appliances, air-con certainly not working a week.

Only reason I can think of to buy is to re-sell for a profit, surely no-one would buy thinking they can drink the stuff. Personally, I think this is a real worry for future markets, I have heard many similar stories after New Orleans.

But absolutely no qualms with Langtons, full disclosure. However, this is certainly open to profiteering.

I can't believe they are auctioning the stuff. That will do me, I'll be staying right away from Langton's for the forseeable future. As said above, if the prices are cheap people will sell to flick on for a profit in the next year or so. I find this despicable considering the bacteria possibilities.

Cheers
Ian

Conclusions...jumping......prematurely....to....?

I'll eat my hat if they don't stamp each bottle.

swirler wrote:Conclusions...jumping......prematurely....to....?

I'll eat my hat if they don't stamp each bottle.

I looked over the whole site and can't find any mention of it. Also how will they stamp it? A sticker is easily peeled off. Black marker is easy for acetone to remove. If I was buying a bottle and they marked the label or put a non-removable sticker on it without telling me I'd be teed off about that as well. So it is probably lose-lose for them in regards to keeping everyone happy.

Good point, Dave. They should be clear about such things. If they didn't say they were going to mark bottles and they do, that would be a problem. Lose-lose as you say.

I'd be surprised if they didn't monitor this site, like Sparky does for TWE and at least avoid similar issues in future.

Nothing looks cheap. I guess most wine drinkers care more for the label than the contents

CHATEAU GRAND-PUY-DUCASSE NV (cleanskin) is rather interesting, though!

Yeah..no mention of anything but I'd expect them to mark it in some way...

On the plus side, most of the stuff there isn't stuff I'm looking to buy from auction anyways...

What is shocking to me is some of the prices on this stuff....Some are going for slightly lower than normal..but nothing crazy low..and some are basically going for a normal auction price...I don't see there being a huge opportunity or incentive to flip...

felixp wrote:the auctioneer has done exactly the right thing

I strongly and utterly disagree. If the bottles aren't marked with a permanent marker and the buyer resells on the secondary market without the flood disclaimer, which is most certainly a given that it will happen, not only do the rest of us auction punters end up have a much higher chance of ending up with substandard wines, worse, some unknowing buyers end up with potentially contaminated wines that pose a health risk without the knowledge that they should be decontaminated before pouring.

That is not only gross incompetence and "handwashing" themselves of the issue, if someone then gets very ill and dies from ecoli bacteria from a resold bottle then Langtons should certainly be one of the accountable parties for that death.

you might be right, Odyssey, I cannot comment on the legal aspects, no idea.
is it fair for an auction house to be responsible for a product after it is sold, following full disclosure?? In my opinion, no, but of course, it would be better to hear from an expert in such matters.

I would, however, agree with you that it seems a little strange it is ok to sell a product that might have a substantial health risk, even with full disclosure. Still, I would be pretty sure they have sound legal advice on such matters.

felixp wrote:I would, however, agree with you that it seems a little strange it is ok to sell a product that might have a substantial health risk, even with full disclosure. Still, I would be pretty sure they have sound legal advice on such matters.

You betcha!

The local auction house I use a lot note those lots with good provenance and is from a respected seller with good cellaring conditions. I bid on these lots with confidence and have never been disappointed. I guess that's Adelaide for you.
Carl

Chuck wrote:I guess that's Adelaide for you.
Carl

phillisc wrote:Gee, better get me a job in the airline industry...perhaps as a cleaner.
Would have thought one would be on top of a bottle worth $7g.

If sold, would the vendor declare?

Cheers
Craig

Private Airbus jet and the owner's stash for an upcoming trip-

1990 Pavie, 1988 Mouton, Ch Margaux 2009, 2003 Angelus, ....makes you scoff at First Class / Business glass offerings on legacy carriers !

If the wine is not stamped this seems pretty foolish as it shatters confidence in the Aussie secondary market.

JamieBahrain wrote:If the wine is not stamped this seems pretty foolish as it shatters confidence in the Aussie secondary market.

This is exactly the point. Any faith in Langton's has now disappeared. And they are doing it for a quick buck. Would this of happened pre Woolworths ownership?

Cheers
Ian

Had a few cheapies I was watching.

05 Giaconda Chardy went for $90 + Comm so about $105?

Some 2nd Growths (Leoville-Barton, Montrose) went in the $90's so they will be a good flick proposition (assuming bottles are not marked)

dave vino wrote:Some 2nd Growths (Leoville-Barton, Montrose) went in the $90's so they will be a good flick proposition (assuming bottles are not marked)

I got 2 of the Montrose's, so i'll let you know if they're marked or not once they get delivered...

If no-one is going to ring Langtons today to check re: markings, I will. I would hate to think that these are going to be flicked back into the auction scene. Although not for much profit on some of them it seems! Are people not worried about the risks, or just going to sell for profit. I assume if anyone here bought anything, they are keeping quiet... Whoops, sorry Deejay, didn't see your post. Are you intending to drink? Not worried about the warnings?

TiggerK wrote:Whoops, sorry Deejay, didn't see your post. Are you intending to drink? Not worried about the warnings?

I am intending to drink, but not for many years. I like a good bargain, even with a bit of risk and I thought the Montrose's were worth the risk (any auction has it's risks when we have no idea or little idea of provenance right?) I just thought it would be nice to have a 2000, 2005, Montrose to go with my 2010 Montrose I already have.

I don't want to get too cocky, but the bottles I bid on didn't look like they had any contact with water or minimal, so I guess heat stress would have been the biggest risk. Some bottles looked pretty nasty and I stayed away from those ones.

I did also put in a reasonably high bid on the 1981 Krug Collection Magnum (birth year), but still got beat out. For this one, I also was intending to drink, unless Lauren found out how much I paid for it and made me sell it again.

TiggerK wrote:If no-one is going to ring Langtons today to check re: markings, I will.

I haven't rung them but I did send them a stern-ish online query, which they seem to have brushed off. I will be really interested to hear what they say to you!

For that matter, if they brush you off over the phone I can give them a call too just to reinforce that there are multiple customers concerned about this.

Are there many Italians in the line up? Wondering if these buffoons just devalued my cellar.

Not a lot, a few Sassicaias (06, 99), Ornelaias (00, 01) and a Solaia (99).