The Auswine Forum

What we say:

"Once again, you will see the tall poppy choppers out in full force, scythe in hand, ready to hoe into the company, lamenting some sort of perceived drop in quality, begging for a stage to be heard. But ask the experts that have actually looked at the wine, the likes of Jeremy Oliver, Campbell Mattinson and Master of Wine, Andrew Caillard and they rate them very highly indeed"

What we mean:

"Once again you will see opinions damaging our chances of selling the 03 Bins. I would prefer to wait another year before I use the words 'weaker vintage' when describing the 03's. Those that dont subscribe to hype are having an honest look at a company and stating the obvious that there has been a drop in quality of recent times in the Bin range. But ask the experts, the are the only ones with palates we can trust, after all they dont want to ruin their chances of being invited to the next 'rewards of patience tasting', and you will see that they rate them very highly indeed"

Craig(NZ) wrote:What we say:

"Once again, you will see the tall poppy choppers out in full force, scythe in hand, ready to hoe into the company, lamenting some sort of perceived drop in quality, begging for a stage to be heard. But ask the experts that have actually looked at the wine, the likes of Jeremy Oliver, Campbell Mattinson and Master of Wine, Andrew Caillard and they rate them very highly indeed"

I've seen this quote on the other forum, and ask the same question that so far hasn't got an answer there:

Who actually made it and where?

If this came from Penfolds/Fosters it seems incredibly arrogant to disregard the opinions of "ordinary" people who actually make up the majority of their buyers. If Jeremy, Campbell and Andrew like the stuff so much it's probably a good thing for them, as it sounds like there will be plenty for them to stock up on.

Cheers,
Ian

As I have not tasted the wines I have no comment on their quality or value but I have just had a look at JO's site and he rated all of the latest release wines higher than last year.

If that statement is from Fosters, then they will pi$$ off a lot of people who read the net; but will that matter if they are not buying the Pennies reds anyway?

I don't know, but its not a good idea to alienate the public, especially as these are the sort of people (knowledgabel wine friends) that Joe Average will ask when they want advise about buying wine.

Where is that quote from?

platinum wrote:Where is that quote from?

Apparently the W* weekly newsletter, maybe the opinion of the owner?

Likewise Ric I haven't tried the wines so no comments to date - maybe this weekend or next week, but I'm in no hurry.

Like I said I'm curious to see where this comment was actually made, as I'd be surprised if Penfolds/Fosters would be so dumb to issue such a potentially inflamatory statement. My guess would be it's more likely to be a big retail chain (DMs/VC, etc) who really don't give a toss what the wines are like as long as they find someone to believe their opinions enough to buy it.

I'd like to add that most of the criticisms I've read to date have been reasonably constructive and remarkably consistent. A fair bit has to do with the QPR aspect, but that's fair enough given we're expected to buy the majority of the stuff.

Cheers,
Ian

Where is that quote from?

Oops debug mode

Red Bigot wrote:

platinum wrote:Where is that quote from?

Apparently the W* weekly newsletter, maybe the opinion of the owner?

That will really impress a lot of people on Bert's forum ... NOT.

Cheers,
Ian

Wine * newsletter but that is kinda beside the point. That type of 'marketing' happens with more than one retailer and for more than one range of wines.

Well Penfolds bashing has become a bit of a bloodsport now for many. I don't fully understand it - with some it seems to border on the pathological. 2003 was a tricky vintage for SA - what do people expect? The wines are selling for under $20 at some places. The 2004 vintage GSM is a beautiful wine. It augers very well for the 2004 bin releases. I have tried all the wines - from whole bottles - tasted over 2 days (still got the kalimna to go) - not instore tastings. They are not great but they are solid wines from an iffy vintage. Certainly not particularily better or worse than 2001 or 2000.

I don't understand why JO has rated them so highly. I can't see what he sees with regards to the quality. He has described them accurately of course but I don't know how you could flog the lovely 03 Leconfield Cab as being green and not the 03 407. I think the 03 Leconfield is streets ahead but that is just my opinion. Thats wine I suppose...

Not to turn this into a retailer debate..but the retailer in question , much like Gavin here at Auswine, does not sell wines he does not think are good quality and/or good value. If you look at the prices then perhaps , if you know much about retail, you will realise that there is 3/5 of stuff all margin on these wines at the advertised prices...and a couple of prominent Melbourne retailers are doing the same. Astute people could read a little between the lines here.

GW

http://www.winorama.com.au

Craig,

In terms of the 2003 Penfolds Bin reds (and to cut to the chase), I scored the wines like this:

Penfolds Bin 128 Coonawarra Shiraz 2003:
88 points.

Penfolds Bin 28 Shiraz 2003:
88 points.

Penfolds Bin 407 Cabernet Sauvignon 2003:
89 points.

Penfolds Bin 389 Cabernet Shiraz 2003:
89 points.

I reckon they are fair, unbiased assessments.

Now if I was angling to get an invite to the next Rewards of Patience tasting - as you ridiculously intimate - then I wasn't doing a very good job ot it.

That's me done with.

As for Jeremy Oliver, if he's rated the wines higher then I'm sure it's because he thinks the wines deserve it - I am certain it has nothing to do with any invitations or lack thereof. Last year Jeremy Oliver did - as did Winefront Monthly - give 2000 grange a fairly ordinary review ... in other words, what you say of wine critics here is nonsense.

Campbell.

Campbell, I think Craig was just gently stirring the pot; having a go at retailers, not critics. After all, to claim critics "rate them very highly indeed" is a bit wishy-washy, and rather carefully shorn of context - and I read Craig's piece as highlighting that.

And you do taste Penfolds Bins in context; not just that of 'opposition' wines, besides which they look quite acceptable (although Bin 389 is pushing the price window), but in the context of their own history, against which they look fairly ordinary, even shoddy. It may be that 2000 - 2003 were mostly crappy vintages in South Australia, but whereas Penfolds reds in the past often transcended, at least for a while, their tricky-vintage origins, the past few releases have rather confirmed them, wherein lies the disappointment for long-time followers of the label.

Gary might call it Penfolds-bashing, but there's a vast history of respected brands being trashed from within, either by poor production decisions (whether take-over related or otherwise) or inept marketing in the not-too recent past; see Lindemans Hunter Valley, Tollana, Seaview, Rouge Homme, Ingoldby. Add others yourself! Seppelt seems to be recovering from it's 10 years of abuse, though not without cost (Dorrien, for instance). It wouldn't have surprised me in the least to learn that the fools from Rosemount, whose brand was already sliding at the time of the 'merger', felt that in Penfolds & Wynns they had respected names whose production they could 'stretch' - as any short term marketing man would try and do. And Rosemount were all marketing men by that time.

Maybe Fosters will change things back, and we'll see things turn around in the 06 vintage. I think the reaction we're seeing here to the 03 Penfolds Bins is the reaction of those who've perhaps tasted other wines from the vintage and felt that, given history, Penfolds should have done better. And that perhaps the old Penfolds (under Southcorp's production-not-marketing driven outlook) would have done so. And that it's disappointing to find that even the mighty Penfolds is not immune to the pernicious influence of the accountants and marketers and money men and merger-capitalists and other sundry non-wine-helpful people...

Graeme

Graeme - fair points. Craig might have only been stirring the pot but when you look at the words themselves, they're a bit more offensive than that. Anyway, that's done with.

I agree with all the other points. The Bin range hasn't been bad over the past few years but it's not what it was ten years ago, partly because the market has caught up with it, partly because they've stretched the blends, and partly because penfolds engaged in a massive planting exercise in the early to mid 90s and a lot of young vine material took the place of some old vine stuff in these wines.

If you look at the last 70 years of Penfolds though rather than the last 7, I think you see that Penfolds has had many ups and downs, and indeed in the mid to late 70s was described as being "on its knees". Wynns Black label cabernet is the same - at the 50 year vertical I did a year or two ago there were clearly 2 or 3 phases in the past when the label was producing pretty ordinary wines - it's like all long-term labels have a cycle of over-delivering and not-quite-delivering. I don't think we need to get too upset about how things are now then. The wines are OK, some of them are better than that, a lot of them aren't quite as good as they once were, or can be, but odds on they will be once again. You woudln't think it would take a rocket scientist to realise what needs to be done to get things back on track.

To some extent the "new Southcorp bin wines" though are the likes of kalleske and majella and that ilk - top growers who used to supply fruit to these wines, but who now produce their own. 10 or 15 years ago these separate labels didn't exist. Wynns and penfolds have had to adjust to this reality, and the reality of their own poor decision making, and they probably are in the midst of doing that.

I guess all I'd add to that is that there's no real reason for anyone to get upset about the current quality levels - there's nothing really sinister in it. These ups and downs have always happened.

Or that's my take.

I'd love to get my hands on Penfolds though - there's lot of things I reckon that they should be doing, which they're not, and which wouldn't be too hard.

And after all THAT, I'll be buying some of the 04 Bin 138 ... because I really like it.

Campbell.

Winefront Monthly wrote:If you look at the last 70 years of Penfolds though rather than the last 7, I think you see that Penfolds has had many ups and downs, and indeed in the mid to late 70s was described as being "on its knees".

Excerpting the sentence above as representative of the whole paragraph, while I agree withe the general sentiment as being characteristic of the industry, I'm not sure that just the old 'cyclical trend' cuts it. We've been living in the great age of wine consumption. It's not like the 70s, where Penfolds are caught with the wrong colour grape, or a miniscule market for their table wines. Until the last year or two, I'm sure they were shifting more wine than ever. I would have expected either a) the wine to be better than ever as they were able to pick from ever greater resources without compromising quality, or b) massive price increases as vastly increased demand competed for a not-much-larger source of wine. It's a disappointing shock to find that c) greatly increased demand and a vineyard footprint many times that of the 50s or 70s has resulted in only average wines. Oh.

I guess all I'd add to that is that there's no real reason for anyone to get upset about the current quality levels - there's nothing really sinister in it. These ups and downs have always happened.

I suppose what I'm saying is that many of the ups-and-down you refer to were outside factors buffeting the industry, whereas I feel Penfolds current situation is entirely of their (proprietor's) doing.

I'd love to get my hands on Penfolds though - there's lot of things I reckon that they should be doing, which they're not, and which wouldn't be too hard.

Aye, that's the rub. The situation being of their own making, it's up to them to fix it. Hence all the bashing...

cheers,
Graeme

Graeme,

In the case of Wynns, the rises and falls were almost always its own making, even in the 60s and 70s - and usually the result of massive increases in plantings - nothing really to do with outside forces.

In the case of penfolds - absolutely of their own making this time around. But also of changed market conditions ... a massive shift in grower mentality, and indeed in buyer mentality. In any case I'm not sure that the lows of the past weren't of their own doing also.

In the end though, it doesn't really matter what the reason is, other than that there is a reason. Every unhappy cycle, like every unhappy family, is unhappy by its own design.

Campbell.

Actually, after I posted, I thought about Wynns, and realised that it was as you say for them.

Perhaps the most important thing of all is that the best vineyards are in the hands of those who do them justice, whether it's Kalimna, Majella, or whoever. And brands will come and go and it may not matter as much, except you need to know where to look; Woodleys in the 40s, Seaview, Redman in the 50s, Lindemans in the 60s, Penfolds in the 80s/90s and so forth...

It just grates to see the same mistakes being made over again. They say history repeats, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce...

cheers,
Graeme

Penfolds wines were stretched. I recall being given the powerpoint speil from Keith Lambert in 2001 (?) about what sort of volumes SRP were going to pump into the pennies brand. Dont be under any illusion they knew exactly what they were doing, the only way to increase the supply of bin quality reds is to lower the quality, because there is not that much of that quality fruit out there.

Cheers
Sean

Ok ok a few points

1. Me stirring the pot??? Those of you who have been around for the close on 10 years ive posted on this forum know "I NEVER STIR THE POT"!!!!, I never upset anyone and I never post anything just to get a reaction

2. My first point was to highlight the continual and sickening flow of "Best ever vintage", "best since last vintage" "best till next vintage", "Bob gave is 100pts" oh and ignore anyone else doesnt hold a MW, or publish wine books. And no the quoted retailer and newsletter isnt the only one, in fact most do it

3. My personal held belief, as with many others, is Penfolds Bins are not as good as they used to be on average. It isnt a voice in the widerness, it is a view held by many here and other places including a number of retailers that agree with me under their breath. Add qpr into the equation and we are smoking with gas.

This is a forum for sharing opinions isnt it? That is my opinion, im not a member of any wine lemming club, I have my own deranged palate thanks

Now I will write up my Te Mata notes. Funny thing is it probably will hardly get a glimpse compared to this thread. Shame such fine wines. Awatea is great this year, another nail in the 407 coffin??

Oh and Campbell, love your work no offense ok??

GraemeG wrote:And you do taste Penfolds Bins in context; not just that of 'opposition' wines, besides which they look quite acceptable (although Bin 389 is pushing the price window), but in the context of their own history, against which they look fairly ordinary, even shoddy. It may be that 2000 - 2003 were mostly crappy vintages in South Australia, but whereas Penfolds reds in the past often transcended, at least for a while, their tricky-vintage origins, the past few releases have rather confirmed them, wherein lies the disappointment for long-time followers of the label.

Maybe Fosters will change things back, and we'll see things turn around in the 06 vintage. I think the reaction we're seeing here to the 03 Penfolds Bins is the reaction of those who've perhaps tasted other wines from the vintage and felt that, given history, Penfolds should have done better. And that perhaps the old Penfolds (under Southcorp's production-not-marketing driven outlook) would have done so. And that it's disappointing to find that even the mighty Penfolds is not immune to the pernicious influence of the accountants and marketers and money men and merger-capitalists and other sundry non-wine-helpful people...

Graeme

These 2 paras sum it up in a nutshell for me Graeme. I tried about 3 times to type the same thing but couldn't find the right words.

Craig(NZ) wrote:Now I will write up my Te Mata notes. Funny thing is it probably will hardly get a glimpse compared to this thread. Shame such fine wines. Awatea is great this year, another nail in the 407 coffin??

One of the most enjoyable wines I've ever had was a 98 Te Mata Coleraine that Michel served me one night.

I might not reply, but post away, I'll certainly read,

AB

Red Bigot wrote:
Apparently the W* weekly newsletter, maybe the opinion of the owner?

Apparently??

You've got no better than heresay on this?

(declaration, I review wines for Winestar).

Murray wrote:

Red Bigot wrote:
Apparently the W* weekly newsletter, maybe the opinion of the owner?

Apparently??

You've got no better than hearsay on this?

(declaration, I review wines for Winestar).

Apparently. Is it true?

(declaration, I don't buy from Winestar or receive the newsletter).

Ohhh gawd.......

DaveB wrote:Ohhh gawd.......

I agree

Craig's stirring, nothing new there .

Bert knows about the thread and isn't fussed.

I'm not fussed.

Let's move on eh.

n4sir wrote:

Craig(NZ) wrote:What we say:

"Once again, you will see the tall poppy choppers out in full force, scythe in hand, ready to hoe into the company, lamenting some sort of perceived drop in quality, begging for a stage to be heard. But ask the experts that have actually looked at the wine, the likes of Jeremy Oliver, Campbell Mattinson and Master of Wine, Andrew Caillard and they rate them very highly indeed"

I've seen this quote on the other forum, and ask the same question that so far hasn't got an answer there:

Who actually made it and where?

If this came from Penfolds/Fosters it seems incredibly arrogant to disregard the opinions of "ordinary" people who actually make up the majority of their buyers. If Jeremy, Campbell and Andrew like the stuff so much it's probably a good thing for them, as it sounds like there will be plenty for them to stock up on.

Cheers,
Ian

It was directly from Bert Werden from his weekly newsletter. I doubt very much he needs to hype these wines at the price, nor do I think he needs to sell wine under false pretense to make a quick buck. I haven't tried them and may never (might the 138 for a look) unless by chance, but that's just me, not becuase I think there is anything wrong with them. FWIW

cheers,

Sorry Gavin, just caught up. Moving on now

Well for what it's worth.. my thoughts on the wines posted on my slice of the internet - just got my samples earlier in the week and had the pleasure of talking to Mr Gago about the Bin wines and other things!

(PS - I won't include scores for them as I only use the 20 point system for myself and placing wines in context to other wines tasted during that and other tastings)

Time to put out the Bins

Though it may not be of interest to my non-white biggoted friends, I was very, very impressed with the Bin 311. The most exciting white wine released since the Yattarna project - even more so than some special Reserve Bin wines and the cellar reserve gerwurtz!

cheers
max

(PS - I won't include scores for them as I only use the 20 point system for myself and placing wines in context to other wines tasted during that and other tastings)

The only reason i tend to score as well. Well said

Heard from the inside that yes 03 was a difficult vintage but all will be redeemed with the release of the 04 wines.Winemakers seemed pretty confident it will go down as well as 90,96 vintages.