The Auswine Forum

For those interested, The TN on Grange 2002 is up on the Penfolds site now.

http://www.penfolds.com.au/library/tast ... ge2002.pdf

I'll get to try it tonight with the other Penfolds premiums.

It will be interesting to see if there's any difference again between the TN's they supply us and what's up on the website.

Cheers,
Ian

Call me cynical but which marketer wrote the TN?

Ian, we expect an honest TN from you, don't get swayed by the labels!

707 wrote:Call me cynical but which marketer wrote the TN?

Agreed Steve. Sloppy and slack writing. I presume the "some Cabernet grapes" they mention are actually Cabernet Sauvignon...

Just noticed a bottle number on the picture of Grange. Is this the first time or has it been on previous vintages?

707 wrote:Just noticed a bottle number on the picture of Grange. Is this the first time or has it been on previous vintages?

They've allowed 6 digits too.

I think prior vintages had vintage and bottled years, but I haven't looked closely at a new release bottle for a few years.

Just had a look at one of my 1996's and theres no bottle number, it just says bottled 1997. Not sure of Vintages after this though.

I notice one retailer already giving the speil that they are sold out but cant rule out getting more down the track

Red Bigot wrote:

707 wrote:Just noticed a bottle number on the picture of Grange. Is this the first time or has it been on previous vintages?

They've allowed 6 digits too.

I think prior vintages had vintage and bottled years, but I haven't looked closely at a new release bottle for a few years.

That's the first time I've seen a bottle number on the standard 750ml bottles too.

I always found the Metala Old Vines Black Label bottle numbering a little difficult to take seriously considering the counter goes over 30,000. If there's going to be six digits numbers on Grange seriously why bother? I can't imagine too much excitment about scoring bottle #106,331 in particular, although I guess it does give us a rough idea of how much they're made of the stuff (ie. plenty).

Cheers,
Ian

Wouldn't surprise me if they did a seperate numbering for the overseas markets to avoid ticking over the 100,000 mark.

Maybe we should get everyone to look at any bottles they spy to see who finds the highest number.

I assume they'll keep all the low numbers for the museum stock.

I want bottle 000707 !

Ian will no doubt report back on what bottle numbers were at tonights tasting.

707 wrote:Wouldn't surprise me if they did a seperate numbering for the overseas markets to avoid ticking over the 100,000 mark.

Maybe we should get everyone to look at any bottles they spy to see who finds the highest number.

I assume they'll keep all the low numbers for the museum stock.

I want bottle 000707 !

Ian will no doubt report back on what bottle numbers were at tonights tasting.

They kept the bottles out of sight so I didn't see the numbers.

I asked how much Grange was made for the 2002 vintage and we were told it was 7000 cases, which is about 42,000 bottles, give or take for the large formats, etc.

Cheers,
Ian

[quote="n4sir"]

They kept the bottles out of sight so I didn't see the numbers.

I asked how much Grange was made for the 2002 vintage and we were told it was 7000 cases, which is about 42,000 bottles, give or take for the large formats, etc.

Cheers,
Ian[/quote]

I would argue that 42,000 bottles isn't necessarily all that much.

Or not when you compare it to something like First Growth Bordeaux.

Lafite: 210,000 bottles
Mouton: 300,000 bottles
Latour: 175,000 bottles
Margaux: 200,000 bottles
Haut-Brion: 132,000 bottles

If by "cases", Grange is actually 7000 x 12 bottles, making it more like 84,000 bottles .. still, again, as Australia's only "First Growth", they're still not necessarily big numbers.

Bordeaux is big numbers.

Campbell.

Winefront Monthly wrote:

n4sir wrote:
If by "cases", Grange is actually 7000 x 12 bottles, making it more like 84,000 bottles .. still, again, as Australia's only "First Growth", they're still not necessarily big numbers.
.

Australias only first growth?

[quote="platinum"][quote="Winefront Monthly"][quote="n4sir"]

If by "cases", Grange is actually 7000 x 12 bottles, making it more like 84,000 bottles .. still, again, as Australia's only "First Growth", they're still not necessarily big numbers.
.[/quote]

Australias only first growth?[/quote]

Sorry, that was just a reference to a famous quote ... which goes something along the lines of that Grange is Australia's only First Growth, in terms of world prestige.

My guess is that they make something like 100,000 bottles of it each year, on average. For a wine based on the greats of Bordeaux, that's not an excessive amount.

campbell.

The Dan Murphy advert in today's rag has a picture of bottle number 75982 so 7000 dozen cases is credible.

In answer to KMPs query on another thread about who actually makes Grange - 7000 cases is nearly 300 barrels, more than one person can be fully intimate with!

707 wrote:The Dan Murphy advert in today's rag has a picture of bottle number 75982 so 7000 dozen cases is credible.

In answer to KMPs query on another thread about who actually makes Grange - 7000 cases is nearly 300 barrels, more than one person can be fully intimate with!

Interesting...

I was going on the assumption of 6-pack cases, so yeah if that's dozens it puts it right up there doesn't it.

Likewise I mentioned to Jason Barrette about the 500 barrels figure you said someone told you once - he said that's way too much, but given that he also said this is a relatively "small vintage", I wonder if a big vintage like 1996 would push anywhere near this? Then again by "small" I think he strongly hinted that this is compared to the perceived demand for it (particularly now from overseas) - I guess this sort of comment could be twisted any which way.

Cheers,
Ian

707 wrote:Just noticed a bottle number on the picture of Grange. Is this the first time or has it been on previous vintages?

I wonder if the numbering is to prevent forgery. The numbers could be checked through the system.
Mike.

I think the laser etching since he 98 had stamped out most if not all that.

platinum wrote:I think the laser etching since he 98 had stamped out most if not all that.

It would be nice to think that, but I'm sure this is not the case. Forgeries would always exist where there is a financial incentive.

I believe "case" always refers to 9 litres of wine - ie. 12 x 750ml bottles. The 'First Growth' quote was an old one from Hugh Johnson back in the 70s I think - was it even quoted in one of the big old Len Evans 'Companion to Australian Wine' you see floating around second-hand shops.
It baffles me why the production volume of Grange is apparently regarded as such a secret. Do they think it will affect demand? Will mug punters stop buying because they think 10,000 dozen is too much? Or make erroneous assumptions about quality v quantity in weak vintages?
Wierd.

The best way to forge wine - especially Grange 2002 - is surely to get a an empty authentic bottle then fill it with swill and hope your recorking & capping will pass muster...
cheers,
Graeme

Well I picked up mine today and she's in the wine fridge safe and sound.....

rednut wrote

Well I picked up mine today and she's in the wine fridge safe and sound.....

Can I ask how much you paid? Have not seen any prices yet.

$499 but bought 5 other bottles of sparkling at Woolworths and saved 10% off the lot. Good deal...