2000 Niepoort Secundum Vintage Port

[Andy Velebil]

Opened about noon and started drinking it about 9pm (9 hours later).

The Secundum is a second label, but by no means a lesser quality. It is a VP that is designed to be drunk at a younger age, while waiting for the big boys to come round.

Now, that said, this is almost as dark as they come. not quite "Squid Ink" but pretty darn close. The nose is just pure grape and dark cherry flavors. The palate is just loaded with tannins and acid on top of deep dark fruit. The tannins and acidity are so big it is a difficult drink at this point. I know this is designed for mid-term drinking, but I would not come back to this one for at least 10+ years, and this from a 375ml bottle. The finish is long and shows no signs of slowing down. Quite the bottle for a second label VP.

Overall, a very impressive effort by Dirk van der Niepoort and worthy of praise. If you can get this cheap, buy all you can so you drink this why you wait for the incredible 2000 and 2003 Niepoort's come round in 30+ years.

[Ronald Wortel]

8) Very nice port indeed.

Over here, the problem is that after the regular Niepoort sold out quick in stores, there was a nasty price raise for the Secundum. It sells now for about €60 (whereas the regular Niepoort, that somehow re-appeared in stores after a while, goes for €70).

[Andy Velebil]

Ronald,

thats a heck of a price for it, and IMO not worth it. Here in the states it hovers around the $45-55 a bottle. I'd be willing to pay $30-35, but more than that I would rather spend the extra $$ and get the regular VP.

[Tom Archer]

From a marketing standpoint, the name 'Secundum' strikes me as singularly ill-chosen.

In English, at least, it associates with the term 'seconds' - a common term for product that has failed to achieve the desired level of quality, and is therefore being sold off cheap. This was reflected on the only occasion I've seen the wine at auction here in the UK.

In Dec '05, 6 bottles of Secundum '99 sold for just £60 (I bought them)

Out of curiosity - I just had a quick look at Niepoort's website, and spotted a little surprise:

Niepoort are declaring 2005 (for their regular brew) - the first web site I've seen to announce an '05 declaration.

Well done Dirk!

Tom

[Todd Pettinger]

Niepoort are declaring 2005 (for their regular brew) - the first web site I've seen to announce an '05 declaration.

Well done Dirk!

Tom

That is a bit of a surprise, but good to see that they will forge ahead with a product they consider to be superior even if the rest of the industry will not generally-declare 2005 (from the sounds of things.)

Now if only we can get them to post these things on THIS Forum as well!!! :)

Todd

[Tom Archer]

Now if only we can get them to post these things on THIS Forum as well

Absolutely - and my promise to buy a case (12 bottles) stands firm if it's announced here first.

Come on guys - hurt my bank account!

Tom

[Ronald Wortel]

That is a bit of a surprise, but good to see that they will forge ahead with a product they consider to be superior even if the rest of the industry will not generally-declare 2005 (from the sounds of things.)

As far as I know, only the Symingtons have stated not to declare 2005, but what Taylor/Fonseca will do is still unknown.

BTW, I've tasted the '05 Niepoort, and it's very good. But I didn't like it quite as much as the '03 and '00. Perhaps I need to taste it again soon. :)

[Russ K]

Opened Dec 31st 2010. 2 more in cellar, going to have to wait another decade.

Opened New Years Eve with good friends. Very deep purple color, showing nice fruit and powerful tannic / astringent flavor still a bit overwhelming. Not hot at all, but the tannins need another 10 years minimum. Top notch. high bang for the buck".

Had seconds the next day after the fog of news years eve had cleared, tasted as above...trying thirds tonight, but I bet it still has not mellowed out.
92+