Page 1 of 1
value for money
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:45 pm
by simon Lisle
my recent favourite is royal oporto 1980 rough round the edges but big in the middle i've had a few bottles now and they've been consistent good value at 14 to 18 pounds or26 to 34 dollars i don't really care what the ratings are its only a guide for the price i make my own mind up when i taste them .
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:15 pm
by Steven Kooij
I have yet to taste a Royal Oporto VP that will impress me, but if you like them: great - you got a good source of cheap VP!
In The Netherlands, the best bargain had to be half bottles of Dow '89 and '96 Qta. d. Bomfin: E 12,50 a bottle: nice...
Oh, and a tip: to use a CAPITOL letter at the begining of a sentence and that simple "." at the end will make your posts much more readable... :?
capitol
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:18 pm
by simon Lisle
Sorry Stevie a bit lazy typing
value port
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:26 pm
by simon Lisle
There are a few good retailers in Germany and the UK for older port, the Dela Force 66 i had last week was purchased two years ago for 20 pounds although i must say it had passed the apex but was still very enjoyable
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:40 pm
by Steven Kooij
No problem, Simon; it is just that English isn't my first language.
To get back on topic: good value Port! The occasional bargain is nice, but what do you find to be a good / great QPR all the time? For me it's Qta. d. Crasto LBV and Vintage - yummy and very affordable.
value port
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:52 pm
by simon Lisle
Sorry Stevie i find value at the lower end good for drinking regularly i've only ever drank (to my shame)one LBV a Taylors 99 and didd'nt care for the style I've had one bottle of 10 year old Taylors which was better,but tonight i had a bottle of ferreira tawny which i brought back from France now this was my favourite in my limited experiance in non vintage ports.
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:43 am
by Stuart Chatfield
I suppose "value" is relative and the cost of a value port depends on the budget.
If it is relative:
1. what about Smith Woodhouse '77 ? The '77s are outstanding but quite expensive. Whilst Taylor and Fonseca are sublime, in many other vintages the SW '77 would have challenged for wine of the vintage (in my opinion) and is one of my all-time favourites. If Taylor's '77 is a 99-pointer, then SW must be at least '95 and only half the price.
2. what about the 60's in general? '63 has been lauded for years and '66 seems to be rising in price and catching up, but squashed between '55 and '63, '60 seems almost 'forgotten' and is relatively good value for a fully mature wine.
3. as I said in another topic, I think Taylor '75 is a bargain, but I imagine many don't share my taste for that.