Ian Sutton wrote:I've still yet to get my bottle
Robin Garr wrote:Ian Sutton wrote:I've still yet to get my bottle
Ian, thanks for taking the lead on this project! I'm having a little trouble finding Bin 28 here, too, which is odd because there are a dozen or more Penfolds labels widely available, not excluding Grange itself (if you can pay the fare). I'm not sure why the one Bin we need is thin on the ground around here, but I'm still looking.
Ian Sutton wrote:[Robin: Do you think it's ok to post large-ish chunks of material from Penfolds web-site, or would you prefer a brief summary and link? I know the latter is normally preferable, but wondered whether you felt it ok to bend good practice in this case as there's no perceived issue. Happy to follow your sound advice on this matter].
Ian Sutton wrote:give me a shout if it's too wordy
Robin Garr wrote:Ian Sutton wrote:give me a shout if it's too wordy
Like Baby Bear's porridge, it's just right!
Now wish me well in my continued quest! So far I've found every ding-danged Bin Number that Penfolds makes EXCEPT No. 28!
Bob Parsons Alberta. wrote:So Robin try another `03 and compare notes with what we all write!! How about a Rawsons (same co.) or Thorn Clark which is excellent.
creightond wrote:Hi all - a thought just occurred. with large output wines like this, what are the chances that all the bottles are in fact identical? in europe there are lot numbers required on the bottles or labels; but is that true for australia? partly, of course, it is a matter of having a tank large enough to hold all the wine at once that will end up being labeled bin 28. but partly also it is a question of not ordering and filling glass that won't be needed for 8 months or more for shipping. why inventory bottles when keeping it in bulk will be more efficient. AND when you do finally bottle the next batch, obviously that will taste somewhat differently - due at least to the extra time in wood. just a thought.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Howie Hart and 3 guests