So I’m trying to determine which is the real deal…or are they both? One has the red wax looking stamp and one doesn’t. Did they make two versions?
The more expensive one is legit.
They have the same photo for all the vintages of it.
The Wine Commune version does not have the round wax looking red seal on it. All others I’ve ever seen have had this other than the completely different label from European negociant bottlers.
try this thread for a discussion of lables
I don’t know if the first one is legit, but the 2nd one is a much more recent vintage.
Thanks John. Looking at the labels from your link, it would seem that Petrus always used the red wax stamp with the signature “P” throughout the vintages outside of the negociant bottles. So am I to assume that the Winecommune (JJBuckley) version is a fake and a bad one at that?
I think a magnum of 61 Petrus with no info about provenance is presumptively suspect. Any any auctioneer who catalogs it without more info is catering to the sizeable market of people who don’t know enough to ask questions.
I’m a novice at this, but I figure it this way…mags of 61 are rare as hens teeth. The date typeface looks more contemporary than 1961. Or the 60s. Plus you can see it has like a one inch cork. I don’t think mags of Petrus had one inch corks, do you? Weird. We need a library of authentic photos to refer to. I don’t think the Petrus mags were tapered like this bottle either, but I grant you it’s been a while since I’ve seen one. Like 30 years.
what i found interesting reading in the prior post is that lables that read authetically as the ones we know today with the “mis en boutille aux chateau” may have been used by negociants, without the “mis en boutille…” commment.
BTW WC has 2 1961 mags, and a 1959 all without the seal up for auction this week.
The 61 mag at WC is the one I was referring to.
do a search, there are 2 this week
Compare and contrast