Thanks for all the replies. I don’t feel like fighting on this one and it was’t a ton of money. I think their posted policy is pretty clear:
“Special Note: Though every effort is made to describe or measure the levels of older vintages, corks more than 20 years old begin to lose their elasticity and levels can change between cataloguing and sale. Old corks occasionally fail during or after shipment. Buyers must understand that there is always a risk of cork failure with old wines. Under no circumstances can an adjustment of price or credit be made after delivery.”
So as I said, I didn’t expect anything, I just thought I’d let them know what happened and find out what they would do. I find it ridiculous that they make up some BS, when all they need to do is point to their policy.
Joe - yes, I will definitely be on the look out for more 1977’s. I’m not sure I’ll keep going through WineBid - I don’t think I got an outrageous deal once you add the buyer’s premium, and they are occasionally available from reputable retailers. That’s probably the route I’ll take in the future instead of rolling the dice at auction.
Andy - I was hoping someone with your experience with port would validate me - I’m optimistic that it will still be good… I might just pop it for my 39th rather than waiting until 40!
I had four bottles that were clearly damaged by excessive heat and WB, after very very long discussion agreed to credit only two. Well, I hope someone from winebid reads the thread and would make it right for the OP. No, five dollar bid increment is not making it right for the OP. A full refund and take back the bottle (At winebid’s expenses) is the appropriate action.
I don’t doubt it, I guess I’ve been lucky. Or maybe the regions I chase are better off on average? I’m a real stickler for ullage/bottle fill, it has to be at least base neck for me to even consider it. But other folks say they do the same thing but with worse results.
Interesting language. I haven’t bought anything from WineBid in a long time, and I don’t think the bolded language was in effect when I was bidding on wine there.
If WineBid really is taking the position that buyers bear the risk of bottles cooked in transit, then I would have to take that into account when deciding whether to bid on anything they offered for auction.
I think you’ll find the same disclaimer at almost any retailer or auction house. The way to protect yourself from cooking in transit is to ship when it’s safe.
I buy a lot through WineBid, all older wines, and have never had a problem. One caveat to mention: I live outside of Chicago where they have a warehouse, and they transfer from their Napa facility in temperature controlled conditions, so there’s never an issue with common carrier temperature variations.
That said, leakage on Port is not as onerous as on table wine. I’ve bought wines that were labeled as having slight leakage conditions (at a discount) and never had a problem. The issue is that the inverted corks used on ports are just poor long term stoppers, and damn every one of them causes creeping up the cork over the years. I can count on one hand the number of port corks I’ve pulled over the years that wasn’t completely stained. It’s just how it works with these corks.
As to the '77 SW, if the level on the bottle is still into the neck, I would recommend putting a small plastic bag over the neck, securing it with a rubber band, and put it in your cellar. Check it in a few months. If there’s no additional leakage, you’re ok. If there’s more leakage, pull the cork and give it a 4-6 hour decant. It should show ok.
I saw a comment about sweet wines being prone to leakage. IMHO, that’s not true. The issue with port is the inverted corks, which were phased out in the 2000s (Andy, would you agree on the date?). Madeira uses awful short corks that sometimes leak, but those wines will live forever. But I’ve never found sweet whites like Sauternes to have any more proclivity to leaking than red table wines.
John,
I assume you mean the old flared neck Vintage Port bottles (never heard of an “inverted cork”). Those were notorious for causing the whole cork to saturate as the bottom part barely, if it did so at all, touched the actual inside walls of bottle. Those older bottles were phased out back around the late 1970’s to early 80’s. VP bottles are now just like regular wine bottles in that the inside diameter of the neck, where the cork is inserted, is a uniform size and designed for a specific length cork.
Andy better described it as the flared neck bottles that port used to have. I just used a bad term for it. The neck of the bottle is narrowest at the opening and flares out as it goes down. I’m sure the theory was that the cork would flare and better seal. It really resulted in just the opposite happening, with the cork getting soaked all the way up.
As far as your contention about “the phenomenon of sweet wines being leakers is well known”, I have to beg to disagree. I drink a lot of sweet whites and have for the 25 years I’ve been “into” wine, probably more than most on this board, and I have never seen that phenomenon. What would be the component of a sweet wine that would cause frequent cork failure?
Thanks Andy. “Inverted cork” was a bad term. I was thinking about champagne corks, which share the same kind of design.
Good to know that the port producers finally phased those out. I haven’t opened any bottles newer than the 1985 vintage, so haven’t seen the new design yet. I still find it on all 1985s I open however.
So I’ve reached a fair resolution to this issue. I got a phone call from WineBid the day after their original email response, explaining that they “omitted” the option for a refund from the email and that they “generally” give that as an option. Not sure whether it was this thread, or if they make a habit of proof-reading their sent mail 24 hours after they’ve sent it……
Anyway, they were professional, provided a new styro shipper with a return label, and processed the refund.
Even if people don’t click on this thread, just the headline alone causes low level brand damage. Their commissions seem large enough that they should be able to satisfy the occasional aggrieved customer.
And if they have to, perhaps for a big ticket item, they just debit the seller. I seem to remember some auction houses having a window of time before they released consignment sales proceeds anyways, presumably to deal with buyers objections to described conditions vs. what was received.
