Grape

Going, going ... Gone!

Caveat emptor is a phrase that should, for many reasons, be firmly embedded in the head of anyone attending an auction; for one thing, it's too easy to get carried away and bid much more than one intended, then there's also the question of provenance and authenticity (aspects very much to mind as I've just finished The Billionaire's Vinegar, the as yet unfinished story of alleged fake bottles of 18th century claret).

It's not often that the caveat is on the other foot, but after the recession-beating results of last week's Cape Winemakers' Guild auction, an event I was unfortunately unable to attend, some deep soul-searching needs to be undertaken by the organisers of the Nederburg Auction.

With overall turnover down by 16%, it can hardly have celebrated its 35th anniversary. Even worse and less-publicised news was the  wine unsold: 15% of the total, including 651 cases of red (a whopping 73% of those on offer) and, more tellingly, given its current popular status, 197 cases of dry white (22%). In contrast, every last drop of the CWG offerings was snapped up at record prices; the grand total of R5 204 400 showing a healthy 5% increase on the 2008 auction.

With this disparity, it's less of a question of quo vadis the Nederburg Auction rather quo vadis members of the CWG who also offer wines on Nederburg. This year CWG members with wines on both events were from Jordan, Neil Ellis, Cape Point, Simonsig and Boplaas; older wines on Nederburg, younger on the CWG.

The track record of each of the above producers suggests their wines mature well, so should command a higher price than younger vintages. But this was not reflected in the results: for instance, the Jordan CWG Chardonnay 2008 reached a high of R366.67, while the Nine Yards 2006 on Nederburg scraped R250; while the Sophia 2007 commanded a top price of R583.33, Cobblers Hill 2004 managed a high of only R233. It was the same story for each of the CWG members. It doesn't matter that the wines aren't exactly the same.

More than damaging the image of each of the producers involved, it can't do brand South Africa any good.

 

What are their feelings about the results of these two auctions; will they consider participating in Nederburg next year? I put these questions to participating CWG members.

 

Gary Jordan expressed surprise that there was a Nederburg Auction at all this year, as he reckoned it looked like folding two years' ago but surmised they wished to hold on until after the 35th and 350th year of Cape Wine. (To my mind, it was never the same after auctioneer Patrick Grubb MW retired). While admitting that the 'sold at the Nederburg Auction' might still attract the average winelover, Gary maintains many more individuals will attend and buy from the CWG auction, now the lots are structured to attract individuals, as happened this year. As for participating in the  2010 Nederburg Auction should there be one, he says they don't have sufficient wine but believes they should anyway focus on servicing their important customers.

 

Cape Point Vineyards' Duncan Savage, who was 'very chuffed and could not have wished for better prices' for his CWG wine, says the whole CWG message is about exclusivity. 'The CWG has a focus and a plan,' he says, which includes far more interaction with the public and stricter selection criteria.

 

Savage intends to concentrate on the CWG in future; older vintages may be sold from the new tasting room due for opening in November 2009.

 

Of course, there are many other high profile producers who aren't members of the CWG who offer wines on Nederburg; I wouldn't be surprised if they don't feel the same about prices and their future participation.

 

I attended the first Nederburg Auction, the first of many; they were well-organised, prestitious occasions that even the Napa Valley auction used as a benchmark when that event started.

I'm very sad that it has lost all that gloss; can it be restored? It would need a total re-think on the part of Distell, Nederburg's parent company, and I'm not sure the will or possibly the ability is there. Perhaps it is now the right time to bring down the auctioneer's gavel on the event.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

Dear Angela

I see that Neil Pendock has already commented on his blog regarding your report on the events that you did not attend (an aside: it seems to be Grape policy to report on events not attended, eg. Michael Fridjhon on the 350 year celebrations of winemaking, or books not read, eg. Tim James on Pendock's Sour Grapes).

The only problem with not attending an event but having to write about it is that you have to work from the press releases supplied and information available on the internet.  Your analysis of unsold cases, I suspect, is based on an incorrect analysis of the Nederburg auction report.

You state that:  "Even worse and less-publicised news was the  wine unsold: 15% of the total, including 651 cases of red (a whopping 73% of those on offer) and, more tellingly, given its current popular status, 197 cases of dry white (22%)."

If I understand the report correctly, a total of 890 cases went unsold of which 651 cases were red, 197 cases white, 26 cases noble late harvest and 16 cases of fortified wine, i.e. 73% of the unsold wine was red and 22% of the unsold wine was white and not, as you intimate, that 73% of the red wine and 22% of white wine on offer couldn't find buyers.  As the Nederburg auction report fails to mention whether the unsold cases were actual cases or 9 litre equivalent cases it would not be possible to do this calculation without getting further data from the auction organisers.

Just thought I should comment as it would be unfair to flog the poor dead horse of a prestitious (sic) event even further.

What is the point please?

Other than the usual nastiness, I have no idea what the point of this comment is.

Re: Lies, damned lies, and statistics

Oh dear, WC, both maths and spelling took a bit of a knock this time - the former never a strong point of mine and apologies for that - you are correct in your analyses of the figures. Regardless, it is a disappointing number of cases unsold.

My spelling is usually stronger, so be kind enough to put 'prestitious' down to finger rather than brain trouble.

To the nub. I think if you read carefully what I wrote, you'll note my point was to ascertain from CWG members, who had wines on Nederburg and the CWG auctions, their reaction to the difference in prices they received on each event; I don't believe that necessitated my being at either of them.

Make no mistake, I would be delighted if the Nederburg Auction could recapture its past prestige, but I do wonder whether Distell has the will or ability.

 

 

Re: Going, going ... Gone!

At the risk of insulting Melvyn Minnaar's sensibilities he may want to remember a quote ascribed to Mark Twain:  "If you have nothing to say, say nothing".

Angela's contention that she was not writing about the event itself, but rather the feeling from producers who are CWG members, does not ring quite true when she states that "... [the auction] was never the same after auctioneer Patrick Grubb MW retired".  This surely can be seen as a direct insult to Stephan Welz's abilities or will we now be told that this was merely a time-line marker, i.e. when the Nederburg Auction started sliding down the slippery slope, and has nothing to do with her comparing Patrick Grubb's auctioneering abilities with one of the finest and most knowledgeable auctioneers in South Africa, if not the world?

 

Re: Going, going ... Gone!

Dear W C (or pisspot, as my husband lovingly refers to you. If your initials really are W C, you shouldn't use them; if not, you should have taken more care with your anonymity),

Quite why my reference to Patrick Grubb, who retired some years ago, should lead you to equate that with writing about an auction I didn't attend (this year's), I can't make out. Nor can I make out any direct inference on Stephan Welz's auctioneering abilities (extremely professional, I agree - and, yes, I have attended Nederburg auctions where he has wielded the gavel) from my comment about Patrick Grubb - that would seem to derive from your own nasty mind.

Unless you have further factual comment, as opposed to snide guesswork, on my article, please may I redirect you to your Mark Twain quote.

 

Awards and arithmetic

Neil P has posted a  comment about the Verits awards on his blog which I confess I am at a loss to understand.

"Another figure for the record books is that the 40 Veritas Double Golds is an almost exact match to the 41 five star stunners chosen by the Platter wine guide last month, although there is not a single coincidence of a Veritas DG and a Platter high fiver, which is a bit of a worry. In effect we have a situation of two groups of “experts” each choosing their 40 best SA wines currently available and coming up with two lists so different, there is no overlap at all."

I think I must be missing the point.

Text amended

The text has been amended on the Pendock blog.

Re: Going, going ... Gone!

Dear Angela.  Maybe your hubby should revert from using toilet humour and asinine name-calling as it's unbecoming somebody of your, and hopefully his, astuteness.

Could you then maybe elucidate what you meant when you wrote: "To my mind, it was never the same after auctioneer Patrick Grubb MW retired"?  What changed due to his retirement?  Did Patrick Grubb MW add a dimension that Stephan Welz has been unable to equal?  Pray tell as I really don't know what that comment in your article aimed to achieve.

Regards

Winston Churchill (pisspot for short)

Re: Going, going ... Gone!

Winston Churchill definitely commands more deference than WC .. be that as it may ..

As you suggested in a previous comment, my Grubb reference was intended as a time line marker, so many other changes occurred with his departure. Please accept this as my final response to any further digging you might feel like making, as there is nothing further to uncover.

Angela Lloyd

User login

CAPTCHA
Apologies for this extra step - this question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
10 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.