Oxidative v. Oxidised

originally posted by kirk wallace:
originally posted by Yixin:
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by Jeff Connell:
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
For the better, or for the worse?
Too soon to say.
Ha! Chou!

You guys crack me up. I put that quote on a draft Board presentation about our China business at my old shop; the CEO laughed but asked me to move it to the footnotes.

maybe Zhou meant 1968

I think that's why Joe brought it up.
 
originally posted by Yixin:
originally posted by kirk wallace:
originally posted by Yixin:
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by Jeff Connell:
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
For the better, or for the worse?
Too soon to say.
Ha! Chou!

You guys crack me up. I put that quote on a draft Board presentation about our China business at my old shop; the CEO laughed but asked me to move it to the footnotes.

maybe Zhou meant 1968

I think that's why Joe brought it up.
It is widely interpreted as though he was referring to 1789, which seems to be what the questioner really did mean. Joe's comment works either way, it seems to me.
 
Interesting, too, what he says about new wood not oxigenating wine through open pores, as I've always supposed, but due to its air content; he says new oak barrels float and old oak barrels sink because of the air content of new wood, something that wine absorbs.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by kirk wallace:
originally posted by SFJoe:
Guess I'd better throw away this 1998 Houillon/Overnoy ouille I was thinking of opening tonight.

The '93 Lopez Tondonia blanco is, as Coad wrote about almost precisely one year ago on this board, in a great spot now. Completely charming, delicious and interesting -- at least based on a bottle at lunch yesterday. I hope that the WineDr warns everybody away else away from it.
Ditto the rosado ORANGO.

Fixed.
 
Back
Top