Underwater champagne find

Fascinating! The BBC say it is believed to be Veuve Clicquot from

Patok wrote in news:i1smsp$sld$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal- september.org:

I do not know if it would taste good or not. I know that I have tasted several bottles of a white wine from Galice (land of Albariño and D.O. Rias Baixas) which is put underwater by the winemaker Raul Pérez (an spanish winemaker very highly regarded by TWA).

I attended a wine-dinner featuring his wines, him being present. He explained how he put the wine (called Sketch) underwater in the Fiords of Galice, for around one year.

He had selected six bottles for the dinner. Opened all of them and directly discarded three out of the six. From the three remaining, one drank great, one drank so-so, the third one was plain awful with a nose that actually forbid me to drank the wine (a biologist could say something about that nose telling my brain something about severe danger to my life).

I really hope these Champagne bottles are different, or it would be like betting with a 50.000 eur entry fee.

s.

So it's 18th cenury Champagne, with an estimated value of 50,000EUR per bottle, and the divers drank a bottle of it before getting ashore! I am not sure whether to aplaud their panache or condemn them for cultural vanadalism.

Bravo to them! Of course it should be drunk. It was made to be drunk. There is nothing sadder than a bottle of wine or whisky mouldering in some cellar because it was bought as an investment. That way no one gets any enjoyment out of it

James

Exactly. When I hear people discussing wine as investment, it makes me want to... not hear that discussion.

Article needs an editor. I'm sure Juhlin got it right, but something was lost in article. There was no such thing as "Veuve Cliquot" in

I agree wine is to be drunk. Article is unclear how much wine there is, and I'm not sure how Finnish finders laws are. But a cynical part of me thinks if a group of divers found an ancient stash, decided to drink a bottle, and it was terrible, they might well say it was very drinkable, increasing interest/auction value and their share of potential profits. That said, underwater in a cold sea should give wine the best chance of survival, so it's quite possible it was good. (sorry Steve for same reply in 2 places)

It's the price of posting the same thing in 2 places :)

I've no problem with it being drunk. What does surprise me is that the finders drank it before they got ashore!

But to carry on this posting in 2 places idea... I am now cynically wondering if they actually found any Champagne at all. It coudl just be a publicity stunt.

That was my thought: rumours of her husbands death were probably exagerated in the 18th century... I finally managed to connect here in Monument Valley, and sure enough Dale did his homework!

cheers

Mike