"Anders Tørneskog" > wrote in message
...
>
> "pavane" > skrev i melding
> ...
> >
> > .... As Dale noted, the spirits don't deteriorate so
> > there might be some value there, and some things (a 50 year old
> > Cognac bottling, perhaps) might just be very interesting.
> Fwiw, I think I've heard that a 3-star cognac of 50-70 years ago was the
> equivalent of a V.S.O.P. or even a Napoleon today.
> Marketing, of course - people go for what is perceived as a great buy, and
> buy names and/or designations. You got problems selling your 3-star
brandy?
> Put two more on the label, and increase the price Wow, sales take off!
> So, that odd bottle of 50 years ago might even be very good! (Or very
poor,
> of course :-)
> Anders
>

Assuming that the bottle is in decent condition, probably "very good" is
the answer. I have done but two Cognac comparisons, a 1960's Courvoisier
VSOP against the 1990 version and a Martel Cordon Bleu from the early
1970s against a 1996-or-so release. In both cases there was a remarkable
quality difference in favor of the older bottling. In fact the two brandies
were
served blind in the Courvoisier example and we guessed that we had an XO
against a VS. I am not sure that the problem is in putting more stars on
the
labels as in putting lesser quality in the bottles regardless of what they
claim
to be.

pavane