Here it is...finally its he

http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm

What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?

I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.

"dick neidich" wrote..............
>
> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.

So, what you are saying Dick is an American company has come up with a
machine which they are selling to the Portuguese cork industry, which *must*
increase the cost of corks to winemakers.

This is a process which removes *most* [Note - not all!!] of the TCA and by
some piece of magic, *you* [as a cork-dork consumer ;-)] are supposed to
know which bottles have been sealed with a treated corks and which ones
haven't - 'cos I can guarantee Dick that only a minority of winemakers
will use the treated corks!

Now, I [an enthusiastic Stelvin-slut!] can go into any outlet in any part of
the world and purchase a screwcapped wine - knowing that there a 99.9999999%
probability that the contents have not been contaminated by TCA..

You keep to cork - I have NO TCA issues - and no hang-ups either!

Cheers!

--

st.helier

On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 19:15:06 +1300, "st.helier"
> wrote:

>This is a process which removes *most* [Note - not all!!] of the TCA

Quite. A claim to remove *up to* 90% of TCA does not impress me.

>Now, I [an enthusiastic Stelvin-slut!] can go into any outlet in any part of
>the world and purchase a screwcapped wine - knowing that there a 99.9999999%
>probability that the contents have not been contaminated by TCA..

Not from the closure at least.

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

"dick neidich" > wrote:

> Here it is...finally its he
>
> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
>
> What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?

First, my name is Pronay (Prónay if you care for Hungarian
diacritics).

Second, they are not the first. Steam cleaning has been available
for some years now.

Third, that's what I posted on the Parker Forum:

| Hmmm. Seems like an equivalent of ROSA and others using steam
| cleaning technology.
|
| The problem is: They claim to take out not 100%, but 90% of TCA.
| The others steam cleaners claim 70 to 75%. Whichever is right —
| 70, 75 or 90% - simply it is not 100%. A heavily tainted cork
| will still taint the wine.

> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.

If you want 100% TCA taint free corks (guaranteed!) then try to get
informed about Oeneo's (formerly aka Sabaté) DIAM (and MYTIK) corks:

http://www.oeneoclosuresusa.com/prod...s_diamond.html

M.

Another factor is that corks are imperfect closures in other ways, too.
Anyone who's ever pulled out a cork and thought "uh oh, that seemed too
easy" and then had an oxidized wines knows what I mean.

Ah, the romance of cork.

Michael Pronay wrote:
> "dick neidich" > wrote:
>
> > Here it is...finally its he
> >
> > http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
> >
> > What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?
>
> First, my name is Pronay (Prónay if you care for Hungarian
> diacritics).
>
> Second, they are not the first. Steam cleaning has been available
> for some years now.
>
> Third, that's what I posted on the Parker Forum:
>
> | Hmmm. Seems like an equivalent of ROSA and others using steam
> | cleaning technology.
> |
> | The problem is: They claim to take out not 100%, but 90% of TCA.
> | The others steam cleaners claim 70 to 75%. Whichever is right -
> | 70, 75 or 90% - simply it is not 100%. A heavily tainted cork
> | will still taint the wine.
>
> > I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.
>
> If you want 100% TCA taint free corks (guaranteed!) then try to get
> informed about Oeneo's (formerly aka Sabaté) DIAM (and MYTIK) corks:
>
> http://www.oeneoclosuresusa.com/prod...s_diamond.html
>
> M.

I knew the spelling would get you :-)


"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> "dick neidich" > wrote:
>
>> Here it is...finally its he
>>
>> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
>>
>> What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?
>
> First, my name is Pronay (Prónay if you care for Hungarian
> diacritics).
>
> Second, they are not the first. Steam cleaning has been available
> for some years now.
>
> Third, that's what I posted on the Parker Forum:
>
> | Hmmm. Seems like an equivalent of ROSA and others using steam
> | cleaning technology.
> |
> | The problem is: They claim to take out not 100%, but 90% of TCA.
> | The others steam cleaners claim 70 to 75%. Whichever is right -
> | 70, 75 or 90% - simply it is not 100%. A heavily tainted cork
> | will still taint the wine.
>
>> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.
>
> If you want 100% TCA taint free corks (guaranteed!) then try to get
> informed about Oeneo's (formerly aka Sabaté) DIAM (and MYTIK) corks:
>
> http://www.oeneoclosuresusa.com/prod...s_diamond.html
>
> M.

"dick neidich" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Here it is...finally its he
>
> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
>
> What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?
>
> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.
I'll believe it... when I don't smell it.
Cheers!
Martin

DaleW wrote:
> Another factor is that corks are imperfect closures in other ways, too.
> Anyone who's ever pulled out a cork and thought "uh oh, that seemed too
> easy" and then had an oxidized wines knows what I mean.

Tradition dies a very difficult death.

Sometimes I'm just stunned at the passionate tenacity among
wine "enthusiasts" for something that is so clearly flawed as
corks.

Corks are more likely to be enemies of wine and enthusiasts than
not. It's just that simple.

Dana

To quote an old Fats Waller song, "Taint what you do, twas the way that you
do it"
"Dana H. Myers" > wrote in message
. ..
> DaleW wrote:
> > Another factor is that corks are imperfect closures in other ways, too.
> > Anyone who's ever pulled out a cork and thought "uh oh, that seemed too
> > easy" and then had an oxidized wines knows what I mean.
>
> Tradition dies a very difficult death.
>
> Sometimes I'm just stunned at the passionate tenacity among
> wine "enthusiasts" for something that is so clearly flawed as
> corks.
>
> Corks are more likely to be enemies of wine and enthusiasts than
> not. It's just that simple.
>
> Dana
>

"Richard Neidich" > wrote:

>>> Here it is...finally its he
>>>
>>> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
>>>
>>> What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?

>> First, my name is Pronay (Prónay if you care for Hungarian
>> diacritics).
>>
>> Second, they are not the first. Steam cleaning has been
>> available for some years now.
>>
>> Third, that's what I posted on the Parker Forum:
>>
>> | Hmmm. Seems like an equivalent of ROSA and others using steam
>> | cleaning technology.
>> |
>> | The problem is: They claim to take out not 100%, but 90% of
>> | TCA. The others steam cleaners claim 70 to 75%. Whichever is
>> | right - 70, 75 or 90% - simply it is not 100%. A heavily
>> | tainted cork will still taint the wine.
>>
>>> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.
>>
>> If you want 100% TCA taint free corks (guaranteed!) then try to
>> get informed about Oeneo's (formerly aka Sabaté) DIAM (and
>> MYTIK) corks:
>>
>> http://www.oeneoclosuresusa.com/prod...oducts_diamond.
>> html

> I knew the spelling would get you :-)

If that is all you have to say ... :-(

M.

"dick neidich" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Here it is...finally its he
>
> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
>
> What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?
>
> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.

So what part of the process impresses you the most -- the part where they
bathe the cork in ethyl alcohol?

What part or retiring corks would you miss the most? Maybe when you pull
it, sniff it, look at it intently, and than make Pontific proclamations?

Lets say that their is 6 parts per million and then it detects all but 10%
of that.

that would mean .6% parts per million which is not detectable.


"Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message
...

> dick neidich wrote:
>> Here it is...finally its he
>>
>> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
>>
>> What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?
>>
>> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.
>
>
> Leaving 10% of the cork taint is enough to make a bottle undrinkable, it
> might not be quite as blatant but the aroma-cancelling effect of TCA is
> evident even in cases of light cork taint.
>
> --
> Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
> email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail

Dana wrote on Thu, 05 Jan 2006 23:52:20 -0800:

DHM> DaleW wrote:
??>> Another factor is that corks are imperfect closures in
??>> other ways, too. Anyone who's ever pulled out a cork and
??>> thought "uh oh, that seemed too easy" and then had an
??>> oxidized wines knows what I mean.

DHM> Tradition dies a very difficult death.

DHM> Sometimes I'm just stunned at the passionate tenacity
DHM> among wine "enthusiasts" for something that is so clearly
DHM> flawed as corks.

DHM> Corks are more likely to be enemies of wine and
DHM> enthusiasts than not. It's just that simple.

I certainly tend to agree. My experience with screw-top closures
has been uniformly favorable but the wines have only been a few
years old. Are there any reports about the longevity of Stelvin
(is that it?) closures over, say, decades?

James Silverton.

"James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.net> wrote:

> I certainly tend to agree. My experience with screw-top closures
> has been uniformly favorable but the wines have only been a few
> years old. Are there any reports about the longevity of Stelvin
> (is that it?) closures over, say, decades?

Yes. There are still bottles from the early 1970s when Australia
started with screwcaps.

M.

Mike Tommasi > wrote:

>> Lets say that their is 6 parts per million and then it detects
>> all but 10% of that.
>>
>> that would mean .6% parts per million which is not detectable.

> Dick, the sensitivity threshold varies from 4 to 50 parts per
> TRILLION.

Normally TCA human detection treshold is given at 3ppt, but there
are tasters that can go below that.

M.

"dick neidich" > wrote:

>>> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm

>> Leaving 10% of the cork taint is enough to make a bottle
>> undrinkable, it might not be quite as blatant but the
>> aroma-cancelling effect of TCA is evident even in cases of
>> light cork taint.

> Lets say that their is 6 parts per million and then it detects
> all but 10% of that.
>
> that would mean .6% parts per million which is not detectable.

Dick, your reasonment is completely flaved, sorry. This parts
per zillion thingie refers to TCA in *wine* and has nothing
whatsoever to do with TCA in *corks*.

M.

The part that impresses me is if the company is public, I buy stock, make
money and buy more wine :-)


"zara" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "dick neidich" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>> Here it is...finally its he
>>
>> http://www.brownmillerpr.com/News_Photos/INNOCORK.htm
>>
>> What say you now Mr. Proney-anti cork man?
>>
>> I get to keep cork...you now have less TCA issues.
>
> So what part of the process impresses you the most -- the part where they
> bathe the cork in ethyl alcohol?
>
> What part or retiring corks would you miss the most? Maybe when you pull
> it, sniff it, look at it intently, and than make Pontific proclamations?
>

"Richard Neidich" wrote ...............

> The part that impresses me is if the company is public, I buy stock, make
> money and buy more wine :-)
>

Wine in bottles with screw caps!!!!!!!!! ;-)))))

I mean, if $$$ is the prime motivation, we don't want to risk the
possibility of your wine being corked, Dick.

--

st.helier

We bottle you in a stelvin and see if you are crisp and fresh in a month or
two.

That would be a good test. :-)



"st.helier" > wrote in message
...
> "Richard Neidich" wrote ...............
>
>> The part that impresses me is if the company is public, I buy stock, make
>> money and buy more wine :-)
>>
>
> Wine in bottles with screw caps!!!!!!!!! ;-)))))
>
> I mean, if $$$ is the prime motivation, we don't want to risk the
> possibility of your wine being corked, Dick.
>
> --
>
> st.helier
>

"Richard Neidich" > skrev i melding
ink.net...
> We bottle you in a stelvin and see if you are crisp and fresh in a month
> or two.
>
> That would be a good test. :-)
>
>
Screwing him, you mean?
Anders

well translated :-)


"Anders Tørneskog" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Richard Neidich" > skrev i melding
> ink.net...
>> We bottle you in a stelvin and see if you are crisp and fresh in a month
>> or two.
>>
>> That would be a good test. :-)
>>
>>
> Screwing him, you mean?
> Anders
>

Having done a side by side tasting of Stelvin(screwcap) and cork
closure as part of an oenology degree, there is a significant
difference in the aroma and taste of a wine.
Wine under stelving, is more aromatic and lifted and intense in
flavour, while cork does appear to dull the wine slightly. However
stelvin is unforgiving if there is even the slightest hint of fault,
while cork will mask it to a degree.
In terms of cork taint, the whole industry should go under Diam, which
guarantees its corks to have the level of TCA present well below
detetction threshold, through the realease of haloanisoles which are
responsible for TCA.

For a good wine, closure isn't a selling point for me. I like good
wine, be it under cork or stelvin

Clare, I had bought the 1997 Plumpjack Cabernet. They offered it with a
cork and stelvin.

I found the stelvin in as good. I cannot explain why. The wine with the
cork was better for me.

To me this simply speaks for how they aged. It did age differently.

I appreciate your posting. Perhaps I am not that sensitive to TCA...but the
reality is....I don't think all wine problems are from the cork...many in
this group think its the perfect solution.


"Clare" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> Having done a side by side tasting of Stelvin(screwcap) and cork
> closure as part of an oenology degree, there is a significant
> difference in the aroma and taste of a wine.
> Wine under stelving, is more aromatic and lifted and intense in
> flavour, while cork does appear to dull the wine slightly. However
> stelvin is unforgiving if there is even the slightest hint of fault,
> while cork will mask it to a degree.
> In terms of cork taint, the whole industry should go under Diam, which
> guarantees its corks to have the level of TCA present well below
> detetction threshold, through the realease of haloanisoles which are
> responsible for TCA.
>
> For a good wine, closure isn't a selling point for me. I like good
> wine, be it under cork or stelvin
>

Stelvin, are bringing out a new screwcap which allows similar amounts
of oxygen ingress as cork does, thus mimicking the effect of age that
cork has.
The Australian Wine Research Institute has done studies on cork and and
stelvin in terms of ageing potential etc. If you look up their
website, the paper should be fairly easy to find if you are interested
in further information about cork and screwcaps.

However in saying that i will say i like the traditional feel a cork
has.

"Clare" > wrote:

> Stelvin, are bringing out a new screwcap which allows similar
> amounts of oxygen ingress as cork does, thus mimicking the
> effect of age that cork has.

Oxigen ingress through bark corks vary in a magnitude of 3 ...

> The Australian Wine Research Institute has done studies on cork
> and and stelvin in terms of ageing potential etc. If you look
> up their website, the paper should be fairly easy to find if you
> are interested in further information about cork and screwcaps.

.... as this Australian study recently confirmed:

<http://content.worldwidewine.com/cli...ub/ACFcombined
media&report.pdf>

or

<http://snipurl.com/cwf7>

There isn't even consensus about which oxygen ingress rate is the
best.

M.