The Jefferson bottles...

[Johan]

You guys probably caught this story already but its so mindblowing I thought it is worth posting again for those who missed it...........

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007 ... fact_keefe
Regards,

Johan

[William P]

This is what the book Billionaire's Vingar concerns. It's a great summer read. Rather damning for the entire industry.

[rjsussex]

Thanks - nice to read this again. Can't imagine how Broadbent and Christies retain any credibility at all after this.

Richard

[SteveH]

They have all become whores for the buyer's premium. The overwhelming evidence is presented in Wallace's book.
The ultra high end of the auction business will not recover for many years. The lawsuits will keep flying.

[rjsussex]

Thanks Steve - but Broadbent seems to be carrying on (writing for Decanter etc) as if nothing happened. And did Decanter itself make much of the story?

r

[William P]

I think Broadbent's reputation took a real hit. He still has ability to taste, write and his vast experience which makes him a wine celeb, but he has also proved that he was more interested in protecting a sale and a selling client than learning the truth. HIs leaps of faith were close to criminal, IMO. Whether he admits it or not, his actions were all about money.

[JimHow]

What anyone ever saw in that grouchy old pissbag is beyond me, anyway....

Like The Sucker, Broadbent didn't come across as a real compelling guy in Mondovino.

The Great American Mighty One from Monkton, Maryland, was fooled by Hardy Rodenstock too.

It's one of the reasons why i can't take any of this "wine critic" stuff too seriously. Nobody really knows anything, in the end....

[DavidG]

Anyone can screw up. It's what you do once you realize you've erred, or suspect you have, that goes to character and honesty IMO. Broadbent stands out among all the critics involved with Rodenstock because of his persistence in supporting the authenticity of the Jefferson bottles in the face of mounting evidence that they were fakes. As a result of that, his reputation has taken a much bigger hit than any of the other critics or collectors involved with Rodenstock. In addition, he had much to gain personally (whether monetarily or reputation-wise) from the sales, which gives at least the appearance of a crass willingness to ignore the evidence.

Further yet, all of Broadbent's tasting notes on historic old wines are now suspect, as any number of them may have been fakes. The ultra-high-end auction market for these rarities has dried up, and appropriately so. Most of the real bottles were discovered long ago.

Finished Billionaire's Vinegar last night. It was like reading a crime novel up until the end. Life doesn't really imitate art, or Rodenstock would have been convicted of criminal forgery and fraud.

[Johan]

I agree, David. Well said. I was really shocked when I first read this article. I saw a similar story on the BBC a few days ago about the bubble on the contemporary art market. Its interesting and worrying that both these markets are completely irragulated. In the financial market there is at least a remote risk that you will go to jail if you dilly dally. Art, wine and other hobbies are lawless territories.

Best,

Johan