On Apr 14, 8:02�am, gerald > wrote:
> no, i do not, as the conversation was the better part of 10 years ago,
> and since i don't drink the stuff(i have thought it overpriced) i
> forgot most of the conversation.
>
> i do recall that my interpetation of the conversation was that gdlt
> was made by a different wine maker at a different site and using
> highly selected grapes. �
>
> is gdlt estate bottled?
>
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 06:28:45 -0700 (PDT), DaleW >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Do you have a source for the idea the GdlT was not in the infected
> >cellar? Because the reports I read at the time said that BV had found
> >contamination in the cellar where the GdlT, Tapestry, Clone 6 etc were
> >produced. The wines that weren't effected were the low level reds and
> >the whites.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Gerald,
The GdlT is an estate wine, selected grapes from their Rutherford
vineyards,. Definitely supposed to be produced at same facility as the
Tapestry, etc. The low -level reds (Signet) I think are mostly non-
Napa and may be produced elsewhere.

Bill,
since the admitted vintages with problems are '97-'00 (not sure re
'01), my guess is that the level of contamination grew with each year,
so '97 likely to be least affected. Maybe Mark could correct me, but I
think that in most cases the issue is chlorine based cleaners on wood
in a humid enviroment. It would make sense to me that initial levels
would be low, and the latter years more heavily affected. I also think
it was one of the rooms used, so you might have gotten a case that
didn't pass through that room, I'd still pass on the 2000 at close to
$40 (and if anyone wants the '98 at the $34 I paid I'll happily sell
or trade!).

Billl