WineBoard
1972 Dom Perignon - Printable Version

+- WineBoard (https://www.wines.com/wineboard)
+-- Forum: GENERAL (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-100.html)
+--- Forum: For the Novice (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: 1972 Dom Perignon (/thread-17140.html)



- corkylee - 01-05-2008

I discovered a bottle of 1972 Dom Perignon champagne in a friend's basement. I have no idea of the value other than hearing it is rare. I also know nothing about how storage affects the wine. I can't seem to find info anywhere--can anyone help me???


- winoweenie - 01-07-2008

Hi Corky and welcome to the board. Don't get dollar signs in your eyes. Any bottle that old has to have definative provenance before anyone would buy it. If it has been stored at or below 55* then you could probably be able to sell it but without that proof it's doubtful. And FYI on this site you only have to post a question in one forum and if we have the answer you'll be informed. WW


- Bucko - 01-07-2008

1972 was a poor year in Champagne. Even if properly stored, the wine is dead.


- corkylee - 01-08-2008

Thank you everyone so much!


RE: 1972 Dom Perignon - Gaylandf@gmail.com - 12-24-2015

Just an FYI, sabred a bottle of 1972 Dom, and it was amazing. Definitely not dead.


RE: 1972 Dom Perignon - winoweenie - 12-24-2015

Hi Gayland and welcome to the board. Seems strange to dig up a post from 2008 to comment on. I have strong doubts about a 40+year bubbly from a poor vintage being "amazing". I've had many 30 year-olds from Superior vintages that were hanging on by a toe-nail. By the way it's sabered. If you ever get to Phoenix please come by and demonstrate for me. WW


RE: 1972 Dom Perignon - winoweenie - 12-28-2015

Gee Gayland was there something in my response that offended you? WW


RE: 1972 Dom Perignon - splurben - 06-05-2018

I second this, we had two bottles of the Vintage '72 along with a '68 (my birth year) for my 50th birthday recently from a lauded cellar. The '68 was significantly higher in price, but the difference was slight.