A description of 2009 Bdx that math types can relish!

Received in the mail yesterday K&L's vintage report for 2009 Bdx. They summarize with this descriptive equation:
2009 = 1947X + 1982Y + 2005Z
A linear combination, how delightful! Of course the real question is, is it true, and if so, should we be afraid? However, more and more, I think I will end up with some in the cellar at some point, probably from the cheap end. But fear not, I will not give in to futures.

Ryan
Afraid? Me? Far from it.

It's only wine, and there are plenty of very satisfying bottles out there from other years and other regions. I have no desires over 1961 or 1947 etc. Bdx, so I doubt I'll get excited about another claimed Bdx 'vintage of the century' (which would by my count be the 3rd such vintage after 2000 and 2005).

Ditto the latest & greatest vintages in Barolo (a personal favourite). There's too much good wine there to get caught up in a single vintage's hype.

regards

Ian

So pricing will be represented by an exponentially increasing function then.

So what are the values for X, Y, and Z?

With the euro likely to continue to go down the toilet, I see no reason to invest in 2009 futures at this point in time.

-Paul W.

Just to be clear folks, my delight at this has nothing to do with the vintages being referenced (although that aspect certainly intrigues me). In this case, being the science geek I am, I just loved the idea that they used an equation to describe it.

Honestly, I'm a fan of classical Bdx, 2000 being a personal favorite, and so much of the talk about this ripe, high-alcohol vintage I find a little concerning. But I still look forward to getting my hands on them . . . . but not until they are released.

Paul, I'd love to know the values of X, Y, and Z, in this case. Given how K&L talked in the rest of the guide, I'd guess something like 0.45, 0.45, and 0.1

Given the hype these days, the sum of the coefficients really ought to be greater than 1 for such vintages.