The Australian Wine Club: Classic cabernet sauvignon from Claymore, Hungerford Hill, Allinda and Byron & Harold
You make certain wines and become known for it, you build a reputation for a particular style, but then the chance to do something quite different comes along – or a piece of personal news you really weren't expecting (more on that shortly).
Either way, you go for it and hope that fortune ends up favouring your side of the equation.
It's why almost a decade ago Carissa walked into the office of Claymore Wines owner Anura Nitchingham – her boss now for almost 20 years – and told him they just had to buy a couple of tonnes of top-notch sangiovese and tempranillo grapes she had come across and branch out into completely different styles. 'It was meant to be a one-off,' Carissa says, laughing.
Except she did the same thing when a similarly small batch of reserve cabernet sauvignon grapes became available unexpectedly.
That was also meant to be a single iteration but has become Claymore's Black Magic Woman Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon that's made in years when the fruit practically demands it.
The 2022 iteration (with a usual retail price of $50) is part of this week's special offer case from The Australian Wine Club, a mix of cabernets spanning Australia from coast to coast – including the gold medal-winning 2022 Hungerford Hill Hilltops Cabernet Malbec.
Add to that the 95-point rated Allinda Yarra Valley Cabernet blend and the 2021 Byron & Harold Rags to Riches Margaret River Cabernet Sauvignon, and the temptation to seize this particular opportunity is obvious.
Claymore winemaker Carissa Major (centre) with friends in Clare Valley
'Often it's about a parcel of wine almost telling us we have to make a wine to reflect the beauty of the site,' Carissa tells us. 'With the cabernet now, it's really small batch, we're talking about 2500 to maximum 3500 litres.
'It has to have that extra depth of flavour that we're chasing in the vine, an extra level of richness and complexity in that primary fruit profile.'
You can hear her pride in what those cabernet sauvignon grapes have come to produce.
There's pride also when she talks about the unexpected business relationship she helped Nitchingham build with his beloved Liverpool FC, thanks to a chance meeting arranged by an Adelaide United fan.
Unexpected situations arise, in other words, and you have to pivot – even when things are not positive.
Like the phone call Carissa got in 2022 to receive a diagnosis of breast cancer.
Her ultimate response was gratitude – for the advances made in our understanding of and treatment for that disease.
'My former mother-in-law, who I was very close to, ended up passing away from exactly the same breast cancer I had but 20 years earlier, and her outcomes were so poor compared to what mine were because of the funding of research in that space.'
The irony is that Carissa had helped fundraise for breast cancer research through Claymore before discovering she had it.
'The incidence of re-occurrence in my mother in law's day were so high, I watched the anxiety that brought on,' she says.
'I've only had one review, my next is in October. But I'm like, if it's negative news I know what we need to do, I'll just jump back on the horse and we go again.
'And if I can use my little platform here or my personal connections to put a bit of extra money in those (research) coffers, I will absolutely do it.'
Claymore Wines Black Magic Woman Clare Valley Reserve Cabernet 2022
The dark ruby that glints in the glass is a perfect primer for the mulberry, plum and blackcurrant that dominate the nose along with hints of chocolate and aniseed. From the first sip it's imbued with Clare Valley elegance, with more mulberry, cassis and chocolate in a velvety-soft palate and lingering finish. 14.5 per cent alc, RRP $50 a bottle.
SPECIALS $41.99 in any dozen, $21.99 in our cabernet sauvignon dozen.
Hungerford Hill Hilltops Cabernet Malbec 2022
What a pairing this is, delivering an intense nose full of menthol freshness, capsicum and bay leaf, some blackcurrant and blackberry, even a sprinkle of spice. The palate is soft, juicy and fruity with blueberry, cassis and vanilla notes amid a vibrant acidity. With structure from the cabernet and a roundedness from the malbec, there's even a touch of dark chocolate. 93 points, James Halliday. 13.5 per cent alc, RRP $50 a bottle.
SPECIALS $39.99 in any dozen, $21.99 in our cabernet sauvignon dozen.
Allinda Yarra Valley Cabernets 2018
The ruby hue and the hints of dried fruit on the nose underline the years this has spent maturing – certainly there's much to savour on the nose immediately, with blackberry, chocolate, leather and pencil shavings coming through. More blackcurrant on the palate segues to a juicy acidity, splashed with sour cherry, and on to a long, fresh finish. 95 points, Wine Orbit. 13 per cent alc, RRP $30 a bottle.
SPECIALS $24.99 in any dozen, $21.99 in our cabernet sauvignon dozen.
Byron & Harold Rags to Riches Margaret River Cabernet Sauvignon 2021
This is why these cases are intriguing – a more savoury profile than the others, with herby, earthy notes and spice as well as red and black fruits. The palate delivers beautiful fruit and a medium weight with soft tannins, perfectly bookended with a final savoury edge of leather and pan juices in a long finish. 92 points, Wine Orbit. 13.8 per cent alc, RRP $32 a bottle.
SPECIALS $25.99 in any dozen, $21.99 in our cabernet sauvignon dozen.
CABERNET SAUVIGNON DOZEN Three bottles of each wine above for $21.99 a bottle. SAVE $222.
Order online or phone 1300 765 359 Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm AEST and quote 'ACCJ'. Deals are available only while stocks last. The Australian Wine Club is a commercial partnership with Laithwaites Wine, LIQP770016550.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
25 minutes ago
- ABC News
Australia is now a 'home owners' welfare state', and income inequality is worse than we think
Australia's income inequality is much worse than we think because official statistics ignore the income that home owners derive from their properties, leading economists say. New research finds Australia's extremely favourable tax treatment of owner-occupied housing is fuelling the problem, encouraging Australians to plough money into housing at the expense of everything else — leaving those without housing even further behind. Professor Peter Siminski from UTS Sydney, and Professor Roger Wilkins from Melbourne University, say standard measures of income inequality fail to properly capture what is happening in Australian society. A new paper from the economists considers the untaxed income owner-occupiers get from their homes, via "imputed rent" — the value of living in your own house without paying rent — and capital gains made when the home's value rises. They show that when imputed rent and accrued capital gains are included in the income measure, inequality is higher, and rising more significantly, than official statistics suggest. The research, using Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) data, highlights that while the average annual disposable income of outright home owners in Australia is 34 per cent higher than renters — when housing income is also counted — it is 86 per cent higher. The professors say that, since income from investing in owner-occupied housing is tax-free in Australia, while all other investments attract tax, Australians are encouraged to pour money into housing instead of more productive investments. That boosts demand for housing, and lifts housing prices, which makes it harder for younger people to break into home ownership, while widening Australia's wealth divide and making income inequality worse. They found the tax-free status of housing makes our income tax and transfer systems much less redistributive and progressive than we think, too. "Owner-occupied housing is the elephant in the room in current debates," Professor Siminski told ABC News. "No-one really seems to be willing to discuss it in current debates about tax reform and our standard studies of income inequality don't really do justice to the role of owner-occupied housing." Professor Siminski and Professor Wilkins have written an article for The Conversation, published today, that explains their paper's findings. They say the size of tax concessions for owner-occupied housing in Australia is similar to the huge tax concessions for superannuation and far larger than for investment property. However, far more public attention is paid to the much smaller tax concessions for investment property income. In the past, Australia was famously described as a "wage earners' welfare state," but Professor Siminski says that version of Australia has disappeared. Treasury estimates it forgoes $50 billion a year in revenue by exempting owner-occupied housing from the Capital Gains Tax (CGT). "There is also no tax on the rental value of owner-occupied housing, although we did tax such "imputed rental income" between 1915 and 1923," Siminski and Wilkins write in their Conversation article. In their paper, they argue that the favourable tax treatment of owner-occupied housing is "a major driver of inequality, undermining the redistributive role of government". For example, they say Australia's progressive personal income tax system helps to reduce income inequality by applying higher tax rates to people with higher incomes. But when looking at long-run income trends(over 23 years), they estimate that the "redistributive impact" of Australia's income tax system is reduced by 40.5 per cent when income from the home is included. They say the redistributive impact of government transfers (welfare payments) is reduced by 18.9 per cent, because the home people live in is generally excluded from assets tests, such as to access the Age Pension. The effect of including housing income is big enough to shift Australia's inequality from 16th to 10th highest amongst OECD countries (without conducting the same exercise for other countries). Australians instinctively know how important it is for their long-term welfare to try to secure a home under Australia's current system. Cameron Spedding bought his first unit two years ago when he was just 23, something he knows is unusual for people his age. "It was a bit of hard work and a bit of luck," he said. He paid about $270,000 for a two-bedroom villa unit in the regional Victoria town of Ballarat after accessing a Victorian government first home buyers scheme. "I was able to get this place with only a 10 per cent down $30,000. It took me about 18 months of strict budgeting to save up $30,000." The 25-year-old auditor has struggled with rising interest rates and consumer prices since buying the property. "In the short term, it's been quite rough," he says. But in the long run, he is confident the financial pain will pay off. He says the value of home ownership was instilled in him early. There is one particular story that his mother told him as a boy that has stayed with him. "When my mum was a bit younger than [I am now] she was already married and had two kids and she was working at a petrol station with a woman who was nearing retirement," he says. "And my mum once asked this lady why she was still working instead of retiring, and the woman said, 'Well, because I had to rent a place. I need to pay rent each week.' Cameron says everyone should have the chance to buy their own home and wants to see more government action on affordable homes. But he does not agree with taxing owner-occupied properties. "I don't think that's necessarily going to help with anything in particular. I already kind of pay an owner-occupied tax in the form of [council] rates," he says. "I'm very fortunate here in Ballarat — they've announced rates will not be going up this year — but to have rates and a tax, it just kind of feels redundant, especially given there are what feels like a lot of different things that could be done in order to address the issue." Australia's record-high property prices, and declining rates of home ownership, have also raised concerns about the reality of more Australians becoming "forever renters" and struggling with long-term housing insecurity. It is another thing on the minds of younger Australians. Kieran Murphy, 25, has followed the advice given to his generation — go to university, get a well-paid job — but he is unsure if he will ever own a home. "I've tried to make smart decisions — I went and got a degree, I got a job in a niche field within my degree, one that pays well — and I'm still unsure whether or not I'll be able to save enough to get a home in a reasonable time, or at all," he told the ABC. "I worry about what that means for my future, how much money I'll be able to save long term. "I worry about what happens if I can't save long term — if, say, my dog had an injury or suddenly fell ill and I needed to pay a large amount to help them out, or if there was a medical emergency with my partner and I. "It's frustrating and it's scary." Saving is about to get even tougher for the oceanographic technician and his two housemates, who will soon have to move out of their below-median price rental. "I think from what I saw the other day, the median price was about $720," Kieran said. "The areas we've been looking — which are areas that are kind of in between where I work, where my housemate works and where my partner works — are all looking at minimum $600 to $700 a week. So it's less than ideal. "I'm very fortunate that I work full-time and I can afford to rent in the market, but it means that my savings and how much I can save each week will drop dramatically. Despite his concerns as a renter, Kieran is also against taxing owner-occupied homes. Instead, he says the federal government should target investors who own large property portfolios. "I'd like to see changes… where the people that have the money to buy multiple properties and develop a portfolio — that's disincentivised for them to want to do that. "I don't know many people my age who own homes, but I can think of a lot of people who are maybe double my age or so that own multiple homes — and they don't need them. Some of them don't even rent them out," he says. Professor Wilkins, who is a co-director of the HILDA survey, says many Australians do not like the idea of taxing the family home. But he argues that if the tax treatment of housing was reformed, the Australian community as a whole would benefit. It would open up opportunities for significant tax cuts in other areas of the economy. He says there are plenty of ways to fairly incorporate owner-occupied housing into the tax and transfer systems. He says a broad-based land tax would be economically efficient (it is advocated by many economists). An explicit tax on owner-occupied housing wealth would be justifiable. A broader wealth tax could be considered. He says there is a strong case for reconsidering the exemption of housing from pensions means tests, because many wealthy retirees benefit from public pensions that are funded by taxes on the incomes of renters. But he admits the politics of those kinds of tax reforms will always be difficult in Australia. "Most renters aspire to be home-owners, so they're probably thinking that if they're to achieve that aspiration, increased taxation of owner-occupied housing might seem like it's putting up further barriers to home-ownership for them," he told the ABC. "But we would actually argue that it would help moderate house prices and probably help more people get into home-ownership than it would hinder. "I think there's also an inherent scepticism about new taxes because it sounds like we're just going to be paying more tax, and of course … [when] bringing owner-occupied housing into the tax system, you'd want to be accompanying that with offsetting tax reductions elsewhere, and we're particularly thinking here about income tax, where we seem to be unduly reliant on income taxes in Australia and that puts a very high burden on younger working-age people. "So, perhaps if people were presented with that sort of trade-off, you may get a different response, if they could see — and be confident — that income tax cuts would be accompanying the introduction of taxes on housing wealth in some form," he says. He also says his main concern is about the $50 billion of annual tax concessions on Australia's owner-occupied housing is about their efficiency, rather than their distributional impact. "As an economist, I think it's really distorting our investment behaviour towards what is essentially a non-productive investment," he says of the tax-free status of owner-occupied housing. "We're much too obsessed with investing in property, either our own home or as an investor, and not sufficiently interested in investing in creating new businesses and undertaking entrepreneurial activities. "I'm always struck by this huge cultural difference between the US and Australia, where in the US people talk about creating wealth by creating a new business and coming out with a new product. "[But] in Australia the culture seems to be much more oriented around buying your next property or upgrading your existing property as ways of accumulating wealth."
ABC News
25 minutes ago
- ABC News
Australian Council of Trade Unions says it's time for a shorter work week to boost performance and reduce burnout
The Australian Council of Trade Unions has become the latest group to throw its weight behind calls for a shorter working week, saying productivity gains should be shared with workers, rather than "boosting corporate profits and executive bonuses". The peak union body will use next week's Economic Reform Roundtable in Canberra to argue that reducing working hours is key to lifting living standards. It is calling for a move towards a four-day week where possible and sector-specific models elsewhere, with pay and conditions protected. It says trials in Australia and overseas show that shorter weeks, when properly planned, can boost productivity, reduce burnout and improve retention. The intervention adds to pressure on Anthony Albanese from his industrial base to widen the scope of the summit. That's amid concerns from attendees that the round table risks becoming "a talk fest" that won't deliver real change or a productivity boost. In June, Treasurer Jim Chalmers told the National Press Club that "no sensible progress could be made on productivity, resilience or budget sustainability without proper consideration of more tax reform". He's since repeatedly said he doesn't want to "rule in, rule out" policy ideas before discussions get underway. Mr Albanese, on the other hand, has watered down the prospect of major tax reform emerging from the forum. He said last week the "only" tax policy the government was implementing "is the one we took to the election". The government's search for productivity answers comes after a warning from the Reserve Bank yesterday that its expectations for productivity growth have dimmed. The Reserve Bank said it had lowered its assumption for medium-term labour productivity growth from 1 per cent to 0.7 per cent. It warned that unless expectations for wage growth and living standard recovery were also revised down, it could add inflationary pressure. The union group has argued productivity growth does not automatically translate to higher living standards anyway, and that if real wages had grown at the same rate as productivity since 2000, "the average worker today would be around $350 a week better off". In the ACTU's submission, president Michele O'Neil argued that "shorter working hours are good for both workers and employers" and "deliver improved productivity and allow working people to live happier, healthier and more balanced lives". She said sector-specific models for reducing working hours could include adding more rostered days off, increasing annual leave, and redesigning rosters to provide more predictability, security and work-life balance. In a statement from the ACTU, released today, the group cites a peer-reviewed study published in Nature Human Behaviour that found a four-day week boosts performance, reduces burnout and improves employee health and retention. The study examined 2,896 employees across 141 organisations in Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. The ACTU also points to a 2023 study conducted at Swinburne University of 10 Australian companies trialling the four-day week. It resulted in productivity being higher at 70 per cent of the firms, and the same as pre-trial levels in the remaining 30 per cent. The push from the ACTU follows similar positions from the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union and the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation. The unions argue that Australia's slow productivity growth is the result of a lack of investment in people by businesses. Business leaders and community groups have put forward nearly 900 suggestions of how to turbocharge Australia's economy to be discussed at the upcoming talks. The Australian Council of Social Services and ACTU have urged Labor to tackle negative gearing and capital gains tax reform. But Australia's peak welfare body is also pressing for those billions of dollars in extra revenue from the tax changes invested in social housing. The round table is also expected to canvass the impact of new technologies, with artificial intelligence and its regulation looming as a potential flashpoint. Ms O'Neil said "a fair go in the age of AI should be about lifting everyone's living standards instead of just boosting corporate profits and executive bonuses". She added that any productivity gains from AI should be shared with workers through reduced hours, more leave or fairer rosters. The three-day round table will be held at Parliament House from August 19 to 21.
ABC News
3 hours ago
- ABC News
Productivity roundtable to discuss ways to turbocharge economy
Business leaders, community groups, politicians and economists will converge on Canberra next week for a roundtable to discuss ways to turbocharge the economy and lift sluggish productivity.
