OK, so I opened the bottle and did the marketing-recommended Mollydooker Shake, and then dumped some of this stuff in a glass. The nose is largely some kind of unidentified sweetness – it’s not unlike circus peanuts (for you Australians, these are strange large marshmallow-like pinkish orange candies that you still sometimes see in the USA). There’s also a bit of what smells like oak barrels gone slightly off, a sort of butterscotch note, and then something like menthol, eucalyptus, mint, and camphor. There’s even sort of a fusty, earthy, moldy note here as well; it’s not that it’s unappealing, it’s just that it seems at odds with the overall penny candy sweetness of the wine.In the mouth, ther’es a real savory edge to the tannins, some supporting acidity (almost too little; it’s almost flabby), a kind of dark, dour note that I can’t place, a fair amount of sucrosité, and then a sort of nondescript finish that really doesn’t go anywhere before fading out on a sort of Kendal mint cake sweetness that I’m frankly not a fan of.With more time and air, it started to taste like pink popcorn balls or perhaps even Luden cough drops; all bright, neon pink fruit, signifying nothing.All in all, I’m not really sure what I’m supposed to make of this. Compared to the Chris Ringland variants on the style (huge, alcoholic Shiraz from South Australia), this seems less rich, less complex, just plain less. What this wine needs is some bacon fat, some toasty, charred barrel notes, some violets or perfume – anything to offset the huge, hulking, bland sweetness of it all.Color me unimpressed.MollydookerPrice: US $20Closure: StelvinDate tasted: January 2008