ATGroom

Members
  • Content Count

    462
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

3 Followers

About ATGroom

  • Rank
    Campanas

Profile Information

  • Location
    Melbourne

Recent Profile Visitors

4,336 profile views
  1. The "definition" of the common names comes more-or-less from Paul Garmirian's Gourmet Guide to Cigars. https://www.cubancigarwebsite.com/cigar/commonnames. Lonsdale is defined as 40-44 and 160+. For what it's worth, my personal opinion is that common names don't really belong on CCW. For one, they're not factual, but just "popular opinion" which is something I try and stay away from where possible. For two, they're not actually commonly in use or agreed upon as evidenced by this thread. CCW came to me complete as an artefact from Trev. I have added things from time to time, but I try to preserve his original design and content as much as possible, and I don't delete things without considering it for four or five years first. I would say we are at about year four of the process on removing the common names.
  2. The Habanos packaging code for Cohiba Genios (I don't have a Lanceros code to hand, but it's much of a muchness) is BN for Boite Nature. The code for Sir Winston is SBP for Estuche Especial or Special Cabinet. So yes, the idea is that a cabinet is a high quality BN with the push latch. The were also made of cedar rather than plywood later than the BNs. I explain it a little bit here. https://www.cubancigarwebsite.com/packaging/information#Packaging_Types I agree that it's all a bit confusing and really a distinction without a difference, however, it's on Habanos' end. In recent years they also seem to have expanded the definition of SBP to include the new "luxury" boxes (both slide lid and SBN style) used on the limiteds, as well as the flat with rounded sides 8-9-8 boxes used on the Punch 48 and Punch 8-9-8 RE. Still thinking about how to handle all that in the CCW data. .
  3. It's not easy. I'm using a camera with a macro lens positioned about 5cm away from the band. Not sure how else you could make an image of them. I tried scanning them at 1200dpi and I can see the lines but the text isn't legible. I would say you need at least 20X magnification to make it out. 40X would be better. You can get jeweller's loops and magnifying glasses that do those kind of numbers. Or otherwise a cheap microscope.
  4. Sorry, you are correct, microprinting on seal was always there. I had taken a photo of old seal and saw no microprinting however, I think this was my mistake and light or focus was just a little off.
  5. Actually, I remember when these bands came out the Habanos press release said that they contained micro-printing as a security feature. I was expecting something about the same size as the serial number 'micro-printing' on the seals, which is small but definitely visible to the naked eye, if not quite legible. I figured they must mean the COHIBA text between the heads. FWIW, the head is about 1mm. There is space for 10 "Cohibas" in it, plus there is a empty space between each one. So the size of this text is about 0.05mm. This also explains two things I have always wondered about: In 2013 the Behike band was revised with only a seemingly small change to the pattern of the hologram. The reason was because micro-printing was introduced. Also in 2013, the hologram on the seal changed slightly, but all consumers noticed was that previously the Habanos had been blurred when looked at straight on, while the Aqui logo was clear. The post-2013 holo behaved in the opposite way, with the Habanos being clear while the aqui was blurred. This seemed like a weird change to make deliberately, so I thought it must be just supplier material change or something rather than a deliberate design choice. The real reason for this change was the introduction of micro-printing to the hologram.
  6. As others have said, the point of these features is not that nobody knows about them aside from Habanos insiders, it's that they're difficult for the fakers to replicate. I would go one step further and say that these features are useless unless people know about them. What is really dangerous IMO and something I am conscious of with CCW is providing high fidelity source material on things that are rare but easy to replicate once you have the original. For example, Dunhill bands. Some of you will probably recall about 10 years ago there was a batch of fake Dunhill circulating that had "Dunhill" written on both sides of the band, not "Dunhill" on the left and "Havana" on the right, as the genuine bands have. There were also discrepancies with how the various lines interacted in the logo. This was because the fakers didn't have access to an original band and had to design their fake from scratch based on pictures of it on the cigar, and made a few mistakes. These days you could pretty much just download the scan off CCW and press print.
  7. This might not be new to everybody, but it was new to me. Someone emailed into CCW to point out some true micro-printing on the Cohiba band. Something to add to the fake identification toolkit.
  8. They do actually have a microprinted serial number in the centre. Every pack will have a unique number. Usually they are sequential within the display box. They don't relate to the outer seal and can't be checked anywhere as far as I know.
  9. My guess is it helps with the pitch. If the tourist you're trying to sell them to on the beach asks "are these real Cubans?" you say "yes, sir, of course. I only sell 100% genuine Cuban cigars. See this seal? The Cuban government would only allow this seal on 100% Cuban cigars."
  10. Look correct as far as I am concerned. I note that stamp indicates them as post-revolution (I would guess 62-65ish). The post rev boxes of these are much rarer than the pre-rev ones. Obscurity I think would be to their advantage as far as the standard old-box-new-cigars trick goes. Seems implausible that you would find an empty box complete with all tubes, and would be a big hassle source the tubes and cigars that perfectly fit the tubes etc, vs the usual just buy an old box and some unused vintage bands and away you go.
  11. Nice find. In the MRN book there is a throwaway mention of the HdM Concorde, which he speculates might have just been a renamed HdM Churchills that was served on Concorde flights. I've occasionally gone down a bit of a rabbit hole trying to confirm this... turns out there is a whole internet community of airline menu collectors, and Concorde menus are some of the most sought after. All the ones I've ever been able to find however don't list the names of the cigars they serve... it just says "Havana cigars" at the end with the dessert, coffee, cheese etc (or "Jamaica cigars" for flights originating in the US).
  12. I've posted these kind of charts a few times before, but here are the latest ones. These show the average of all cigars that were in production in a given year. Special releases only count in the year they are released (or at least supposed to be released. An EL 2018 counts in 2018 even if the cigars don't arrive until 2020). I separate out the specials as they distort things a bit. I don't have any way to weight them, so for the purposes of the average a 60 ring Cohiba that only has 50 humidors of 50 released will sway the average just as much as a Monte 4 that has millions of units produced. At least gives an idea of the trends though as I think what is a special release today probably predicts what will be regular production tomorrow. Average ring of standard production cigars (ie, no special releases): Average ring of all production cigars (incl. special releases): Average length of standard production cigars (no special releases): Average length of all production cigars (including specials): Takeaways for me are: -Cuba was more or less static from the revolution until the Altidas era starting in 2000. -Cigars are getting fatter, although special releases are getting fatter faster than regular production. -Regular production cigars are getting shorter. Special releases are getting longer.
  13. Was a Julieta No.2 or something within a close shave of it. Definitely higher than 42. Photos attached are the cigar unmolested and then with the wrapper removed. "Viso" is not a term that is used in Cuban cigars as far as I can tell - at least, it doesn't appear in the descriptions of the process in The Great Book of the Habano or The World of the Habano, and Hector Luis Prieto doesn't use it when describing categorisation of leaves etc. In the NC industry Viso is is a category of leaf between Seco and Ligero. As I mention above, blenders don't just think in Volado, Seco, Ligero but in "the top two leaves of Seco", indicating that for them blends are more complex than just "volado, seco, ligero," and draw from presumably around 9 sub categories within these grades.Not sure if they have terms for them but "viso" would fit as a light ligero or dark seco.
  14. I wonder about the absence of cedar sheet between the layers, although don't have any real knowledge of whether or not this particular kind of box was supposed to have one.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.