Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

One of the intentionally aged teas, Pu-Erh has a loyal following.


Nov 16th, '14, 23:09
Posts: 44
Joined: Nov 12th, '14, 21:46
Location: Japan

Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by AdmiralKelvinator » Nov 16th, '14, 23:09

Got wind recently of a friend of a friend who is holding on to a pu-erh brick from the late 60s, and who could potentially convinced to sell. While I am a neophyte to Pu-erh, I am aware that fake "aged" tea abounds in the market place. Therefore I would like to appeal to the collective wisdom and experience of this board. First, a few photos:

Image

Image


A few potential concerns that spring to mind from these two photos (Apologies for the blurriness of the text in the second)

- The front ticket has what looks like Thai(?) printed on it. At this time, were teas being produced specifically for export to the Thai market?

- While the back wrapper looks quite weathered and old, what are the odds that it is original? Would an actual tea from 1967 describe itself as "Cultural Revolution Tea"? Or was this description clearly written after the fact and applied to this brick at a later date?

- would a tea from this era list such specific information about the year of its production in the first place? I gather that in general bing wrappers from the 60s do not list the specific year of production, but what about the inside labels?

Since all of these questions are beyond my ken, I would like to submit them to the pu-erh historians here. Does it have the ambiance of an original 1960s brick, or does it smack of fakery?

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 00:34
Posts: 1657
Joined: Sep 2nd, '13, 03:22
Location: in your tea closet
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact: kyarazen

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by kyarazen » Nov 17th, '14, 00:34

not positive in my opinion, i would think it to be not of original packaging even if it is.

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 00:45
Posts: 4536
Joined: Apr 1st, '09, 00:48
Location: Bangkok

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by Tead Off » Nov 17th, '14, 00:45

The writing looks Tibetan.

Nov 17th, '14, 03:00
Posts: 51
Joined: Nov 29th, '12, 18:14
Location: Oslo

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by ole » Nov 17th, '14, 03:00

Tead Off wrote:The writing looks Tibetan.
Yeah, it is Tibetan for sure, ཀུང་ཇབིདགས་ཅན།* or something.
Tibetans are big consumers of tea bricks for their butter teas, are they not? So having the Tibetan inscription don't really seem all that strange.
Not that that really helps in your original questions about authenticity. :roll:

*I have no knowledge of Tibetan :lol:

Nov 17th, '14, 03:43
Posts: 44
Joined: Nov 12th, '14, 21:46
Location: Japan

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by AdmiralKelvinator » Nov 17th, '14, 03:43

ole wrote:
Tead Off wrote:The writing looks Tibetan.
Yeah, it is Tibetan for sure, ཀུང་ཇབིདགས་ཅན།* or something.
Tibetans are big consumers of tea bricks for their butter teas, are they not? So having the Tibetan inscription don't really seem all that strange.
Not that that really helps in your original questions about authenticity. :roll:

*I have no knowledge of Tibetan :lol:
Tibetan? Very interesting, and indeed does make sense given the history of brick teas there. Ole, If you don't know Tibetan how did you type that!?

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 03:54
Posts: 709
Joined: Jan 5th, '13, 09:10

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by Teaism » Nov 17th, '14, 03:54

Doesn't look right from my experience. Please give it a miss.

Cheers! :D

Nov 17th, '14, 06:27
Posts: 51
Joined: Nov 29th, '12, 18:14
Location: Oslo

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by ole » Nov 17th, '14, 06:27

AdmiralKelvinator wrote:
ole wrote:
Tead Off wrote:The writing looks Tibetan.
Yeah, it is Tibetan for sure, ཀུང་ཇབིདགས་ཅན།* or something.
Tibetans are big consumers of tea bricks for their butter teas, are they not? So having the Tibetan inscription don't really seem all that strange.
Not that that really helps in your original questions about authenticity. :roll:

*I have no knowledge of Tibetan :lol:
Tibetan? Very interesting, and indeed does make sense given the history of brick teas there. Ole, If you don't know Tibetan how did you type that!?
I can still look at characters, and try and match them ;)

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 08:27
Posts: 43
Joined: Jan 14th, '14, 22:27
Contact: paxl13

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by paxl13 » Nov 17th, '14, 08:27

For the lil' I know, if the date is written, it's a fake. No brick prior 2010 has dates on them. But bear in mind that this is only from my blog reading experience! :D

Cheers!

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 09:19
Posts: 445
Joined: Mar 25th, '13, 23:03
Location: Lexington Park, Maryland

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by MEversbergII » Nov 17th, '14, 09:19

Fu brick, I'd guess. Can't really tell without a closeup, but it looks awfully stemmy, much like fu zhuan typically is.

M.

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 21:41
Posts: 400
Joined: Jul 22nd, '09, 21:54
Scrolling: fixed

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by TomVerlain » Nov 17th, '14, 21:41

in the immortal word of flock of seagulls

And I ran, I ran so far away.
I just ran, I ran all night and day.
I couldn't get away.

looks beyond fake

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 21:45
Vendor Member
Posts: 510
Joined: Mar 19th, '12, 02:49
Location: Frequently Moving Around
Contact: TwoDog2

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by TwoDog2 » Nov 17th, '14, 21:45

TomVerlain wrote: And I ran, I ran so far away.
I just ran, I ran all night and day.
I couldn't get away.
This is the best thing I've seen on teachat in a long time.

Nov 17th, '14, 21:48
Posts: 162
Joined: Mar 29th, '13, 06:00

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by puyuan » Nov 17th, '14, 21:48

Best case scenario, it's a genuinely old fuzhuan with hilarious tickets attached to it... But in such cases there's hardly ever a best scenario.

User avatar
Nov 17th, '14, 21:50
Vendor Member
Posts: 510
Joined: Mar 19th, '12, 02:49
Location: Frequently Moving Around
Contact: TwoDog2

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by TwoDog2 » Nov 17th, '14, 21:50

puyuan wrote:Best case scenario, it's a genuinely old fuzhuan with hilarious tickets attached to it... But in such cases there's hardly ever a best scenario.
Sort of like the best case scenarios that go through your mind in a casino.

"Now, if I am lucky, I could win millions of dollars!" But, rarely are any of us that lucky.

Nov 19th, '14, 04:07
Posts: 44
Joined: Nov 12th, '14, 21:46
Location: Japan

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by AdmiralKelvinator » Nov 19th, '14, 04:07

TwoDog2 wrote:
puyuan wrote:Best case scenario, it's a genuinely old fuzhuan with hilarious tickets attached to it... But in such cases there's hardly ever a best scenario.
Sort of like the best case scenarios that go through your mind in a casino.

"Now, if I am lucky, I could win millions of dollars!" But, rarely are any of us that lucky.
There must be a special variety of gambler's fallacy that applies to pu-er drinkers. "The last 5 cakes were all fakes...so this one's bound to be a winner!"

Interesting info about the fuzhuan. Old fuzhuan can also be good I assume? Certainly wouldn't command the price of old pu-erh, but that might even be a blessing in disguise.

Since I've never tasted fu zhuan, any tasting notes to look out for? How would you compare it to HK-stored pu-erh? Hopefully I can get a taste of it in the near future regardless of what its true identity may be.

Thanks for all the advice thus far.

User avatar
Nov 19th, '14, 12:43
Posts: 445
Joined: Mar 25th, '13, 23:03
Location: Lexington Park, Maryland

Re: Genuine 1967 Brick? What are the odds?

by MEversbergII » Nov 19th, '14, 12:43

Fu is truly bottom of the barrel stuff. I don't think age helps, except to cultivate the flowers (Jun Hua). I've got plenty if you would like a sample - just shoot me a PM.

M.

+ Post Reply