of vintage and artifacts

The Sunday Times reported on Lim Swee Say's talk to a group of young and bright eyes unionists. And the reporter, Keith Lin, reported that Swee Say gave them 'an insight in the challenges of governing Singapore.' For his insightful anecdotes, Swee Say was described as 'vintage'. I can imagine all the impressionable young unionists going ga ga with what Swee Say had shared with them. If Swee Say has risen to the level of vintage, and he is only in his early 50s, and bearly 10 years in politics, what would he be appropriately called in another 10 years, artifacts or antiques?