Yesterday was the first day of a couple of days of tasting the new vintage in London. I am stuck in NY, but as someone who wants to know what is going on, I follow this quite closely.of course no substitute for tasting, but there are a couple of people whose palates I trust (up to a pointđ) who views are worth listening to.
Friends and a couple of merchants have expressed that this is a vintage you really have to know what you are doing, and although there are some âgreatâ wines, there is a lot of mediocrity too. Gilman who just managed to get his newsletter out before the tastings, echoed this.
Normally I would just focus on older vintages and ignore this, but it seems that the best wines are incredibly good, so I may look at the initial offers and buy a little, but I have to say a couple of major producers were mentioned who made overexextracted wines, and my merchant friend was going to pass this year at the risk of losing allocation next.
Prices were of course mentioned. The opening gambit was that they would not go up this year, which went over like a lead balloon. A fair amount of pressure was exerted to reduce prices, but at this late stage if it does happen, it would be a token percentage. Lots of intrigue, and for once merchants will have to earn their money and make difficult choices with their Burgundies. An interesting ride ahead.
The costs Iâve seen from early offers have been slightly less than 16, but not extremely attractive. What Iâve heard is the vintage is sorta similar to 07, sorta earlier drinking but approachable and lovely and that whites were better than reds, in gernsal. Considering how big yields were on 17, youâd think prices will ultimately be lower.
Thanks Mark. Iâve come across quite a few reports stating that 2017 is an exceptionally variable vintage and quite hard to judge without firsthand knowledge. I wonât have the opportunity to taste before applying for allocations so I most likely go with the same producers I buy each year to ensure my continued allocation. I will also repeat my annual request for a small allocation of wines I have never received allocations for historically. Hopefully some merchants that have those allocations will pass much like your friend and I might finally be able to get a small allocation myself given the high volume of the vintage. So maybe there will be a silver lining to the vintage variability?
Out of curiosity are there any villages that performed better in 2017?
When one thinks about vintages 2000 and 2007 and how tasty and well they are drinking now, I think it would be a mistake to skip 2017, except you have a cellar full of ready to go bottles for the next 5-10 years.
I haven´t tasted very much last summer of 2017, and only reds, but what I´ve tasted was very charming, full of fruit and (mostly) well balanced with enough structure for 1-2 decades. I think the vintage is slightly more concentrated than 2007 and 2000, but will not close down as tightly as for instance 2014 is now beginning to.
But I would not buywines from unknown producers or those who are known for variable quality, and it is also not a vintage to stock general Appellations. The best however is to taste before buying.
Also no need to accept high prices, except for the rare trophies.
I think the decision as to whether or not to buy 2017 is, of course, going to come down to price, and frankly unless there is a serious discount for the same wine from older and better vintages, they will be tough sell. Sounds as if the price ainât going anywhere, so smart money suggests passing, and perhaps picking them up in a couple of years, when they are discounted. It is not a must have vintage, but I get the feeling, the best wines will certainly be worth buying. For instance Gilman gave Trapet Chambertin a very high score, might buy it at the right price.
I think the pricing point is more at the retailers or importers than at the producers.
Producers in Burgundy suffered a lot over the last 3-4 vintages with low yields, so they raised prices moderately (with exceptions). I don´t think they need - and won´t - lower prices just because they have now a good quantity.
You won´t buy a fine Premier Cru at 40 at the domaine just because the 2016 was also 40 ? You want it for 36 ?
Many retailers made good money with less bottles of 2016 - they should be content with a lower price for more bottles of 2017, otherwise they might have to drink them themselves.
As you suggest, discussing the prices the producers charge does not tell us very much in the case of many small producer Burgundies. The prices charged by the producers are in many occasions pretty reasonable given the size of the wineries and the demand for the wine. The question is how much will middlemen be able to gouge customers for the 2017s with huge markups over what they pay for the wines.
Are you discussing producer prices or retail prices. This is not Bordeaux. There often can be only a limited relationship between the two with small production Burgundy. I have seen grand cru Burgundies that sell for less than 150 euros at the wineries to customers who get allocations sell in the US for $700.
The winery versus retail price is one of the annoying facets of Burgundy. As a journalist, I could not buy direct, now of course I am at the mercy of the secondary market.
I meant what you consumers can buy at, so perhaps the middle men may make a little less profit.
Thatâs because of cherry picking. I find it humorous that you think that there is any such thing as gouging based on the attitudes here. Why shouldnât everyone charge what the market will bear all the time? The only reason not to is too take care of customers who buy every year, but now everyone wants to pass on vintages. Why do you think that market prices for Bordeaux are tied to cellar door prices more than Burgundy? That is a misunderstanding of how this market works.
Given how out of whack supply and demand have gotten in Burgundy, any expectations at release for price reductions are somewhere between wishful thinking and self-delusion. Iâm hoping for flat price changes, and will buy modestly from producers I like and the few I get to taste. The smart (yet very difficult!) play is to just buy a little and wait a few years for the far more likely long term lower prices (like what weâre seeing now to varying degrees for 11/12/13/14). Hereâs to 2017 close outs in 2022!
You seem to think that the way a lot of retailers price Burgundy will make customers want to buy whatever crap the retailers want to sell them so we can be their really good customers. I am getting older and have plenty of wine. What is truly happening is that I am buying less wine. If I cannot buy what I want at reasonable prices, I just will drink what I have.
No, what Iâm trying to point out (and have, though it doesnât seem to be sinking in) is that all of this talk about âgougingâ etc. etc. is all a natural outgrowth of a more efficient market. Those of us who canât/wonât pay market price for wines that weâve loved and followed for years are SOL. If we want the low prices that more efficient markets bring us, then this is the flip side of that coin. Personally, I liked the way the old market used to work, but I prefer a lot of things like that. It would be nice to be able to go to a hardware store and talk to someone who knows something. All the haberdashers have closed.
Iâm not super old, but I also have plenty of wine and follow that strategy, in fact, I always have itâs a good strategy. Most wines are fungible.
I donât have my notes with me, but for 17s I tasted at the following domaines: Gerard Mugneret, Faiveley, Lamarche, Hudelot-Noellat, Dujac, Clos Lambrays, Duroche, Damoy, Thibault Liger-Belair, Roulot, Lafarge, Y Clerget, Genot-Boulanger, Ponsot, Mugneret-Gibourg and Cecile Tremblay. So take my opinion with a grain of salt given that I think most would agree that most all of these producers are very good.
With 17 the one aspect I would consider is what happened to the appellation in 16. If it got hit hard by hail in 2016 then in 17 the vines naturally tried to overproduce. Somehow the vine seems to know that every year it should produce X and if in 2016 it produced a fraction of X, in 17 the vines tended to overproduce. If the vines overproduced then you have some wines that can appear a bit dilute. Some vigneron seemed to take very different approaches to this, but all agreed that if the vineyard got hit in 16 then the crop was abundant in 17. Faiveley shuffled some of their vineyard managers early to do pruning and training before bud break, others did a green harvest but from Faiveleyâs work in the past they have concluded by then it is already too late and you arenât accomplishing enough. Other vigneron were just so happy to have an abundant harvest after getting hammered in 2016.
I said it here before (and really hoped I would be wrong) was you saw a demand surge with 2015 as it was the next vintage of the century-so prices gapped higher. In 2016 you have a tiny harvest so prices stay firm. Which brings an abundant crop in 2017 and demand is still high and prices do not go down materially.
As someone pointed out up thread-the pricing increased from 2014->today by in large have not come from the producer. Cellar door prices are probably up 10-15%, but retail demand has skyrocketed so prices have doubled or tripled. It is fairly remarkable when you can go to dinner in France and see current release DRC on lists for 400e vs the US retail pricing. When I was there in November we drank Mugnier Musigny 3 times in one week, not because we are huge hitters but because there were 4 of us and the prices were too good to pass up. It is also tough to pass on Rousseau CSJ for 200e off a restaurant list.
It is not a vintage to skip, but also not a vintage to chase. I think the whites are exceptionally good, and many reds are also great.
Now that I have seen both Gilman and Burghoundâs reports, I have to say that I am very excited about select 2017s. I very much like what I call the âluncheonâ vintages, and lighter wines which are also well-balanced very often have a way of lasting and improving longer than one might think.
That said, I am being very cautious about overextraction because, despite the crop size, the financial impacts of so many small vintages will still be felt- and so I have 2012 Bordeaux on my mind when considering the temptation to try and get too much out of this vintage. 2012 Margaux is a great example- beautiful wine in some respects, but if only they had let it be the light to mid-weight wine it could have been rather than push the limits on oak and extraction. In time it may well turn out okay, but the opportunity for a delicate and lacey luncheon wine for early drinking in the vein of the 1992 was lost.
And to second what you and Paul have said about pricing- that is all happening in the distribution chain, and ironically it is concentrated in the direct import operations that enjoy reputations for having good prices. The âevilâ three tier system so many like to complain about has been pretty good to loyal burgundy collectors in 2015 and 2016 when it comes to pricing.
Great example- Meo-Camuzet Echezeaux. Via regular channels I paid about $260 for the 2014- and then a legit bump (meaning ex-cellar and then on up the chain) to $380ish for the 2015. And I paid the same for the 2016 even though prevailing retail and prearrival was over $600 from some of the national âdiscountâ retailers.
Frankly, some of the mid-tier markups on 2015 and 2016 have been so absurd that even if just those evaporate a good number of more in-demand wines will see US price drops of 20-30%. At those levels, I think there will be good appetite for the 2017s if the wines prove as Gilman and Burghound report.
Time will tell. For my part, I am in for 3 favored producers. Not much, but a bit more than planned because I desperately need and want a lighter and more charming vintage in the cellar as I wind down and wait for all these 15s and 16s to mature.
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}