Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Message
Author
User avatar
Craig G
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 13808
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 10:57 am
Location: Town of Cats

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#201 Post by Craig G » May 11th, 2019, 1:08 am

Jonathan Loesberg wrote:
May 10th, 2019, 11:53 pm
But resistance to GMOs is the leftist version of science denial.
This is not always true. Some people oppose GMOs because of the way they are patented and used (some would say abused) by corporations. If the motives behind GMO development were always humanitarian, public opinion might be different. For that matter, history says we should be skeptical of safety aspects of technology particularly when the motivation behind it is profit.
“You need to look down to the bottom shelf where they keep the Fighting Cock” — Corey N.

C. Gle@son

Jonathan Loesberg
Posts: 1553
Joined: April 27th, 2010, 5:59 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#202 Post by Jonathan Loesberg » May 11th, 2019, 1:44 am

Craig G wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 1:08 am
Jonathan Loesberg wrote:
May 10th, 2019, 11:53 pm
But resistance to GMOs is the leftist version of science denial.
This is not always true. Some people oppose GMOs because of the way they are patented and used (some would say abused) by corporations. If the motives behind GMO development were always humanitarian, public opinion might be different. For that matter, history says we should be skeptical of safety aspects of technology particularly when the motivation behind it is profit.
Distrusting the reliability of government regulation and the purity of corporate intentions is a reason for either distrusting all new technology and medicine or for working to make government regulation more reliable and getting control over corporate activity. It is not a reason for blanket opposition to GMOs. Your last sentence is accurate enough, given your reasoning and, again, gives a reason for taking more care with any innovation but not one for particular opposition to GMOs.

Doug Schulman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4852
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 9:42 am
Location: MA

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#203 Post by Doug Schulman » May 11th, 2019, 7:29 am

Josh Grossman wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 4:34 pm
Somewhat you are right but combined with trying to buy organic or biodynamic wines, I look at it as more akin to ethical consumerism.
Josh Grossman wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 5:11 pm
My cellar is very Eurocentric much because I shy away from the dominant American styles and farming practices though.
Josh, I am pretty sure that you can't be convinced otherwise, but these views really do not add up. Please read Eric's comments on copper sulfate and the excellent article from World of Fine Wine that he linked. Most growing regions in France (especially Champagne, Loire, Burgundy, and Bordeaux), and many others in Europe, have such disease pressure that organic growers must use enough copper sulfate to be extremely harmful to the environment. Copper sulfate is extremely toxic in multiple ways and is not actually a naturally occurring compound ("organic"?). Meanwhile, conscientious growers who aren't opposed to using small amounts of treatments that would not be allowed for "organic"/biodynamic practices are able to fend off powdery and downy mildew with FAR less negative environmental impact. Organics being more ethical, sustainable, or environmentally friendly is a romantic fantasy when it comes to many European growing regions. Then there's the fact that this one treatment, the only one allowed for fending off the most common problems, is not even really organic.
ITB - retail sales and education

R Greene
Posts: 38
Joined: May 27th, 2017, 4:22 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#204 Post by R Greene » May 11th, 2019, 5:14 pm

Josh Grossman wrote:
May 5th, 2019, 7:39 pm
R Greene wrote:
May 2nd, 2019, 1:57 pm
As someone who has bought (and continues to buy) both older and newer LaLas, I find the premise to this thread questionable. There is no doubt that older LaLas have increased in price over the past few years. If you follow wine-searcher prices (and don't just look at the average), as I do, you will find that the majority of older LaLas like the 1989 Mouline are much more expensive these days. The 89 Turque was around $600 two years ago; the least expensive bottle on wine-searcher is now $899. Around the same time, 95 La Turque was around $350-400; it's now $600+. On the other hand, young LaLas have remained somewhat stable, with the exception of some newly released vintages like 2015. The reason for this? LaLas take 20 years to even begin starting their mature phase, so once they start to reach 20 years old, the prices increase. Auction prices have remained high as well. Every now and then, you'll see a LaLa as a passed lot, but not often. And if you're lucky to get a 98 Turque at a low price, as one commenter did, consider yourself lucky. That doesn't happen often in vintages like 1998. Finally, the older early and mid 80s LaLas are often well over $1,000 per bottle.

I think what's happened is that whereas wine drinkers were focusing on few Northern Rhone producers in the past, which included Guigal, now that has broadened. Other producers like Jamet are now hot, as evidenced in recent auctions. And I can understand that many people don't like the LaLas. They definitely have their own style that some people won't like. But I don't think there's been some universal epiphany that the LaLas are bad wines now that Parker has retired. There will always be trends that occur in the wine world, but I don't think the popularity of the LaLas (or most other Northern Rhone wines) will significantly change anytime soon. If it does, great! I would absolutely love the prices to come down.
https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/70 ... a-Landonne

This didn't sell in last weeks auction. No bids at $260:
https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/70 ... La-Mouline

I guess my response for these two examples would be: 1987 is regarded as an off-year for the LaLas. This vintage always sells low. I personally wouldn't use this as an example; I would instead use vintages like 1983, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991.... And as for the 2001 La Mouline, this price has remained pretty level for awhile. But as I said before, the prices for LaLas tend to increase once they start to reach maturity -- and the 2001 LaLas are nowhere near maturity.

I'm not really passionate about this argument; these have just been my own personal experiences. I agree that many of the LaLa prices have remained fairly consistent, and haven't increased. I wouldn't dispute that. I merely disagreed with the title that Guigal has been a 'casualty.' Shouldn't a casualty mean that prices have plummeted, or even significantly decreased? It's a good discussion though; let's see what happens over the next few years. If the 1998s and 1999s don't increase over the next 5-10 years, then I'll change my mind. But with the current auction and non-auction prices of the 1985s 1988s etc, I just wouldn't say that Guigal has been a 'casualty.'
R y @ n

User avatar
Kris Patten
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3895
Joined: February 1st, 2009, 6:25 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#205 Post by Kris Patten » May 11th, 2019, 6:32 pm

Ryan,

The prices of LaLa's are much closer on release to auction prices as they have done a fairly good job of pushing their release price higher to leave less profit on table.

Granted, we sell them, but only in the last few years, so I was a consumer first, but the value for me was always below the LaLa level with CdRs, Crozes, Gigondas, Saint Joseph, Condrieu, and CdP along with rest of sub-$50 wines.... SJ Lieu Dit, Cote Rotie and Hermitage in the $100 range.
ITB

User avatar
D@vid Bu3ker
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 30618
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:06 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#206 Post by D@vid Bu3ker » May 11th, 2019, 6:37 pm

If Guigal was a casualty I would be able to buy the LaLas for $150 a bottle (or less).
David Bueker - Rieslingfan

User avatar
Jim Brennan
Posts: 4311
Joined: April 17th, 2009, 6:10 pm
Location: People's Republic of Illinois

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#207 Post by Jim Brennan » May 11th, 2019, 6:47 pm

Doug Schulman wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 7:29 am
Josh Grossman wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 4:34 pm
Somewhat you are right but combined with trying to buy organic or biodynamic wines, I look at it as more akin to ethical consumerism.
Josh Grossman wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 5:11 pm
My cellar is very Eurocentric much because I shy away from the dominant American styles and farming practices though.
Josh, I am pretty sure that you can't be convinced otherwise, but these views really do not add up. Please read Eric's comments on copper sulfate and the excellent article from World of Fine Wine that he linked. Most growing regions in France (especially Champagne, Loire, Burgundy, and Bordeaux), and many others in Europe, have such disease pressure that organic growers must use enough copper sulfate to be extremely harmful to the environment. Copper sulfate is extremely toxic in multiple ways and is not actually a naturally occurring compound ("organic"?). Meanwhile, conscientious growers who aren't opposed to using small amounts of treatments that would not be allowed for "organic"/biodynamic practices are able to fend off powdery and downy mildew with FAR less negative environmental impact. Organics being more ethical, sustainable, or environmentally friendly is a romantic fantasy when it comes to many European growing regions. Then there's the fact that this one treatment, the only one allowed for fending off the most common problems, is not even really organic.
That one is strong with opinion, but weak with experience.

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#208 Post by Mel Knox » May 11th, 2019, 6:58 pm

What are the differences in what we can call organic vs the European version??Is copper sulfate allowed here for organic farming??
ITB

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 538
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#209 Post by Greg K » May 11th, 2019, 8:12 pm

R Greene wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 5:14 pm
Josh Grossman wrote:
May 5th, 2019, 7:39 pm
R Greene wrote:
May 2nd, 2019, 1:57 pm
As someone who has bought (and continues to buy) both older and newer LaLas, I find the premise to this thread questionable. There is no doubt that older LaLas have increased in price over the past few years. If you follow wine-searcher prices (and don't just look at the average), as I do, you will find that the majority of older LaLas like the 1989 Mouline are much more expensive these days. The 89 Turque was around $600 two years ago; the least expensive bottle on wine-searcher is now $899. Around the same time, 95 La Turque was around $350-400; it's now $600+. On the other hand, young LaLas have remained somewhat stable, with the exception of some newly released vintages like 2015. The reason for this? LaLas take 20 years to even begin starting their mature phase, so once they start to reach 20 years old, the prices increase. Auction prices have remained high as well. Every now and then, you'll see a LaLa as a passed lot, but not often. And if you're lucky to get a 98 Turque at a low price, as one commenter did, consider yourself lucky. That doesn't happen often in vintages like 1998. Finally, the older early and mid 80s LaLas are often well over $1,000 per bottle.

I think what's happened is that whereas wine drinkers were focusing on few Northern Rhone producers in the past, which included Guigal, now that has broadened. Other producers like Jamet are now hot, as evidenced in recent auctions. And I can understand that many people don't like the LaLas. They definitely have their own style that some people won't like. But I don't think there's been some universal epiphany that the LaLas are bad wines now that Parker has retired. There will always be trends that occur in the wine world, but I don't think the popularity of the LaLas (or most other Northern Rhone wines) will significantly change anytime soon. If it does, great! I would absolutely love the prices to come down.
https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/70 ... a-Landonne

This didn't sell in last weeks auction. No bids at $260:
https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/70 ... La-Mouline

I guess my response for these two examples would be: 1987 is regarded as an off-year for the LaLas. This vintage always sells low. I personally wouldn't use this as an example; I would instead use vintages like 1983, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991.... And as for the 2001 La Mouline, this price has remained pretty level for awhile. But as I said before, the prices for LaLas tend to increase once they start to reach maturity -- and the 2001 LaLas are nowhere near maturity.

I'm not really passionate about this argument; these have just been my own personal experiences. I agree that many of the LaLa prices have remained fairly consistent, and haven't increased. I wouldn't dispute that. I merely disagreed with the title that Guigal has been a 'casualty.' Shouldn't a casualty mean that prices have plummeted, or even significantly decreased? It's a good discussion though; let's see what happens over the next few years. If the 1998s and 1999s don't increase over the next 5-10 years, then I'll change my mind. But with the current auction and non-auction prices of the 1985s 1988s etc, I just wouldn't say that Guigal has been a 'casualty.'
A few things to be parsed here.
1. I’m not sure anyone is suggesting the Guigals themselves are suffering. The discussion seems to be focused on older wines.
2. It’s odd to suggest that if the Guigal LaLas aren’t decreasing in value there has been no effect when the rest of the Northern Rhône has appreciated so significantly. Producers like Jamet have seen their pricing go through the roof in recent years as Guigal has, as people have suggested, stayed relatively flat. When the rest of the market is going up and you’ve stayed flat, you’ve suffered a relative decline.
3. It remains entirely unclear to me when Guigal’s LaLas reach maturity based on posts on this thread. Is it 40 years?? I’ve had a decent number of Guigal’s Hermitage from the 80s, which was pleasant, but fairly simple. Or was I supposed to wait longer?
Greg Kahn

Gerhard P.
Posts: 4668
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: Graz/Austria

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#210 Post by Gerhard P. » May 12th, 2019, 5:20 am

R Greene wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 5:14 pm

I guess my response for these two examples would be: 1987 is regarded as an off-year for the LaLas. This vintage always sells low. ...
Especially for Guigal - and who really knows Guigal will agree - 1987 is definitely NOT an off-vintage ... it is a very successful year for all three LaLas. The vintage is not a great one in the Northern Rhone, but also not really bad, and in Cote-Rotie better than in Hermitage/Cornas etc.
However I agree that prices for 1987 LaLas are lower than for 1988/89/90/91, but the times to buy a ´87 La... for half the price of a 1989 are gone ... there are enough people who know how good they actually are.

Regarding maturity for Guigals LaLas I´d say that most vintages are reaching maturity around 25 years, minor vintages still earlier (15-20y) ... like 1992/93.
All vintages 1997 and older are kind of mature, maybe 1995 can still wait a few years ... and 1999 should be kept for another 5+ years.
1998 - depending on storage - is very close to maturity and usually drinks fine.
On the other hand no hurry to drink up 1983/85/88-91 and 1994, but 1987 will not get any better, but still keep well.
Gerhard Pr@esent
composer / AT

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#211 Post by Mel Knox » May 13th, 2019, 6:48 pm

One thing Parker was good at was selling a wine. He was quite enthusiastic. Some writers you cannot tell if they like the wine until you see the score. The Spectator is still around and I imagine they will give Guigal his share of press.

If other Cote Roties catch up to Guigal in the auction market, does this mean he is suffering or that other producers have benefited from Guigal's star??
ITB

User avatar
D@vid Bu3ker
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 30618
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:06 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#212 Post by D@vid Bu3ker » May 13th, 2019, 6:50 pm

It means that Guigal made a whole lot of money while other wineries were underpriced.
David Bueker - Rieslingfan

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#213 Post by Mel Knox » May 14th, 2019, 10:18 am

Shakespeare said good wine needs no bush and he wasn't talking about George. It's a good thing he stuck to the theater as he knew nothing about wine sales. All wine needs bush.
In the late 70s and early '80s Marcel Guigal and his agent here worked the American market a lot. Before them it was hard to source Cote Rotie here. Jerry Jacoby brought in Dervieux Thaize as I recall and sometimes there were Avery's bottlings available.

David,perhaps the other wineries were underpriced. But they might not be priced at all here if Guigal hadn't excited people about the region.That's my point.
ITB

User avatar
D@vid Bu3ker
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 30618
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:06 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#214 Post by D@vid Bu3ker » May 14th, 2019, 10:46 am

Totally agree Mel. Didn’t mean to imply otherwise.
David Bueker - Rieslingfan

User avatar
John Morris
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 15961
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
Location: Gotham

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#215 Post by John Morris » May 14th, 2019, 11:18 am

Mel Knox wrote:
May 14th, 2019, 10:18 am
Shakespeare said good wine needs no bush and he wasn't talking about George. It's a good thing he stuck to the theater as he knew nothing about wine sales. All wine needs bush.
In the late 70s and early '80s Marcel Guigal and his agent here worked the American market a lot. Before them it was hard to source Cote Rotie here. Jerry Jacoby brought in Dervieux Thaize as I recall and sometimes there were Avery's bottlings available.

David,perhaps the other wineries were underpriced. But they might not be priced at all here if Guigal hadn't excited people about the region.That's my point.
By the early 80s at least -- and I think by the late 70s-- Kermit Lynch was bringing in Gentaz Dervieux, Jasmin and Rostaing. By the mid-80s, a number of other CR producers were available in the Bay Area, including Barge, Champet, Jamet and Clusel-Roch. As I recall, Kermit's producers were selling for more than the Guigal Brune & Blonde, and the other wines were priced on a par with the B&B or a little less. Of course, the Bay Area was uniquely blessed with great importers.

Chapoutier's wines were a rarity and I don't recall Delas in those days, though Jaboulet's full range was available. I don't ever recall seeing an Avery.
“The writing of legislation is perhaps the highest art form the United States has yet achieved, even more original and compelling than the television commercial.” – Gore Vidal, 1974

It's hard for a $35 zin to compete with a $100 cabernet that tastes the same. – me, 2018

User avatar
R@y.Tupp@+sch
Posts: 2425
Joined: February 19th, 2009, 8:22 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#216 Post by R@y.Tupp@+sch » May 14th, 2019, 11:59 am

When Classic Wines started bringing in Guigal to the US around 1970, they couldn't give away any of his wines. An example of how hard a sell they were, a purchaser asked to have a couple of cases of 1970 La Mouline bottled in 375ml which they had never done for La Mouline. Guigal agreed to fulfill the order.
So the wines were readily available in the US in the early 70's, it's just that nobody wanted them.
Killer, Staggering, Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor ®

User avatar
Josh Grossman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 658
Joined: August 30th, 2017, 11:26 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#217 Post by Josh Grossman » May 14th, 2019, 12:18 pm

Jim Brennan wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 6:47 pm
Doug Schulman wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 7:29 am
Josh Grossman wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 4:34 pm
Somewhat you are right but combined with trying to buy organic or biodynamic wines, I look at it as more akin to ethical consumerism.
Josh Grossman wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 5:11 pm
My cellar is very Eurocentric much because I shy away from the dominant American styles and farming practices though.
Josh, I am pretty sure that you can't be convinced otherwise, but these views really do not add up. Please read Eric's comments on copper sulfate and the excellent article from World of Fine Wine that he linked. Most growing regions in France (especially Champagne, Loire, Burgundy, and Bordeaux), and many others in Europe, have such disease pressure that organic growers must use enough copper sulfate to be extremely harmful to the environment. Copper sulfate is extremely toxic in multiple ways and is not actually a naturally occurring compound ("organic"?). Meanwhile, conscientious growers who aren't opposed to using small amounts of treatments that would not be allowed for "organic"/biodynamic practices are able to fend off powdery and downy mildew with FAR less negative environmental impact. Organics being more ethical, sustainable, or environmentally friendly is a romantic fantasy when it comes to many European growing regions. Then there's the fact that this one treatment, the only one allowed for fending off the most common problems, is not even really organic.
That one is strong with opinion, but weak with experience.
I am young (comparatively) and here mostly to learn about wine. I do have one degree in plant biology though. I don't deny that Bordeaux mixture is bad for everything. First though, it's a fungicide, not a herbicide like glycophosate, so the above comparison to that doesn't really work. I'm not aware of any great chemical fungicide (other than manual removal of infected material) and suspect most non-organic producers also use Bordeaux mixture? For my home garden, to control tomato fungus diseases (panama and septorias) I use rain covers so rain droplets don't spread the fungal spores, and I alternate beds they are planted so Anthracnose can't overwinter. Hard to do that with a vineyard. What is the more environmental fungicide than Bordeaux mixture? Is Bordeaux mixture used heavily in non-organic grapes?

User avatar
Josh Grossman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 658
Joined: August 30th, 2017, 11:26 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#218 Post by Josh Grossman » May 14th, 2019, 12:58 pm

R@y.Tupp@+sch wrote:
May 14th, 2019, 11:59 am
When Classic Wines started bringing in Guigal to the US around 1970, they couldn't give away any of his wines. An example of how hard a sell they were, a purchaser asked to have a couple of cases of 1970 La Mouline bottled in 375ml which they had never done for La Mouline. Guigal agreed to fulfill the order.
So the wines were readily available in the US in the early 70's, it's just that nobody wanted them.
I was born in '82 and by the time I hit legal age, Guigal and M Chapoutier were, I believe, the only Northern Rhones available in Ohio--but there wasn't a supermarket where you couldn't find a shelf groaning under the weight of their base bottlings. I do suppose that my perception of many of their wines as being mostly mass market wine, and what I tried, I didn't like. At the same time, the Lala's were one of the most expensive wine I saw growing up, and they just seemed like a prime example conspicuous consumption and a Veblen good. Now there are seemingly unlimited N. Rhones out there which I love. I just was trying to give my two cents as to why I'm not a customer (and others like me)--but am for Chave, Clape, Sorrel , etc and why that might contribute to making the market soft for Guigal. Right now in a similar style to Lala's, I do own (but have yet to try) Maryline & Christophe Billon's La Côte Rozier, Les Elotins, La Brocarde, and flights of Bedrock Wine Co. Syrah Exposition Weills. I do suppose there is an advantage, in immediate gratification, that it's easier to find mature examples of Guigal than most other N. Rhones. Now that the market is soft, I will work to give a mature example another chance. Maybe a bit of viognier makes syrah better able to integrate new oak and I'll have an epiphany?

User avatar
R@y.Tupp@+sch
Posts: 2425
Joined: February 19th, 2009, 8:22 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#219 Post by R@y.Tupp@+sch » May 14th, 2019, 1:21 pm

Josh,

My post was mainly in response to Mel's post saying that Guigal's Cote Rotie wasn't readily available in the US until after their agents worked the market in the late 70's and early 80's.
Killer, Staggering, Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor ®

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#220 Post by Mel Knox » May 14th, 2019, 2:56 pm

R@y,

Your post made me think back a bit.
I visited Guigal in 1977 when we were carrying their wines. Grape Expectations brought in their wines through Fred Eck of Classic Wines. Grape Ex started up around 1974. Grape Ex and a man named Jerry Jacoby were the main people bringing in northern Rhones then.Jerry's girlfriend was from the Rhone. Because of Jerry, I also visited Chave in '77, or was it '79?? All I remember is that Mr Chave opened up a 64 Hermitage Blanc.

Guigal did a winemaker tasting at the store before I went to visit.

I've got an old catalog around here somewhere....but exactly where?? As I recall, Guigal's Cote Rotie ('73?) went for $7.50 retail. We also bought 71 Monprivato from Grape. It sold for $6.59 retail.
ITB

User avatar
John Morris
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 15961
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
Location: Gotham

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#221 Post by John Morris » May 14th, 2019, 3:40 pm

As it happens, going through some old papers a couple of days ago, I stumbled on the 1983 catalog for Brookline Liquor Mart, Classic's retail outlet. An interesting walk down memory lane with these Guigal prices:

1974 and 1977 Cote Rotie - La Mouline, $23.95 (now $250+, or 10x the 1983 price)
1979 Cote Rotie - Brune & Blonde, $11.95 (so La Mouline was only twice the B&B price) (now $55+, or 4.5x the 1983 price)
1977 or 1979 Hermitage Rouge, $11.95
1979 Cotes du Rhone Rouge, $5.50 (this can be had for $15-$16 today, or ~3x the 1983 price)

The CR and Hermitage were less than a Max. Grunhauser Abtsberg Spatlese, which sold for $13.25.

Not all Barolo was cheap, Mel. The '78 Marcarini Brunate sold for a whopping $17.25 and Gaja '78 Barbaresco Costa Russi for (gulp!) $45.

But Mascarello's 75 and 76 Monprivato could be had for $8.95, and Capellano's 1975 Serralunga for $5.95 -- roughly the Guigal CdR price. Of course, those vintages weren't as good. But, then, neither was '77 in the Northern Rhone, as I recall.

It's interesting to see how the relatively prices have moved around on those.
“The writing of legislation is perhaps the highest art form the United States has yet achieved, even more original and compelling than the television commercial.” – Gore Vidal, 1974

It's hard for a $35 zin to compete with a $100 cabernet that tastes the same. – me, 2018

User avatar
Eric Ifune
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3431
Joined: June 19th, 2009, 7:43 pm

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#222 Post by Eric Ifune » May 14th, 2019, 4:01 pm

I remember buying the 1978 Guigal Hermitage and Brune & Blonde in Los Angeles. No other Cote Rotie based producers were around. There was Jaboulet and Chapoutier on the market.

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#223 Post by Mel Knox » May 14th, 2019, 6:00 pm

I remember visiting Gaja in 1979. I was with a guy from Queens named Lou Iacucci, who ran what he called the Enoteca of Queens Boulevard. Sadly, he was killed in a traffic accident sometime in the '80s. Angelo showed us the Sori Tilden and said it would sell for $35. I thought he was nuts and Lou tried to buy all he could. He had a bunch of chauvinistic Italian American customers and I had a bunch of chauvinistic Californians. I think the regular Barbaresco sold for $12 retail back then.
ITB

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#224 Post by Mel Knox » May 14th, 2019, 6:11 pm

Just found my old catalog:
'67 Monprivato...$47.25....in a bottle holding 3.78 liters...a regular magnum cost $16
'69 Conterno Barolo...$7.50
'71 Monprivato...$9
'70 Fiorano...$8
'74 Chave Red....$8.50
75 Chave white...7.75
74 La Mouline...16.00
73 Cote Rotie Guigal...$10
'76 Ridge Lytton Springs...$6.75
72 Clos de Tart...$15

Anybody for a time machine??
ITB

Lee Short
Posts: 1174
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 7:33 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#225 Post by Lee Short » May 14th, 2019, 6:24 pm

John Morris wrote:
May 14th, 2019, 3:40 pm
As it happens, going through some old papers a couple of days ago, I stumbled on the 1983 catalog for Brookline Liquor Mart, Classic's retail outlet. An interesting walk down memory lane with these Guigal prices:

1974 and 1977 Cote Rotie - La Mouline, $23.95 (now $250+, or 10x the 1983 price)
1979 Cote Rotie - Brune & Blonde, $11.95 (so La Mouline was only twice the B&B price) (now $55+, or 4.5x the 1983 price)
The juice that went into the B&B then, sure ain't the same as the juice that goes into the B&B now.

User avatar
John Morris
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 15961
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
Location: Gotham

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#226 Post by John Morris » May 14th, 2019, 9:52 pm

Mel Knox wrote:
May 14th, 2019, 6:00 pm
I remember visiting Gaja in 1979. I was with a guy from Queens named Lou Iacucci, who ran what he called the Enoteca of Queens Boulevard. Sadly, he was killed in a traffic accident sometime in the '80s. Angelo showed us the Sori Tilden and said it would sell for $35. I thought he was nuts and Lou tried to buy all he could. He had a bunch of chauvinistic Italian American customers and I had a bunch of chauvinistic Californians. I think the regular Barbaresco sold for $12 retail back then.
By 1983, Brookline was selling the Gaja '78 plain Barbaresco for $24.50, slightly more than the '79s from Palmer ($24) and Pichon Lalande ($20).
“The writing of legislation is perhaps the highest art form the United States has yet achieved, even more original and compelling than the television commercial.” – Gore Vidal, 1974

It's hard for a $35 zin to compete with a $100 cabernet that tastes the same. – me, 2018

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#227 Post by Mel Knox » May 14th, 2019, 10:45 pm

Gaja seems to believe that the more you charge the more respect you get.
Another topic for an MW dissertation or maybe something the Society for Wine Economics could work on.
ITB

User avatar
D@vid Bu3ker
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 30618
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:06 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#228 Post by D@vid Bu3ker » May 15th, 2019, 4:19 am

Mel Knox wrote:
May 14th, 2019, 6:11 pm
Just found my old catalog:
'67 Monprivato...$47.25....in a bottle holding 3.78 liters...a regular magnum cost $16
'69 Conterno Barolo...$7.50
'71 Monprivato...$9
'70 Fiorano...$8
'74 Chave Red....$8.50
75 Chave white...7.75
74 La Mouline...16.00
73 Cote Rotie Guigal...$10
'76 Ridge Lytton Springs...$6.75
72 Clos de Tart...$15

Anybody for a time machine??
A couple of guys in my tasting group still have a few bottles of 1970 Petrus that they bought on release. The price sticker for the 1970 is $24.99.
David Bueker - Rieslingfan

John Gilman
Posts: 548
Joined: June 30th, 2009, 10:46 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#229 Post by John Gilman » May 15th, 2019, 5:22 am

Jay Miller wrote:
May 2nd, 2019, 6:48 am
I had a few in the past which didn't impress me but I admit to loving a recent 1986 La Turque.

anyone know if the style changed since then?
Hi Jay,

I used to drink a lot of Guigal wines from the decades of the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s, with my regular contact with these wines slipping away after the 1995 vintage. To my palate, there was a change in the style of the oak component in the wines in the second half of the 1990s, which presented itself quite differently in the finished wines. In the days of Marcel Guigal, the new oak here was heavily toasted, as was the style for proponents of new oak throughout much of the rest of the wine world as well in this era, so one had that smoky, toasty oak element present in the wines. I happened to think that this oak aromatic and flavor profile worked quite nicely with both Cote-Rotie and Hermitage, and though the wines were always quite new oaky in style, to my palate the combination worked nicely with the underlying terroirs of those regions. I am not sure when the change in new oak style occurred precisely (or if this was a gradual thing), but recent vintages I have tasted of Guigal's Crozes, Hermitage and Cote-Rotie (I did not get samples of the new vintages of the La-Las) had a completely different new oak signature, which was very spicy and cedary, in the style one finds often in casks from Taransaud. I did not find that the spicy oak element in the new wines married with the terroir anywhere near as seamlessly as in the older era of toasty oak, so the new oak component laid there like a veneer over the wine, rather than feeling like an integral part. The new oak tannins also stuck out uncovered on the backend a bit in the wines that I sampled- not so much that I worried it would never fully integrate- but, again, in making the comparison to the era when I drank a lot of Guigal, it was quite striking in its lack of integration when viewed through the prism of past vintages.

I have not visited the Guigal cellars in Ampuis in a very long time (Philippe Guigal was still a teenager and I was in my mid-20s when I was last there) and so do not have any firsthand information on how these changes have been implemented or over what time period, but to my palate they are very much in evidence in comparing wines from the late 1980s and today. So, the beautiful 1986 La Turque you drank recently (and Marcel Guigal made absolutely brilliant wines in both 1986 and 1987- those were some of the sleepers in the market back in the day that I used to drink with regularity, as they were also cheap, with La-Las from both vintages often to be found around $40-$50 a bottle)- will not be replicated stylistically in the wines of recent vintages. However, the wine I drank and bought the most of in that era was always the Brune et Blondes Cote-Rotie, which was always exemplary and a great value. I bought it by the caseload in the vintages from 1983, 1985, 1987, 1988 and 1991 with immense satisfaction and never had any regrets, despite its more new oaky style compared to the great classicists of that time. Whether or not the change in the new oak component in the wines might have had an affect in the market is another matter which I cannot comment on, as have not been a merchant for a long time now and have no sense of where Guigal stands today in comparison to that era when I was very familiar with the wines and happily offered them to clients. I will echo the sentiments of others that the Cotes du Rhone bottling remains a very good value (at least the last iteration I tasted) and is damn impressive in quality for the price point and volume level of the bottling. The white wines here that I have tasted in recent times are over the top to my palate and far less interesting, but I thought that good wines lurked under the spicy oak at the Crozes, regular Cote-Rotie and Hermitage levels and to my palate would still be quite interesting, if the profile of the new wood could revert back to the 1980s style of toastiness.

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#230 Post by Mel Knox » May 15th, 2019, 9:32 am

John,

I know that Taransaud tried to sell barrels to Guigal but did they ever succeed?? You can say that for a lot of cooperages! Since I repped Taransaud until a few years ago I think somebody would have told me. I am checking on this.

To me the style of Guigal's oak signature was a kind of smoky BBQ quality that came from Damy barrels (from the 'Foret Guigal' Marcel told me). The last time I saw Marcel was at a ceremonial cutting of the last tree Colbert had planted in the Troncais forest. This was around 2005 and at lunch he was sitting with a party that was neither Taransaud nor Francois. Nadalie?? Or was it a book broker named Canadel??

David,
I bought 70 Palmer for $10. If you got on to '70 early there were lots of deals. Then again, there were several dumps during the '70s --Austin Nichols, Monsieur Henri--that featured some stellar pricing...'71 Rieussec $4...second growths for $10...
ITB

Doug Schulman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4852
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 9:42 am
Location: MA

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#231 Post by Doug Schulman » May 15th, 2019, 11:50 am

Josh Grossman wrote:
May 14th, 2019, 12:18 pm
Jim Brennan wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 6:47 pm
Doug Schulman wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 7:29 am


Josh, I am pretty sure that you can't be convinced otherwise, but these views really do not add up. Please read Eric's comments on copper sulfate and the excellent article from World of Fine Wine that he linked. Most growing regions in France (especially Champagne, Loire, Burgundy, and Bordeaux), and many others in Europe, have such disease pressure that organic growers must use enough copper sulfate to be extremely harmful to the environment. Copper sulfate is extremely toxic in multiple ways and is not actually a naturally occurring compound ("organic"?). Meanwhile, conscientious growers who aren't opposed to using small amounts of treatments that would not be allowed for "organic"/biodynamic practices are able to fend off powdery and downy mildew with FAR less negative environmental impact. Organics being more ethical, sustainable, or environmentally friendly is a romantic fantasy when it comes to many European growing regions. Then there's the fact that this one treatment, the only one allowed for fending off the most common problems, is not even really organic.
That one is strong with opinion, but weak with experience.
I am young (comparatively) and here mostly to learn about wine. I do have one degree in plant biology though. I don't deny that Bordeaux mixture is bad for everything. First though, it's a fungicide, not a herbicide like glycophosate, so the above comparison to that doesn't really work. I'm not aware of any great chemical fungicide (other than manual removal of infected material) and suspect most non-organic producers also use Bordeaux mixture? For my home garden, to control tomato fungus diseases (panama and septorias) I use rain covers so rain droplets don't spread the fungal spores, and I alternate beds they are planted so Anthracnose can't overwinter. Hard to do that with a vineyard. What is the more environmental fungicide than Bordeaux mixture? Is Bordeaux mixture used heavily in non-organic grapes?
First, a fair point was made about the article that it's comparing a fungicide to an herbicide. I know there are alternative fungicides that non-organic growers tend to use, and that they tend to use far less copper sulfate than organic growers in these regions. Hopefully Jim can educate us further since he seems to want to. Meanwhile, I'll see if I can find some time to research this a bit.
ITB - retail sales and education

Doug Schulman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4852
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 9:42 am
Location: MA

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#232 Post by Doug Schulman » May 15th, 2019, 12:04 pm

Phosphorous acid seems popular for downy mildew.
ITB - retail sales and education

Mel Knox
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 8:46 am
Location: San francisco

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#233 Post by Mel Knox » May 15th, 2019, 12:19 pm

It appears that Marcel built himself a cooperage and that Seguin Moreau supplies the wood. Taransaud did make some foudres for him.
ITB

User avatar
dr0ch
Posts: 493
Joined: April 26th, 2010, 11:17 pm

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#234 Post by dr0ch » May 15th, 2019, 4:05 pm

David Glasser wrote:
May 1st, 2019, 8:49 pm
My first Guigal LaLa was the 1988 La Turque. I fell in love. .... and that first experience hasn’t been replicated.
+1, except it was the '88 La Mouline for me.
-Devin

User avatar
Jim Brennan
Posts: 4311
Joined: April 17th, 2009, 6:10 pm
Location: People's Republic of Illinois

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#235 Post by Jim Brennan » May 16th, 2019, 6:52 am

Josh Grossman wrote:
May 14th, 2019, 12:18 pm
Jim Brennan wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 6:47 pm
Doug Schulman wrote:
May 11th, 2019, 7:29 am


Josh, I am pretty sure that you can't be convinced otherwise, but these views really do not add up. Please read Eric's comments on copper sulfate and the excellent article from World of Fine Wine that he linked. Most growing regions in France (especially Champagne, Loire, Burgundy, and Bordeaux), and many others in Europe, have such disease pressure that organic growers must use enough copper sulfate to be extremely harmful to the environment. Copper sulfate is extremely toxic in multiple ways and is not actually a naturally occurring compound ("organic"?). Meanwhile, conscientious growers who aren't opposed to using small amounts of treatments that would not be allowed for "organic"/biodynamic practices are able to fend off powdery and downy mildew with FAR less negative environmental impact. Organics being more ethical, sustainable, or environmentally friendly is a romantic fantasy when it comes to many European growing regions. Then there's the fact that this one treatment, the only one allowed for fending off the most common problems, is not even really organic.
That one is strong with opinion, but weak with experience.
I am young (comparatively) and here mostly to learn about wine. I do have one degree in plant biology though. I don't deny that Bordeaux mixture is bad for everything. First though, it's a fungicide, not a herbicide like glycophosate, so the above comparison to that doesn't really work. I'm not aware of any great chemical fungicide (other than manual removal of infected material) and suspect most non-organic producers also use Bordeaux mixture? For my home garden, to control tomato fungus diseases (panama and septorias) I use rain covers so rain droplets don't spread the fungal spores, and I alternate beds they are planted so Anthracnose can't overwinter. Hard to do that with a vineyard. What is the more environmental fungicide than Bordeaux mixture? Is Bordeaux mixture used heavily in non-organic grapes?
Josh, I won't get into the chemistry since I think you're mostly responding to other assertions in the thread.

I will say that The most useful rhetorical question anyone has ever posed to me about wine is one that's good to keep in mind: how many times do you need to try a wine to know that you don't like it?

Whenever I think I "know" something about a wine or a style, this always comes into mind... And time and again it has been my experience that wine confounds prior expectations, that palates change, and that I should always be willing to reconsider my assumptions.

Hell, I might even find I learn something useful from Jeff someday (aside from avoiding what he likes). :-)

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 538
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#236 Post by Greg K » May 16th, 2019, 8:26 am

Jim Brennan wrote:
May 16th, 2019, 6:52 am
Hell, I might even find I learn something useful from Jeff someday (aside from avoiding what he likes). :-)
I learn useful things from Jeff all the time - if he really likes a wine, I'm best advised to stay away (a recent 2003 Le Greal was a great example - blech). I find that a genuinely useful service, and I mean that with absolutely no snark once so ever.
Greg Kahn

Jonathan Loesberg
Posts: 1553
Joined: April 27th, 2010, 5:59 am

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#237 Post by Jonathan Loesberg » May 16th, 2019, 11:00 am

Alas staying away from wines Jeff likes does not work any better for me than staying away from all wnes Parker did. That would mean I would never drink Rayas, Charvin, Ferrand, Pegau in CdP. I am not a big bordeaux person but I doubt it would work any better for me there. The method does seem to leave all great Loire reds before me where to choose, though.

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 538
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Is Guigal a casualty of Parker’s retirement

#238 Post by Greg K » May 16th, 2019, 11:06 am

Jonathan Loesberg wrote:
May 16th, 2019, 11:00 am
Alas staying away from wines Jeff likes does not work any better for me than staying away from all wnes Parker did. That would mean I would never drink Rayas, Charvin, Ferrand, Pegau in CdP. I am not a big bordeaux person but I doubt it would work any better for me there. The method does seem to leave all great Loire reds before me where to choose, though.
I don't generally love CdP, so that's fine for me! I'm obviously not really this dogmatic about Jeff's reviews, but his opinion on a wine is a very useful data point for me. He has his palate, it's very much not mine, and hey - that's great.
Greg Kahn

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”