Heavily allocated!!! I was offered 100x3 packs…!
Heavily allocated!!! I was offered 100x3 packs…!
so what’s the production numbers?
Interesting; my merchant friend was offered a grand total of six bottles.
Pm me if you want and I’ll steer you to mine.
DP holds back hundreds of thousands of bottles for late release and would like to see this number hit 1 million. They probably are there by now. Going off memory, I think 2002 was the start of true ‘commercial planning’ around this. If you can sell a bottle for $125 on release and then sell it for almost three times that much after another 8 years, the more you can fine tune the hold back to optimize supply/demand, the more return you can get. If you can hold back 1 million bottles, you are talking about what could be $100M more intake (at minimal additional internal cost) and that would just be with P2 and not any P3 releases.
You didn’t take it all?
![[scratch.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/4/42a16863a8714da3c1604419e3eb9206bb87aa50.gif "scratch"){kind=small}
Thank you. Maybe I am nitpicking but I find some of the article comments rather troublesome- for example that oxygen exposure is bad for aging. That exposure is actually a critical part of the aging process.
In any event, the lees contact is another point and I did not realize that the continued contact prior to disgorgement could have such a profound effect. The article assumes it is always a good thing and makes for a much better result in the long run than an original disgorgement. Sounds nice- but is that really true and proven? I imagine personal preference could play a role too.
Asking this because the assertions in that article- and here in a couple of places if I am reading correctly- would imply that later releases of champagnes are going to consistently be of higher quality than original disgorgements.
When you consider 08 Dom is $170ish retail and P2s are now going for $399, and that Krug 04 is running $250ish at retail but recent library releases of 88 and 90 are going for $600+ - and in all cases with the P2/library wines selling for quite a bit more than original disgorgements of the same vintages at auction- then that article implies that the true cost of a tete de cuvee in its best form based on current elevage/retail practices is now suddenly 2-3x the cost most people think they are paying for a wine at its potential best to cellar for the future.
In other words, if I love 02 and want to open it at its greatest potential at maturity, that article implies that I should not have spend $120 for it at release and instead should be paying $400 now for the P2- or potentially $1,800+ (the current going rate for 1988 P3) at the P3 stage.
That is a pretty big deal, no?
Tom,
You are spot on with the words you wrote. Longer time on lees does not equal a better wine. Some wines show better with less lees aging and some more, but the majority of the effects of lees aging is seen by ~ 8-9 years; this has been proven. Not saying that further aging doesn’t have an effect, but it is minimal. There also is an optimal time to disgorge any wine as different disgorgements of a wine can show, but there is no scientific way to tell what this optimal time is; trial and error seems to be the best way to go about it. Add in that extended aged DPs are aged on cork vs crown crap for the original release and see a different dosage and you have a completely different wine. In my book, P2/P3 is about more than just extended lees aging.
More than anything else, the best part about any late released Champagne is that you know the provenance. That alone can be worth the price of admission.
Already got my 100 cases elsewhere. ![[bow.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/3/34fe6dfbb5b9ca18529c11cea0b49f72cb1f17d5.gif "bow"){kind=small}
Thank you Brad. This makes sense to me. Appreciate it.
Agree with this…
A big fan of the p2 releases, and always fun to put them next to a properly stored original release bottle of the same vintage…
As I think both you and Brad are suggesting, there is no objective “better” here that justifies the price jack on a quality basis (as opposed to a price to reflect storage costs and the added cost of the aging process). There is only subjective (i) hype that the late releases are or should be or are expected to be better and (ii) personal preferences.
I have personally tended toward a slight preference for original Dom bottlings, well stored, which is not to say Oenos/P2s are not also great.
Brad’s observation is spot on and very useful- far more so than the article, which seems to be more about cheerleading for P2 and a thank you for the invite, rather than anything insightful. Last I checked, one could make Champagne with pinot blanc, arbanne etc, not just the big three grape varieties, but that is off topic. As Brad cogently points out, one of the big differences with P2 versus original releases of Dom Perigon is the aging under cork for P2 and crown cap for the first release. Aging under cork allows a very, very discreet oxygen exchange over time and really dramatically changes the evolutionary direction of the Champagne on its fine lees in a positive manner, adding complexity and textural richness to the wine in comparison to the crown cap. These variations, along with the natural softening of the acid structure with longer aging, allows the DP cellar team to find the P2’s perfect balance point with a lower dosage at disgorgement time, which also gives a different profile to the wine vis a vis the original release. So, in essence we really have two different wines, albeit, in close relation to each other due to identical (one assumes) blending of vins clairs at the outset. That said, some of the very greatest Champagnes I have ever drunk have been original disgorgements of DP that were cellared from release for an appropriately long time- 30 or 40 years- and I am hard pressed to say that a 2002 P2 is going to be intrinsically better at age 30 or 40 than the 1964 or 1966 DP were from the original disgorgement at age 40. My approach would be, provided one has the necessary discretionary income, would be to buy both versions and do the comparison 20+ years down the road, as both versions should be absolutely stunning.
John,
Great post. The only other thing I will add is that DP has dialed in the Oenotheque/P2 program quite a bit when compared to the late releases that they offered for sale in the 1980s and 1990s (normally vintages between 1959-1980). A lot of those were just kind of released whenever without a huge amount of forethought other than putting older vintages out there. Once you reached the 1970s, a lot weren’t cork aged either. Starting with the Oneotheques that were disgorged around 1999 and now the P2s, there is a lot more thought put into things and I think that has helped to raise the quality of these late releases. In general, I think there are a number of producers really looking at the right way to do a late release wine that creates a different experience, has aging capability, and has the potential to be a better wine than the original disgorgement. Look at what Roederer and Ruinart are doing with the Cristal Vinotheque and the Dom Ruinart Reserve.
Like you, I usually prefer a well stored original of the DPs from the 60s and 70s, but I have had some stunning Oenos, P2s, and P3s from the 80s and 90s that rank above the original releases (at least right now). Your advice of buying originals and late releases is very sound; having them side by side over the years is a fun and educational event. Heck, you can compare the various disgorgements of the 95 or 96 DP Oenotheques and see clear differences in most.
A million cases a year, or whatever LVMH decides is the best balance between infinite sales and revenue, and losing the cachet. Zero surprise at one board member being offered 300 bottles and another’s ITB merchant being offered 6. Arnault is not reading this thread, but one of his under-assistant-sub-managers is, and laughing all the way to his bonus.
'02 at $160 a bottle and I would buy one if it has im-fucking-peccable provenance. Would taste it against a few grower '02’s and not bet on the result, either way.
Dan Kravitz
Thank you John and Brad for the additional insights. This just hit Dallas and I was able to get 4 bottles for under $400 each- which from a view of WS looks like about as good as the price will ever get stateside- so based on your raves I went ahead and locked them in.
One follow-up question since I just have 4 bottles- worth opening one now, or better to stash them all away? For reference, I recently had the 02 Krug courtesy of a friend and thought it was lovely- but would not even think of opening one of my own for another decade.
So - I was at a LVMH preview tasting yesterday and I probably drank 15 oz of the 2002 P2 from two separate bottles. It was funny, the way they set up the tasting for about 30 people was that Veuve Grand Damme 08 and 08 rose, Dom Ruinart 07, Dom Ruinart 04 Rose were in the front courtyard where everyone was hanging out mingling. In the room on the side was Krug pouring 04 Krug and Krug Rose 22e at the entrance and the back side had Dom Perignon pouring the 06 Rose and P2.
They had brought out 6 bottles of 06 rose and 6 bottles of P2 but it was going so slowly (the rep was pouring shorter pours than anyone else) that they actually ended up taking some bottles into the back. Then when all the reps went outside to pour other wines for the general event (Krug MV/08 Dom), they just left all the opened bottles in the back room.
So I spent about 20 minutes just tasting through 06 Rose, 02 P2 and 04 Krug. Probably finished off 1/4th of each bottle in those 20 minutes. This didn’t include my multitude of pours prior to this time period.
It’s a really nice wine. Not as linear and saline driven as the base level. Creamier with more lemon curd but still strong acid spine and that ocean spray character that the base level has. Actually reminded me a bit of the texture of the 2008. Far more expansive mouthfeel wise than the 02 base. But I haven’t had an 02 regular bottling in almost a year now, so i’m just working off prior memory of multiple bottles. Dunno if i’d pay $390 for it though (what we were offered it at)
Nice! It pays to watch the bottles and not the crowds.
What did you think of the 06 Dom Rose? I did not much care for 06 Dom- too ripe and soft for me- but sometimes those can be nice vintages for the Rose.
I’m not a huge Rose fan for the big houses, but the 06 Rose was nice. Liked it more than the 05 Rose. Definitely had a meaty/smoky element. Showed much better than the Krug Rose 22e next to it.
Did they figure out who drank all the wine? Or were you slumped down against the wall with a bottle in each hand…