I don’t think there is any harm in having the critics taste from barrel. It’s a finite number of people you are servicing, and the wineries aren’t wining and dining them. The critics pay for their own travel expenses, so it’s really just the samples, which isn’t that much wine.
The much bigger expense is when the trade comes to Bordeaux. That’s quite the spectacle, and a huge boost to the local economy for that week.
I think being more open door to visitors, and more road shows sounds like a working solution. It’s cheaper to go to Bordeaux for a week than Napa!
People listen to their friends more than merchants. Wasn’t always like that, but seems that merchant influence is slipping. It’s risky, but getting in front of a wine group that is actively buying certainly has its pluses.
But also this method engages a different audience to the traditional one. Anyway we will see - curious to see if we do get the new wine from chateau X later this year!
In certain markets (e.g. my market here in Toronto, Canada), en primeur is really the only way to buy and rarely are prices ever lower than through the en primeur process via LCBO. We also only have to put 25% down and pay remainder when the wines arrive in bottle which makes en primeur still attractive.
That said, I’m planning on buying in very limited quantities for 2024 given my understanding of the vintage.
Assuming the two sides are the sellers and the buyers, what, exactly, do the buyers need to give? All-too-often it feels like sellers (and this is not restricted to wine, by the way) feel entitled to buyers’ patronage. With non-essential goods and services, that’s just not how it works.
This is because merchants, by in large, cannot find it in themselves to be honest with their customers. Or, when they are “honest,” it comes in the form of coded language. Guess who is not dishonest with those same customers? Those same customers’ friends. And other wine geeks — the type who might post on discussion forums, CT, or other social media. And many wine geeks have legitimately good palates, and are known entities to their friends. Yes, it’s true this all falls apart w/r/t EP, in particular, unless said friend goes to Bdx and participates in EP — but EP is no longer as attractive or important as it used to be, as we have discussed in great detail over thousands of posts on this board.
I’m surprised at how little discussion there has been about chaptalization with the 2024 wines. I know @Mark_Golodetz has mentioned it a couple times, however.
Does anyone even care about this? Is chaptalization common in Bdx., spanning many producers and many vintages?
Supply is one side, the other side is demand. Chateau need to cut supply, AND they need to increase demand. I dont think they’ll simply ‘increase demand’ sufficiently to match current production volumes.
By cut supply, as well, I think there are a few things that can be done. It doesnt necessarily mean a reduction in the volume of wine produced, but for example, reducing the amount of top end wine and having more second wines (if you cut lafite/etc volumes by 90%, that would sell out every year without any issue). Or, for example, third tier chateau trying to premiumise their product could just stop, spend less on production costs, make poorer wines. I find bordeaux too crowded at the £50-150 a bottle price point.
Depending on the producer, vineyard and varietal, between .5 and 1 degree, especially for Cabernet.
Why do you care? All those 80s, 70s, 60s etc., wines you adore and covet utilized chapatization! Same for grapes from recent cooler vintages, 17, 14, 11, 08, 04 and 02.
Agreed, but I also don’t think merchants taste that much wine (and the really successful ones do). You need to taste the wine to create honesty.
The customer’s friend can run afoul though. It’s one thing if you were saying to me, “Hey, try this Cabernet Franc”, I probably wouldn’t blink and would buy it. But the “wine expert” friend can be label happy, and recommend nonsense like Decoy, Caymus and Prisoner too.
For those that I know that went and tasted at EP, the theme was that it was necessary, and probably helped fill out the mid-palate and finish on a lot of the wines.
and then next year they’ll go back to releasing just slightly too expensive for customers to have any real interest, yet again. Its like the pinky and the brain.
Well, I don’t covet wines from the 80s, 70s, and 60s, generally speaking. And, although I love '14s (would love to hear more about certain wines here, see bottom of this post), I haven’t found much to love in the other vintages you ticked-off.
Why do I care? For the geeky aspect of it all (possibly; which is why I also asked how common the practice is). If a wine is being chaptalized, then isn’t that masking the terroir and vintage? Comparing different terroirs/producers/vintages is part of the fun of wine geekdom for me — from my perspective, chaptalization bastardizes all of this. That is, unless the practice is so common, and so widespread, that it nearly amounts to a discussion about use of oak barrels. Chaptalization is a manipulation, which merits conversation — we discuss a whole slew of other interventions and manipulations, such as sorting, no stems/stems, barrel type/treatment/age, etc. etc. etc. …
Chaptalization usually hides behind a black curtain for us “regular consumers” (non-insiders), so it’s hard to have fact-based opinion on the matter, leaving us only with philosophical/intellectual surmise and opinions, in the absence of more information.
about the 14’s: I would love to know if the following were chaptalized or not:
Domaine de Chevalier
VCC
Pichon Baron
Montrose & La Dame de Montrose
Grand Puy Lacoste
Pontet Canet
Leoville Poyferre
Malescot
Carmes Haut Brion
La Conseillante
Gruaud Larose
Haut Bailly
Cantemerle
Senejac
Giscours
Sounds like we’ve found part of the answer to your “why are people listening to merchants less?” query. I will say, however, merely tasting the wines does not honesty make. One must taste the wines and then be honest about them. Preferably not in coded language, and preferably not while wearing rose colored glasses.
The “wine expert” friend [who is] label happy, and recommend[s] nonsense like Decoy, Caymus and Prisoner is very much not included in the group I’m talking about. Folks who are listening to those people rather than merchants are just trading one potentially bad source of information for another potentially bad source.
I wish chaptalization information wasn’t so secretive. Without the specific information – who did it, when, and to what extent – it’s hard to know if this is something we should care about. It’s impossible to know what effects it has on the finished wines, and the extent of those effects. The bigger the effect, the more we should be caring about this practice, no?
Without knowing the desired specifics, all I can say is the idea of “adding sugar to wine to make it better” doesn’t excite me, and actually turns me off.
The mere fact that these details are kept secret raises suspicion. If it weren’t “bad,” or weren’t anything to be ashamed of, then producers would be more forthcoming about it, no? They certainly aren’t secretive about their barrels or sorting decisions. When someone seeks to hide something, it’s reasonable to wonder why that something is being hidden. People typically don’t keep secret information that casts them in good light; people often hide information that casts them in negative light. … If chaptalization isn’t bad, then why all the secrecy?? … hopefully this helps explain where I’m coming from on this topic.
As a guess, in the less ripe vintages, you find more chaptalization than you think, though it’s usually on a parcel by parcel basis, and most of that is for Cabernet. It’s not hidden. Most producers will tell you if you ask.
It’s only in recent vintages, thanks to climate change that the Cabernets do not need chaptalization.
Chaptalization is not hidden, or done in the dark. While I don’t address it for every property on an individual basis, it’s acknowledged in my intro and analysis for the vintage. It’s a reasonable deduction in less ripe vintages to assume it’s fairly widespread. In fact, it’s the law that producers need to report it for tax purposes.
Aside from '82, I don’t have meaningful experience with any vintage older than the '90s.
Critics could be very helpful to their intended audience by publishing specific chaptalization information — not vintage generalities, but rather specific producers, in specific vintages, with exact amounts.
Am I correct in assuming I can find a 2014 vintage analysis on your site? I love that vintage, and have a base of experience with that vintage that helps me contextualize new information about those wines.
Like I said in my previous post, by law, producers need to report chaptalization in France, and probably all of the EU. So, it’s not hidden.
That’s a lot of work you’re asking for and few people care. But you’d need to ask others why they do, or don’t report on various aspects. FWIW, most folks ask me about blends, alcohol levels and when will it be ready to drink. Little else seems to matter to most people, though YMMV.
And, although I love '14s (would love to hear more about certain wines here, see bottom of this post), I haven’t found much to love in the other vintages you ticked-off.