Can someone explain burgundy negociants

[A_Songeur]

Negociants either buy and pick the fruit, buy the picked fruit, buy the juice and make the elevage or buy the finished product and only do the bottling. So, it may be Dujac do the elevage in a different way…

[Adam_Frisch]

As I understand it, there used to be a far bigger delineation between growing vs. making the wine. Only in the recent decades have the oenologist also been pressed into being an agriculturalist, which was rarely the case previously. This is predominantly a New World-led phenomenon.

[John_Morris]

As I understand it, there used to be a far bigger delineation between growing vs. making the wine. Only in the recent decades have the oenologist also been pressed into being an agriculturalist, which was rarely the case previously. This is predominantly a New World-led phenomenon.

Historically, the same peasants who tended the vineyards made the wine. There was no delineation. And that’s still true many places in the Old World.

Obviously, coops and negociants are exceptions to that pattern.

[Adam_Frisch]

As I understand it, there used to be a far bigger delineation between growing vs. making the wine. Only in the recent decades have the oenologist also been pressed into being an agriculturalist, which was rarely the case previously. This is predominantly a New World-led phenomenon.

Historically, the same peasants who tended the vineyards made the wine. There was no delineation. And that’s still true many places in the Old World.

Obviously, coops and negociants are exceptions to that pattern.

Yes, I suppose I meant in the “modern” era of winemaking. UC Davis used to have Viticulture and Enology as separate curriculums (only since the 70’s or 80’s were they combined). I still think they’re separate in Montpellier, so it seems France still has that delineation.

[larry_schaffer]

Please understand that if you do get a degree from UC Davis, you are required to take classes in both Viticulture and Enology . . .

[John_Morris]

As I understand it, there used to be a far bigger delineation between growing vs. making the wine. Only in the recent decades have the oenologist also been pressed into being an agriculturalist, which was rarely the case previously. This is predominantly a New World-led phenomenon.

Historically, the same peasants who tended the vineyards made the wine. There was no delineation. And that’s still true many places in the Old World.

Obviously, coops and negociants are exceptions to that pattern.

Yes, I suppose I meant in the “modern” era of winemaking. UC Davis used to have Viticulture and Enology as separate curriculums (only since the 70’s or 80’s were they combined). I still think they’re separate in Montpellier, so it seems France still has that delineation.

I don’t think there was every that kind of segmentation in Europe, so if the uniting of viticulture and enology is a New World thing in recent years, it was to correct a New World approach. Given that schools like UC Davis and Cal State Fresno were oriented toward agribusiness historically, it’s not surprising that they’d view growing as separate from chemistry in the cellar.

FYI, the Montpellier program description makes it sound like they view things holistically:

The institute offers a comprehensive range of training courses, covering vocational, engineering, master’s and PhD degree programmes. The programmes are structured around viticulture, oenology, economics and management.

[Vincent_Fritzsche]

Read the label. It’s often pretty clear if you understand the French.

Jadot is a great example. You’ll routinely see “Eleve et mise en bouteilles par…” on wines they saw from elevage to bottling. And you’ll see “recolte, vinife et mise en bouteilles…” on stuff they grew, vinified and bottled.

In the US you’ll see “cellared and bottled by…” for wines where purchased bulk wine is involved.

Sometimes that “cellared and bottled” wine will include wine you made from grapes but filled out in part with purchased bulk wine. If you add some outside wine, it’s now considered all to be “cellared and bottled.”

Sometimes a producer makes their own wine from grapes but has to move facilities where their wine is under another producer’s license, and you’ll see “cellared and bottled by…” even though they made the wine. Just not where it ended up being bottled. The distinction is administrative, not about who made the wine.

Bottom line - who made the wine is often information you can glean from the label. Sometimes be careful drawing too many definitive conclusions though, there are exceptions.

[Adam_Frisch]

Sometimes a producer makes their own wine from grapes but has to move facilities where their wine is under another producer’s license, and you’ll see “cellared and bottled by…” even though they made the wine. Just not where it ended up being bottled. The distinction is administrative, not about who made the wine.

Vincent obviously knows this already, but perhaps of interest to some others:

Yes, a “cellared and bottled by…” is a clear indication of a custom crush setup where you’re making wine on someone else’s license. If on the other hand it says “Produced and bottled by…” that means one of two things: the producer has his own license and his own winery OR he has his own license and rents a space at another winery under a so called Alternating Proprietorship, or AP for short.

[MChang]

This is not the case! All these houses buy finished wine and bottle it. While the négoce have tended to pivot towards domaine activity plus the vinification of purchased grapes, the historic core of this business was purchasing wine, and that is very much alive to this day. Nor, I should add, is there anything nefarious about this!

Certainly nothing nefarious. If a negociant with a very wide range of labels/vineyards is buying some finished wine, it would explain the diversity of styles one finds among a single (large) producer’s wines. William - among that list above, plus Bichot - who do you think are most consistent in terms of style, across estate and negociant bottlings? And any particular negociant bottlings that really stand out?

Yes indeed. I would say they all make efforts to be as consistent as possible, e.g. delivering barrels to their suppliers so that the wines are matured in their house cooperage from the beginning. Some will also complement a base of domaine produced wine, or a base of wine from purchased grapes, with purchased wine in a final blend. However, there are always going to be ups and downs and since so many producers domaine-bottle today, it’s obviously less of a buyers market that it would have been fifty years ago (hence the move towards ever more vineyard acquisition). As for cuvées of purchased wine that stand out as normally very good I’d single out the Clos Saint-Denis from Drouhin (from Jouan, which I think is well known) and the Les Saint-Georges from Jadot off the top of my head.

Gagey/Jadot CSD too, although there are different versions?

[A_Songeur]

For some wines, Dominique Laurent says he buys from several producers and blends and does the elevage.

[John_Morris]

Sometimes a producer makes their own wine from grapes but has to move facilities where their wine is under another producer’s license, and you’ll see “cellared and bottled by…” even though they made the wine. Just not where it ended up being bottled. The distinction is administrative, not about who made the wine.

Vincent obviously knows this already, but perhaps of interest to some others:

Yes, a “cellared and bottled by…” is a clear indication of a custom crush setup where you’re making wine on someone else’s license. …

Not at all. It could also be a negociant wine, where someone simply buys wine and puts their label on it. In terms of volume, I think that’s much more common.

[Adam_Frisch]

Not at all. It could also be a negociant wine, where someone simply buys wine and puts their label on it. In terms of volume, I think that’s much more common.

Sure, but in the eye of TTB, that falls under a custom crush definition still, I’m pretty sure? There might be a way of buying bulk wine in bond and transferring it so you can say “produced by…”, but I’m not sure.

[John_Morris]

Not at all. It could also be a negociant wine, where someone simply buys wine and puts their label on it. In terms of volume, I think that’s much more common.

Sure, but in the eye of TTB, that falls under a custom crush definition still, I’m pretty sure? There might be a way of buying bulk wine in bond and transferring it so you can say “produced by…”, but I’m not sure.

I don’t know where negociant wines fall under the TTB rules, but the point is that “cellared by” and equivalent phrases do not necessarily imply that it’s a custom crush arrangement where the marketer contracts to have someone make wine or makes it in their facility. It also covers the situation where the marketer buys wine that’s already made. In the latter case, the person buying and marketing the wine may not have any input into how the wine is made, so it’s fundamentally different.

[Marshall_Manning]

Bottom line - who made the wine is often information you can glean from the label. Sometimes be careful drawing too many definitive conclusions though, there are exceptions.

Is that why all of your labels say “Vinted, cellared and bottled by Jackson Family Wines?”

[David_Kubiak]

I have noticed negociant labels (Maison Leroy, for example) that list every possible way the contents of the bottle could have been created, but do not reveal which one pertains to the contents. Maybe because it’s impossible to know exactly bottle to bottle.

[William_Kelley]

Certainly nothing nefarious. If a negociant with a very wide range of labels/vineyards is buying some finished wine, it would explain the diversity of styles one finds among a single (large) producer’s wines. William - among that list above, plus Bichot - who do you think are most consistent in terms of style, across estate and negociant bottlings? And any particular negociant bottlings that really stand out?

Yes indeed. I would say they all make efforts to be as consistent as possible, e.g. delivering barrels to their suppliers so that the wines are matured in their house cooperage from the beginning. Some will also complement a base of domaine produced wine, or a base of wine from purchased grapes, with purchased wine in a final blend. However, there are always going to be ups and downs and since so many producers domaine-bottle today, it’s obviously less of a buyers market that it would have been fifty years ago (hence the move towards ever more vineyard acquisition). As for cuvées of purchased wine that stand out as normally very good I’d single out the Clos Saint-Denis from Drouhin (from Jouan, which I think is well known) and the Les Saint-Georges from Jadot off the top of my head.

Gagey/Jadot CSD too, although there are different versions?

The Gagey CSD is a domaine wine, so I don’t think that counts. I was giving examples of very solid bottlings from the négociants that consist of purchased wine.

[Marcus_Goodfellow]

As I understand it, there used to be a far bigger delineation between growing vs. making the wine. Only in the recent decades have the oenologist also been pressed into being an agriculturalist, which was rarely the case previously. This is predominantly a New World-led phenomenon.

Historically, the same peasants who tended the vineyards made the wine. There was no delineation. And that’s still true many places in the Old World.

Obviously, coops and negociants are exceptions to that pattern.

John,

I think in many places you can find multiple processes.

But Champagne is an example of a significant region where until recently(the last 30 years or so) there were many growers who only farmed and sold grapes.

[John_Morris]

Good point.

[Howard_Cooper]

As I understand it, there used to be a far bigger delineation between growing vs. making the wine. Only in the recent decades have the oenologist also been pressed into being an agriculturalist, which was rarely the case previously. This is predominantly a New World-led phenomenon.

Historically, the same peasants who tended the vineyards made the wine. There was no delineation. And that’s still true many places in the Old World.

Obviously, coops and negociants are exceptions to that pattern.

John,

I think in many places you can find multiple processes.

But Champagne is an example of a significant region where until recently(the last 30 years or so) there were many growers who only farmed and sold grapes.

When I first started drinking wine in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Burgundy was much more like Champagne was 20 years ago or even like Champagne is today. While some producers in Burgundy have long bottled their own wines, this was much less commonplace when I first started drinking wine. As is generally true with a few exceptions today in Champagne, the wines from the top negociants were the highest price wines and when growers started appearing on retail wine lists, generally the prices were bargains compared with the negociant wines. How different things are today.

The top negociants then and now are mostly the same - Leroy, Jadot, Drouhin and Faiveley, although Bouchard is much better now than they were then. Most of these also have been very large landowners in addition to being negociants both then and now although there have been significant land acquisitions over the years. For example, Jadot’s holdings in the CdN really increased in the 1980s when they bought a lot of vineyards from Clair Dau, and Leroy had a major land acquisition somewhat later from one of the Noellats.