Einaudi Confusion

WINE TALK
1

Just a note on Einaudi Barolo bottlings.

In prior years, Einaudi “Terlo” Barolo was the entry-level Barolo. Einaudi’s “Costa Grimaldi” was a higher-end bottling at the top of Einaudi’s Barolo offerings.

I was just looking at the 2010s from Einaudi and it appears that the higher-end Barolo is now labelled as “Terlo Vigna Costa Grimaldi”, while the entry-level Barolo is labelled just “Terlo”.

Don’t know why Einaudi would do this - definitely adds confusion to the mix. In fact, looking at Cellar Tracker it seems clear there is confusion. One review of the “Terlo Costa Grimaldi” refers to it as the “entry level” wine…but clearly it is not.

Any idea why Einaudi would choose to blur the line and confuse consumers in this way?

2

The winery’s website lists just three Barolos and says each is a cru/single vineyard:

Barolo “nei Cannubi”
Barolo “Costa Grimaldi”
Barolo “Terlo”

Where did you see a Terlo Vigna Costa Grimaldi?

3

BAROLO TERLO “VIGNA COSTA GRIMALDI” DOCG (NEW NAME AND LABEL from the 2010 vintage):

4

Poking around on the site, it looks like Costa Grimaldi is a subportion of Terlo. The page for Costa Grimaldi lists the cru as Terlo-Costa Grimali, though it doesn’t show the updated label.

Another page for “Terlo Vie Nuove” appears to describe the larger vineyard:

“From this land one obtains two classic and powerful Barolo; from the vineyard Costa Grimaldi, which is 0.80 of an hectare, the identical “cru”, while the surrounding 4.10 hectares produces the classic Barolo… The wines of this estate are:
Barolo Costa Grimaldi Docg
Barolo Terlo Docg
Nebbiolo Langhe Doc”

I think someone posted here recently about some efforts to standardize cru designations in Barolo, but I don’t recall the details. Maybe that explains it. Or maybe they wanted to convey that CG is part of Terlo.

5

Hi John,

I was thinking that must be the answer. Einaudi has to be aware that their “Costa Grimaldi” bottling always was more prestigious than the “Terlo”, so it seems unlikely that they would voluntarily derogate from that by associating with the lesser site.

Sort of like if Lexus decided to rebrand as Toyota Lexus…not smart. [oops.gif]

Cheers,
Blair

6

You should expect to see some changes starting with the 2010 vintage and going forward from a few producers.

7

Will G. Conterno now be forced to label its top bottling “Monfortino - Casina Francia”? I guess that’s a brand rather than a site designation, though, isn’t it?

8

This reminds me of when Aldo Conterno changed all of his lineup in 2004 (I think).

9

Not sure. But starting in 2010 the Barolo says only Francia.

10

http://www.langhevini.it/pagine/eng/territorio/menzioni-geografiche-aggiuntive.lasso
from http://www.ascherivini.it/welcome_eng.lasso

The 2010 Barolo
With the 2010 vintage will be official the list of the Additional Geographical Definitions of the denomination Barolo. This is an important step because from now on the so-called “sub-regions” will be defined in their number and in their bounded extension .
In particular they are 170 and 11 the denominations by commune

http://www.langhevini.it/pdf/mappe/mappa-del-barolo.pdf

11

No. There is some degree of grandfathering of names that have been in use for a specified time. I think that Roman sorted the new Langhe name game out on an earlier thread and above. I also recall that O’Keefe spent a fair amount of space describing and criticizing the new approach to nomenclature in her book, if you have it.