Musigny Faiveley: new parcel

Following this acquisition, musigny faiveley should not be a unicorn wine anymore :slight_smile:

that is cool!

Sweet! Now my allocation will double to zero!

Well done sir.

Damn, that’s pricey juice.

“The acquisition brings the Faiveley holdings to nearly 350 acres…”

It was 0.25 acres…it didn’t really “bring” their land position anywhere it wasn’t already. Any rumors of price paid?

I was at a tasting and dinner at Faiveley the night/day they purchased the parcel and this was a great source of pride for them. We shared in their celebration and had an excellent bottle of the 1993 Musigny with some other things of course…

Any idea about the quality of the dufouleur musigny ? I fear it could dilute the quality of the faiveley juice.

In 2014 my friend Mark organised a visit of our group with Francois-Xavier Dufouleur. He’s a great guy.

We tasted his Musigny in barrel. Tasting it, you could see the underlying fruit quality but it didn’t really have the quality you would hope for from that vineyard.

Knowing Faiveley’s resources, I don’t doubt they’ll be able to maintain the quality of their Musigny from the larger parcel. Perhaps they’ll be able to increase NZ’s annual country allocation for this cuvée above one bottle?

It’s good news.

Cheers, Howard

Thierry’s review here:

how can you maintain quality of the overall while adding a lower quality juice ? Seems odd. I’m pretty sceptic to be honest. You don’t do great if you buy something which is tier 2-3 quality wise

So sensible for Faiveley. It’s a standard business roll-up strategy and I’m surprised not pursued more in Burgundy. Faiveley can probably charge 3x to 5x what Dufouleur can charge for the same bottle, so by transferring ownership, both buyer and seller wins (and if the quality becomes ‘Faiveley’ level quality then the consumer wins as well as with constant demand and increased supply the buyers get to take a ride down the downwardly sloped demand curve as the supply curve bumps to the right). Would think the same thing should happen for Roumier in Musigny, Bonnes Mares and Amoureuses, and many others. But, of course, this is Burgundy so it will not as the normal rules do not apply!!

They won’t add juice, they will grow grapes.
Believe it or not a great wine always begins with great grapes from great vines on a great terroir.
It will probaby take a few years before the Faiveley vineyard team can bring these vines back to a decent shape, but then I don’t see why they wouldn’t make a wine up to their standards.
Dufouleur may have skills but definitely not vinegrowing. Really below average. Faiveley is not among the very bests for sure, but way above average.

When you look carefully at the list of the best producers in Burdungy, they are all outstanding growers. Not enough but necessary condition.

Not sure about no longer being a unicorn wine with only 500 bottles produced!

500 btlles wine is extremely easy to find. At least when you live in France

I was also thinking that increasing production from 150 bottles to 500 bottles won’t make it any easier to get for most people.

what we learnt from visiting Dufouleur is that the small Musigny production was meant for the Paris cafés market where the wine would be sold by the glass, a significant market for the estate and its wine distribution. No doubt Faively will have other plans in mind.
If Dufouleur is sorting out its inheritance taxes, it might mean that the control of the operation is changing hands and moving on to the next generation who seem to be focused on improving the quality of the wine.

Good news, this is one of my top 3 wines made…

Bill Nanson’s take on the story:

Musigny by the glass? Wow.