Musigny prices

[Robert_Sand]

Les Borniques makes a mighty fine poor man’s Musigny, as it happens

There are very few producers who bottle this separately.
I only know it from Magnien, not my fav producer.

[Dennis_Borczon]

Faiveley Musigny is one of the great wines of the world.

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph!!! A quick dekko at wine searcher and I’m gobsmacked at the price of that! It’s Faiveley, for feck’s sake. My entire wine budget would go up the spout for a single bottle.

It’s important to note that Faiveley Moose is on par with Screaming Eagle, DRC or Coche in terms of cult following that drives up the price. The price at the cellar door has always been a fraction of the market price.

It never ceases to interest me that these relatively small producers (by worldwide comparison, not always by Burgundian standards) do not follow the same formula that small California producers do and sell more direct to consumer. The massive secondary markups on some of these wines could be captured by the producers and they would have to work a lot less hard at moving the lower level wines in their portfolio. Who wouldn’t seriously consider buying a case of Mercurey, case of village Gevery Chambertin, perhaps a 6 pack of 1er Cru wine in the portfolio in order to access a bottle of Musigny at less than nosebleed prices? They get to move lower level wines and keep the full markup value, consumers get access to rare wines without having to be ITB or sleeping with the daughter of a nationwide distributor, and the retail market gets a piece of the pie to sell commercially? At least the passionate wine geeks out there would have a shot at getting the wines without having to be at the mercy of the 3 tier system. Ray Walker seems to be the only person to attempt this model here, and unfortunately we all know how that worked out. I know folks here hate the concept of “hostage” wines, but they might sing a different tune if they like the producer already and this provides a path to wines essentially unobtainable by other means. If you hate the hostage idea, just go back to paying the full markup price in the market.

Hell for some producers, I would fly to Burgundy once a year, pick my wines up at the cellar door, and ship them myself. (or Cote D’Or imports) Not much different than a trip to Cali and the nonsense you go through in the states. Offers extra benefit of knowing provenance and having more control over shipping logistics. Sounds fun no?

So who can we convince to try this out???

[Brady_Daniels]

Interesting!

I’ve always heard Faiveley Musigny was usually very good, but wildly inconsistent, largely due to the fact that its tiny quantity means its wood to liquid ratio is very high, and it was all from one tiny parcel, so no lots could be rejected.

I’ve never had it, and have no opinion, it’s just interesting that this thread is 180 degrees from what I’ve heard before, from others who have had it.

¯_(ツ)_/¯

[Brady_Daniels]

Why do the Vogüé bottlings come in so much cheaper? Is it the perception that the wines have not been living up to the terroir, or is it in fact a disadvantage to own 80% of the vineyard?

DRC owns some very large parcels, and even some monopoles, and their prices aren’t suffering. I think that hints the latter factor ain’t Vogue’s problem.

[A_So]

Les Borniques makes a mighty fine poor man’s Musigny, as it happens

There are very few producers who bottle this separately.
I only know it from Magnien, not my fav producer.

Amiot-Servelle makes an excellent version from 2017 onwards from vines next to Faiveley’s Musigny (I’ve only tasted the 2017).

[Jason_T]

It never ceases to interest me that these relatively small producers (by worldwide comparison, not always by Burgundian standards) do not follow the same formula that small California producers do and sell more direct to consumer. The massive secondary markups on some of these wines could be captured by the producers and they would have to work a lot less hard at moving the lower level wines in their portfolio.

Are producers leaving money on the table by not going direct to consumers? Possibly. But it’s naive to think there’s not extra cost and effort to deal with shipping all over the world. Smaller producers simply aren’t tooled for it. Larger producers, if they haven’t had that model from day 1, what are they going to do? Turn their backs on the distributors and importers who helped get them where they are? And there’s extra risk as well. Financial (risk of not selling through) and reputational (screwing orders up).

Keep in mind as well that the three-tier model and related costs are unique to the US. The rest of the world doesn’t have the same rigged system, and prices for many/most wines are comparitively lower outside the US as a result.

[William_Kelley]

My understanding is that they want to retain their traditional winemaking. Having had some of the younger wines (including at Paulee), I didn’t notice a change.

I don’t think it could really be called “traditional” in the sense of representing a continuation of de Vogüé’s historic winemaking style: when François Millet took over in the second half of the 1980s, he changed up everything, and he is still in place today. Before then, the wines were made by the Roumier family and were quite different.

[Arvid_Rosengren]

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph!!! A quick dekko at wine searcher and I’m gobsmacked at the price of that! It’s Faiveley, for feck’s sake. My entire wine budget would go up the spout for a single bottle.

It’s important to note that Faiveley Moose is on par with Screaming Eagle, DRC or Coche in terms of cult following that drives up the price. The price at the cellar door has always been a fraction of the market price.

It never ceases to interest me that these relatively small producers (by worldwide comparison, not always by Burgundian standards) do not follow the same formula that small California producers do and sell more direct to consumer…

It’s already happening, albeit slowly. Many producers are talking about it, some have started in small measure. A good handful have been releasing big chunks direct to the auction markets, some officially (Liger-Belair with Acker recently, Fourrier etc). I think Burgundians are reluctant to make sweeping changes though. Yes, there have been some big vintages lately, but everyone remembers streaks of tiny vintages, and many remember the times (not long ago) when they had a hard time selling their wines.

[Jeremy_Holmes]

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph!!! A quick dekko at wine searcher and I’m gobsmacked at the price of that! It’s Faiveley, for feck’s sake. My entire wine budget would go up the spout for a single bottle.

It’s important to note that Faiveley Moose is on par with Screaming Eagle, DRC or Coche in terms of cult following that drives up the price. The price at the cellar door has always been a fraction of the market price.

It never ceases to interest me that these relatively small producers (by worldwide comparison, not always by Burgundian standards) do not follow the same formula that small California producers do and sell more direct to consumer. The massive secondary markups on some of these wines could be captured by the producers and they would have to work a lot less hard at moving the lower level wines in their portfolio. Who wouldn’t seriously consider buying a case of Mercurey, case of village Gevery Chambertin, perhaps a 6 pack of 1er Cru wine in the portfolio in order to access a bottle of Musigny at less than nosebleed prices? They get to move lower level wines and keep the full markup value, consumers get access to rare wines without having to be ITB or sleeping with the daughter of a nationwide distributor, and the retail market gets a piece of the pie to sell commercially? At least the passionate wine geeks out there would have a shot at getting the wines without having to be at the mercy of the 3 tier system. Ray Walker seems to be the only person to attempt this model here, and unfortunately we all know how that worked out. I know folks here hate the concept of “hostage” wines, but they might sing a different tune if they like the producer already and this provides a path to wines essentially unobtainable by other means. If you hate the hostage idea, just go back to paying the full markup price in the market.

Hell for some producers, I would fly to Burgundy once a year, pick my wines up at the cellar door, and ship them myself. (or Cote D’Or imports) Not much different than a trip to Cali and the nonsense you go through in the states. Offers extra benefit of knowing provenance and having more control over shipping logistics. Sounds fun no?

So who can we convince to try this out???

Hi Dennis,

The direct sales model, which I think many of us wonder why it is not employed more widely, is not an easy thing to do internationally. I know that running a business here in Australia where we only ship domestically, that it is almost a fulltime job keeping an eye on weather where the wine is being sent, monitoring stock movements, tracking orders etc. To do the same shipping to multiple counties, ensuring delivery in a timely fashion, during the right weather and with the best transport company is simply not a matter of popping down to the La Poste in Nuits and dropping off a few cartons. The other thing with a direct sales model is that when a ‘so called’ lesser vintage comes along you may actually see a big drop off in sales. This will really hurt cash flow. Long term relationships with quality importers will yield orders even in the difficult years. If a direct sales model was achievable or sustainable I think the likes of DRC and Dujac may have done it by now, but it is just not that simple. I can see why the producer may yearn for the margin between ex winery and full retail but they understand that tiers of distribution so far as international trade is concerned is a model that has worked for many years.

Domestically, a direct sales model can work very well and I tend to think of how well the likes of Wendouree and Rockford do it in Australia. They have very little exposure to wholesale accounts, getting their money upfront before sending the wine out. The ex-cellar price is the retail price giving them full margin. They both make great wine that is highly sort after and have a full mailing list. People take their allocation yearly regardless of the quality of the year. If either of these guys attempted the same model on an international scale I suspect they would fail.

Best Regards
Jeremy

[Greg_K]

My understanding is that they want to retain their traditional winemaking. Having had some of the younger wines (including at Paulee), I didn’t notice a change.

I don’t think it could really be called “traditional” in the sense of representing a continuation of de Vogüé’s historic winemaking style: when François Millet took over in the second half of the 1980s, he changed up everything, and he is still in place today. Before then, the wines were made by the Roumier family and were quite different.

William, thanks for the correction - I meant that the current generation wasn’t intending to change the style of the wines from when they took over management.

I was having a discussion with someone recently who suggested they were becoming more approachable in recent vintages, and that has not been my experience at all.

[Robert_Sand]

Just fwiw:
a bottle of Musigny Leroy 1995 just sold here in Europe for 6.600 € -
quite a proud price

[Arvid_Rosengren]

A whole bunch of Leroy, Faiveley, Roumier (and Vogue back to the 1940s) up for sale tonight on Acker. If you have a few hundred thousand to spare you could put together a pretty decent side-by-side tasting.

Highest estimate by the way is $50k-$70k for three bottles of 2005 Leroy (+ premium etc). 1993 Roumier is the only non-Leroy to make it into the top 15 of Musignys on offer) . Faiveley looks like a steal by comparison. Or 70 year old Vogue.

[alan_weinberg]

A whole bunch of Leroy, Faiveley, Roumier (and Vogue back to the 1940s) up for sale tonight on Acker. If you have a few hundred thousand to spare you could put together a pretty decent side-by-side tasting.

Highest estimate by the way is $50k-$70k for three bottles of 2005 Leroy (+ premium etc). 1993 Roumier is the only non-Leroy to make it into the top 15 of Musignys on offer) . Faiveley looks like a steal by comparison. Or 70 year old Vogue.

I rarely drink alone but once I opened a 1990 Leroy Musigny and drank the entire bottle myself. It was difficult to finish after two angels came down from heaven, hoisted me on their shoulders, and flew me around the room. Epiphany wine. $200 on release. Less than one barrel made.

[Dennis_Borczon]

It’s important to note that Faiveley Moose is on par with Screaming Eagle, DRC or Coche in terms of cult following that drives up the price. The price at the cellar door has always been a fraction of the market price.

It never ceases to interest me that these relatively small producers (by worldwide comparison, not always by Burgundian standards) do not follow the same formula that small California producers do and sell more direct to consumer. The massive secondary markups on some of these wines could be captured by the producers and they would have to work a lot less hard at moving the lower level wines in their portfolio. Who wouldn’t seriously consider buying a case of Mercurey, case of village Gevery Chambertin, perhaps a 6 pack of 1er Cru wine in the portfolio in order to access a bottle of Musigny at less than nosebleed prices? They get to move lower level wines and keep the full markup value, consumers get access to rare wines without having to be ITB or sleeping with the daughter of a nationwide distributor, and the retail market gets a piece of the pie to sell commercially? At least the passionate wine geeks out there would have a shot at getting the wines without having to be at the mercy of the 3 tier system. Ray Walker seems to be the only person to attempt this model here, and unfortunately we all know how that worked out. I know folks here hate the concept of “hostage” wines, but they might sing a different tune if they like the producer already and this provides a path to wines essentially unobtainable by other means. If you hate the hostage idea, just go back to paying the full markup price in the market.

Hell for some producers, I would fly to Burgundy once a year, pick my wines up at the cellar door, and ship them myself. (or Cote D’Or imports) Not much different than a trip to Cali and the nonsense you go through in the states. Offers extra benefit of knowing provenance and having more control over shipping logistics. Sounds fun no?

So who can we convince to try this out???

Hi Dennis,

The direct sales model, which I think many of us wonder why it is not employed more widely, is not an easy thing to do internationally. I know that running a business here in Australia where we only ship domestically, that it is almost a fulltime job keeping an eye on weather where the wine is being sent, monitoring stock movements, tracking orders etc. To do the same shipping to multiple counties, ensuring delivery in a timely fashion, during the right weather and with the best transport company is simply not a matter of popping down to the La Poste in Nuits and dropping off a few cartons. The other thing with a direct sales model is that when a ‘so called’ lesser vintage comes along you may actually see a big drop off in sales. This will really hurt cash flow. Long term relationships with quality importers will yield orders even in the difficult years. If a direct sales model was achievable or sustainable I think the likes of DRC and Dujac may have done it by now, but it is just not that simple. I can see why the producer may yearn for the margin between ex winery and full retail but they understand that tiers of distribution so far as international trade is concerned is a model that has worked for many years.

Domestically, a direct sales model can work very well and I tend to think of how well the likes of Wendouree and Rockford do it in Australia. They have very little exposure to wholesale accounts, getting their money upfront before sending the wine out. The ex-cellar price is the retail price giving them full margin. They both make great wine that is highly sort after and have a full mailing list. People take their allocation yearly regardless of the quality of the year. If either of these guys attempted the same model on an international scale I suspect they would fail.

Best Regards
Jeremy

Thanks for all the thoughtful replies. The shipping issue is one that could be worked around with a storage company that could handle the shipping separately. (Think 55degees in St Helena). The question of selling year to year in off vintages is an interesting one, as it seems for really hot wineries they have no trouble in clearing out their supplies over the past decade despite variable harvests. Does Leroy or DRC ever get stuck with cases of wine they have to beg a distributor to take off their hands? Hardly. Would anyone want to skip a Roumier allocation in a difficult year and drop off the list? Ask the Screamers about that.

[Jeremy_Holmes]

Dennis,

If The States was a particular Domaine’s only market, The Screagle model could work. Most Domaines however have multiple and diverse markets including Belgium, Germany, Japan, Australia, China, Russia and many, many more. I would bet that none of your domestic favourites, who utislise the direct to client model, use this same model for sales of any volume across multiple and diverse countries. One size does not fit all.

Best Regards
Jeremy