Per Jasper Morris, Roumier has 0.1 ha of Musigny and 0.4 ha of Les Amoureuses.
And THIS is why people are angry. I recently started trying Burgundies and if I catch the bug could be interested in some of these lots. However I will never buy high priced Burgundy at auction. Even if only one lot was blatantly fake and sold it screams volumes about the rest of the lots. Rudy was caught because of a lot of stupid, glaring mistakes and the auction houses either were too incompetent or turned a blind eye to the problem. What about the counterfitters that dont make stupid mistakes? Who will catch them?
Andrew
I expect that sooner or later some people who have purchased wines that originated from Mr Kurniawan and did not have knowledge of what was posted here will want to file civil fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims against the auction houses that have sold Mr. Kurniawan’s wines over the past few years without disclosing that they were selling his wines.
But I’m also hoping that the government will elect to pursue the matter in the course of its ongoing criminal investigation.
Not sure I agree Adam - I have multiple examples of wines in my cellar - bought directly from domaines since 2000 - where 75cl is crudely (with a Biro) ammended to 150cl, likewise some halves where (a similar Biro) has added a 3 in front of the 75 and ammended the cl. I know that in some cases I am the only person to have mags - they were done expressly for me. I would never be able to find a receipt, though I suppose the domaines would probably still have the paperwork as I export to Switzerland and send them their invoices back with a stamp from the French customs to prove they were exported…
Nicely done by Keith:
Sarah -
I respectfully disagree with you on this.
My take on this sordid affair is as follows:
The facts
- Fine wine is worth faking
- It is not prohibitively difficult to fake wine (more on this later): we can therefore conclude that criminals have the incentives and means to do so
- As a matter of public record, Rudy is accused of producing and selling fake wines
- As a matter of public record, Rudy sold 10s of millions worth of wines before being arrested. No one knows how much of this was fraudulent.
- There have been highly publicized instances of (attempted) sale of fake wine by Rudy through auction houses (think Ponsot,…)
- Subsequent to this, and as per Don’s posts above, many auction houses have knowingly continued to sell Rudy’s wine at auction
- This community, examining just two sales and focusing mostly on DRC lots, has found numerous examples of obvious fakes being sold
- This community has also established that provenance had been materially misrepresented in a number of catalogues involving wines sold by Rudy
The solutions
- There are two ways for me to avoid fake wines: trusting the auctioneer or doing my own due diligence
- Trusting the auctioneer, as outlined in points 6-8 above, cannot be relied upon as a consistently safe strategy
- Most catalogues don’t have enough provenance information for me to form an accurate judgement on “fake risk” on this alone
- Labels discrepancies can occur because of inconsistent treatment by the domain or because of fraud
- Given points 1-11, if auction houses don’t explain away discrepancies then I, for one, won’t be taking the risk
- I would therefore posit that in absence of a trusted “gate keeper” in the world of fine wine auction, “grass root” checks is the least bad option…
- …Though I agree with you that some innocent bystanders will get caught by this until the auction houses clean up their act and we can trust them again
If you want to be really scared about the risk of fraud in wine, just spend an hour browsing on http://www.ebay.fr: you can buy empties of +/- everything (that includes Jayer and DRC), and quite often get the cork too!
Just an example of how easy it all is:
http://cgi.ebay.fr/Lot-de-13-bouteilles-vides-du-domaine-de-la-romanee-conti-DRC-/150777839338?pt=FR_JG_Vins_Vins&hash=item231b0f3eea (13 empties of DRC)
http://cgi.ebay.fr/Caisse-bois-1-bouteille-Romanee-Conti-DRC-/280843194690?pt=FR_JG_Vins_Vins&hash=item41638f1142 (an empty DRC wooden case to put your empties in)
Bill,
I agree. I have both in my possession and have seen in the actual producer’s cellars a fair amount of old Port magnums (or larger format) that have 750ml labels on them. In the older days it was fairly common to use the same 750ml label for all size of bottles (I’ve even seen them on .375ml). Simply, as most of it was shipped in cask and bottled by the retailer, not the producer. It is far less common now, but I’ve still seen it on recent bottles.
And as Charlie Fu mentioned, I’ve seen a lot of (mostly) older California wines where large format bottles have 750ml labels on them, direct from the producer. It was (is?) far more common than most people think. Simply due to costs. What winery wanted to spend a bunch of money on new labels to make a small handful of larger format bottlings, not many? They simply used what they had on hand, which was the 750ml labels.
Now THAT is one fine article! Really great. I think Keith should write it up as a longer article for a publication, such as World of Fine Wine.
The prevalence of empties on Ebay is astounding.
It seems like it would be in the interest of top BDX and Burg houses to make a concerted effort to purchase back their empties when they see them pop up on auction websites.
Well-done, Keith! You are really carving out a place for your blog as exceptionally thoughtful and well-written.
The paragraph I quote below is a good example. It is exactly this idea that I was discussing with another board member on Friday, but you have captured it much better than we could.
Superb reading. Perhaps some of the finest I’ve read on the subject.
Here and all this time I thought “Sideways” was responsible for those nice $15 bottles of California Pinot that used to be my daily drinkers suddenly being $30. Or more. Seriously a great piece of writing by Keith Levensberg. Recommended to all.
I’ve been mostly silent on this thread for over a month now since that fateful day in February when I clicked on a link found in this thread to a Decanter Wines website article about the Spectrum February auction. All hell broke loose on my laptop as I was assaulted with a very nasty computer virus, one that I understand others on this list (including Poppy) also caught.
That virus led to numerous other issues and a re-infection several days later, and suffice it is to say, I have spent the last month purchasing and installing new computers and a new network for my small office, both to replace the hopeless laptop and also the other older computers and equipment in my office. Technology had marched on and apparently I was still operating in a bygone decade.
I am back up and running (well, mostly just jogging with occasional pauses to catch my breath) and wanted to reconnect:
-
Don, Maureen, Jancis, and others (Adam and also Ken on Barolo/Barbaresco) with the passion for knowing so much about these wines and caring enough to share that passion and knowledge with this community: continuing thumbs-up for what you have done and are doing.
-
Sarah: you make valid points re: mob mentality and the necessity for choosing one’s words carefully on this public forum called the internet where shelf-lives are as long as Twinkies (and apparently 1945 DRC’s).
The irony in your posts and the subsequent exchange with Don proves your point that words matter, indeed, including even yours, i.e., your choice of “all” vs. “many” vs. “some” as Lewis suggested.
An important distinction is that when the tenor of your post was questioned and whether you were ITB (I wondered the same when I first read your post), both you and others RESPONDED. You corrected what you wrote, you clarified what you said, and the ensuing communication led to more knowledge.
Similarly, after Rudy was arrested, his one-time business partner, Paul Wasserman, posted on another website what amounted to a gut-wrenching and raw apology about his previous involvement with Rudy and his own ill-chosen words toward Don. He, too, chose to communicate openly.
Contrast that, on the other hand, with the likes of Spectrum and others ITB of auctioning these wines. Other than the one post (#25) that is not only self-serving but undeniably false, Spectrum chose to stop communicating when surely they had both a legal and moral obligation to do so. Yet, they continue to bombard my mailbox and email inbox with fancy catalogs crowing upcoming auctions and imploring me to sign up early and bid often.
I find that beyond reprehensible.
Carrie
P.S. Re: the virus, two IT professionals have now told me that they believe that whoever placed that attack on the Decanter website more than likely did so in order to target persons who had significant disposable income and frequently purchased items electronically – most wine drinkers probably fit into that category. The attackers – much like Rudy – knew just the right places to find their victims.
This “virus” on the decanter website. Was it a link within decanter?
Charlie, I don’t know. It was early a.m. when it happened to me and I can’t say that I was awake enough or had enough coffee in me at that point to know exactly what happened.
Whatever it did, it left some backdoor opened and I got more serious infections a day or so later, including a rootkit one. I was told that there was no way to ensure that my laptop would ever be clean unless I reinstalled the operating system, and since the laptop was from 2008 and my other computers even older, it was best to just start afresh.
The thread where I asked about it is here: https://wineimport.discoursehosting.net/t/important-question-re-this-mornings-virus/56841/1
.
+1. Well said.
Catching up on this thread on a rainy Sunday…
-
Spectrum & the “mob mentality.” I understand the points and concerns that have been raised. I certainly think that everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially regarding Spectrum and what anyone chooses to think about how they’ve conducted themselves in connection with these recent auctions. As I commented a number of time upthread, the most blatant aspect of the London auction for me was the number of exceedingly rare wines completely devoid of any statement regarding the actual provenance of the lot. Spectrum has NEVER explained (at least publicly) why those various wines for offered up for auction without any statement of provenance.
-
The likelihood that a given wine is legitimate vs. counterfeit. Although I suspect most people following the rare wine segment were already aware of it, but there is obvious a “spectrum” (pun intended) of possibilities/percentages when it comes to the question of whether a given bottle is legitimate or a counterfeit in some way. In certain situations (e.g., the 2008 auction of non-existent vintages of Ponsot), one could reasonably say that the likelihood that a given bottle is counterfeit is or approaches 100%. Conversely, if you buy a bottle of wine directly from the winery itself, with no evidence of any problems or inconsistencies, then the likelihood that the bottle is legitimate is or approaches 100%
But there are certainly situations where the inconsistencies or problems (with corks, capsules, labels, glass, etc.) are significant but do not prove with 100% certainty that the bottle is counterfeit in some way. HOWEVER, what seems to be the case here is that at least SOME auction houses are offering up bottles with significant inconsistency issues. Either the auction house is unaware of the problem, or it chooses not to mention it in the hope that the potential buyer will not notice it. If an auction house is going to offer a bottle with the description Vintage Date A Domaine B Vineyard C, then they at least should note if there are inconsistencies with the bottle that suggest it may not be Vintage A, Producer B, or Vineyard C, etc.
Bruce
More on the Magnum of 99 Roumier Amoureuses
While I own, and have owned, lots of Roumier over the years, my first magnums of Amoureuses were purchased from the 2008 vintage. The label definitely says 1.5 L, not 750 ml.
However, I am surprised to see that the capsule, while in the proper color, does not have Domaine Georges Roumier printed on it. These magnums came direct from Roumier via a UK merchant who ordered them from Christophe pre-arrival on my behalf.
Here is a photo of 1990 Roumier Bonnes Mares Mag from someone I know:
Notice the 1.5L on the label.
Now, that said, Jasper Morris of Berry Brothers wrote me this morning and told me he has three empty magnums of Roumier wines that Christophe provided and drank with him. Two of the three magnums (all older wines apparently) had 750 ml on the label. The only Amoureuses (1989) had a 750 ml label but no capsule. The other two bottles (vintages presently unknown) had a 1.5L label in one case and 750ml label in the other. These are bottles of course that weren’t sold in commerce but were kept at the Domaine.
Christophe has previously told me that he’s paid a good deal of attention to labeling and capsuling consistency over the past several years. I don’t know his specific practice on the labeling of the 99 Roumier magnums, but I will attempt to find out.
As someone said above, this is a question which should have been posed by Spectrum during the vetting process and absent an acceptable answer, the bottle should not have been included in the sale in my view.
Small plot thickening here…
We have just been offered a bottle of 1990 DRC by Vanquish wine, after being requested by a client to look for some and one of my colleagues sending out some requests following a winesearcher search.
They sent a photograph. The wine is serial # 06428.
This was lot 38 in the Evening Sale (which apparently sold for £8,500 at the time, although it has astonishingly become more ‘valuable’ in the interim - they now want £10,500 for it).
Is it usual that someone offers something for sale only a few weeks after it was sold at auction, when they were auctioning it?
Thanks all for probably the most interesting internet forum thread in history, and to Don et al for bringing all this to my attention, and all the hard work. I can honestly say I never really knew this went on to this degree and I am sure you have saved me money/hassle/disappointment in the future.
As this is my first post here, you might be interested to hear that Rudy Kurniawan is an anagram of I run away, drunk. Which sounds slightly funnier, if perhaps a tiny bit racist, with ‘runaway’ as one word.
Rod
(ITB)