A run of extraordinary years out of Bordeaux: 2000, 2005, 2009, and now preliminaries of 2010. Along with: 2003 and 2008 being considered outstanding years. All of the years in between are generally rated as above average as well, so one must ask: Are we actually looking at one of the greatest decades in the recorded history of the region or are we subject to great marketing, talented winemakers, and nouveau technology?
From the critics standpoint Bordeaux has had above average vintages since ’93. If this is the case wouldn’t we eventually have to skew the above average years to be average, the outstanding years to above average, and the extraordinary years to outstanding? It’s not that I am against a region having great years, but I do think that a run of nearly 20 years of above average vintages sounds a little crazy. Even more so it is crazy to think about where the prices of these wines are heading, they have been relentlessly increasing in price year over year for twenty years to the extent that they are unattainable by any other than the rich. Let me lay this thought out for you a bit…
Bordeaux has a system of quality measurements for the finest wines of the region that was organized by the merchant groups in France and Britain circa 1855. In 1855 this group decided that there were four Chateau that stood out above all others, at the time the best of the best was Chateau Haut Brion, in other words this wine fetched the highest price at market. Haut Brion was joined by three others; Margaux, Lafite-Rothschild, and Latour. 1973 marked unprecedented change to the Classification of 1855 as Mouton-Rothschild was added as a First Growth making five in total. This whole situation is a pretty intense story in of itself, but that is not why we are here today. There are also several other great wines that make up the other four groups of classified growths, but we will just focus on the first growths for now.
Since 1990 there have been extraordinary if not ridiculous price increases regarding the wines of Bordeaux. In 1990 the average price of a First Growth was around $65 per bottle upon release. This is a price that most people can live with, and specially if you are drinking some of the finest wines of the world. In 1995 the average price of a First Growth was around $125 per bottle, with Latour making some noise at $250. These were expensive wines, but largely attainable for most who really desired them. In 2000 the average price of a First Growth was $310 per bottle. Alright, still you have to remember the economy was strong, and it was a collector’s item being the first bottling to fuel millennial fever. In 2005 the average price of a First Growth was $592 per bottle. I would say that this represented the finest vintage in a long time, but 2000 was rated nearly as well. 1990 was easily rated as solid as 2005 and I remind you that those wines released at $65 per bottle. We are getting more than a little ridiculous since this easily outpaces any sense of inflation at the time. The economy is super strong though and there were loads of nouveau-riche coming onto the wine market. A weak argument, but you have to put it out there. Now we arrive upon our most recent futures campaign of yet another great vintage, 2009, launching in a tough world economy. The 2009’s released at an average of $1000 per bottle with Latour once again feeling the need to ring everybody's bell with a hefty price tag of $1600 per bottle.
At this point I am just pissed off.
Wine has become a very large part of my life. I have immersed myself in the industry. I read about wine constantly, I watch television about wine, my search engine is filled with search history about wine, I taste several wines a day and sometimes hundreds in a month. It is to my dismay that I find that some of the wines I feel I should experience are entirely unattainable. So your wine gets a great score, wonderful, there are plenty of other wines with comparable scores from the critics that are much more reasonably priced. Well the Chinese market is eating most of these wines up right now. Great, they are drinking all of these “great” wines well before they are “great” as these wines have not even come close to peak maturity in the bottle, they are treated as trophies. Good Bordeaux takes a decade or more to come into its own. Do not even try to go into how the wines are a rarity. Spottswoode in California produced a near perfect 2007 by most critics estimation and they made 24,000 bottles that retailed for $140 each. This wine sold out in about a month, 24,000 bottles is not enough for California, much less the world. The average production of the First Growth Bordeaux ballparks 150,000 bottles, some go well beyond that number. This represents $150 million off of a single bottling. I love wine, no question, but at some point you have to step back and look at the big picture. Its 750 milliliters of grape juice…
Price aside, how are we seeing so many good to great vintages in such a short period of time?
Winemaking has come a long way regarding technology, you have to remember 1990 was twenty years ago now. Vineyard practices have shifted with nearly the entire world starting to push back harvest more and more in order to achieve a greater ripeness that the critics love. I don’t know about you, but I do not find my weather guy very accurate. Apparently in the wine world they have got something figured out. New styles of vineyard management and correcting the wine in the winery can now mask flaws that mother nature would have once caused. The Merlot coming out of Bordeaux in 2010 achieved an average alcoholic strength of 15%. That is wildly high for the region! Not only is this a much riper style than usual in the area, but arguably ripeness levels of this nature will hide the sense of place, and shift what could be elegance to power significantly cutting the cellar life of the wine. If the wines do not taste like Bordeaux, if they do not taste like these places that were designated 150 years ago, do they warrant the price? Modern chemistry has become a tool for the winemaker, and while this may allow us to enjoy better wine on average, even in less expensive bottlings; Should this not change our view of what is a great vintage is verses an average vintage? Temperature controlled fermentation, and long, extensive cold soaks that over-extract the flavors in the wines lead to more density and flavor. How much of the wines naturally occurring quality is masked by over-extraction? Can’t these nouveau practices be performed anywhere in the world to achieve the same results?
I fear that more and more wine is being made to a formula as opposed to focusing on growing the right grapes in the right spots, picking the fruit at the right time, letting fermentation occur naturally, and moderating your oak program allowing your fruit and your land to show through. Again and again I see various varietals losing their sense of individual character and particular vineyard sites losing their very identity. Will it be that in 50 years there will only be a few general flavors of wine all around the world as opposed to the thousands of different flavors that we experience today and in years past? I don’t actually think this will happen, but only because I get the opportunity to meet people on a regular basis that are faithful to the art of wine. They desire for there particular piece of dirt to shine. They seek elegance and balance as opposed to a score. They price their wines to make a living, and pay the bills, not to appear extravagant. These are the people that make wine special, and these are the people that will continue to carry the legacy and art of winemaking to the generations to come. I will not be buying First Growth Bordeaux futures any time soon, but then again neither will most of us. At least I am in the bigger of the two clubs…
