Giacomo Fenocchio Barolo

Does anyone have any familiarity with these wines and how they age? I’m thinking of buying the 16s but don’t have any personal experience with the producer. I’m a fan of Brovia, G Rinaldi, Burlotto, and others of that ilk.

Haven’t had the 16s but this is an undervalued, traditional-leaning producer that I’m a big fan of. I’ve had a couple 11s and 10s (Bussia) and was delighted by them. Given the consistent quality in 16, you probably can’t go wrong if the price is right for you. Their Villero is the best for long aging.

I sampled the 2010s and bought a handful. Definitely old school, classic leaning. I thought the Villero had more aging potential, though my guess is that these are more 10-20 year wines rather than 25-30. At these prices why not buy one and try it? These are not likely to disappear from the market too quickly.

It’s my understanding they age well, but I haven’t tried one yet. I bought some of the 2010 (classico) recently and holding them for longer term storage. I’ve had some of the 16s at the winery. Giacomo said the Bussia is his signature wine and it was our most favorite that we tried.

chambers street in NYC just got a nice cache of older ones.

I tried the 2016 once at an industry event. The 2016 Villero is much lighter, and slightly more herbal, than the 2016 Brovia rendition. I bought a couple, but do not put the Villero in the same league as the OP’s original list. That said, the price is way less.

The lange nebbiolo 2018!is flat out delisious
Juicey and ready to drink
As Said under the radar traditional Barolo
Good value for money
I have purchased a mixed case of Busia-Cannubi
And Villero 2016

I’d be wary of any of these at the prevailing prices. I’ve been burned by Chambers St. in the past and so I’m biased. Sure, they’re knowledgable, but they’re completely price uncompetitive in most recent vintages because of their inherently hight cost structure so they’ve tried to differentiate themselves by going into the niche of selling older vintages sourced from peoples’ cellars. I bought an old vintage from them that was completely undrinkable and I later told the clerk at their store about my experience. He basically said that people who buy these old vintages are doing so more for the novelty and experience of drinking a really old wine instead of the actual quality in the bottle. Indeed, I ended up with the experience and they ended up with the money. Just know you’re paying for the novelty of being able to say “we’re drinking a 1968 Barolo,” regardless of whether you have to pour it down the sink because it’s undrinkable.

I disagree with this assessment of Chambers Street. Their provenance is good in my experience and their service is also good if there is an issue. You have to know what you’re buying. A 1968 Barolo is probably not going to be good now no matter what the storage was, it’s a below average vintage. If you buy a 1968 Barolo, you should be expecting a novelty and not a good wine.

At this point I generally prefer vintages that are more youthful, but when I was starting out a few years ago I bought a lot of good older vintages - 1958, 1964, 1967, 1970, 1971 - from Chambers St and had very good experiences with them.

If someone wants a birth year 1968 or 1965 or whatever wine, it’s good in my view that market exists. If you want to drink good older Barolo or Barbaresco, it’s fairly easy to know which vintages were good and which weren’t.

I tasted the 16s at the cantina last fall and liked them a lot, the Villero in particular. I agree it’s a bit liter than the Brovia rendition, but still very good. The Bussia Riserva has a lot more power (I personally prefer the Villero though).

As a follow up, that Chambers link you included has them selling the Giacomo Fenocchio 2010 for $69.99. I bought same bottle from a retailer a couple of months ago for $30. Again, Chambers is totally uncompetitive–and oftentimes by a lot.

Second, let’s look at the first item on that list: 1 bottle of Fenocchio, Giacomo 1979 Barolo Riserva Bussia Sottana for $124.99. Not knowing the provenance, what are the chances this bottle has been stored perfectly in some unknown person’s cellar (and any other places it’s been) for the last 40+ years. 10%, maybe 20%? If there’s a 10% chance, then this is like pricing a bottle of this wine that is knowingly in perfect condition at $1,249.90. Would anyone buy this at that price?

Maybe the same can be said about buying wine at auctions (I don’t know, I’ve never participated), but with Chambers and its reputation, I feel like it automatically lends a degree of credibility to this roll-the-dice practice.

Fred your probabilities are ridiculously off vs. my experiences, with Chambers St or other retailers or auctions. I would say 90%+ of old bottles from Chambers St are in “good shape”, by which I mean the wine comes across as I expect for the age and quality level of the producer, vintage. If it’s not in good shape, you contact them and get a refund very quickly.

Do you think an honest store should have a disclaimer then for any old wines it sells that are not from the several outstanding vintage years? Something like, “you should be expecting a novelty and not a good wine.” I mean, it’s not like they’re selling these bottles for $10 where a disclaimer may seem redundant.

High cost structure? And still complaining because they gave your money back? Gee…

TBF, I have not bought enough of them to make a statistically significant assessment.

Do you think an honest store should have a disclaimer then for any old wines it sells that are not from the several outstanding vintage years? Something like, “you should be expecting a novelty and not a good wine.” I mean, it’s not like they’re selling these bottles for $10 where a disclaimer may seem redundant.
[/quote]

No I don’t think that is their responsibility. If you ask someone at the store about what were good vintages, I think they should be honest with you, but I don’t think bottles need a disclaimer especially in the age where you can google vintages, or search a bottle on Cellartracker, in a minute.

If you want to see a rip off, how about restaurants that list awful vintages of wines that have become cult wines, like Bartolo Mascarello or something, for $1,000+. I think I’ve seen 1983 Bartolo for $1,000+ at some place this year. Terrible vintage.

Where did I say they gave me my money back? They didn’t. I took the loss.

No I don’t think that is their responsibility. If you ask someone at the store about what were good vintages, I think they should be honest with you, but I don’t think bottles need a disclaimer especially in the age where you can google vintages, or search a bottle on Cellartracker, in a minute.

If you want to see a rip off, how about restaurants that list awful vintages of wines that have become cult wines, like Bartolo Mascarello or something, for $1,000+. I think I’ve seen 1983 Bartolo for $1,000+ at some place this year. Terrible vintage.
[/quote]

Restaurants are in a different league of ripoff. At least with them, you’re expecting it. But that’s not a good business model either.

You didn’t have to, as they say they will refund bad bottles.

Anyone have experience with the Castellero bottling?