Overly simplistic article by Asimov in the NY Times regarding Bordeaux

While in Bordeaux, I read with interest an article by the talented fine wine writer Eric Asimov ‘The Soulful Side of Bordeaux’ which I found nonetheless overly simplistic and in many ways terribly misleading. I am not ITB and have criticized the Bordelais for being too pricey in 2009 for example, and do get annoyed with certain chateaux that come off as overly stuffy. But basically, you get what you pay for, and there are many excellent and expensive Bordeaux chateaux that deserve much praise. In reading Asimov’s article, I did some investigation on my own:
The simplistic side of Eric Asimov – Connections to Wine" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hi Panos,

you said you get what you pay for. Does that mean you believe Lafite Rothshild is the best Paulliac because it sells for the highest price? Or Petrus is the best Pomerol and so forth? I think you are aware that in quite a few blind tastings so called lesser wines won the contest against cult wines or were at least pretty similar.

On the other hand I am with you that it´s a bit strange to say any wine can compete with Lafite i.e. But I strongly believe that one can spend way less money than the price of the very expensive wines without missing anything. It´s indeed often only marketing and image that sets the so called top wines apart from other wines with lesser prestige. But again: that is only true for the underdogs who make wines from good terroir, up to modern standards such as temperature conrolled fermentation, proper work in the vineyard, selection process during harvest, rather low yields, good barrels etc.

It sounds as if Asimov picked the wrong example.

Well, yes, that is my point. A wine that is supposed to be ‘authentic’ and ‘soulful’ and yet fetches $60-100? And then to taste it and find out it has not been approved for the appellation? It sounds like we are going from on extreme - overpriced high end Bordeaux - to another - overpriced low end Bordeaux… and that is why I posted.

I believe the basic point of Asimov’s blog is that Bordeaux is rapidly becoming, or is already, an afterthought region for American winos - particularly the young wine enthusiast. Obviously pricing is reason #1 and it seems Eric would think corporatism perhaps #1a.

Americans, particularly on the left coast, do not largely believe you get what you pay for when wine shopping in Bordeaux.

I’ve had several Jaugarets and found them lovely wines without any of the chemical taints you’re mentioning. And why begrudge a little 1.3ha property for doing something different? Doesn’t seem like there’s any danger of its taking over Bordeaux.

Count this young wine enthusiast from the left coast firmly in that camp. I love BDX, but for the most part it definitely has become a luxury good that is way out of my reach. As a result, my passions are pushed toward other areas like the Rhone Valley.

That said, I have a unique perspective given that I work for a retailer that sells older vintages of the top BDX wines… From an international perspective, there is no other wine that is in higher demand than BDX. Period. The stuff has become a status symbol in the same vein as Louis Vuitton in certain parts of the world. There are a large number of buyers out there that have more money than I could ever hope to have in 10 lifetimes that are basically an open check-book. Find them X, and they will buy it - price is not an issue.

I guess that I could be upset about the situation, but it really won’t get me anywhere. The wines are way out of my league, I know it and I’m moving on. If BDX can sustain this creme de la creme pool of buyers, then more power to them - I would be marketing and pricing my products toward that set if I could. They are easy to work with, money is not an issue. You are selling a brand/lifestyle/image, which far transcends fermented grape juice as a commodity.

The obvious risk here is if BDX falls out of favor with the über wealthy - as they have alienated their previous customers, and the younger generation has no idea who they are…

I don’t think Panos was begrudging them anything. It sounds like a reasonable counterpoint to Asimov (a writer I greatly admire), who appears to have written more of an opinion column than an actual piece of reporting. Clearly, there was a point of view expressed, whether you agree with him or not (and I know you do).

But, you see, this isn’t true. It’s not out of your reach anymore than it ever has been it’s just that the top ~40 or so names that get all the press are and the wines that we grew to know in past years have moved out of range too.

Here’s what I mean - when I started collecting wine after grad school, the 1990 Bordeaux were just on the market. Several were in the $20 range, including Sociando Mallet. I tried some, loved it, bought some bottles (sadly drunk too young). The 2009 version of that wine is a bit under $40 on futures and likely will retail for $40 or so. IN 19 years, the retail price has doubled… but what hasn’t? That’s a very good wine for very reasonable money.

The problem is that wines like Pichon Baron, once available for $45ish, are now well over $100… so some of the names we’d give you to try out are simply out of range. The percentage increase isn’t that bad, but it puts the dollar amount in another category. Then add in what happened to the first growths - I was seriously considering a few bottles of 1990 Latour when it released. Yes, I was straight out of grad school. No, I wasn’t rich. 1990 Latour was on the shelf for… $65. The other 1st growths were similarly priced. This isn’t NYC, this is Seattle. You won’t see bottles of Latour on the shelf here at all now and certainly not for anything as reasonable as an inflation adjusted $65.

Now add in a rise in Cali Cab, some Syrah popularity and the fact that the 1995 futures campaign divorced the Bordeaux market from reality and was a spur to look elsewhere. Then mix in the fact that a lot of wines from the Rhone and Italy match a more diverse set of meals. YOu can still get some very nice wines fro Bordeaux, but it’s not the default first stop for serious wine enthusiasts - there are several first stops.

Approval for the appellation has been withheld on occasion for reasons other than quality or typicity. I’m not sure that means anything without additional information.

Thanks for all the replies. I do not think that this producer is about to take over Bordeaux. I am just skeptical about putting him on such a high pedestal. Especially when his wine is actually not inexpensive, surpassing some of the so called ‘luxury’ brand prices. It just seems to me to be very simplistic and romantic to say, ‘ah, these evil corporate Bordeaux types vs the little guys who are so much better in a soulful way’ or something like this. It is not that simple.

Also, I am not sure that California wines are all the cheap either. I mean, the great California labels have gotten quite expensive as well.

Once again, I think that 2009 Bordeaux pricing - on a general level - is too high. And I have spoken to several negociants who say this. Ferdinand Mahler Besse told me that ‘this is the most dangerous campaign he has seen’ . Another negociant has spoken about a lot of potential ‘toxic stock’ . So, yes, the danger of a bubble bursting is real.

But that does not mean that the ‘soul’ of Bordeaux is found in rather obscure estates with limited means, however charming they may be. The reason many established estates have reputations is because they do have the superior exposures and microclimates and soils. They have the money to invest in something as basic as temperature control during fermentation, or to invest in new vertical presses and tractors. Or whatever other important items/services are needed to make the best of a given domain. Certainly, I am not someone with a modern palate, and do not like wines with ultra low yields resulting in overripe thickness. But the truth is that many established brands - to me at least - truly represent the soul of Bordeaux. Wines like Leoville Barton in St Julien. Or Grand Puy Lacoste in Pauillac. Or Brane Cantenac in Margaux. These are not $1000 per bottle boutique wines. They are generally quite affordable and represent ageworthy wines - clarets - that have not ‘betrayed’ tradition but rather embraced modern methods and progress in a reasonable fashion. And there are many others like them.

Panos, I’d have to agree with you that this article says more about Asimov than it does about Bdx. Having just drunk a bottle of 2000 du Tertre (91 pts) and last week the 2000 Cantenac Brown (89 pts) it is hard to argue why you have to search out this estate if you wanted reasonably priced wine that is quite good for the money and also display the regional characteristics. It be hard to find cab blands of this quality and value almost anywhere in the world.

Peter,

“Cab blands” has to qualify as the Freudian slip of the year. [winner.gif]

Cheers,

Harry

Wages.

Harry, Must have been the alcoholic bland I was drinking [oops.gif]
While I won’t promise too much, I do feel fairly proud that I haven’t yet succumbed to the charms of Burgundy [stirthepothal.gif]

Sadly true. Though I was talking about the price of things, that’s a good point.

I think my point to Mike is stil valid though - you can buy and drink very good Bordeaux for the same price a lot of people spend on Cali wines with much less of a track record, for the same price a many Rhones, etc. The problem that you point out is a real one though.

Agreed, your point is a fair one.

Nathan:

UNC football victory totals? [winner.gif]

May I please ask what your price range is? While I also buy and drink a lot of Rhone wines, IMO, at the value end of the spectrum, it’s hard to beat the quality found in Bordeaux. Plus because the wines are made in such massive amounts, they are easy to find.



The obvious risk here is if BDX falls out of favor with the über wealthy - as they have alienated their previous customers, and the younger generation has no idea who they are…

How many Bordeaux wines are only sold to the uber wealthy? 10-15-20? Is that any different than any other wine region? Would you say Napa has the same problem because of Screaming Eagle, Harlan and other wines? What about Burgundy with DRC and countless other high end wines? You mentioned Rhone. Because the bench mark wines like the Guigal single vineyard wines, Chave or da Capo, as well as other wines are only purchased by wealthy people, are those regions at the same level of risk?

As soon as Butch Davis gave his ridiculous speech (“all the things are in place to win a national championship”) at halftime of the Duke game where he was introduced I said that for us to have a good team, he’d turn us into Miami. Lo and behold.

I think the same applies to Washi wines [snort.gif]