45 Romanee Conti - new world auction record

[Fred_Bower]

My hubris is that I would absolutely pay whatever it took to win this wine if I had the means and then experience it with a select set of those I deemed important enough to share it. This is a , as I do not have the means. I do not begrudge those who do.

fred

[A_Songeur]

Won it! Drank it! Dusted…

"New world auction record for any single bottle of wine set this morning at Sotheby’s. $450,000 hammer, approximately $550,000 after premium, for a single bottle of 1945 Romanee Conti. "

Got it just in time for tonight’s diner! Dedicated by Rudy K! Superbe!
Tasting note
"Still vigorous, very fruity and bright (I can’t believe it’s 73 years old!..). Blue, dark and red fruit, plum, banana, raspberries…maybe a hint of zebra truffle (black and white), but this is very much a DRC wine. They really make very good juice and it glides onto the palate while the nose is intoxicating. I’ve been buying from Sotheby’s for a while, but rarely at this price point. Picked this up at the morning auction and I’m very pleased at how elegantly it’s aging. Had not had it for a long time … looking forward to the next one…although I may not be able to afford it if the price trend continues… "

[Ian_Dorin]

My hubris is that I would absolutely pay whatever it took to win this wine if I had the means and then experience it with a select set of those I deemed important enough to share it. This is a , as I do not have the means. I do not begrudge those who do.

fred

Well said, and I agree. If I had the means, I would have dropped 7 figures on this sale to taste true bottles of history.

Interestingly, I looked back at the auction history of this wine. It was interesting to see how many bottles sold from 05-12 (around 15) and then none…until last week.

[Tom_Reddick]

I thought phylloxera was complete in Bordeaux by the 1890’s, did it take until the 1940’s to clear through Burgundy?

Romanee-Conti is generally considered to be the last vineyard to succumb- and production was down for a number of years leading up to the 1945 vintage. There may have been other plots elsewhere replanted later, but the history books say RC was the last replanting due to phylloxera.

[Tom_Reddick]

My hubris is that I would absolutely pay whatever it took to win this wine if I had the means and then experience it with a select set of those I deemed important enough to share it. This is a , as I do not have the means. I do not begrudge those who do.

fred

Well said, and I agree. If I had the means, I would have dropped 7 figures on this sale to taste true bottles of history.

Interestingly, I looked back at the auction history of this wine. It was interesting to see how many bottles sold from 05-12 (around 15) and then none…until last week.

I do not have the details at hand, but a legitimate full case of 1945 Romanee-Conti did sell at auction in, as I recall, the late 90s. Came out of California I believe. Some of those probably recycled at auction- but I do not think anyone was keeping close watch back then. What is more concerning is how many 1945 Romanee-Conti, including large formats, were sold privately. Even Premier Cru had a magnum and jeroboam once upon a time.

CellarTracker shows 21 bottles owned and 3 consumed, which seems very high. The talk I have heard over the years from those who would know best is that most of the wine never left Paris and was consumed long ago.

Count me in as well as a buyer last weekend if I could have managed it. Though I probably would have been more interested in the 1959. I like that vintage far more than 1945, even though I will concede that in intellectual terms 1945 is the greater year.

[billnanson]

Both hail and frost in 45, Robert Drouhin told me. Must have been a short crop. But it is the Victory year, and I think that counts for a lot.

2hl/ha - 622 bottles
The last vintage of the old vines on their own pre-phylloxera roots - no grafts. Then they were pulled out. So yes a short crop but not particularly due to hail and/or frost.
But IMO the wine is not coveted for its rareness, rather its other-worldly tasting notes - many commenters who know/knew, plus many who do not know(!) placing the 1945 as the greatest Romanée-Conti ever made - though most bottles in the last 30+ years have been fakes! It’s not really about the ‘victory vintage’ - there’s no victory artwork like for Mouton - if 1944 had been a better wine, that would have been the one making the headlines this weekend, not the 45…

Bill, as I mentioned, Robert Drouhin told me that it was a short crop due to both hail and to frost. He also said that the 38 was the better vintage, but that the 45 would probably go for a higher price because of the rarity. So if you disagree with those points, as you seem to, your disagreement is with Mr. Drouhin.

I am not sure what the artwork has to do with it. There are plenty of examples of vintages that are widely thought of as historically relevant without the benefit of artwork.

You simply quoted victory vintage and hail and frost as potentially the main reasons for the high price Levi - I was trying to add more context. Nobody sees 38 as having the same cachet as the 1945, indeed it’s hard to find any notes for 38’s - I think you miss-typed - 37 was a great vintage though. Yes there may have been frost and hail in 1945, Aubert always mentions it too, but as mentioned by many posters, the miserly volume of the dying pre-phylloxera vines was the biggest driver to delivering 2hl/ha - replanted La Tache also had a small yield in 1945 due to frost (1st May) then hail - but still produced significantly more than Romanée-Conti, for example.

Tom - A 1.2 ha parcel of Richebourg was the last (for DRC) to be uprooted from its original provignage roots - and that was in 1946…

[Levi_Dalton]

2hl/ha - 622 bottles
The last vintage of the old vines on their own pre-phylloxera roots - no grafts. Then they were pulled out. So yes a short crop but not particularly due to hail and/or frost.
But IMO the wine is not coveted for its rareness, rather its other-worldly tasting notes - many commenters who know/knew, plus many who do not know(!) placing the 1945 as the greatest Romanée-Conti ever made - though most bottles in the last 30+ years have been fakes! It’s not really about the ‘victory vintage’ - there’s no victory artwork like for Mouton - if 1944 had been a better wine, that would have been the one making the headlines this weekend, not the 45…

Bill, as I mentioned, Robert Drouhin told me that it was a short crop due to both hail and to frost. He also said that the 38 was the better vintage, but that the 45 would probably go for a higher price because of the rarity. So if you disagree with those points, as you seem to, your disagreement is with Mr. Drouhin.

I am not sure what the artwork has to do with it. There are plenty of examples of vintages that are widely thought of as historically relevant without the benefit of artwork.

You simply quoted victory vintage and hail and frost as potentially the main reasons for the high price Levi - I was trying to add more context. Nobody sees 38 as having the same cachet as the 1945, indeed it’s hard to find any notes for 38’s - I think you miss-typed - 37 was a great vintage though. Yes there may have been frost and hail in 1945, Aubert always mentions it too, but as mentioned by many posters, the miserly volume of the dying pre-phylloxera vines was the biggest driver to delivering 2hl/ha - replanted La Tache also had a small yield in 1945 due to frost (1st May) then hail - but still produced significantly more than Romanée-Conti, for example.

Bill,

I did not miss-type. Robert Drouhin said that 1937 was a strong, ageable vintage but that 1938 was one of the great vintages of his life. It was 1939 that he said was very poor.

If you disagree with that vintage summary, your disagreement is with what Robert Drouhin said, and not something having to do with myself.

[Tom_Mann]

Continuing on my “I’m surprised this didn’t sell for more,” here is some comparison (of course excluding items in the stratosphere like cars, violins, pianos, art, antique furniture):

Most expensive stamp: $9.5 million
Most expensive coin: $10 million
Most expensive watch: $17.8 million
Most expensive baseball card: $2.9 million (and there are cards in existence that certainly would sell for way in excess of $2.9mm)
Most expensive guitar (non-celeb-owned): $600,000+
Most expensive whisky: $1+ million

I get that wine isn’t durable in the same way as any of the above, and may not have historical importance in the same way, but I also think that in many circles owning the one pristine btl of '45 DRC RC is going to get you way more cache than owning many/any of the above (although owning a pristine '59 Les Paul Standard would be pretty badass in any context). I would not be shocked if this btl sold for #1mm+ in the future.

And none of those compares to the 1963 Ferrari GTO which sold for $48m earlier this year…!

[Glen_Gold]

I don’t see it mentioned above, but most expensive comic book, Action 1: $3.2 million.
And most expensive comic book artwork (which, if you ask an insurer, still isn’t artwork, but a collectible), Tin Tin: $1.64 million

[David_Glasser]

$450.3 million:

[Ian_Dorin]

Continuing on my “I’m surprised this didn’t sell for more,” here is some comparison (of course excluding items in the stratosphere like cars, violins, pianos, art, antique furniture):

Most expensive stamp: $9.5 million
Most expensive coin: $10 million
Most expensive watch: $17.8 million
Most expensive baseball card: $2.9 million (and there are cards in existence that certainly would sell for way in excess of $2.9mm)
Most expensive guitar (non-celeb-owned): $600,000+
Most expensive whisky: $1+ million

I get that wine isn’t durable in the same way as any of the above, and may not have historical importance in the same way, but I also think that in many circles owning the one pristine btl of '45 DRC RC is going to get you way more cache than owning many/any of the above (although owning a pristine '59 Les Paul Standard would be pretty badass in any context). I would not be shocked if this btl sold for #1mm+ in the future.

And none of those compares to the 1963 Ferrari GTO which sold for $48m earlier this year…!

Interestly, the most expensive “sales” of cars don’t occur at auction. A GTO sold for like $70 million.