News in St. Emilion: 1996 classification reinstated

Hi,

Another new twist and turn to the never-ending saga of the Saint-Emilion classification...

Tacking on a special ammendment to a bill in progress, the French senate just voted to re-establish the 1996 classification of St. Emilion wines. This must now be approved by the Parliament (Assemblée Nationale).

Some sort of decision had to be taken because the château owners didn't have an inkling of what to put on their labels, corks, and wooden cases!
Something had to give...

The upshot of this amendment is that that 11 châteaux kicked out in the 2006 classification are back again as grands crus classés:

Bellevue
Cadet Bon
Faurie de Souchard
Guadet-Saint-Julien
La Marzelle
La Tour de Pin Figeac (Moueix)
La Tour de Pin Figeac (Giraud-Bélivier)
Petit Faurie de Soutard
Tertre Daugay
Villemaaurine
Yon Figeac

*However*, the châteaux that were promoted in the 2006 classification must return to their former status:

Troplong Mondot and Pavie Macquin(demoted from premier cru classé to "simple" cru classé)
followed by the following which are no longer classified:
Bellefont-Belcier
Destieux
Fleur Cardinale
Grand Corbin
Grand-Corbin-Despagne
Monbousquet

A new classifacation may be made in two years.

The challenge stemmed from several estates that had been removed from the list, spearheaded by Château La Marzelle, owned by Philippe Genevey of Belgium.

Reactions range from phlegmatic to satisfied to incensed, depending on whom you talk to...

An article in today's Sud-Ouest sums up the situation pretty well.

It is easy to say that wines are sold on their quality and reputation rather than their classification, but classifications count in Bordeaux...
I don't know what the legal status of this means with respect to someone who, let's say, bought a cru classé en primeur only to find it is no longer a cru classé in the bottle...

I sincerely hope that the appellation gets over this hump as soon as possible.

One thing is for sure: the next classification will be conducted with the utmost rigor!!!

Best regards,
Alex R.

It is easy to say that wines are sold on their quality and reputation rather than their classification, but classifications count in Bordeaux...

Thanks for the information, Alex. Do you mean by this that this classification is mainly a status symbol for château owners? I don't think that many people outside perhaps France pay much attention to it.

I don't know what the legal status of this means with respect to someone who, let's say, bought a cru classé en primeur only to find it is no longer a cru classé in the bottle...

I have no sympathy for anyone who complains in this situation. He is a label drinker not a wine drinker.

Further I can see no legal basis for a complaint if the classification was correct at the time of purchase and known to be subject to revision.

[David M. Bueker]

Not surprisingly things are still a mess. I'm actually slightly happy about this for two specific reasons:

1. No classification for Monbousquet
2. Troplong Mondot fails to be rewarded for completely changing the style of the wine

Tim,

In writing that "It is easy to say that wines are sold on their quality and reputation rather than their classification, but classifications count in Bordeaux..." I am referring to more than just status symbols, pride, and ego. While these are not inconsequential, I'm referring above all to cold, hard cash.
Losing rank can go unnoticed to the vast majority of consumers, but it sure as heck matters to people who buy the stuff, from importers on down to retailers to enlightened and clued-in amateurs.

You note that "I don't think that many people outside perhaps France pay much attention to it".
That is both true and false.
As I said in a recent post, the St. Emilion classification is very complicated to understand at the best of times.
Not one person in a hundred knows the difference between grand cru and grand cru classé in the Bordeaux region itself - not to mention Singapore or Montevideo!

But, then, how many people know the difference between "premier cru" and "grand cru" Burgundy, Pouilly Fuissé and Pouilly Fumé, Chambolle Musigny and Le Musigny?
The answer is that the classification matters most to those people who are most likely to buy that sort of wine!
This is borne out by the outraged reactions from the owners of Troplong Mondot and Fleur Cardinale, among others. Not only have they been given special recompense, only to have it withdrawn on difficult-to-understand (and largely legalistic) grounds, but they are also very worried about the market value of their wine!
There will be some kind of feedback on this all in the next couple of years. If I see or hear anything on the subject, I'll be sure to post here.

A Swiss friend of mine is visiting. He went to the northern Médoc for dinner. He heard the story of a young winegrower who created an estate out of nothing and received a good Parker review. On the strength of this, he went and built a new vatroom. The next year, or the year after, he wine wasn't reveiwed at all by Parker (one way or the other). The vintage that sold out instantaneously thus remained a flash in the pan. He couldn't sell his wine thereafer or pay his debts, so has since gone bankrupt.
Agreed, Parker and an official classification aren't the same thing, nor a relatively obscure estate in the Bas Médoc and a famous one in St. Emilion.
But the parallels are there...

I don't own Parker's guide. There were 68 crus classés in the 1996 classification. How many does Parker review?
If it's less than half, as I suspect, the only guideline as to what constitutes the appellation's élite for many people is the classification.


With regard to the legal status, you write "I have no sympathy for anyone who complains in this situation. He is a label drinker not a wine drinker".
As for consumers, I entirely agree.
But, please, put yourselves in the shoes of a wine merchant who bought Château XYZ cru classé, only to find out that it isn't any more.
Would he not be legally entitled to claim "tromperie sur la marchandise" (being sold a pig in a poke)?
I very much hope that a court case revolving around just such an issue does not arise. It would be a devilishy complex one to figure out...

David,

I agree with you about Monbousquet but not about Troplong Mondot.

Best regards,
Alex R.

[David M. Bueker]

Alex,

Do you like what has happened with Troplong in the last few vintages (i.e. 2003-2005)? I used to buy the wine year in and year out, but it seems to have gone on a bit of a gob-fest.

Just a note to say thanks for this info, Alex. I don't drink much Bordeaux, but I find these classification issues to be fascinating.

Hi David,

I was at the château last week. We had the 2002 Mondot and the 2002 Troplong Mondot.
I know no other recent vintages.
However, what I tasted was not Parkerized (i.e. extracted and oaky). They were authentic "vins de terroir".

Perhaps others would care to chime in here!

At dinner last Saturday, we had an 89 Troplong Mondot. It was a beauty with rich, mineral, and earthy flavors.
The 2002 was from a so-so year, so it would be unfair to compare.

Best regards,
Alex R.

Alex, thanks much for the update. I too find this fascinating. My love lies on the left bank, but this is just great stuff for wine party conversation.
Do you know of anything going on with regard to the other court action that struck down the "bordeaux superior" and other general classifications that affect the left bank wines? Any effort to re-establish those classifications with perhaps a little more care?
-w

OW,

I am not aware of any Bx. Supérieur appellation.
Blaye has its "crus bourgeois" and at one time there was talk of legal action by the Médocains, but I think they let it go, and the Blaye classification still exists.

Alex R.

Sorry, Alex, I wasn't very specific, or even accurate. I was speaking of the court's decision in 2006 to invalidate the classification system established in 2003, as discussed in this piece:
http://www.thewinedoctor.com/regionalgu ... eois.shtml