Bordeaux Wine Official Classification of 1855

[Don Giovanni]

Bordeaux Wine Official Classification of 1855, well it's broke after 152 years.

The idea was a very good marketing idea at that time for the Châteaux's of the day. With the change of ownership and some increasing the land and some decreasing it, I ask why no reclassification ? What system is so perfect that it doesn't need a tune up every now and again? If the vineyards are living then like all things living some evolution has to occur.

How could such and old classification stand the test of time? Even the Dow Jones index gets changed as time go on. So if you are using this system to buy and price wine then you are just not going to be right on the money...you might be 40% right... maybe. The injustice that is imposed upon newer Châteaux's or older ones that have and are vinting wonderful wines can't get the dollars that they should....when the Châteaux's that have such a high classification can put out plunkish wine and sit back and charge a false market price.

The point is that the market price of the wines are now out of the control of true market. The true market should be based on quality not status granted 152 years ago. Ok I still have to remember someone in France has a working........ and I will give the inventor his due Joseph Guillotin - thank you....a Guillotine..

So off to the Guillotine with the classification of 1855 and then you would have a more democratic open market and you better believe it prices would go up and down over night...to reflect the true market and not a name.

[E. M. Pashman]

.

Edited May 23, 2017 by E. M. Pashman (log)

[Rebel Rose]

If anything, the classifications do help to prop up the prices of the premiers crus in off years, but this is more a problem for the dilettantes drinking them as symbols of status than for those who care more about what's in the bottle than what's on the label.

Excellent point, Eric. I am not an expert on Bordeaux . . . Do you feel the classifications are still useful as long term indicators of quality? Or are they regarded more as royal figureheads?

[GordonCooks]

Any modification to the current classification would only benefit the chateau and penalize the consumer.

[JohnL]

"well it's broke"

??????????????

Is it really?

As the Oxford entry notes: "it has held up remarkably well."

I would also love to know who these "dilettantes" are? Many claim they exist yet I have rarely seen any evidence.

As I see it, the market has added a few wines here and there and moved some among the classifications and "created" the super second category. The system does not take into consideration the fact that for periods of time, various wines can be better or worse than their classification indicates due to poor wine making etc. The market usually makes the appropriate adjustment.

[E. M. Pashman]

.

Edited May 23, 2017 by E. M. Pashman (log)

[E. M. Pashman]

.

Edited May 23, 2017 by E. M. Pashman (log)

[Rebel Rose]

I'm no expert on Bordeaux, either, Mary, so just take all of this as one man's opinion. ...

Your commentary on this is well-expressed, and one of the best and most succinct I have encountered.

I also agree on the dilettante issue. There are "layers" of customers in this group. Some are just wlling to pay more than necessary to be assured of an impressive wine, but that's okay, because they are also not spending their children's college education on a wine hobby. And there are people who are willing to, and certainly can, pony up for the trophy wines, but they do so because they really, really want them. And then there are the "flippers" who are into it for secondary market profits.

And there's another group--there are individuals in affluent areas of the world who make a very good living as wine consultants, charged with buying, stocking and inventory for personal wine cellars. One wonders if the owners really care about the wines in their cellar or are even aware of what they have . . . I'm not knocking the economic model, but doesn't it make you want to stretch out your arms and wail, "Nooooo . . . ." as these wines disappear into the black cavernous reaches of an indifferent cellar?

[JohnL]

I have never encountered this level of obsessiveness with people's motivations for buying wine with any other product made by man.

"Oh how can that guy really appreciate that Picasso he just bought!"

"Those people are buying Porsche's just because of the name!"

etc.

Are people allowed to enjoy wine to what ever degree they want to?

Does one need to pass an appreciation test before they buy a first growth?

Do they have to start with vin ordinaire and work their way up?

If one can afford it, one should be able to buy whatever they want and enjoy it as they see fit.

"Excuse me sir--I notice you are wearing a Brioni suit! Do you really appreciate the fine craftsmanship and attention to detail?" And hey, are those John Lobb shoes on your feet!"

"The nerve of that guy"

Should people be quizzed before they are allowed entry into Per Se or The French Laundry?

Should one only be allowed to purchase caviar after they have tried shad roe?

Does everyone purchasing Beluga really know the difference from Sevruga?

No mainly it is wine that gets some folks going.

High prices? Blame it on those mysterious speculators.

Hard to find? There they are again! those Wall Street types who order magnums of Opus One!

Why is it with wine we spend so much time decrying and discussing people's worthiness to enjoy it? To buy it?

It is not as simple as critic's scores or speculation (whatever that is) that determines a wine's price or value. Do you think the people buying up Cros Parantoux are waiting for a Parker score? That Latour is six hundred dollars a bottle because of speculators? And how about that Opus One? One would think that those Wall Street barbarians would have driven the price up to hundreds a bottle (check the current price).

Yes people are flipping allocations of Screaming Eagle. Yet lot's of folks are drinking it --witness the myriad tasting notes on the net. It is also very good wine--if it were the quality of two buck Chuck think the demand would drop a bit?

The truth is the wine market is much more complex.

I also find it snobbish and more than a bit snarky to anticipate how much people appreciate wine and how they will enjoy it once they purchase it? Or even worse, begrudge them based on this. There's so much wine available today that imagining some nefarious conspiracy behind the price or scarcity of any particular wine is more sour grapes than anything.

I haven't been able to find (or afford) Romanee Conti since that damn Parker gave it a hundred! There are plenty of available and affordable (for me at least) Red Burgundies around--I am just hoping those Japanese businessmen don't start using it to fill their swimming pools though! (I heard they are using Montrachet in their wine spritzers). No wonder I can't find it at my local wine shop anymore.

[E. M. Pashman]

.

Edited May 23, 2017 by E. M. Pashman (log)

[JohnL]

I got ya Eric!

I don't disagree either though I don't spend too much time "lamenting." I prefer drinking and a bottle in hand is worth....

The 1855 classification is not "broke."

It was based mainly upon the prices that wines were selling for. Latour sold for a lot then and it sells for a lot now.

The first growths (with some noteworthy additions) are still wines that stand out in tastings as the pinnacle of what Bordeaux can achieve and they are as such, in demand. Hence they fetch higher prices. The market has evolved--there are many more wine drinkers today (many more people) and many more who have a lot of discretionary income. Therefore the market for these top wines is thriving.

How could anyone make the argument that if you can afford a Rolls or a Ferrari you should settle for a Toyota simply because you are not a car afficianado or do not posses a certain level of connoisseurship to "adequately appreciate" your purchase?

That's all I am saying.

Somehow a lot of wine lovers enjoy playing the snob's game in reverse. I know folks who believe that if you enjoy a glass of Yellowtail or two buck chuck you are a cretin!

Conversely, the Yellowtail fans like to point out that those who like Rieslings from obscure producers are snobs and everyone seems to enjoy questioning the motives the wealthy in their wine purchases.

I say the wider a range of wines one can enjoy the better and let's let everyone buy and drink (or not drink) whatever they want to!

Kind of let's "drink and let drink"

[E. M. Pashman]

.

Edited May 23, 2017 by E. M. Pashman (log)

[JohnL]

I think Don G is making the point that the prestige of the first growths is driving their prices and in turn, their inclusion as first growths.

Am I correct John?

I still disagree but it is an interesting thought. This is a horse and cart thing. So I would agree that the classification system was "broke" only if the first growths were not deserving of their status because they were not of top quality as generally agreed upon by those who taste them.

Over the course of many years I would say that all the current first growths are pretty deserving of their status and price. I would add a few wines to the category and perhaps include a super second tier but overall, the whole classification is amazingly accurate even today.

[Don Giovanni]

I think Don G is making the point that the prestige of the first growths is driving their prices and in turn, their inclusion as first growths.

Am I correct John?

I still disagree but it is an interesting thought. This is a horse and cart thing. So I would agree that the classification system was "broke" only if the first growths were not deserving of their status because they were not of top quality as generally agreed upon by those who taste them.

Over the course of many years I would say that all the current first growths are pretty deserving of their status and price. I would add a few wines to the category and perhaps include a super second tier but overall, the whole classification is amazingly accurate even today.

←

Yes my point that first growths are over rated and if the system was rendered obsolete then we would see more price stabilization. Only since the Internet and wine critics reports that are now available at the click of the mouse has the system seemed to be working to a point. Up until this time from 1900 onward it was the name and not the quality that made the Châteaux's first growths coveted. I still think that over 40% of the wine is for bragging rights and 30% for speculation and this distorts the market. Price equalization would bring some wines up and other wines down, this would be a free and fair market. The biggest problem is that all the inventory and cellars would have a value change that was predicated on a monarch system of royalty. This alone would cause financial chaos and be the biggest impediment toward any revision. Back in Europe my family would have the title of Count, yet in a democratic system I am just the same as anyone else. Now it would be unfair if I was a Count today and then at birth you and I would already be valued differently.

[Craig Camp]

The Classification of 1855 is not broken, it's just ignored and irrelevant. Most consumers have never heard of it. The only classification that counts is that of Robert Parker. The idea of such a classification is from another time and the conditions that led to its creation no longer exist and any thought of redoing it is just a waste of time. Now it is only a bit of Bordeaux history suitable only as a museum piece.

It is the wine press that now sets the value and status of a wine.

[Don Giovanni]

The Classification of 1855 is not broken, it's just ignored and irrelevant. Most consumers have never heard of it. The only classification that counts is that of Robert Parker. The idea of such a classification is from another time and the conditions that led to its creation no longer exist and any thought of redoing it is just a waste of time. Now it is only a bit of Bordeaux history suitable only as a museum piece.

It is the wine press that now sets the value and status of a wine.

←

And like sheep you are to follow the very few....and chase the price up of grape juice...yep the best wine starts as grape juice... and the cost is the same. So if you follow the winepress you are now at the mercy of that critic. Now have you or the market gained any freedom ? No, you only no have one voice or so and they are the new standard. How myopic a system that all wine can't be treated and judged and information given to the masses. Now we are down to a system that is totally broke and the sheep can't be any happier.

Yet science has proven each of us has a different taste 96% of us, so how is this being expressed if we only follow a few voices. So I say to you go out and taste some wine that is not rated and go find something good , but for much less than a rated wine that may be over rated at that. Remember you are your own wine critic, so don't be a sheep and enjoy the wine world.

[Rebel Rose]

John Z:

I believe Craig was being a little tongue-in-cheek. Check out his Wine Camp blog (see link above) and you will see that Craig is a very independent thinker and acclaimed wine writer.

[Craig Camp]

The Classification of 1855 is not broken, it's just ignored and irrelevant. Most consumers have never heard of it. The only classification that counts is that of Robert Parker. The idea of such a classification is from another time and the conditions that led to its creation no longer exist and any thought of redoing it is just a waste of time. Now it is only a bit of Bordeaux history suitable only as a museum piece.

It is the wine press that now sets the value and status of a wine.

←

And like sheep you are to follow the very few....and chase the price up of grape juice...yep the best wine starts as grape juice... and the cost is the same. So if you follow the winepress you are now at the mercy of that critic. Now have you or the market gained any freedom ? No, you only no have one voice or so and they are the new standard. How myopic a system that all wine can't be treated and judged and information given to the masses. Now we are down to a system that is totally broke and the sheep can't be any happier.

Yet science has proven each of us has a different taste 96% of us, so how is this being expressed if we only follow a few voices. So I say to you go out and taste some wine that is not rated and go find something good , but for much less than a rated wine that may be over rated at that. Remember you are your own wine critic, so don't be a sheep and enjoy the wine world.

←

Rant away as much as you want, but this is the reality of the market - especially a commodity market like Bordeaux. Bordeaux prices are now driven far more by Robert Parker than the 1855 Classification. Bordeaux in 2007 has little to do with Bordeaux in 1855 except location. Even the climate is different.

[budrichard]

I've been purchasing Bordeaux futures for over 30 years. The vinyards making great wine, sell for the top prices whatever the Classification. The real question is the incremental price increase with percieved quality. Percieved quality is not just the Classification but the tasters subjective judgement. Surely one cannot argue the Parker's ratings are not subjective. So is Lafite worth more than Gloria? Probably yes but the incremental cost for Lafite is substantial over the cost for Gloria. So how much more is it worth? That is the question each purchaser makers for her or himself. I never traded in Lafite or the others but always chose the lessor Growths or non classified wines. Currently we are drinking the 1970 Vintage, my children and grandchildren will probabaly drink the 2000 and 2003! -Dick

[JohnL]

The Classification of 1855 is not broken, it's just ignored and irrelevant. Most consumers have never heard of it. The only classification that counts is that of Robert Parker. The idea of such a classification is from another time and the conditions that led to its creation no longer exist and any thought of redoing it is just a waste of time. Now it is only a bit of Bordeaux history suitable only as a museum piece.

It is the wine press that now sets the value and status of a wine.

←

I agree somewhat.

The classification helped establish brands: Latour, Margaux etc. Branding is one way to market one's products.

What is interesting though is the fact that the 1855 brand hierarchy is still operative. That is the first growths still command relatively higher prices--they have been joined by a number of others. Parker or no Parker.

It is also arguable that based upon pretty much anyone's judgment, the first growths still represent a high level of quality.

No system can really account for the hand of man in the equation and provide a guarantee of quality and fair relative price.

So with or without Parker or any critic it is likely that first growths (and the other major Bordeaux brands) will cost more money. This is based upon historical fact.

Bordeaux prices have always been set based upon various influences. Today critics and writers have pretty much replaced the brokers and merchants of yesterday. I would argue that this is a desirable improvement. A disinterested third party is more often than not, more reliable than someone who is actually selling the item--the press is for the most part, disinterested. Let's not forget that Parker's impetus to write about wines is grounded in his belief that the influential writers of the day were a number of European's who were actually part of the wine trade--that is they were at least open to suspicion that they were disinterested parties.

So the Bordelaise use the critic's assessments both of the overall vintage and the specific wine, as a factor (yes a key factor) in setting initial prices. However, it is not so simple. the over riding influence on how much a wine costs at retail is the market. Desirability is critical. The market must want a wine. Historically, the desirableness of top Bordeaux has been established. Again Lafitte was selling for top dollar long before Parker entered the scene. Also of immense importance is disposable income. If no one can afford a wine regardless of price or quality or a score, etc, then the wine will not sell.

Let's put things into perspective. While Parker and other critics and writers (there are more of them today than ever so even the most ardent Parkerite or Parker hater will have to admit that his influence is being diluted) are influential within the industry and outside in the market place, The actual cost of wine is much more influenced by the growth of the marketplace and the disposable income it generates.

More likely, those high prices for Bordeaux are driven mainly by the fact that the market is no longer a handful of British (and European) upper class stocking their cellars and a few American Anglophiles. Millions of Asians, Russians, South Americans, Australians, South Africans as well as middle and upper middle class Americans and Europeans among many others are now vying for the fine wines of the world. That bottle of Latour is desired by a huge market willing to pay a lot to have it. Yes, supply and demand. Yes, Parker and other writers play a role but let's not exaggerate that role.

There are far too many examples of wines never rated poorly or not at at all by Parker (and others) that command high prices and wines that are often rated highly that do not. If Parker and other writers and critics did not exist , history indicates that that bottle of Latour or Romanee Conti etc would still be in demand and still command high prices. How about "D Yquem?

And what of regions beyond Bordeaux? Who is responsible for the astronomical prices for the Monfortino's of Conterno or Grange etc. A writer or a critic can help create interest in wine and initial demand but over time the market will make its own adjustments. Parker's own web site is rife with dissenters from his opinions. It is far too easy to blame Parker (really anyone) for the ills of the wine world. The conventional wisdom is always too simple and neat.

So most of the discussion of the 1855 classification is academic in nature. But we should not lose sight of its impact in establishing brands. we should also recognize the power of the market place--for eg Petrus was not ranked at all yet back in the early fifties (Parker was a small child) somehow the market place "discovered" the extraordinary quality and uniqueness of this wine and elevated it. So too for Cheval Blanc and Ausone and others. Time has proven the market correct and time will tell how more recently "discovered" wines will endure (and cost).

By the way, I am waiting for the theory implicating Parker in the Phyloxera epidemic! He has always preached the benefits of low yields so......!

[Don Giovanni]

John L.,

Your post was very well structured and very accurate with information that holds very true. Critics of this world are being diluted by the expansion of information and the speed it travels at. Democratization of information has helped, but still we have to deal with undervalued wines and overvalued wines. Now what causes a wine to reach stratospheric levels, quality, consistency and demand ? So how and why is the demand created ? By having a pedigree surely can't hurt, is it not a caste system then and if it is irrelevant then why market on the 1855 system as many do ?

This is the injustice that I see and still I ponder how the market would price wines without such a system. Believing that we have more feet on the ground when I hear numbers like 144,000 in one day converging to taste I know then that the marketing is working and this artificially inflates the price of wines. With 10,000 varieties of grapes there will always be a wine that will be as interesting and age worthy as a over priced wine but for a fraction of the price. This is why I say go out and taste as many wines as you can. "In vino veritas"

[Don Giovanni]

Sour grapes blight Bordeaux wine event

suspension of the area's 'grand cru' label,

The ruling has prompted serious questions over Bordeaux's whole wine certification system, after the same court last month annulled a similar mark, 'crus bourgeois', in the well-known Médoc region.

The moves mean two of the most prestigious quality marks for Bordeaux wine currently do not exist.

Click On Me

Nice to see that I stuck my neck out in another post and then to see this, very nice.

Maybe I had a good point the other day