by Wine Owners
Posted on 2015-06-10
Jane Anson’s insight into what courtiers and négoces think about the en primeur system makes for very interesting reading.
Perhaps what many Chateaux are unwilling to go on record with is the question of estate value.
Land values are at least partially driven by the cost per bottle that can be achieved by the Chateaux at the point of release. The higher the release price (whenever that is) the higher the cost of land per hectare.
If you've just blown €200M on a slice of prime classed growth real estate, you want to support the underlying assumptions upon which that price was predicated. The balance sheet value of that asset and its ability to appreciate over time (and not see shareholder value diminished) becomes pretty crucial.
Is this one of the reasons why Calon released so little and massively cut back on the number of Négoces they allowed allocations, narrowing channels to market?
We totally agree with Jane Anson that a number of the First Growths got their pricing right. For me Lafite at first tranche and Mouton (Grand and Petit) got it most right vs market pricing of back vintages. There is future value in those purchases.
The sooner the 'funding' model of EP is clarified, the sooner the negativity surrounding the EP release period will evaporate. I think consumers dislike conflicting messaging and behaviour as much as channels of distribution do.
Let's say it; the top Chateaux (the only part of the EP market that appears to be worth bothering with) don't need us to fund the next vintage. Nor therefore do they have a need to leave enough on the table to convince us of the opportunity-cost of stockholding for them. That illusion is about to be shattered.
