Grands Vins / Grand Crus Tiers in the Languedoc
The CIVL (Conseil Interprofessionnel des Vins du Languedoc — but I’m sure you knew that ;D) has declared a new system of classification in the Languedoc to separate and celebrate the “Grands vins du Languedoc” and “Grands Crus du Languedoc”. Articles in Harpers and Drinks Business for the full story.
A lot of people have been asking me what I think about this and I guess I should take a moment to express my personal feelings about how the CIVL’s newly declared hierarchy.
On the one hand, the Languedoc is certainly entitled to having some Grands Crus or terroirs/wineries that have proven themselves over time to be emblematic champions of the region. It might seem absurd or capricious today to arbitrarily say that certain places or people are better winemakers than others. But hey, fake it til you make it. In a hundred years, the Grands Crus du Languedoc might seem just as legitimate as the Grands Crus de Bordeaux or Grands Crus de Bourgogne (determined by the laws from 1855, parcel drawings of Cistercian monks, and other really legit old stuff).
That said, it’s a pretty classic move for my dear region. At a time when so much of the world mocks the complexity, capriciousness, and obsolesence of the Grands Crus system in other parts of France, we establish a long term plan to incorporate it into how we sell wine. We’re about 200 years too late. But hey, it can’t really hurt us.
At worst, a couple of people (generally folks who are “in the know” about wine) will ridicule the effort. But at best, we can seriously raise self-esteem in the area. We have to throw our old defeatist attitude in the rubbish bin. The Languedoc is GREAT. And we have Grands Crus too! Power to us.
Now, what do we hope to gain from it? Other than just being a positive mantra to sort of repeat to yourself as you wake up each morning? I don’t know.
When Frederic Jeanjean, President of the CIVL and owner of Jeanjean (edit: large groupe viticole based out of Terrasses du Larzac) says the strategy will “transform the Languedoc into a profitable, quality wine‐making region”, I think that’s a little ambitious. Really? Calling certain wines and crus Grand is going to transform the Languedoc into a profitable quality winemaking region? That’s a tall order. What exactly is the strategy being referred to? Well, the Drinks Business article alludes to “a detailed action plan of technical, economic and marketing strategies, which will provide a framework for its activities over the coming years.” Let me tell you, that I have not seen much of that detailed plan of action.
Short of checking the CIVL news site (which I really like), I don’t get much news from them at all. You might assume this is some fault of mine, but let me clarify my relationship to the interprofession. I am forced to pay dues to put AOC Cabardes on my wine bottles. And a significant portion of those dues goes to the CIVL. So I am a paying member of the Interprofession. Then they also send you letters and try to get you to pay as an individual. So they have my address. But they don’t send me invitations to the assemblee generale. Just more requests for me to make double payments on my wine production.
Here’s the only thing I have received regarding the new hierarchy plan, copied and pasted from an email sent within the AOC Cabardes ODG (our syndicat):
Premier niveau : LES VINS DU LANGUEDOC
ð Niveau d’objectif : entre 3 et 4 € par col (prix TTC consommateurs) et pour les marques de distributeurs : 2,50 € par col (prix TTC consommateurs).
ðPrix vrac d’objectif : 90 à 100 € l’hl avec un rendement de : 50 à 55 hl/ha
ðPrix plancher d’objectif : 80€ l’hl.
Deuxième Niveau : LES GRANDS VINS DU LANGUEDOC
ðNiveau d’objectif :entre 4 € et 7 € par col (prix TTC consommateurs).
ðRendement de 48 à 50 hl/ha
ðPossibilité de repli en AOC LANGUEDOC (a priori pour le Cabardès sous réserve d’identification par l’INAO des parcelles complantées en cépages méditerranéens)
Troisième Niveau : LES CRUS DU LANGUEDOC
ðNiveau d’objectif : au-delà de 7-10 €/cols (prix TTC consommateurs au caveau)
Les AOP du Languedoc seront réparties entre le deuxième niveau (les grands vins du Languedoc) et le troisième niveau (les crus du Languedoc) en fonction :
- du souhait de positionnement des ODG de chaque appellation
- de critères économiques précis garantissant l’homogénéité du segment de marché.
Les critères économiques retenus en première analyse pour accéder au segment « crus du Languedoc » :
- nombre de producteurs (entre 30 et 50 metteurs en marché),
- volume de production (entre 25.000 à 35.000 hectolitres commercialisés),
- rendement maximum (45 hl/ha : critères INAO 2008),
- prix vrac (>150 €/hl) ou pourcentage des ventes directes (>70%),
- prix consommateurs (caveau > 10 € TTC / GD : > 7 € TTC ),
- mise en bouteille en région restreinte de production
And this is a CIVL powerpoint PROJET DE SEGMENTATION DE L’OFFRE DES AOC which ostensibly originates from that June assemblee referred to in the Drinks Business article.
So I guess the plan is just to limit each tier to a certain yield, certain price per bottle, total number of producers, certain size of plantation, and quantity of production (although this should really be a function of yield and size of plantations).
Anyway, this is a really long post just to say that I don’t really know what I think about this new strategy. If the CIVL continues to operate in a way that even a winemaker like me who spends a great deal of effort trying to stay branché has no idea what they’re doing, I don’t see how this new system of classification can “transform the Languedoc into a profitable, quality wine‐making region”. A rose by any other name.
But at the same time, I’m glad to see they’re sending out positive press releases and that people are reading that stuff. Because hey, we deserve grands crus just as much as Bordeaux if not more.
PS – One of the execs at the CIVL said that the new hierarchy will “mould the future of the Languedoc region for the next 15 years.” … Even that seems a little ambitious. I feel like I’m probably going to have more impact on this region than some system of classification put forth by the CIVL (who has lost a lot of gumption in the Freche years) but I guess that’s a subject for another post.
August 20th, 2010 at 12:43 am
considering the lack of information you describe I guess you wouldn’t know the status of this. Is it a plan that has yeat to be approved by e.g. the INAO? So, may yet be ditched? Anyone remembers the Loire appellation Chaume Premier Cru? That was launched but that was then deemed unlawful by a court. Twice. And no longer exists. Is there a risk that this will happen here too?
And there’s an argument for saying that the Grand Crus of Bordeaux are good, but only for the ones who are inside the classification, who can thus inflate their prices. Whereas for most others it is of much more questionable value. And maybe even counter-productive.
One of the charms and beauties of the Languedoc is precisely that – it has (had) little of stringent controls of what you can do, and therefor there are many creative and talented growers who have made some excellent products.
Would it not be better to sell the wines thanks to their intrinsic qualities rather than due to some, always to some extent arbitrary, “classification”.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:13 am
hallelujah, Per
Good question about the legality. As far as I can tell, it’s a press initiative of the CIVL and as such might not even be a legal restriction. Less than a year ago, I was told that anybody with an AOC in the Languedoc could put “grand vin du Languedoc” on their bottles or marketing material. That sort of suggests that “grand vin du Languedoc” might be a trademark that belongs to the CIVL. Or something like that. But that is pure assumption based on what one AOC President told me. So /shrug
August 20th, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Very cool! Thanks for breaking the story. I loved the “legit old stuff” reference
I don’t quite know what to think of it either. Is it a date 200 year old fad? Or could it help establish credibility amongst the region’s growers. It’ll be fun to see what comes of it.
August 22nd, 2010 at 12:44 am
well, saying that the Languedoc has “the charm of having (had) little of stringent controls of what you can do, and therefore there are many creative and talented growers who have made some excellent products.” is not quite my impression – French laws with taxes, reglementations and bureaucracy are everywhere – even in the Languedoc – and creative and talented growers often end up with “table wine” on their bottles (which even forbids you, to tell the vintage year and the terroir it comes from normally. So we do make table-wine in the price range > 20€/blt., but we would never be considered as a Grand Cru by the CIVL;-)
August 22nd, 2010 at 2:40 am
This sounds like a bad move to me. The classification system seems to me to reflect everything that is bad about Bordeaux – arbitrary, restrictive, exclusive, whatever. It’s a discredited system, and would only be bad for Languedoc. Once you go down that road, you create a hierarchy that is as good as set in stone, which makes it difficult (if not impossible) for the up-and-coming stars to break through. I have learned to love the AOC system (or whatever they call it now) but it is far from perfect. If it was, then some of the greatest wines produced in the region wouldn’t still have to be labelled as Vins de Pays, or even Vins de Table. I am in that minority that considers Languedoc wine to be up there with Bordeaux and Burgundy (and all the other great regions of France and indeed the world) in terms of quality potential. But the last thing it needs is for some group of know-it-alls to come along and stick them all into a series of league tables. If this comes to pass, I can see the majority of the best growers deserting the appellation system altogether, in favour of Vin de Table. At least that would create a level playing field!
August 24th, 2010 at 7:15 am
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. Are CIVL accountable to their subscribers. Perhaps all the vigneronnes should cancel their subscriptions and pass the savings on to those who purchase their wine. My guess is the guys from Faugeres have upset them big time.
Trying to be a bit more serious, if Languedoc is going to have Grand Crus then fine, but don’t we know what they are already based on price and established reputation – the likes of Granges des Peres, Mas de DG, Peyre Rose. I’d deliberately leave out a grower like Mas Jullien as he has changed his (spread out) vineyards over the years to achieve the style and balance he’s after.
A Grand Cru, to my mind, is a vineyard area that is proven over time to be able to make great wine (given a grower capable of doing it justice of course). This is the model in Burgundy and, relatively recently introduced, Alsace.
CIVL seem to be saying that anywhere in Gres de Montpellier (a patchwork catch all for a vast area) is up for it yet Faugeres can never have a Grand Cru. Sorry, but if this is the case it’s total incompetence.
February 28th, 2011 at 9:29 am
[...] Another chapter unfolds in the Grands Crus du Languedoc story. [...]
March 14th, 2011 at 9:40 am
[...] I understand La Conf’s complaints and I get similarly whiney about some CIVL initiatives (see Grands Crus du Languedoc), I think the proper channel for that debate is within the ODG. If an AOC-producing winemaker [...]
March 28th, 2011 at 7:12 am
[...] since the CIVL (Conseil Interprofessionnel des Vins du Languedoc) announced the new grands crus / grands vins du Languedoc system, people have been asking me for more details about the plan and [...]
April 1st, 2011 at 8:12 am
I am not that well informed on the new system but here my two cents on wine, laws and restrictions. I believe the future of the wineworld will be split in two camps: the low priced, high volume producers who make a generic wine and the winemakers that try to make something that reflects the soil, the climate of their vineyards and a touch of their philosophy. That second group will make a unique product in a unique place where they need to put more effort, time, knowledge and investments in so it will sell in a higher price category. The winemakers who do not choose sides will be bought up.
This means that neighbors can produce very different wines if they choose for a different approach. Quality vs quantity, high price vs 0,01 cent profit, identity vs randomness: there is a market for both sides and they will exist side to side, depending on the winemakers choice. It will become impossible to put prices and quality based on regions.
We are living in a society that is branded, wine is following that path already. Costumers “trust” the logo more than the the laws of their government. Business is moving quicker than most lawmakers when it comes to structure. The idea of forbidding yields, varieties and so on based on borders is politics and limits the possibilities and creativity of the winemaker. Limiting price will limit the possibility for a whole region to invest in better quality.
I believe in a self-regulating-system where wineproducers got a lot of freedom to create their vision and promote and sell it. If this is something the customer likes they earn an income and can keep doing it. It is an approach you can find back in Australia. The government is there to make sure that the system is good for their people so for example they need to test health parameters, make sure there are always different players on the field…
I believe more in a democratic medium like internet to get an idea of the quality and value of a bottle than hundred year old laws based on borders that are even older. Do we really need to make another set of confusing lists based on whole regions where a limited amount of wines is tasted by a small group of decisionmakers.
Will it be easier for the average winedrinker to decide how to spend their money with the new system if they exclude lots of regions? Will the new system of classification represent the content of a wine, the respect for nature and employees, the uniqueness of a product or the productionmethod? Because we need a system that informs us about the QUALITY of a certain WINE, not the average quality of a region the last decades.