What’s the point? Chateau Montrose edition
Here’s an interesting chart from the folks at Liv-Ex: Chateau Montrose 2009 is valued at $1,400 more a case than Montrose 2010. The 09 surged when Parker gave it 100 points. (The price did not move on the Suckling 100-point score). But the ’10 stayed flat with 99 points. Clearly, a score of 99 ain’t what it used to be!
I haven’t tasted the two vintages of Montrose in question, but in some other comparisons of 09 vs 2010, I preferred the 2010s. So if this pricing continues to be played out across other wines in the two vintages, it seems the point-chasers will be paying an outsized and unnecessary premium.
On July 25th, 2013 at 12:58 am ,Rick Tandy wrote:
Wow, such a hard decision, spend $1.4K more for a RP scored 2009 Montrose. I checked out wine searcher, 2010 C. Montrose was $349 / bottle and 2010 was $195. So, actually more like $1.8K difference and all for the added “Nirvana” of ONE RP POINT. When is the market going to stop reacting to his over inflated ego….I mean scores.
On July 25th, 2013 at 11:46 am ,Blake Gray wrote:
You’re not looking at this the right way. Celebrate it: if only 100-point wines get inflated prices, it leaves more to drink for the rest of us.
On July 25th, 2013 at 1:37 pm ,jc jouas wrote:
Agreed, the ’10 is certainly the ‘value’ play when considering the current pricing for each of these Montrose bottles post RP rating.
As far as the stagnant price of the ’10 goes, I don’t think you have to look much further than the substantial futures price increase the ’10 took over ’09. Just another example of where the score was already built into the futures asking price …