I once read that luxury Champagne often is priced as is perfume - what
the market will bear. Extensive advertising often plays a role. Good
reviews by critics always helps. However some luxury Champagnes are
quite limited in production because the source may be a very small
vineyard. Decanter recently gave some production figures for luxury
Champagnes made in only very small quantities.

(1) Bollinger, Blanc de Noirs, Vieilles Vignes Francaises. The latest
release is the 1999, and there were only 3000 bottles. This wine is
extremely expensive and difficult to find. I have only seen it offered
at auction and at inflated prices at a few carriage trade wine dealers
who likely bought at auction. The Pinot Noir grapes from which the
wine is made are planted on their own roots and have never had to be
grafted over to American roots. Why a tiny plot of such vines escaped
disease, that required replanting in most of France, is not known, at
least to me. According to some critics who have tasted many vintages
of this wine, it often can improve greatly with considerable age, and
it is very much a food wine, especially when well aged.

(2) Billecart-Salmon, Le Clos Saint-Hiliare. The 1996 production was
only 4000 bottles

(3) Philipponnat, Clos des Goisses. There were only 5000 bottles of
the 1997.

(4) Krug, Clos du Mesnil. There were 12624 bottles and 260 magnums of
the 1995.

(5) Roederer Cristal Rose. Production was 20000 bottles of the 1999.

The first 3 Champagnes on the list above are even more rare than the
1990 Romanee-Conti, for which the label gives a production of 7446
labeled bottles. Of course rarity is not the only factor at work here,
because the 1990 Romanee-Conti sells far far more than any of the
Champagnes listed above.

The Bollinger Blanc de Noirs Vieilles Vignes Francaises escaped
phylloxera is because this particular vineyard (or perhaps it's two
vineyards... I don't remember-- it's been a decade since I've visited
Bollinger) is that it's surrounded by a thick stone wall and the
phylloxera louse just didn't find its way in.

I've heard that while it might be nice to taste this particular wine
it's not so wonderful as to merit the price that this rare wine
brings. Of course I've not had it, so I can't opine first-hand. But
there's not necessarily anything distinctive just because the wine is
from ungrafted rootstock.

There's a Champagne (I don't remember the name) that's made NOT from
pinot noir, pinot meunier nor chardonnay, but from some ancient grapes
that are also allowed in Champagne but nobody else uses anymore. I
was thrilled to try it. And the result? I didn't notice any
difference. If you'd told me it was made from any combination of the
usual three grapes I'd have said "Of course." I tasted it twice and
it tasted like Champagne to me. Not that all Champagnes taste alike,
of course-- I've had hundreds in the last fifteen years. But nothing
about it said that anything was out of the ordinary.

Shaun Eli
www.BrainChampagne.com