Champagne: Houses Vs. Growers

By Alex Russell on April 17, 2012 in Food

When most people think of Champagne, brands like Moët, Veuve, Billecart and Bollinger come to mind. These big names are known as Champagne ‘houses’.

These houses own some vineyards (between them about 12% of the vineyards in Champagne), but since they account for over 80% of Champagne sales globally, they need to buy grapes from growers.

You can tell who buys their grapes in. If you look very closely on the labels you’ll see the letters ‘NM’, which stands for ‘négociant manipulant’. It’s often in very tiny print (see the picture above, for example).

But, increasingly, a lot of growers are making wine from their own grapes. In the past there hasn’t been a lot of it around. Remember, the grapes are their livelihood, so they need to sell them to make a living. You can tell which Champagnes are grower Champagne by looking for the letters ‘RM’ on the label, which stands for ‘récoltant manipulant’.

This grower Champagne, or ‘farmer wine’, accounts for only about 3% of annual global Champagne sales but the numbers are growing. A lot of Aussie winemakers, wine writers and sommeliers are getting very interested in these wines so you’ll see them about a bit more, especially in some of the trendier places.

So what’s different? With the big houses, they buy grapes in and make wines in what some describe as an interventionist style. The wines from these grapes are eventually blended together to form a ‘house style’. In doing so, the unique flavours of the different vineyards are lost in the mix, which is not always a bad thing. In contrast, the growers only use their own grapes (although, of course, they can still blend vineyards together). This can be both a blessing and a curse because growers are stuck with whatever they have. If their grapes aren’t great that year, they’re in trouble, but if they’re awesome, they won’t get blended into a bottle of bubbles from the big houses.

Some would think that the growers have more freedom to do interesting things with their wines but that’s not always the case. There are some really interesting Champagne makers out there, some of whom even use very old plots of Pinot Blanc in their Champagnes (e.g, Pierre Gerbais).

The one thing that the big houses have to their advantage is clout. Think of the marketing campaigns, especially from the likes of Moët and Veuve. Most of us don’t know much about the growers, but the bigger houses have long, storied histories that we’ve all heard, such as Madame Bollinger’s quote: “I drink it when I’m happy and when I’m sad. Sometimes I drink it when I’m alone. When I have company I consider it obligatory. I trifle with it if I’m not hungry and drink it when I am. Otherwise, I never touch it—unless I’m thirsty.”

So what about quality? Well, as with all things, there’s no clear answer. Many people don’t like one or more of the famous Champagne houses and I’ve tried some not-so-great grower Champagnes too, but some drops from both camps are breathtaking.

A lot of writers also argue that grower Champagne can be great value compared to the big houses, and they’re right. You’ll still have to pay a bit for something decent though.

Labels to look out for are Jacques Selosse, Cédric Bouchard, Larmandier-Bernier (popping up on a lot of decent wine lists these days), Pierre Gimonnet and, my personal favourite, Egly-Ouriet.

If you’re worried about taking a risk, try them next time you’re out at a decent restaurant or wine bar where you can usually get them by the glass.