PDA

View Full Version : Is Red Gag dying?



AVB
10-18-2009, 15:46
Beam's experiment isn't doing well here in southeastern PA based on talking to some bartenders and that my local store hasn't sold a bottle in over a month. When I was down in Hilton Head this summer the people I spoke to there said it wasn't moving. What's happening in your part of the country? Is this crap going to die out or is it only the first of a line of adulterated bourbon concoctions?

ThomasH
10-18-2009, 16:53
Somewhere it was reported that Red Stag sold 90,000 cases frome June 1st through Sept. Myrtle Beach had liter bottles of it on the shelf and it seems to be selling. It seems to be selling moderately here in Ohio too!

Thomas

callmeox
10-18-2009, 17:36
September sales in Ohio show about 1050 units sold wholesale (restaurants/bars) and around 2200 units sold at retail.

3200 units would probably put it in the top 10-12 for American straight whiskey sales in the state.

ThomasH
10-18-2009, 18:23
At my local liquor store, it seems to be popular with the college kids!

Thomas

ACDetroit
10-18-2009, 18:29
As I said before... this is going to be an annual release with new flavors coming out every year.

Coming this spring, you'll love this one will be the new and improved
BANANA STAGG , for all of you in the know it really 35% AVB Jack Daniels. The funny part about this is the price will stay the same and the ABV will go down but the JACK @$$'s will not know the difference.

Keep your eyes peeled

Tony

ErichPryde
10-18-2009, 22:27
you know what else smells strongly of bananas? Kentucky gentleman.

jburlowski
10-19-2009, 14:49
Bartenders I have talked to locally and as I have travelled have all said that it is quite popular.

Go figure...

Special Reserve
10-19-2009, 15:09
I have no doubt that it has some popularity with the younger crowd.

cowdery
10-20-2009, 15:50
Multi-platinum musician Kid Rock announced this weekend a donation of $177,044.50 to Operation Homefront®, a nonprofit organization that supports America’s troops, their families and wounded warriors. Operation Homefront® received a fifty cent donation from every ticket sold during the 25-city Rock N’ Rebels Tour sponsored by Red Stag by Jim Beam™, the new black cherry-infused offspring of the world’s No. 1-selling Bourbon.

In addition to the per-ticket donation, Kid Rock and Red Stag by Jim Beam™ honored individual military heroes and supporters during the tour. Nominated by their friends and family, honorees were presented with tickets to Kid Rock’s concert in their hometown and signed Red Stag by Jim Beam™ guitars.

Clearly, you people who badmouth Red Stag hate America and don't support the troops. :) :) :)

ILLfarmboy
10-20-2009, 17:47
Its not that I want Beam to fail, I just want Red Stag to go the way of New Coke because I see what Red Stag is doing to our Bourbon heritage. ;)

cowdery
10-20-2009, 22:19
Maybe this will change your mind.

boss302
10-20-2009, 23:09
Beam's experiment isn't doing well here in southeastern PA based on talking to some bartenders and that my local store hasn't sold a bottle in over a month. When I was down in Hilton Head this summer the people I spoke to there said it wasn't moving. What's happening in your part of the country? Is this crap going to die out or is it only the first of a line of adulterated bourbon concoctions?

As a bartender in South Central PA, I can say that most Pennsylvanians aren't particularly interested in changing their routine drinks-- they usually order what they wanted a decade ago.

Every new flavored vodka, liqueur, etc. does absolutely great for 2 weeks after it is introduced. After that, when their curiosity is satisfied, they order the same sh|t they always have.

Lost Pollito
10-21-2009, 06:01
Maybe this will change your mind.
I'm weak. My mind is changing.:rolleyes:

AVB
10-21-2009, 20:24
I do want Beam to fail and fail miserably if that is what it takes to stop calling this crap bourbon, new breed or otherwise.


Its not that I want Beam to fail, I just want Red Stag to go the way of New Coke because I see what Red Stag is doing to our Bourbon heritage. ;)

Lost Pollito
10-21-2009, 21:00
I do want Beam to fail and fail miserably if that is what it takes to stop calling this crap bourbon, new breed or otherwise.

Yep. I agree. It aint bourbon, and the ri1 aint top shelf rye. I wish we could get some barrel proof non chill filtered white label. I had some white out of the barrel at kbf and loved it. They can do better. They do know how to make some great juice. Lets just hope they throw us bourbon nerds a bone.

funknik
10-22-2009, 12:22
Yep. I agree. It aint bourbon, and the ri1 aint top shelf rye. I wish we could get some barrel proof non chill filtered white label. I had some white out of the barrel at kbf and loved it. They can do better. They do know how to make some great juice. Lets just hope they throw us bourbon nerds a bone.
Amen. I see you've changed your tune a bit on the ri1, Joe.

As far as Red Stagg . . . let it die . . . it can't even be vatted . . . I tossed about 20ml or so into the Flask of Shame to try and soften up some of the harshers in there, but after a day, the whole thing tasted like a cherry cough drop . . . my cousin liked it, but he's in a frat and thinks JW Red is the good stuff . . . go figure.

Joshua
10-22-2009, 12:56
I'm laughing over here at the Banana Stag comment from Tony

ILLfarmboy
10-22-2009, 13:31
I do want Beam to fail and fail miserably if that is what it takes to stop calling this crap bourbon, new breed or otherwise.


Now, I'm envisioning a world without Beam and I can't say I would feel any real loss. In fact, I'm envisioning how Beam's assets might be purchased by other distilleries.

callmeox
10-22-2009, 22:12
It's not aimed at us and it contains JBW so why the constant "balls in an uproar" attitude about the product?

Is it causing a shortage for all of the closet JBW drinkers on the list? :shocked:

AVB
10-23-2009, 03:25
The uproar is, since you haven't been paying attention, that they are calling it BOURBON in all the advertising when it clearly is not. If they advertised "Jim Beam Cheery Flavored Whiskey made with real Jim Beam" I would care less but that is not the case.

callmeox
10-23-2009, 12:57
Apply for a job at the TTB or start a letter writing campaign to correct the horrible injustice. March on Washington! March on Clermont! March on Chicago!

Obviously the Feds say that it fits the legal requirements that allow it to be called Bourbon with ________ or Beam couldn't call it that.
I just don't understand wishing ill will on a company because they are marketing a product that you don't care to consume.

AVB
10-23-2009, 14:49
The Bourbon with..... aspect has already been covered. It is the ADVERTISING not the label. Look at the website, shelf talkers, print media. All of them say "A Different Breed of Bourbon" and no matter how you look at it it ain't bourbon. The label may be legal but the ads are designed to fool the consumer into thinking it is something its not.

cowdery
10-24-2009, 13:47
The Bourbon with..... aspect has already been covered. It is the ADVERTISING not the label. Look at the website, shelf talkers, print media. All of them say "A Different Breed of Bourbon" and no matter how you look at it it ain't bourbon. The label may be legal but the ads are designed to fool the consumer into thinking it is something its not.

What's not bourbon? Every drop of whiskey in the Red Stag bottle is Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey. There just happens to be something else in the bottle with it, as the label discloses, but the whiskey in the bottle is bourbon.

ThomasH
10-24-2009, 17:56
I have had Red Stag mixed with diet sprite and it is a tasty mixed drink. I would rather see someone support a brand that is made with bourbon and flavored than one that is made with vodka and flavored. If you don't like the taste, don't drink it. As Chuck C. stated above, every drop of whiskey in Red Stag is Straight bourbon!

Thomas

cowdery
10-24-2009, 18:44
I admit that "A New Breed of Bourbon" all by itself could be misleading, but the way they are handling this product overall, there should be no consumer confusion. In no way are they hiding the fact that this is bourbon with added flavoring.

The purpose of a headline is to get the consumer's attention. I can see why they wanted both the word "new" and the word "bourbon" in there. "A new way to drink bourbon" would convey a similar and perhaps slightly more correct message, but it lacks zing. "Breed" suggests a rutting stag, which may be a long way to go to put some sex into the equation.

It's anyone's prerogative to be offended by the adulteration of bourbon with flavoring, just like it is anyone's prerogative to simply dislike the product, but to contend on the basis of the Standards of Identity that the product has forfeited the right to use the term "bourbon" is incorrect and a mis-reading of the rules.

AVB
10-24-2009, 18:57
Bourbon plus whatever does not equal bourbon. You can't add anything and still be called bourbon as the end result. They are trying to call the end product bourbon and it by any reading of the Standard of Identity it isn't. Made with, OK. infused OK, end result is flavored whiskey not bourbon.

ILLfarmboy
10-24-2009, 19:12
I admit that "A New Breed of Bourbon" all by itself could be misleading.....

Misleading? Sure, because it is contradictory to the label. Bourbon with added flavoring can't be a "new breed of bourbon" because bourbon with added flavoring isn't bourbon, its bourbon with added flavoring.

There is enough confusion in the bourbon category already. Some people even think Southern Comfort is bourbon.

The advertising combined with its positioning on shelves (everywhere I've seen it it is right amongst Beam white, Beam black and Beam Rye) and the fact that they somehow made it so sweet without adding enough sugar to having to label it a liqueur, is evidence of , for lack of a better way to put it, getting by on a technicality, and setting out from the outset to do just that.

cowdery
10-24-2009, 19:55
The obsessive need to hate this product is clouding people's reasoning.

The rules about additives are intended to prevent producers from "manufacturing" bourbon by making something that is not bourbon taste like bourbon, then labeling it as such. Similar to "you can't unring a bell," you can't unbourbon bourbon. Once you have bourbon, it's bourbon. It doesn't become something else because something is added to it. It becomes "bourbon with..."

No one is pretending this product is anything other than what it is, bourbon with added flavoring. You may believe the rules should operate in a different way, just as some people personally interpret other laws to suit their own beliefs, but the law (and agency regs are law) is not subject to personal interpretation. It is interpreted by the people charged with its interpretation, and this is how those responsible parties are interpreting it.

If this is so heinous, why hasn't one of Beam's customers or competitors filed a complaint? Have any of you written to the TTB to protest this grievous harm?

ThomasH
10-24-2009, 20:05
As far as shelf positioning goes, Red Stag sits right next to the beam white, black and choice bottles in Ohio too. Wild Turkey liquer sits right next to the other Wild Turkey bottlings even though it is clearly labeled as a liquer. Even Southern Comfort is located in the bourbon section even though it too is a liquer and isn't even made with bourbon anymore. My local store owner told me that the ODLC comes in and determines the shelf layout of all new stores and periodically changes the shelf layout of the existing stores. ODLC dictates where each brand is placed and what sits next to what and where each category of liquor is placed in the store. You can go to one store and see tequila near the entrance while another might have scotch or brandy in the first section you see as you enter the store. Distributor reps generally are in charge of building aisle displays and posting materials on shelves during sales events and the holiday season but don't choose where the product sits on the sheves!

Thomas

callmeox
10-24-2009, 20:14
The address below is from the TTB site. Complain to someone who can do something about it or STFU.

Promise that you will let us know what they say when they reply??

----------------------

Report information regarding trade practices between businesses selling or purchasing beverage alcohol products (spirits, wine, or beer) to TTB by e-mail, telephone, or writing to:
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
Alcohol Labeling and Formulation Division
1310 G Street, NW, 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20220
Customer Service Desk (202) 927-8140
or Toll Free (866) 927-ALFD (2533) Fax: (202) 927-3306
E-mail: alfd@ttb.gov

ILLfarmboy
10-24-2009, 20:18
.... Complain to someone who can do something about it or STFU.


Nice language directed at your fellow forum members. :rolleyes:

callmeox
10-24-2009, 20:26
A quick Google search for Beam's US ready to drink line produced results for cola and ginger ale products.

The label on both says Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey and (cola or ginger ale).

What's the difference between the label requirements for those products and Red Stag?

My guess: Nothing

silverfish
10-24-2009, 20:29
It doesn't become something else because something is added to it. It becomes "bourbon with..."

No one is pretending this product is anything other than what it is, bourbon with added flavoring. You may believe the rules should operate in a different way, just as some people personally interpret other laws to suit their own beliefs, but the law (and agency regs are law) is not subject to personal interpretation.

I think that about sums it up for me. It's "bourbon with...".

Like it or hate it, using Chuck's (well, not really his, but
his post) definition, it is a bourbon. Could be some folks
wanna split hairs or interpret to hate on something they
might not like?

Is it dying as the title asks? I haven't been to any local
bars to see if it's there but it is on the local liquor store
shelves and the workers there report that it is selling.
Dying there, living here. Same as everything else, I s'pose.

cowdery
10-24-2009, 21:12
Is it dying? Probably too soon to tell, since they're pouring enough money against it to get decent sampling. Give it a few more months, when they're supporting it less and people are deciding if they want a second bottle.

Re Southern Comfort, unless something has changed recently, Southern Comfort does have bourbon in it. It didn't historically and didn't when Brown-Forman bought it in 1979, but maybe 10 years ago they reformulated it with a small amount of bourbon. Exactly how much is a secret, but they admit it's not very much.

The bourbon in Southern Comfort is the bourbon version of Early Times, which is a slightly different recipe from Old Forester.

For the most part, products are shelved where the producers want them

callmeox
10-24-2009, 21:24
If my friends and/or their spouses are any indication, the product is selling. A couple time in the last month I've been shown a bottle of it at a friends house with the query "Have you tried this yet?"

Both instances are folks who are on their second bottle or beyond.

AVB
10-24-2009, 22:18
My guess is they'll say you're an ass.


The address below is from the TTB site. Complain to someone who can do something about it or STFU.

Promise that you will let us know what they say when they reply??

AVB
10-24-2009, 22:37
The obsessive need to hate this product is clouding people's reasoning.

Once you have bourbon, it's bourbon. It doesn't become something else because something is added to it. It becomes "bourbon with..."

I'll agree that it does start with bourbon but "bourbon with" isn't bourbon. I'm sure I don't need to reprint the requirement for bourbon in total but the pertinent part is: Title 27, Part 5, subpart ca3 says: “Harmless coloring, flavoring, and blending materials” shall not include.... (iii) any material whatsoever in the case of neutral spirits or straight whiskey." Once you add to it, it isn't bourbon and "bourbon with" isn't bourbon.



No one is pretending this product is anything other than what it is, bourbon with added flavoring.
If this is so heinous, why hasn't one of Beam's customers or competitors filed a complaint? Have any of you written to the TTB to protest this grievous harm?

Beam is pretending it is bourbon and while the label fits the letter of the law, the intent is to make it appear to be bourbon.

I have no idea what the other distillers are doing besides watching how this plays out but I have written the TBB and await their reply.

Here in PA the PLCB controls every placement of every product on the shelves. What shelf it will be on and how many facings it will have. It doesn't matter what the product actually is they'll place it wherever they want. American Honey and Southern Comfort are in the Schnapps section along with some Cinnamon flavored whiskey. JD is dead in the middle of the bourbon section, and Early Times is there too albeit on the bottom shelf. The state is paid for product placement and as long as they can suck some money out of somebody they don't care what the reality is.

Lost Pollito
10-24-2009, 22:50
My guess is they'll say you're an ass.
Doubt it. He has a point. It's bourbon, and it's not marketed to you. Chill out. This has gotten silly. Don't buy Beam if you feel so strongly. No need to name call here....but I'm not surprised.

ILLfarmboy
10-24-2009, 23:16
Doubt it. He has a point. It's bourbon, and it's not marketed to you. Chill out. This has gotten silly. Don't buy Beam if you feel so strongly. No need to name call here....but I'm not surprised.


Imagine if a product called itself orange juice with added flavors but it was positioned as orange juice and billed as a "new breed of orange juice".

Would that not be mighty disingenuous?

cowdery
10-24-2009, 23:26
Imagine if a product called itself orange juice with added flavors but it was positioned as orange juice and billed as a "new breed of orange juice".

Would that not be mighty disingenuous?

Perfect example. What about orange juice with extra pulp? Orange juice with no pulp? Orange juice with added vitamins? Orange juice with added calcium?

cowdery
10-24-2009, 23:31
Beam is pretending it is bourbon and while the label fits the letter of the law, the intent is to make it appear to be bourbon.

That statement is conjecture--you don't know what Beam intends--and I disagree. I say their intent is to generate interest in their enhanced bourbon product among bourbon drinkers.


Here in PA the PLCB controls every placement of every product on the shelves. What shelf it will be on and how many facings it will have. It doesn't matter what the product actually is they'll place it wherever they want. American Honey and Southern Comfort are in the Schnapps section along with some Cinnamon flavored whiskey. JD is dead in the middle of the bourbon section, and Early Times is there too albeit on the bottom shelf. The state is paid for product placement and as long as they can suck some money out of somebody they don't care what the reality is.

Have you explained the law to them too? How did that go?

You have an opinion, I have an opinion. Neither of our opinions matters, although mine seems to be shared by the people whose opinion does matter.

ILLfarmboy
10-24-2009, 23:35
Perfect example. What about orange juice with extra pulp? Orange juice with no pulp? Orange juice with added vitamins? Orange juice with added calcium?

I was thinking of added fruit, non orange fruit juices and how it would fundamentally modify the flavor while the product that would still call itself orange juice, a "new breed of orange juice". Maybe I wasn't clear.

BTW, I like my Pure Premium tropicana, with pulp. I like it because it is an unadulterated product. Well, aside from being pasteurized.

Being an unadulterated product is one of the things I like about bourbon. Well, aside from chill-filteration and If I had my druthers I'd do away with that process. A little haze never hurt anybody.

AVB
10-25-2009, 06:27
This seems to be different then what you have posted previously. If I have time I'll dig out the post(s).

I really doubt Beam is marketing it to bourbon drinkers. Frat boys, women and people who don't normally drink bourbon I can see.


I say their intent is to generate interest in their enhanced bourbon product among bourbon drinkers.

ThomasH
10-25-2009, 10:12
Hey Chuck, sorry about the mix up with the SoCo. I knew that it has been produced with and without a bourbon base. I just mixed up the time frame. Anyhow, Red Stag deserves to sit next to the other Beam versions in the bourbon section due to the fact that SoCo and WT honey are there too. Even Jack Daniels and Early times are there and they get mistaken for bourbon even more than Red Stag!

Thomas

Josh
10-25-2009, 18:28
This seems to be different then what you have posted previously. If I have time I'll dig out the post(s).

I really doubt Beam is marketing it to bourbon drinkers. Frat boys, women and people who don't normally drink bourbon I can see.

"Frat boys, women and people who don't normally drink bourbon", eh? You seem to be saying those three groups of people belong in the same category, that of people who don't know the difference between good bourbon and something like Red Stag.

I wonder if Betty Jo, Dawn, Heather, Kate, or Amy has an opinion on this.

ILLfarmboy
10-25-2009, 18:58
"Frat boys, women and people who don't normally drink bourbon", eh? You seem to be saying those three groups of people belong in the same category, that of people who don't know the difference between good bourbon and something like Red Stag.

I wonder if Betty Jo, Dawn, Heather, Kate, or Amy has an opinion on this.

Really?

To be honest I think ABV's assesment is right on target.

Just because the product, in this case bourbon, real bourbon not Red Gag, isn't aimed at a particular demographic doesn't mean that everyone in that demographic does not drink it (bourbon), or is incapable of knowing the difference between good bourbon and something like Red Gag.

Josh, are you saying that bourbon isn't primarily marketed to men, and to be more specific men over 30 or so?

I really don't think ABV meant it as a slight to our female members, just an honest and factual observation.

AVB
10-25-2009, 20:50
Yeah, that is pretty much what I am saying. All three of those demographics aren't big bourbon drinkers but obviously, there are exceptions.



"Frat boys, women and people who don't normally drink bourbon", eh? You seem to be saying those three groups of people belong in the same category, that of people who don't know the difference between good bourbon and something like Red Stag.

I wonder if Betty Jo, Dawn, Heather, Kate, or Amy has an opinion on this.

cowdery
10-25-2009, 21:31
You say, "the intent is to make it appear to be bourbon," but if they're not marketing it to bourbon drinkers, how does that make sense?

ILLfarmboy
10-25-2009, 22:32
You say, "the intent is to make it appear to be bourbon," but if they're not marketing it to bourbon drinkers, how does that make sense?

I'll take a stab at that.

Its marketed to frat boys and twenty-something adolescence who want something that to all outward appearances looks like bourbon but is sweet and tastes as much or more like the "added" flavoring than the underlying spirit.

AVB
10-26-2009, 05:28
ILLfarmboy has it...what he said.

silverfish
10-26-2009, 07:26
Not to hijack this thread but has
anyone tried this "infused" scotch:

drinkhacker.com/2009/10/25/review-compass-box-orangerie/

"The folks at Compass Box make some unusual whiskys to
begin with, but Orangerie is something unlike any other
Scotch you’re likely to have tried: Take a Highland single
malt whisky (from Fife) and add hand-zested Navalino
orange peel, Indonesian cassia (cinnamon), and Sri Lankan
cloves to it. Bottle the infusion and you have Orangerie,
now back on the market after three years of unavailability."

AVB
10-26-2009, 08:18
I have not had it and Scotch has a different set of regulations they have to follow.

p_elliott
10-26-2009, 08:44
I've stayed out of this but tell me what is different from red stag than a 100 years ago when whiskey drummers bought bourbon and added fruit juice or sulfuric acid to it? It was just Bourbon infused with fruit juice or Bourbon infused with sulfuric acid. Taylor and and lot of others fought hard to stop this and now we are just going to roll over and let it back in. Chuck just because you happen to like don't let it cloud your judgement on history. This was the whole reason for the regulations and now the Government is laying down on it. Using terminology doesn't make it right straight bourbon is straight bourbon or isn't it. Beam should be using different wording in their labeling and their advertising.

cowdery
10-26-2009, 08:59
Let's just say I'm satisfied we know where everyone stands on this.

callmeox
10-26-2009, 11:04
I would love to see a label from a rectifier indicating that their product was bourbon laced with sulfuric acid.

An oversimplification of the problem back then was that the addition of other substances was not on the label.

Anyhow, who is "we"? How are "we" rolling over?

The Beam ready to drink line has been using the KSBW with _______ label with no protests from here. Where have the knights on white horses been all this time?



I've stayed out of this but tell me what is different from red stag than a 100 years ago when whiskey drummers bought bourbon and added fruit juice or sulfuric acid to it? It was just Bourbon infused with fruit juice or Bourbon infused with sulfuric acid. Taylor and and lot of others fought hard to stop this and now we are just going to roll over and let it back in. Chuck just because you happen to like don't let it cloud your judgement on history. This was the whole reason for the regulations and now the Government is laying down on it. Using terminology doesn't make it right straight bourbon is straight bourbon or isn't it. Beam should be using different wording in their labeling and their advertising.

AVB
10-26-2009, 11:30
They weren't and aren't calling those mixes bourbon. It isn't the product itself, although I personally don't care for it, it is the advertising that is calling it bourbon which it plainly is not. "New Breed of Bourbon" implies that it is bourbon. Jim Beam with cola does not.



The Beam ready to drink line has been using the KSBW with _______ label with no protests from here. Where have the knights on white horses been all this time?

Joshua
10-26-2009, 12:43
"Its marketed to frat boys and twenty-something adolescence who want something that to all outward appearances looks like bourbon but is sweet and tastes as much or more like the "added" flavoring than the underlying spirit."

I'm going to have to agree with this. I'm in my late 20s, and NO ONE my age around here drinks bourbon neat. Everyone acts like I'm crazy for ordering a WT101 neat at the bar. However, lots of guys my age WANT to drink bourbon because it's 'tough' or they can be like 'I go to the bar and drink whiskey! Screw beer, that's for sissy's!" "I'm going to impress this girl by drinking whiskey! Give me a red stag on the rocks!" They proceed to slam it down as fast as possible and make some sort of primal grunt as they smash the glass down onto the counter... It's the same as ri1 with the fancy "vodka" bottle to me.

I'm not going to deny for a second that I'm a snob about it... I love the history behind bourbon, I love that when I was a kid all of the old timers I looked up to drank bourbon. I'm somewhat afraid of change and losing that culture. Does this have a huge role in why I hate Beam's marketing and such- you bet it does.

AVB
10-26-2009, 12:58
Everyone? Isn't that a little pretentious?


Let's just say I'm satisfied we know where everyone stands on this.

ILLfarmboy
10-26-2009, 18:12
"Its marketed to frat boys and twenty-something adolescence who want something that to all outward appearances looks like bourbon but is sweet and tastes as much or more like the "added" flavoring than the underlying spirit."

I'm going to have to agree with this. I'm in my late 20s, and NO ONE my age around here drinks bourbon neat. Everyone acts like I'm crazy for ordering a WT101 neat at the bar. However, lots of guys my age WANT to drink bourbon because it's 'tough' or they can be like 'I go to the bar and drink whiskey! Screw beer, that's for sissy's!" "I'm going to impress this girl by drinking whiskey! Give me a red stag on the rocks!" They proceed to slam it down as fast as possible and make some sort of primal grunt as they smash the glass down onto the counter... It's the same as ri1 with the fancy "vodka" bottle to me.

I'm not going to deny for a second that I'm a snob about it... I love the history behind bourbon, I love that when I was a kid all of the old timers I looked up to drank bourbon. I'm somewhat afraid of change and losing that culture. Does this have a huge role in why I hate Beam's marketing and such- you bet it does.

Your post made me laugh.

The next time one of your friends orders Red Stag ask him if he wants a Zima chaser. :cool:

callmeox
10-26-2009, 19:22
Everyone? Isn't that a little pretentious?

Not when you step back and look at the posters in this thread. I don't think that anyone is on the fence on this and I assume that's what Chuck was trying to say.

fishnbowljoe
10-28-2009, 10:16
I'm not the biggest fan of Beam products, although I do have some Beam Black and KC in the bunker. (I was offered a deal I couldn't refuse:grin: ) I do drink Beam White w/coke at the bowling alley because......well......, because that's all they have. A couple of things that intrigue me, the Red Stagg IMHO isn't nearly as good as Beam White (which itself isn't all that great), it's not KSBW, and yet it costs more.

Sometimes I have a hard time understanding things that go on in the bourbon world. Beam White is the largest selling bourbon in the world. Evidently Beam makes a lot of money selling it. The small batch collection as a whole, is decent, but not great. It seems to me that Beam is trying to gain more market share by trying to come up with a product that appeals to a younger crowd ( ri 1 and Red Stagg). To me, it would make more sense to try and make a truly great upper-mid shelf or top shelf bourbon. I know that would appeal more to a lot of us here, but I think that it would appeal to others too. The Beam name alone could possibly sway others into trying it. I know there are many different issues involved in this, but what do the rest of you think? Joe

funknik
10-28-2009, 10:25
I think you're right, Joe, but Beam is big business. As you said, they hold the largest selling bourbon, so why mess around too much. The ri1 with it's slick bottle does seem intended to appeal to the youngsters, but at $45+ a bottle, I think they ARE trying to make a play to the dudes like us -- we're just not falling for it.

People who don't know any better (myself included in the past) think that the small batch collection is REALLY PREMIUM whiskey . . . mostly because it's on the top shelf and comes in really nice bottles and they only shop for liquor at the grocery store -- they don't even know it's related to JB. Beam could go big, but I think they're like, "why bother?" They service the quantity folks (like HH & BF), let 4R & BT have the quality dudes like us.

Josh
10-28-2009, 10:37
...The Beam name alone could possibly sway others into trying it. I know there are many different issues involved in this, but what do the rest of you think? Joe

I'd let to see that from Beam. But I think even if they did, some whiskey-lovers would still poo-poo it just because it's Beam. I have observed that some seem to have issues with Beam that go beyond their actual products, but are some sort of personal animosity based on their marketing strategies, familiarity breeding contempt or whatever other issues may be at play.

I like KC, JBB, JBDS, OGD & OGD BiB. Booker's and Baker's are also good, but overpriced. Basil Hayden is WAY overpriced. But I also think Lot B, and the Pappys are overpriced. But I still drink them.

fishnbowljoe
10-28-2009, 22:01
I would just like to see Beam put in as much effort as, say BT, WT, HH and FR when it comes to producing a high quality/specialty product. Even though there may be times when other distilleries haven't quite hit the nail on the head, at least they are trying. And, for the most part having a lot of success. The BTAC, Parker's Heritage, WT special bottlings and the FR Mariage and barrel proof offerings are all shining examples. It just appears to me that Beam is trying to come up with something new, without a lot of time, money or effort put forth. It's almost like they are resting on their laurels of mediocrity. I dunno. I hate to think I've turned into a bourbon snob, but....... Oh well. Maybe it's like Andy said. Beam has the #1 selling bourbon in the world. Why bother? Joe

Lost Pollito
10-28-2009, 23:36
I would just like to see Beam put in as much effort as, say BT, WT, HH and FR when it comes to producing a high quality/specialty product. Even though there may be times when other distilleries haven't quite hit the nail on the head, at least they are trying. And, for the most part having a lot of success. The BTAC, Parker's Heritage, WT special bottlings and the FR Mariage and barrel proof offerings are all shining examples. It just appears to me that Beam is trying to come up with something new, without a lot of time, money or effort put forth. It's almost like they are resting on their laurels of mediocrity. I dunno. I hate to think I've turned into a bourbon snob, but....... Oh well. Maybe it's like Andy said. Beam has the #1 selling bourbon in the world. Why bother? Joe
Yes, yes, yes!!! What He said.:grin:

callmeox
01-06-2010, 19:36
Anyone have a new opinion on this? :slappin:

emr454
01-06-2010, 19:47
They were all out of it at my local liquor store. I'm not sure if that's a good or bad sign. Hopefully, they were all out because no one bought any and decided not to restock the shelves, rather than being out because it keeps selling.

We can only hope...

Eric

Lost Pollito
01-06-2010, 20:18
Well I can tell you I had a guy in the bourbon aisle tell me he loved bourbon, and needed to get some more Stagg. I was headed down to the vault for a GTS for him when he said, never mind I found it. He held up a bottle of red stagg. At least he was in the aisle. A conversion may occur next time.:grin: In other beam news....ri (1) has dropped in price to $30. I may buy a bottle now. :grin:

ILLfarmboy
01-06-2010, 21:02
Well I can tell you I had a guy in the bourbon aisle tell me he loved bourbon, and needed to get some more Stagg. I was headed down to the vault for a GTS for him when he said, never mind I found it.........

Its enough to make you weep.......

I just knew things like this were going to happen........

whskylvr
01-06-2010, 21:33
We sold the R Stagg okay when it first came out but only as a combo with another buy. For instance buy 3 beam white label get a red stagg free. Nobody has ever just bought a bottle by itself

I have to carry it and It's just taking up space of a real bourbon.

jburlowski
01-07-2010, 05:46
Every bartender I've asked (locally and when on the road) has said that it's very popular. One local place even sells it in some strange concoction with Jaggermeister. :puke:

AVB
01-07-2010, 05:47
I hate to say but after the initial push it did die out at my local store but picked up over the holiday season. The manager says he is selling 3-4 bottles a week now of this crap.

smokinjoe
01-07-2010, 06:11
Well I can tell you I had a guy in the bourbon aisle tell me he loved bourbon, and needed to get some more Stagg. I was headed down to the vault for a GTS for him when he said, never mind I found it. He held up a bottle of red stagg. At least he was in the aisle. A conversion may occur next time.:grin: In other beam news....ri (1) has dropped in price to $30. I may buy a bottle now. :grin:

:lol: Sounds like a reality show in the making, Joe: "Bourbon Intervention--Chicago". You lock the doors, take the guy to the back room, surround him with his family, and begin the deprogramming. "We're doing this for your own good, sir!!!!"

Cmurfs73
01-08-2010, 18:33
Guys just to tell you it is 4year old white label that is infused with black cherry juice. i know this beacuse i used to sell it. Now in Virginia it is doing pretty well to the point they have gottten additional size distribution. it was available in 50ml and 750ml only, and in a matter of months they have made a 375ml and liter available. Im sure next listing will be the 1.75. Now as far as the joke earlier about the bananna flavor they do have other flavors in the works. Word is a cinnamon could be coming in the future. Just wanted to let you know what's going on out this way, and I dont see it going away, matter of fact the cheaters will be out soon trying to get them just like the wild turkey honey cheaters that are now available...

cowdery
01-08-2010, 19:41
Beam Global reports that Red Stag has been the most successful new product launch in the whiskey category in the past five years. More here (http://chuckcowdery.blogspot.com/2009/12/emollient-for-red-stag-haters.html).

Cmurfs73
01-09-2010, 03:28
Beam Global reports that Red Stag has been the most successful new product launch in the whiskey category in the past five years. More here (http://chuckcowdery.blogspot.com/2009/12/emollient-for-red-stag-haters.html).

Sir Yes Sir! The beam line is hurting in alot of markets and Red Stag has certainly helped them stop the "bleeding". In alot of markets it has been pricing strategies that has hurt Beam. I know in Virginia a 1.75 of Beam White label is 32.95. In non-Control states they are giving it away for 19.95...They have priced Red Stag 2-3.00 more than the white label and as i said earlier its 4yr white label with Black Cherry Juice added. I asked the question of why is it priced this way and they responded its the cost of the juice. You know darn well it doesnt cost that much for the juice, let alone the "Stuff Inside".

shoshani
01-10-2010, 21:13
Well I can tell you I had a guy in the bourbon aisle tell me he loved bourbon, and needed to get some more Stagg. I was headed down to the vault for a GTS for him when he said, never mind I found it. He held up a bottle of red stagg.

THAT brings up an interesting point: Is "Red Stag" close enough to "George T. Stagg" to cause trademark confusion, being that both names are for distilled spirits?

shoshani
01-10-2010, 21:15
Beam Global reports that Red Stag has been the most successful new product launch in the whiskey category in the past five years. More here (http://chuckcowdery.blogspot.com/2009/12/emollient-for-red-stag-haters.html).

"In the whiskey category"....technically, Red Stag is a liqueur, isn't it? (Southern Comfort is, and yet it is 'mistaken' for whiskey all the time.)

callmeox
01-10-2010, 21:35
No, it is a whiskey with cherry essence/extract/whatever. There are separate rules for liqueurs and the percentage of sugar or sweeteners that they contain.

Apparently, the sweetness in RS is "natural" or under the liqueur threshold.

ILLfarmboy
01-11-2010, 03:34
"In the whiskey category"....technically, Red Stag is a liqueur, isn't it? (Southern Comfort is, and yet it is 'mistaken' for whiskey all the time.)

Think of it this way:

Red Stag is as much whiskey as some Russian female athletes in the 60's and 70's were woman.

In other words, it meets criteria set forth in the legal standards, but would fail a DNA test.

kickert
01-11-2010, 05:27
Think of it this way:

Red Stag is as much whiskey as some Russian female athletes in the 60's and 70's were woman.

In other words, it meets criteria set forth in the legal standards, but would fail a DNA test.

Well played Brad.

callmeox
01-27-2010, 20:39
So, what did the TTB have to say about Red Stag?

AVB
01-27-2010, 20:51
Basically, they said that the labeling as presented is legal and that they don't have control over advertising.

The question was never about the legality of the swill, it was that Beam advertises it as "A New Breed of Bourbon" when it isn't bourbon. Bourbon infused is not bourbon, it is flavored whiskey.

callmeox
01-27-2010, 21:13
What we know:

The label states that it is Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey Infused with natural flavors

The label is legal per the TTB


Your conclusion that it isn't bourbon conflicts with the facts as presented.

kickert
01-28-2010, 05:44
What we know:

The label states that it is Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey Infused with natural flavors

The label is legal per the TTB

Your conclusion that it isn't bourbon conflicts with the facts as presented.
Obviously we are talking semantics here. The phrase "Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey Infused with natural flavors" can be legal and perfect correct and the final product still not be bourbon.

If I describe Kool-Aid as "Water infused with sugar and flavoring" I am being technically correct. But, if I then advertised that Kool-Aid as "The most enjoyable glass of water you will ever drink" then I am being a bit too loose with the truth.

The product, as is, is not bourbon. It is bourbon infused with something else. It is no differant than Jim Beam Ginger Ale sold by the can.

AVB
01-28-2010, 06:00
The advertising isn't saying "A New Breed of Infused Bourbon" it is saying it is Bourbon. There is a difference between how they label the product and how they advertise the product. I have a problem with the advertising.

ILLfarmboy
01-28-2010, 10:59
A few people around here have been drinking the Beam Kool-Aid. ;)

Josh
01-28-2010, 11:06
A few people around here have been drinking the Beam Kool-Aid. ;)

You know me, I'm a weak-minded sheep. I'll fall for anything.

ILLfarmboy
01-28-2010, 11:51
You know me, I'm a weak-minded sheep. I'll fall for anything.

I didn't remember where you came down on the Red Gag question.

Ben and I rarely agree, so.... there's hope for you yet.....:70358-devil:

callmeox
01-28-2010, 13:19
You know me, I'm a weak-minded sheep. I'll fall for anything.

I'd rather you be a weak minded sheep than a one trick pony, Josh.

ebo
02-09-2010, 18:20
I finally broke down and tried this stuff at a bar... no way I would buy a bottle just to try it. YUCK!!! It tastes like cough syrup.

thanis
03-17-2010, 13:21
I need to give it a try.


...The label may be legal but the ads are designed to fool the consumer into thinking it is something its not.

I don't think it is fooling anyone who cares to notice the difference. More likely, it will increase knowledge of the differences of not just bourbon vs bourbon mixes, but bourbon vs scotch vs whiskey.


What's not bourbon? Every drop of whiskey in the Red Stag bottle is Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey. There just happens to be something else in the bottle with it, as the label discloses, but the whiskey in the bottle is bourbon.

+1


...I would rather see someone support a brand that is made with bourbon and flavored than one that is made with vodka and flavored....

Agree. Why hold back a good American made bourbon, it is clearly labled. If it helps them sell more bourbon, good for them.

AVB
03-17-2010, 16:09
First, American honey doesn't say it is a new kind of bourbon. The label says "Exceptionally smooth liqueur blended with pure honey and bourbon whiskey" Notice it says liqueur. Gag on the other hand is saying it is a "New Breed of Bourbon" which by any way you want to read the regs, it is not. Bourbon, in order to stay bourbon can not have flavors added to it infused or otherwise. Once that is done it is flavored whiskey and no longer bourbon. Chuck is wrong in saying that the whiskey in the bottle is bourbon, it WAS bourbon.

It is the continued dumbing down of the public. The same ones that think JD is bourbon and the ones who don't know the difference. It's not the product, it is the false way they are advertising it. I don't think we'll ever know if it ever increased sales of actual bourbon.

callmeox
03-17-2010, 16:28
Referencing phantom TTB rules as though they are fact while ignoring rules that *are* stated in the TTB regs is disingenuous.

Liqueurs are clearly defined in the regs, so if Red Stag was a liqueur it would be labeled as such.

Josh
03-17-2010, 16:33
First, American honey doesn't say it is a new kind of bourbon. The label says "Exceptionally smooth liqueur blended with pure honey and bourbon whiskey" Notice it says liqueur. Gag on the other hand is saying it is a "New Breed of Bourbon" which by any way you want to read the regs, it is not. Bourbon, in order to stay bourbon can not have flavors added to it infused or otherwise. Once that is done it is flavored whiskey and no longer bourbon. Chuck is wrong in saying that the whiskey in the bottle is bourbon, it WAS bourbon.

It is the continued dumbing down of the public. The same ones that think JD is bourbon and the ones who don't know the difference. It's not the product, it is the false way they are advertising it. I don't think we'll ever know if it ever increased sales of actual bourbon.

Here's something I don't get.

You have said that Maker's Mark suing to protect their trademark is catering to the dumbest elements of society. If those elements can't read what's on the bottle, and confuse MM for something else, then they get what they deserve for their stupidity.

But when Beam (with the same parent company) calls Red Stag "A New Breed of Bourbon" when the label clearly states that it is cherry-infused bourbon, you upbraid them for deceiving the dumb public.

Why don't you think people who are "too dumb" to read the Red Stag label are getting what they deserve too? Or why aren't the liquor companies that attempted to use red wax drips guilty of deceiving the "dumb" public? Your criticisms of Beam and MM seem to be incompatible.

AVB
03-17-2010, 18:03
I said it should be called flavored whiskey and NOT bourbon. I was pointing out that American Honey IS calling itself a Liqueur and not "New Honey Bourbon!"


Referencing phantom TTB rules as though they are fact while ignoring rules that *are* stated in the TTB regs is disingenuous.

Liqueurs are clearly defined in the regs, so if Red Stag was a liqueur it would be labeled as such.

I'll stand corrected, I forgot all about the "White and Proud of it" thread. Still it is protecting the most stupid elements of society only this time it is protecting them from fake bourbon which they are too stupid to know the difference about. Just like wax dripings.


Sorry Josh I haven't said anything about Makers Mark you have me confused with someone else.


Here's something I don't get.

You have said that Maker's Mark suing to protect their trademark is catering to the dumbest elements of society.

Josh
03-17-2010, 18:34
I said it should be called flavored whiskey and NOT bourbon. I was pointing out that American Honey IS calling itself a Liqueur and not "New Honey Bourbon!"



I'll stand corrected, I forgot all about the "White and Proud of it" thread. Still it is protecting the most stupid elements of society only this time it is protecting them from fake bourbon which they are too stupid to know the difference about. Just like wax dripings.


Sorry Josh I haven't said anything about Makers Mark you have me confused with someone else.

I still don't agree with you but I am very glad you found where you said that. I was making myself crazy trying to find it!:banghead:

cowdery
03-17-2010, 18:39
AVB,

I've been looking into this and it is so much worse than you think.

First, people reading this should understand that AVB has set himself up as an alternative TTB and is countermanding rulings the TTB has already made. Among the people who don't agree with him are the TTB. That said, on some levels he's right.

Seagram's 7 Dark Honey (Diageo) is clearly flavored whiskey, as evidenced by the fact that is is less than 40% ABV (35.5%). Flavored whiskey may contain sugar but flavored whiskey is supposed to be all whiskey, meaning every drop of it aged at least a little, and none of it is GNS, yet the label for Dark Honey calls it a blended whiskey, and regular Seagram's 7 is 75% grain spirits (GNS that's seen a little wood). A product that contains whiskey, GNS, flavoring and sugar should be labeled a whiskey liqueur, but it's not. (It also sure tastes like a liqueur, it's very sweet, and has virtually no whiskey taste.)

Diageo's Jeremiah Weed is another category blaster, with products in the liqueur, blended bourbon and flavored vodka segments.

There is no standard of identity for flavored blended whiskey, including blended bourbon, just for flavored whiskey. Yet Dark Honey is apparently a flavored blended whiskey and Jeremiah Weed Cherry Mash is apparently a flavored bourbon blend.

Blended whiskeys, and any other products that contain GNS, are supposed to be labeled with the source of the GNS (grain, grapes, sugar, etc.) and the GNS content. Regular Seagram's 7 Crown has such a disclosure, Dark Honey does not.

Heritage Blended Whiskey, a store brand at Jewel-Osco, is clearly labeled 'blended whiskey' yet it discloses no GNS content. Is it an all-whiskey blend, unlike every other blended whiskey in America, or is it mislabeled? Store brands aren't exempt from the labeling requirements.

What I also know is that when producers, especially major producers, say "this is what we want the label to say" and "this is why our army of lawyers says it's right," it's hard for the TTB to say no. AVB isn't there to give them an atta boy.

On the related subject of advertising claims, in advertising (as opposed to on the label) Diageo calls Jeremiah Weed bourbon and calls Dark Honey whiskey (omitting both 'flavored' and 'blended'). The TTB used to police advertising too, but apparently they no longer do. All advertising materials of any kind used to require what was called a mandatory statement, which consisted of the brand name, its official category designation, the producer's name, and the proof. They stipulated type size and everything else. Apparently, with all the new media, they just can't keep up.

Sazerac now sells Ten High as both a straight bourbon and a bourbon blend. Luxco does the same thing with, of all things, Bourbon Supreme. Bourbon is, after all, just part of the name, but there is a Bourbon Supreme Blended Whiskey along with a Bourbon Supreme KSBW. The same is true of Yellowstone and several other Luxco brands.

So, Red Stag starts to look pretty straightforward. At least the label says exactly what it is.

Red Stag is no different from Jim Beam and Cola. In both cases, the official product description is bourbon and something else.

You can't unring a bell. Once bourbon, always bourbon. If you add certain specific things to it -- such as GNS -- it becomes something else, blended bourbon or blended whiskey, depending on how much GNS you add. But if you add sugar and flavoring, and it's merely whiskey, you have to call it flavored whiskey, but if it's bourbon (since there is no flavored bourbon designation) it's bourbon with...

So maybe somebody will blow the lid off TTB, which is clearly screwing the pooch, or is it?

AVB
03-17-2010, 19:34
Having multiple products across types of liquor is no part of this argument and so is a straw man at best. Besides Weed says it is a liqueur on their website. I can't speak of the other products as they are not available to me so I'll just believe you on those.

My complaint is with the advertising as mentioned quite a few times in this and the other thread and you yourself admit the TTB isn't (or hasn't been) regulating that if I am there to cheer them on or not. The label doesn't say "New Breed of Bourbon" the advertising does.

Since we differ in the interpretation of bourbon with me saying any additive makes it not bourbon and you saying it is.

This is what the TTB says as I mentioned more than once, Title 27, Part 5, subpart ca3 says: “Harmless coloring, flavoring, and blending materials” shall not include (iii) any material whatsoever in the case of neutral spirits or straight whiskey, except that vodka may be treated with sugar in an amount not to exceed 2 grams per liter and a trace amount of citric acid."

So to me that says it can't be bourbon any longer no matter what it was to start with. The advertising doesn't say "bourbon with..." it says bourbon.

It is flavored whiskey the definition I found. Whether it HAS to be called that has obviously been decided.

Whiskey flavored with natural flavoring materials, with or without the addition of sugar, bottled at not less than 30% alcohol by volume (60 proof)
The name of the predominant flavor shall appear as part of the class and type designation. (Cherry Flavored Whiskey for example)
Wine may be added but if the addition exceeds 2.5% by volume of the finished product, the classes and/or types and percentages (by volume) of wine must be stated as part of the class and type designation.

That sounds like Gag to me.

cowdery
03-17-2010, 19:55
Where I'm agreeing with you is that it is very hard to reconcile many of TTB's recent decisions with the plain wording of the regs, and what they are doing and approving seems very inconsistent. I can see the rationale for Red Stag, Woodford Reserve Master's Collection and the new Maker's Mark expression better than I can some of these other things, although none are really consistent with a plain reading of the regs and I am at a loss to explain the TTB's actions.

I also refuse to take this so damn seriously. I'm trying to agree with you if you'd just let me.

All of the various Jeremiah Weed expressions are on the web, but no where are they all together. thebar.com (http://www.thebar.com) is Diageo's web site for the products they're promoting, so you'll find Seamgram's 7 Crown Dark Honey but not regular Seagram's 7 Crown. Ditto with the new Weeds.

callmeox
03-17-2010, 19:59
The PDF is locked down so I can't copy/paste into the thread but check out the last paragraph on the second page as that's where I believe Red Stag fits.

It starts with:

"A distilled spirits product may not fit into any of the classes or types of spirits found in the regulations..."

http://www.ttb.gov/pdf/brochures/p51902.pdf

cowdery
03-17-2010, 20:08
So, blame it on Captain Morgan.


"A distilled spirits product may not fit into any of the classes or types of spirits found in the regulations, usually because of the addition of flavoring materials or because it was made with a non-standard blending or treating material. When this is the case, the product must be labeled with a truthful and adequate statement of composition such as 'rum with natural flavors.' These products will also bear a mandatory fanciful name, such as 'spiced rum.'"

AVB
03-17-2010, 20:10
Could be..... but it also say that they have to have a mandatory fanciful name. Red Gag probably doesn't count :)

cowdery
03-17-2010, 20:36
You're not even trying. The 'fanciful name' equivalent to 'spiced rum' is 'Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey infused with natural flavors.'

ILLfarmboy
03-21-2010, 12:24
You can't "unring a bell". True enough, but Beam is trying to get oak from ash. I'm with AVB, once you add something you shouldn't call it bourbon-anything.

To get my meaning, indulge me for a minute.

Is there an upper limit to the amount of GNS in blended whiskey? If there is, let's say it is 80%. Could a company then produce a label that says: Blended Whiskey With additional Spirit if its GNS content was 90%. Would anyone argue that since everything in the bottle that isn't "additional spirit" falls under the reg for "blended whiskey", the label is legal?

thanis
03-21-2010, 16:29
Went to two stores today, and both were sold out. Not a big issue, and I'm sure I could find it if I wanted (it was just chance that both were sold out). At both locations, they stated it is selling well, but they were only stocking one size.


... Chuck is wrong in saying that the whiskey in the bottle is bourbon, it WAS bourbon...

I think that is an interesting take, and can't fault you for it. However the same logic holds that when you add something to whiskey, it WAS whiskey.


... It is the continued dumbing down of the public. The same ones that think JD is bourbon and the ones who don't know the difference. It's not the product, it is the false way they are advertising it. I don't think we'll ever know if it ever increased sales of actual bourbon.

As I've noted, your not dumbing down anyone who cares.

Advertising is used to sell ptoducts, and as long as the label is honest, a little puffery (the term in vogue) is just that. From body wash to soft drink brands, very little factual information is provided.

If I order a bourbon & coke and get a scotch & coke, I'm not getting what I asked for.

So, the public is being informed they are buying a bourbon + something. The english is correct on the label. IDK, maybe, just maybe, it should read something other than the term "natural flavors", and should state "natural cherry flavors." Problem is, once you add cherry, you are most likely breaking some other product rule, and the generic term "natural flavors" is safe.

AVB
03-21-2010, 18:39
Moot point since other whiskies are not limited by purity as bourbon is. As stated above, and as the regulations say, no additives are allowed in bourbon. You add cherry to bourbon and it becomes flavored whiskey. Still whiskey but not bourbon any longer.






I think that is an interesting take, and can't fault you for it. However the same logic holds that when you add something to whiskey, it WAS whiskey.

If I order a bourbon & coke and get a scotch & coke, I'm not getting what I asked for.

thanis
03-21-2010, 20:36
I don't want to troll, so I'll respond one last time, understand if you don't see it the same as me, and hope you can always find something good to sip.

Some of you want to be purist, and that is fine. However your defination reveres bourbon so much, not allowing it to be adulterated or diluted after bottled in a mix, that it begs to know by what form of transubstantiation does the bourbon remain bourbon when it mixes with saliva? That is say without some miracle, no one has ever tasted bourbon. :)


Moot point since other whiskies are not limited by purity as bourbon is. As stated above, and as the regulations say, no additives are allowed in bourbon. You add cherry to bourbon and it becomes flavored whiskey. Still whiskey but not bourbon any longer.

Ok, so with that line of logic, the only way one can drink bourbon is if the drink it straight. If you put water into it, or add ice, you alter the proof, and no longer have bourbon. There are no bourbon cocktails, only whiskey cocktails? Then again, whiskey has requirements.

Perhaps bourbon stops being bourbon the instant it is taken out of the barrel (the same bourbon regulations you mention clearly state it must be potted in new, charred, white oak barrels). Is it the bottled requirement? If JB bottled the bourbon first at 80 proof, then poured that bottle into another bottle, would that make it a bourbon mix?

Maybe only Schrodinger's cat can sip bourbon & if it could it could not because cats are not allowed to be in the bourbon.

It is an ad hoc argument. You are applying an extraneous definition by applying a distillery requirement to something that does not claim to be bourbon by that requirement.

Now, indirectly, it does claim to be more than a mix or cocktail. It is "infused."

Now it would be rational to somehow argue it is this wording that is false (to permeated with something to make it better). So that is to say that you don't think it makes the bourbon better. That is also to say, you don't like it.

Well, that is the case with many claims, does it really taste great & less filling, does it really taste more like regular cola, etc. I don't know, but that claim is subjective.

What is not subjective, is that it contains bourbon.

With sincere humor, I guess others lack faith and do not believe Red Stag contains the miracle of bourbon, as for me I say, some say it is at once lost but I believe it can be found, though out of sight, I see.

cowdery
03-21-2010, 21:57
Moot point since other whiskies are not limited by purity as bourbon is. As stated above, and as the regulations say, no additives are allowed in bourbon. You add cherry to bourbon and it becomes flavored whiskey. Still whiskey but not bourbon any longer.

Now I understand. You have it exactly backwards. The purpose of the regulation you hang your hat on is to prevent the addition of additives on the way to becoming bourbon, which would keep it from earning that status. Once it is bourbon, additives are just that, additional ingredients that must be disclosed, but which do not effect the bourbon-ness of the underlying spirit, any more than the bourbon in Jim Beam and Cola isn't bourbon any more. That is the accepted interpretation of the rule. You can say it shouldn't be interpreted that way if you want. I think both positions are reasonable, but the other one has the advantage of also being accepted.

You never seem to have an answer for the Jim Beam and Cola analogy, or for the fact that the purpose of the rule is to prevent the production of faux bourbon, not to prevent bourbon from being declared as an ingredient in bourbon-based drinks, as you want it to do.

You're entitled to your opinion, but not to your own facts. Where do you get this "other whiskies are not limited by purity as bourbon is"? There is not a single regulation that applies to bourbon that doesn't apply to all of the other named types like rye, malt, rye malt, wheat, etc.

The reg you seem to be basing all this on is hardly exclusive. It applies to "any class and type of distilled spirits, except as otherwise provided in this section."

You are talking about Sec. 5.23 Alteration of class and type, right?

5.23(a) Additions. (1) The addition of any coloring, flavoring, or
blending materials to any class and type of distilled spirits, except as
otherwise provided in this section, alters the class and type thereof
and the product shall be appropriately redesignated.

kickert
03-21-2010, 22:07
I still like my analogy from a few pages back...


If I describe Kool-Aid as "Water infused with sugar and flavoring" I am being technically correct. But, if I then advertised that Kool-Aid as "The most enjoyable glass of water you will ever drink" then I am being a bit too loose with the truth.

cowdery
03-21-2010, 22:24
That may be an unfortunate analogy when you look at what is being sold as 'water' these days.

kickert
03-22-2010, 05:30
That may be an unfortunate analogy when you look at what is being sold as 'water' these days.

You know that's a good point... I hadn't thought about things like "Fitness Water" and such.

If the shoe fits...

AVB
03-22-2010, 05:55
I have answered the Beam and Cola previously but here it is again. They don't advertise it as bourbon. Pre-made or home made cocktails and mixed drinks are not saying they are new versions of the underlying base spirit. You keep going back to the label which is not the point of contention, it is the advertising.



You never seem to have an answer for the Jim Beam and Cola analogy, or for the fact that the purpose of the rule is to prevent the production of faux bourbon, not to prevent bourbon from being declared as an ingredient in bourbon-based drinks, as you want it to do.


I think that your quoted part of Title 23 pertains although there are other parts that are relevant too.

Part 5.22 (i) Class 9; flavored brandy, flavored gin, flavored rum, flavored vodka, and flavored whisky. “Flavored brandy, “flavored gin,” “flavored rum,” “flavored vodka,” and “flavored whisky,” are brandy, gin, rum vodka, and whisky, respectively, to which have been added natural flavoring materials, with or without the addition of sugar, and bottled at not less than 60° proof. The name of the predominant flavor shall appear as a part of the designation.

In any case the above is all about the labeling which which you already know I have a problem with but can accept. The advertising is the point of contention. If I peed in your glass and said it was a new type of naturally flavored bourbon would you agree?

p_elliott
03-22-2010, 07:59
You can't "unring a bell". True enough, but Beam is trying to get oak from ash. I'm with AVB, once you add something you shouldn't call it bourbon-anything.

To get my meaning, indulge me for a minute.

Is there an upper limit to the amount of GNS in blended whiskey? If there is, let's say it is 80%. Could a company then produce a label that says: Blended Whiskey With additional Spirit if its GNS content was 90%. Would anyone argue that since everything in the bottle that isn't "additional spirit" falls under the reg for "blended whiskey", the label is legal?

I think Brad started on something here But I would have gone another dirrection. By your guys deffinition companies no longer have to declare their whiskeys to be blends, they are just GNS infused bourbon.

cowdery
03-22-2010, 09:34
There will be no peeing in anyone's glasses, thank you very much.

ILLfarmboy
03-23-2010, 09:14
....Some of you want to be purist, and that is fine. However your defination reveres bourbon so much, not allowing it to be adulterated or diluted after bottled in a mix, that it begs to know by what form of transubstantiation does the bourbon remain bourbon when it mixes with saliva? That is say without some miracle, no one has ever tasted bourbon. :)



:confused:


When I bought the pork loin chops and the fresh pineapple, I got just that. Last night, just before I ate them, it was grilled pineapple and seasoned and grilled chops. This morning it was something else entirely.

Point being, both the chops and the pineapple was what they purported to be be when I bought them. That is, after all, the whole point of much consumer protection legislation, not what happens to it afterwards.

ILLfarmboy
03-24-2010, 13:50
According to the bartender at Jigg's in Alexis, Red Gag doesn't sell very well, in fact it hardly sells at all.

I was glad to hear that.

ThomasH
03-24-2010, 14:32
Whatever you want to call it and whether or not you like it, it seems to be selling well in some areas of the country. Ohio started sending handles of it to some local stores last week. 41.00 and Change!

Thomas

Special Reserve
03-25-2010, 15:36
The sales volume of this product will vary greatly with the milieu. In a bar that attracts a twenty something crowd it will sell. I a bar full of bikers my guess is that there is no need for it, the same for a neighborhood shot and beer bar.

jburlowski
03-25-2010, 15:48
And don't forget IHOP.:cool:

thanis
03-30-2010, 15:07
:confused:


When I bought the pork loin chops and the fresh pineapple, I got just that. Last night, just before I ate them, it was grilled pineapple and seasoned and grilled chops. This morning it was something else entirely.

Point being, both the chops and the pineapple was what they purported to be be when I bought them. That is, after all, the whole point of much consumer protection legislation, not what happens to it afterwards.

So, when you ask for a bourbon and coke but get a whiskey and coke, you are not getting what you asked for. Just because something is mixed with bourbon does not prevent it from being bourbon mixed with something.

"That is, after all, the whole point of much consumer protection legislation, not what happens to it afterwards."

Bourbon does not stop being bourbon after it is mixed, it is no longer "straight" bourbon.

AVB
03-30-2010, 18:43
It does however, prevent it from being called bourbon which is exactly what gag is doing.


Just because something is mixed with bourbon does not prevent it from being bourbon mixed with something.

callmeox
03-30-2010, 18:59
:deadhorse:http://images.wetpixel.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/deadhorse.gifhttp://www.irishbikerforum.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/dead-horse-fast2.gifhttp://fineartbymary.com/smilies/horse2.gif

http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r102/takravd/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

kickert
03-30-2010, 19:12
http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj72/MWSPHOTO/deadhorse.gif

http://i428.photobucket.com/albums/qq10/plushiemaster/deadhorse.gif

http://i954.photobucket.com/albums/ae30/SUDOG/deadhorse.gif

Josh
03-30-2010, 19:17
Scott's last horse looks like a dead llama, and Ben's last one looks like a decomposed kangaroo.

That said, here are my further thoughts on Red Stag...:pope: :bandit:

thanis
03-30-2010, 20:04
It does however, prevent it from being called bourbon which is exactly what gag is doing.

They don't call "it" bourbon. They use english to discribe what it is, a bourbon mix. Key words different and infused.

One tatement is on the label, and judged to a higher standard. "KY Straight Bourbon Whiskey infused with Natural Flavors."

KY: a location. a state located in the East Central U.S.

bourbon: an American whiskey.

whiskey: a type of alcoholic beverage distilled from fermented grain mash.

infused: to cause to be permeated with something (as a principle or quality) that alters usually for the better.

with: used as a function word to indicate a participant in an action, transaction, or arrangement.

natural: having a specified character.

flavors: the quality of something that affects the sense of taste.

The second, advertising, "A different breed of bourbon."

a: an article

different: partly or totally unlike in nature, form, or quality.

breed: to develop new or improved strains. (edited)

bourbon: an American whiskey.

AVB
03-30-2010, 20:23
Apparently insinuation is a word you don't know.

Breed: To develop new or improved strains, chiefly through controlled mating and selection of offspring for desirable traits.

thanis
03-30-2010, 20:36
Apparently insinuation is a word you don't know....

There is a version I was thinking of but after review I was wrong. You are being far more accurate. Is what they intend. Even if by the definition I was going for, it was forced.

As a term for an advertising, the definition you provided works.