PDA

View Full Version : Doesn't this Bonham's auction Old Overholt from 1911 look super fake?



humchan2k
05-06-2013, 11:33
Just had to share this, cuz it looks SO out of place. If you haven't checked out the results from the Bonham auction, you really should, because the prices are LUDICROUS and completely out of whack with the industry. Some clowns paid $800+ for a PV23, for example. Anyways, I have vintage bottles of Overholt from '48 and '53 in my house, so I have an inkling as to what older OO bottles look like..and while I know that a lot can change in 30+ years of packaging advancements, this bottle that sold for $1K+ at Bonham's looks like it was put together by high school students with a laser printer. It's just SO simplified, I can't imagine it's the real deal...any way, check it out: http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20986/lot/24/?page_anchor=m1%3D1%26b1%3Dresults%26r1%3D207

MyOldKyDram
05-06-2013, 11:48
Ha wow. Yeah, certainly looks like someone slapped that sucker together and got away with it. Such a joke the stuff that goes on there.

savagehenry
05-06-2013, 11:52
Was it common for any whiskey to actual have the vintage year on the label?

squire
05-06-2013, 11:54
I donno fellas, antique screw cap bottles are hard to find.

MyOldKyDram
05-06-2013, 11:56
Hell. A quick peek around rhe web and it looks like that could be the real deal. Ill be damned. Hopefully someone else will know, but that o e may be the genuine article.

humchan2k
05-06-2013, 12:12
Also, of big importance - BOTH of my Overholts were cork, not screw top....just another very suspect sign that this is BS.

PaulO
05-06-2013, 12:43
I have seen pictures of genuine pre-prohibition OO. They didn't look like this. The top also looks like modern shrink wrap plastic. Rediculous

Meruck
05-06-2013, 13:20
$800 for a Pappy23, that is just nuts........how did they get it at half off?

Meruck
05-06-2013, 13:22
I would have liked to bid on the McCleen 50. But my $250.00 wouldnt have gone very far.

smknjoe
05-06-2013, 13:33
looks like it was put together by high school students with a laser printer. It's just SO simplified,

I'm going with 10-12 year old with a Commodore or Tandy and a dot matrix printer. Man, that thing looks bad!

At first I thought that the picture was just a place holder, but then I read the description.

mosugoji64
05-06-2013, 13:35
Two words come to mind: Word Template. :rolleyes:

MyOldKyDram
05-06-2013, 13:43
Check out this old blog article on what appears to be the sameish bottle.

http://offthepresses.blogspot.com/2009/07/old-old-overholt.html?m=1

squire
05-06-2013, 13:46
Two words come to mind and the first one is bull.

mosugoji64
05-06-2013, 14:46
Check out this old blog article on what appears to be the sameish bottle.

http://offthepresses.blogspot.com/2009/07/old-old-overholt.html?m=1

I'm no expert so I may well be wrong, but that label just looks too clean to be legit. There seems to be no age on it at all. Anyone else have any insight?

Trey Manthey
05-06-2013, 15:10
I'm not ready to write this off as a fake. The "shrink wrap" looks like a piece of white tape to me. And why couldn't an screw top have been used? The label looks dumb, for sure, but I also think it looks like a hand drawn and screened job, rather than something off a computer.

humchan2k
05-06-2013, 15:23
Here's the thing from that other article - if it tastes ANYTHING like the current OO, it's clearly bullshit. True vintage OO, as any of my homies who've tasted my '53 can attest, was made as a Pennsylvania rye and has NOTHING in common with the current juice, and it's from a defunct distillery. Also, how does that bottle have 0% info on it? Nothing about who made it, what distillery, no location, nada....I think some dudes made some bootleg joints, stamped "1911" on it and cashed in on the adage (that PT Barnum did NOT say, by the way,) about suckers.

MyOldKyDram
05-06-2013, 15:26
I tend to think it's a gigantic fake, too. But if it is, the faker has suckered more than a few suckers it would appear.

smknjoe
05-06-2013, 15:57
The label does not look like it could possibly be original to the bottle (as it's dated) (to me), but is it possible that some bottles from that era didn't have labels and one was made at a much later date just so they could keep proper inventory? Is it also possible that the whiskey wasn't originally acquired in a bottle but maybe by barrel or some other vessel and then bottled and labeled by hand? I'm just curious since I remember reading somewhere that shortly before prohibition people were flocking to distillers filling any container they could find with whiskey.

Old Forester boasts that it's the first bottled bourbon. So, I assume it was quite common to get whiskey in something other than a bottle. I'm just thowing this out there guys. What do you think?

On the other hand, the auction description sure does seem to describe it as all "original" or authentic.

darylld911
05-06-2013, 17:46
As to the integrity of Bonhams . . . I re-introduce Exhibit A: An auction of Elmer T Lee Bourbon, circa 1950s (with the name "Buffalo Trace" on the label as the distillery - a company which didn't exist until 1999).
http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20459/lot/215/

Courtesy of Chuck, of course :grin: http://chuckcowdery.blogspot.com/2012_10_01_archive.html

smknjoe
05-06-2013, 17:54
That's pretty bad. The ETL label didn't exist then either (did it?)

callmeox
05-06-2013, 18:08
That's pretty bad. The ETL label didn't exist then either (did it?)

Elmer would have been in his 40's back then, so it's save to say that he didn't have a bourbon named after him yet. :grin:

Meruck
05-06-2013, 18:14
As to the integrity of Bonhams . . . I re-introduce Exhibit A: An auction of Elmer T Lee Bourbon, circa 1950s (with the name "Buffalo Trace" on the label as the distillery - a company which didn't exist until 1999).
http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20459/lot/215/

Courtesy of Chuck, of course :grin: http://chuckcowdery.blogspot.com/2012_10_01_archive.html

Just in case your not convinced by above, no tax stamp, and it has the safety seal. But then it could be one of those very early examples of the scre cap, and perhaps it an early "experimental collection".........??

ethangsmith
05-12-2013, 12:54
Don't go writing that OO bottle off as fake. I've found a few of these bottles in antique shops over the years around here with VERY weathered, beat up labels. All of them looked the same as this one. I too think the label looks ridiculous and simple, but it's possible it was legit!

squire
05-12-2013, 12:55
Could well be genuine but I'm not betting my money.

darylld911
05-12-2013, 15:16
Don't go writing that OO bottle off as fake. I've found a few of these bottles in antique shops over the years around here with VERY weathered, beat up labels. All of them looked the same as this one. I too think the label looks ridiculous and simple, but it's possible it was legit!

It might be, although making something look weathered isn't terribly difficult. How would someone authenticate the bottle? Where are our bourbon historians out there?

Flyfish
05-13-2013, 08:57
Don't go writing that OO bottle off as fake. I've found a few of these bottles in antique shops over the years around here with VERY weathered, beat up labels. All of them looked the same as this one. I too think the label looks ridiculous and simple, but it's possible it was legit!
Did any of the dusties you have ever seen have a vintage date prominently displayed? Age statements tell how long in the barrel, not when put in the bottle. Was all the rye in that bottle from the same year? Other than EWSB and the current single barrels that note when dumped, what old bourbons or ryes ever came with a date? And what does that 1911 date mean? Barreled? Bottled? Anniversary of Overholt's marriage? And did rye come with a tax strip in 1911?
These are not arguments, just questions for those SBers who are better informed than I.

squire
05-13-2013, 11:23
Good questions indeed . . .