MM Proof Change

I can't count the number of times I've left something on the shelf thinking I would get it on another trip. People say it's never too late, how wrong they are.

Does anyone have a sense of the quality of water MM will be using to dilute/cheapen their product? Mineral, spring, mountain melt, filtered tap?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rockefeller

Does anyone have a sense of the quality of water MM will be using to dilute/cheapen their product? Mineral, spring, mountain melt, filtered tap?

---

They draw their water from a spring-fed pond on the property. I assume its filtered.

I had wondered whether BT and Heaven Hill might capitalize on this MM proof change, and BT answered my question this morning with a Facebook post stating that they do not water down their bourbon, linking to an article about the MM change. Then, curiously, they just pulled the post.

Having no links to the industry or the region, I am curious if the big distilleries view each other as brethren or rivals, but I wonder if BT got squeamish about calling out MM.

In any event, this would seem like a reasonable opportunity for HH to call out their 92-proof Larceny, and BT to call out the obvious age and proof benefits of the Weller line. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by White Dog

I've been thinking that while reading this entire thread. While I'm no great fan of Sazerac, can you imagine what that company would have done with this brand, rather than Beam.:bigeyes:

---

I think the Beam's are getting greedy.
Joe :usflag:

That is kind of silly for BT to say that. Of course they water it down. All of them do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jeffrey r

I had wondered whether BT and Heaven Hill might capitalize on this MM proof change, and BT answered my question this morning with a Facebook post stating that they do not water down their bourbon, linking to an article about the MM change. Then, curiously, they just pulled the post.

Having no links to the industry or the region, I am curious if the big distilleries view each other as brethren or rivals, but I wonder if BT got squeamish about calling out MM.

In any event, this would seem like a reasonable opportunity for HH to call out their 92-proof Larceny, and BT to call out the obvious age and proof benefits of the Weller line. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

---

They were wise to have pulled it; they have done the same thing in the past (ER10/101 for one) and probably can't say whether they will again. Same with HH (Evan Williams Black) although I do agree that they could use proof as a selling point for Larceny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighInTheMtns

They were wise to have pulled it; they have done the same thing in the past (ER10/101 for one) and probably can't say whether they will again. Same with HH (Evan Williams Black) although I do agree that they could use proof as a selling point for Larceny.

---

Excellent point on the ER 101!

Agreed on the wording of BT's post. It came off a bit disingenuous when I read it to be honest. They should be touting their products, rather than calling out the practice of watering down bourbon, which all of these guys do to some extent.

Say what you will about the Pappy craze/availability, but when faced with the choice of putting out the better product vs producing 18% more bottles ... they chose to discontinue the ORVW10/90.