Welcome to the Straightbourbon.com Forums.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29
  1. #11
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Bloomington, IN
    Posts
    784

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    Jeff,
    The problem is Mr. Brown wants pot still whiskey in the product so they have started putting some in in small amounts.

    Mike, just as you argue against accountants some of my biggest arguments have been with family of long-time family controlled firms. When I worked for Bill Stokely on Gatorade he insisted on a number of really stupid ideas. He also engineered the finances so that eventually Quaker bought the company basically for nothing by being able to get Gatorade and sell off all other assets for about what they had paid for the firm.

    Anyway, while the pot stills are romantic the adage is "never mess with a successful product UNLESS you absolutely can improve it!"

    Line extending - more products with the WR name -- is likely the best way to go in the long run. But wise-man Bobby is right, IMHO. No need to copy the Jack Daniels idea even if it is the same firm.


  2. #12
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Louisville, Ky.
    Posts
    735

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    Greg,
    The big problem that has so many in the company calling from the name change is the the name itself. When they hear people pronounce it "Lab rot" they cringe. The theory is by changing the name to "Woodford Reserve Distillery" with Labrot and Graham proprietors will minimize the damage.

    It also may help to remember that the proper name for the bourbon now is something like "Woodford Reserve Master Distiller's Selection". This would dovetail nicely with the idea of naming all of the products Woodford Reserve with a descriptor added to it.
    Mike Veach

  3. #13
    Bourbonian of the Year 2003 and Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    2,942

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    It also may help to remember that the proper name for the bourbon now is something like "Woodford Reserve Master Distiller's Selection". This would dovetail nicely with the idea of naming all of the products Woodford Reserve with a descriptor added to it.

    You would like to see it done this way? I didn't ask before, I think I can guess now, this is also what Chris and Lincoln would like as well.

    They did a nice job restoring L&G. I suppose they have never stopped bringing those Old Forester barrels from Louisville. I am left to wonder what they have there. It's a distillery sure enough. It's too early to give a verdict either way, I did think we'd be able to proclaim success last September.

  4. #14
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    495

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    Bobby,

    Without a doubt, the L & G Distillery looks beautiful. Now, they just need to get some of that pot-stilled bourbon out there for us. We have all been waiting a long time to know what they're going to do out there. I for one, find it hard to believe that they would go to all that expense of restoring the distillery, only to mix barrels of pot-stilled Bourbon with Old Forester. If they can produce a good quality pot-stilled Bourbon, doesn't it make sense that they would want to market at least some of it as the one and only currently distilled KY Pot-Stilled Bourbon? Seems to me that would be quite a distinction, but once again, they have to be making a good product to do that. I wonder if they've had some problems. Woodford Reserve has its following with their current product, I'd say leave that alone and give us the Pot-Stills (assuming its worth bottling on its own)! That's just my opinion of course...

    Bob

  5. #15
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Louisville, Ky.
    Posts
    735

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    Bobby,
    I am not sure which way I would prefer it to be done. I see plus and minus points for both sides. I am just glad it is not my decision to make. I think from a marketing point of view Chris would prefer the Woodford Reserve name on all, but as a history buff he would like to see a chance to bring back some old brand names.

    Mike Veach

  6. #16
    Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Pelham, AL
    Posts
    3,899

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    Oh, no. There is another thread where people are saying that, recently, OF is not tasting as good as it used to.

    Now, we have heard that the pot stilled L&G does not taste so good, itself.

    And, here, the idea that they are adding the pot stilled L&G to OF! Could it be the reason OF is tasting worse, recently? (This is not confirmed by me, but others have said it).

    I hope not! OF has been a quality product at a reasonable price for a long, long time. Please don't go screwing with it!

    Tim

  7. #17
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Bloomington, IN
    Posts
    784

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    If they can produce a good quality pot-stilled Bourbon, doesn't it make sense that they would want to market at least some of it as the one and only currently distilled KY Pot-Stilled Bourbon?
    Bob
    That's just the point. They can't get good bourbon out of the pot stills. If they could, they wouldn't mix a little in just so they can say they are.

    They've got product -- but they bet you would not like it if you tasted it.

  8. #18
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    621

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    They can't get good bourbon out of the pot stills.
    Why do they even bother running the stills!? Is it solely to maintain the illusion that they're making Woodford Reserve? Or is there some hope that aging will make this stuff palatable!?

  9. #19
    Bourbonian of the Year 2002 and Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    12,656

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    I hope someone is devising a proper punishment for the people who advocate changing the name of the distillery. B-F went to the trouble and expense of acquiring and restoring an authentic historic distillery and they gave it one of its historic names (the only one they owned). "Woodford Reserve" has no history, except that the distillery is located in Woodford County. Sure, a lot of companies have zero respect for history, but B-F isn't one of them. Authenticity has value and the Labrot and Graham name is authentic.

    That said, the distillery doesn't need to be named Woodford Reserve for them to treat Woodford Reserve as a brand capable of extensions.

  10. #20
    Disciple
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Bryan, Ohio
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Labrot and Graham

    Hmmm. . . I wonder if they just have to sit on the pot still stuff longer. All of the pot still stuff I have seen in my meager experience with scotch and bourbon had had to be at least 10 years old to be a worthwhile experience. I wonder if its not just a matter of whether its good or not (and last year when we tasted it, I did not htink it was very good), but that its just not quite ready yet. I know that we all want to see this stuff come to market 9and not just in a bottle of Woodford Reserve, which was just fine the way it was. But maybe a coupla more years of patience will be worth it in the end.


    TomC

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Labrot and Graham update
    By tdelling in forum General Bourbon Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2003, 12:28

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top