Diageo evil?

[cowdery]

I concede Four Roses as a good example, but when it was reintroduced into the United States only people above a certain age had any memory of it, and it had a good reputation in non-U.S. markets upon which to build.

A perhaps more instructive example is Evan Williams, a value brand for which Heaven Hill was able to successfully introduce an upmarket line extension.

[Dramiel McHinson]

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the extensive education into the corporate side of our beloved bourbon. One of the things that appeals to me about scotch and bourbon is the artisanal approach to making it. There is still a master at the helm directing our bourbon into the barrel and out to the bottle. In the whole process of making bourbon there is art and craftsmanship. Intertwined with this age old making of spirits is technology and corporate business.

Here is where I believe our beloved bourbon begins to suffer. History is littered with the skeletal remains of distilleries. It appears finances were often the root cause of demise. A bottle may have, "Since 1825" on it but since 1825 multiple companies have owned it. The great whiskey in that bottle is at the mercy of the company leadership of the moment, often, more so than at the hands of the master distiller.

The huge uptick in premium and super premium brands is good spirits with premium or super premium marketing and prices. They'll be there as long as we spend enough money to own it and drink it. When sales drop below a certain ROI, more skeletons will haunt those that loved the bourbon that came out of that once proud distillery.

Are they evil or is it just business as usual? Only our tastebuds and wallets know for sure.

Disclaimer: Just my opinion. No research, analysis, or mathmatical algorythms were used. No animals were harmed and no bourbon was spilled.