OWA-NAS/new label

[theDon]

Huh? What do you mean "domestic version"?

Obviously it was made here, but I think he was referring to the 760ml bottle being a foreign bottle right?

[doubleblank]

Christian correctly identified the Italian tax stamp. And they printed 760 ml on the label too.

Randy

[cowdery]

I mis-read. I thought the reference was to my bottle as non-domestic.

[funknik]

Oh, boy . . . this may be beating a dead horse, but I want to weigh in on this briefly.

Ox's breakdown on the quantity of OWA vs. WLW SR kind of surprised me, but I guess it is reassuring in some way. Still, I wonder why BT has decided to keep the age statement on the SR though . . . it's pretty cheap (around here at least) and I don't think that typical drinkers of this bourbon would be especially concerned about its age (not to mention us -- I doubt there be nearly as much of an uproar on SB.com if SR had gone NAS & OWA stayed at 7yr) -- I think it would be easier to assimilate this flavor with younger juice also, but what do I know. It seems pretty industry-standard (not to mention common-sensical) to drop the age statement on your least expensive product to me, so I wonder why they chose to go the way they did.

Also, to me age statement does not necessarily imply better juice -- I'd take WT101 NAS over RR10/90 any day.

Something that hasn't been touched upon that I can tell is of lesser importance, but still very dear to me and that is the label. I love the old OWA bottle/label . . . part of the draw when I got into bourbon was the aesthetic of the label looking, well, antique. It gave me a sense that the whiskey was well crafted and suggests a heritage that I found intoxicating at the time . . . I think the OWA & ORVW labels are some of the coolest out there. This new bottle & label is a nice facelift for the SR, but the OWA had so much character . . . oh, well . . . call me an old crank . . .

not as brief as I thought guys . . . sorry

[p_elliott]

Andy

According to BT they could either put the proof or the age statement on the OWA they thought the proof was bigger selling point. Take that for what it's worth.

Paul

[funknik]

Andy

According to BT they could either put the proof or the age statement on the OWA they thought the proof was bigger selling point. Take that for what it's worth.

Paul

I read that but don't buy it -- you can always make room on the label. Sounds like a cop-out.

[p_elliott]

I read that but don't buy it -- you can always make room on the label. Sounds like a cop-out.

I totally agree !!!!!! to make this 16 characters

[DeanSheen]

I just got 2 bottles of the new make yesterday and had a few pours of it. I have no problem with the juice and will happily continue to buy it as an excellent bargain @ $23 out the door.

Thankfully no nasty char overtones and bitterness that I got from 2 of the 4 bottles I had purchased in the old style bottle.

[bourbon-n00b]

Is there a reliable way to determine if a bottle was part of this first-run bottling? Right now, obviously anything on the shelf is, but in the future that won't be the case. It'd be nice to know that I was getting some of this highly-rated stuff vs whatever they end up deciding to release down the road.

[bourbon-n00b]

Is there a reliable way to determine if a bottle was part of this first-run bottling?

Not sure if this is significant or not, but along the bottom of the bottle there are 9 dots in a pattern like this

.. . . ... ..

might be a bottling year of 09?