I mentioned this incidentally in another thread, but thought I'd put it here, more upfront that is, for any views/discussion:

"Just a further thought, why shouldn't the next big thing in bourbon be bonded bourbon? The name is evocative, has history and status, the stuff would be just 4 years old, thus suitable for a market in which well-aged bourbon is at a premium. It seems a natural for line extensions or revivals of old brands".

Gary