Welcome to the Straightbourbon.com Forums.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39
  1. #11
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    994

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    Quote Originally Posted by ACDetroit View Post
    So Jeff does this mean you would no longer buy WTRR? Price went up proof went down.

    You can still find some 101 WTRR out there but the price is going up.
    I won't buy the WTRR 90. Russell's Reserve implies it is just as Jimmy Russell selected it. And yet it lacks the signature 101-proof. Rubbish. And, naturally, the price went up. After all, it's in a much prettier bottle.

    I've become pretty disenchanted with the trends in whisk(e)y, particularly American whiskey. I don't buy EW black, won't buy any 1783, won't buy the NAS version of Beam black if it appears, etc. Am I boycotting myself out of enjoying whiskey? Maybe. But, hey, if the problem is all on the supply side, then a few of us not buying the stuff should right the ship and we'll be back to age statements and higher proofs, right? In the meantime, I have dusties and some nice current-production bottles to sustain me.

    Of course I'm particularly put off by the thought of Beam doing this. Not a single age statement over 9 years and there's not enough whiskey? Ugh. From what I've ascertained on other whisky forums, Beam global has recently decided that Canada doesn't need Laphroaig 10, and will get the Quarter Cask instead: higher price, younger whiskey finished in small casks. It's fine stuff, but it's part of a range of options, and the 10yo is the regular distillery bottling (for how much longer?). Which one oughta be the more available? And when do you think Beam Global will decide we don't really need Laphroaig 10 anymore, either?

    It's all a lot of nonsense. I love whisk(e)y, and I want to love the distilleries, but the conglomerates that own them make it damned hard. Stagg sounds like a great thing, until we're told that there's not enough aged whiskey to sustain older age statement bottlings. Ditto WLW. I'm having a hard time talking myself into running all over town like a madman this fall begging BT to screw me up front on the price of the bottles and in the rear by pulling age-stated products off the market.

    Rant over.
    Last edited by TBoner; 09-17-2007 at 08:08.

  2. #12
    Disciple
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    1,606

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    An aside to some of Tim's statements: I asked Ken Weber about a bottle I had found while hunting in Atlanta, 8yr Benchmark. He said it was not available anymore bacause they were using the stock to fill the Buffalo Trace brand. A brand that runs $19.99 or so far a 750ml, while the Benchmark 8YR sells for $18-19 per 1.75. I'll let y'all do the math on the profit margin for BT over Benchmark 8. This is why Benchmark is now a 4yr product at $15. Who is the real winner with us loosing a decent mid shelfer and gaining a moderate top shelfer?
    ______________________________

    Jeff Mo.

  3. #13
    Bourbonian of the Year 2002 and Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    12,604

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    I have often called Jim Beam Black the most fiddled-with brand in history, but ever since they really launched it in the USA, full bore, a few years ago it has been 8-years-old and 86 proof. Still is here unless something has changed very recently. The website still shows it as 8/86.

    Jim Beam, unlike some other companies, exports some of its whiskey in bulk for bottling in the country where it will be sold, so just the packaging may be different, or the product may be different, or both.

  4. #14
    Disciple
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    1,606

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    I have a bottle of 7/90 Black label. Most of the newwer ones I have seen are 8/86.
    ______________________________

    Jeff Mo.

  5. #15
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    994

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    Quote Originally Posted by cowdery View Post
    I have often called Jim Beam Black the most fiddled-with brand in history, but ever since they really launched it in the USA, full bore, a few years ago it has been 8-years-old and 86 proof. Still is here unless something has changed very recently. The website still shows it as 8/86.

    Jim Beam, unlike some other companies, exports some of its whiskey in bulk for bottling in the country where it will be sold, so just the packaging may be different, or the product may be different, or both.
    Fair enough, and I may have gotten a bit more perturbed than I needed to given that I've not seen any U.S. product without an age statement. However, these things have a way of spreading out once they start somewhere (especially if people buy the new product). And it's symptomatic of some things I find annoying. Anyway, here's hoping the Beam black stays at it's price, proof, and age points for years to come (unless, of course, they want to increase the age and proof without driving up the price).

  6. #16
    Bourbonian of the Year 2002 and Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    12,604

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    There's a big difference between the way Beam Global runs its business and the way Heaven Hill is run, which is why I would be very surprised if Beam took the age statement off Beam Black like HH did with Evan Williams.

  7. #17
    Bourbonian of the Year 2011
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,075

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    I just purchased a bottle of Jim Beam Black in Ontario. I cannot see where on the label it states an age of 8 years.

    There was a small label on the back of the bottle but it fell off (I can see glue remnants on the glass), so unless the missing rear label stated 8 years of age, this bottling would appear not to claim an age of 8 years.

    On the front label it states over the reference to 86 proof, "Aged to Perfection".

    It's actually pretty good, regardless of actual age.

    Gary

  8. #18
    Bourbonian of the Year 2002 and Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    12,604

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    This might be something new or just for Canada, or both, because the fairly recent bottle I have has "Aged 8 Years" very prominent where you have "Aged to Perfection."

    We all know there's a shortage, especially in extra-aged product, that forced the age statement off Evan Williams and many other Heaven Hill products about three years ago. If Beam is following suit, that's unfortunate.

    The web site still says it's 8 years.

    I hate to think my brothers to the north are getting shortchanged, but better you than us.
    Last edited by cowdery; 03-01-2008 at 19:53.

  9. #19
    Bourbonian of the Year 2011
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,075

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    I see now Tracy's comment that current Beam Black in Australia does not have an age statement of 8 years. My bottle must be the same since it also states on the front "Aged To Perfection".

    Beam Black is a brand I know very well. If in fact the contents of this bottle are under 8 years barrel age, it must have been selected to match the profile of the 8 years Black since they are identical in flavor from what I can see.

    Gary

  10. #20
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    994

    Re: Jim Beam Black Age statement

    Damnit! Damnit! Damnit!

    It's only a matter of time before the age statement disappears here, too.

    I know there's a shortage of extra-aged whiskey, etc., yadda, yadda, whatever and ever amen.

    Again I ask, how can Beam not have a single age statement over 9 years and yet have a shortage of 8-yr-old product? The hell with it...I'm going back to beer.

    In all seriousness, I am finding myself drawn to beer consumption as I watch prices climb, age statements vanish, proofs diminish, and quality slide.

    Sure, there are lots of NAS products that drink quite well: ETL, BT, WT Rye, WT 101, etc. come to mind. Sure, good whiskey is good whiskey, no matter how old it is or what the proof is. Sure, the only reason for all of this is lack of aged whiskey to meet demand. (I'm skeptical as I don't expect the age statement will suddenly reappear on any of these products when the "shortage" is over - the shortage will end, given ramped up production and warehouse space at the top 3 American whiskey producers, right???).

    Sometimes I think bunkering is silly, that I don't really need all of this whiskey sititng around, that I'll be able to pick up a bottle of OGD 114 whenever this one's empty. Then I watch as the rest of the English-speaking world loses age-stated Beam black and wonder how much time I have to stockpile a few bottles.

    I'm tired of excuses, including those we make here, for the American whiskey industry's failure to continue satisfying the demand for traditional products: BIB, age-stated, and otherwise; even as they scramble to generate "new" products that they can charge exorbitant prices for. What's the saying? You don't make money by selling more cars. You make it by selling more car. Witness Parker's Heritage, Stagg, etc. Roger has lamented the fact that some truly superb individual barrels are sacrificed to maintain profiles for EW Black, Old Taylor, and other cats and dogs. I understand the sentiment, and to some extent I agree. But I also lament the fact that barrels are held back for premium bottlings at the expense of age statements, proof, or quality in the everyday bourbons that have been the cornerstone of American whiskey.

    A scattershot rant, as I look back. Oh, well. I'm in no mood to focus the argument: I just finished my taxes, and I'm a bit tired.

    If I could go to the store tomorrow and buy a couple of handles of Beam black, I would. Guess I'll have to wait until Monday.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Jim Beam Black Label
    By Gillman in forum General Bourbon Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-17-2005, 20:23
  2. Jim Beam Black Label
    By jeff in forum General Bourbon Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-18-2004, 03:32
  3. Jim Beam Black Label
    By Forbes in forum General Bourbon Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-28-2001, 12:23
  4. Jim Beam Black
    By bourbonmed in forum General Bourbon Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-27-2001, 07:24

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