Jump to content

Before Makers' Mark, it was not OK for bourbon to taste good!


BBQ+Bourbon
This topic has been inactive for at least 365 days, and is now closed. Please feel free to start a new thread on the subject! 

Recommended Posts

... Where is the past and present marketing that has the sheeple fooled? ...

http://www.doeanderson.com/our-work/makers-mark.aspx

http://higheredbcs.wiley.com/legacy/college/bygrave/0471755451/add_cases/makers_case.pdf

It's out there. They have built a significant brand over the years by using a pretty consistant message.

I know when my wife and I are doing the dinner party thing with neighbors and friends I often see MM on the kitchen counter or bar. It sits right there next to the Jack Daniels, Absolute, Capt Morgan, Crown Royal, Dewars, Bacardi and the various other perceived upscale brands. These are the same people that buy other perceived upscale brands like Toyota, Bose, Nike, Lays, LazyBoy, etc... etc...

It's all perceived value vs. brand awareness. Without the marketing, MM would be out of business or on the bottom shelf next to Old Crow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would compare Jim Beam White to McD's and MM to something like Applebees.....

I'd say you are being generous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.doeanderson.com/our-work/makers-mark.aspx

http://higheredbcs.wiley.com/legacy/college/bygrave/0471755451/add_cases/makers_case.pdf

It's out there. They have built a significant brand over the years by using a pretty consistant message.

I know when my wife and I are doing the dinner party thing with neighbors and friends I often see MM on the kitchen counter or bar. It sits right there next to the Jack Daniels, Absolute, Capt Morgan, Crown Royal, Dewars, Bacardi and the various other perceived upscale brands. These are the same people that buy other perceived upscale brands like Toyota, Bose, Nike, Lays, LazyBoy, etc... etc...

It's all perceived value vs. brand awareness. Without the marketing, MM would be out of business or on the bottom shelf next to Old Crow.

Thank you for the links, Rod. Interesting information, for sure. There would be no argument from me that MM has been very successful in building their brand. (Incidently, that's why in another thread, I have defended their position to aggressively protect it.) I certainly would expect them to attempt to build their brand, otherwise what's the point. Like all distilleries, they have ad agencies doing what they do. What do they call it? Enthusion! :lol: But, I see nothing in the information you provide that would lead me to believe that what they have done is significantly different or applied in in greater scope than what most other major brands in the bourbon industry have done, or for that matter, any consumer product. If we have a problem with their success at it, well that's our fault. So, I continue to remain skeptical of claims of over-the-top marketing.

PS:

Out of business, or on the bottom shelf next to Old Crow, without the marketing? Wow, now that's a claim!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent post Scott, and a good analogy as well.

To add to the perspective that Scott gave, when I did the MM tour back in November, the tour guide stated that their goal for 2009 was to ship 900,000 cases (I'll assume they meant case equivalents since there are different sizes). I joined SB in January and I'm member #5588, so if every member through me purchased 1 case of MM last year, we'd have accounted for 0.62% of the total amount of volume that they expected to ship.

Also, as to the marketing comments, I'm still relatively new to all the bourbons that are out there and I've seen the ads (billboards or print ads) for MM, but I can't say that I was ever aware of other products like BTAC or ORVW through advertising. I'm sure these products don't really need advertising, because they are so limited, but without the knowledge gained here, I'd still think that products like OGDBIB and Weller Antique weren't worth me spending money on because they were lower tier brands. (Again, this is my former perception.) Now, I know the fact that there are some great lower priced bourbons out there and maybe MM isn't "worth" the retail prices I generally find. However, before doing research in here I was largely unaware of the quality and variety that was out there, so advertising played a role in my perception of what constituted quality.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..PS:

Out of business, or on the bottom shelf next to Old Crow, without the marketing? Wow, now that's a claim!!

Looking back, perhaps I should have gone further. The point that I was trying to make is that the marketing and building of the brand has had more of an impact on the success and retail postioning of MM than the actual product itself. I'm not trying to be negative regarding the actual product, and at the end of the day, the product itself has to be desirable to the consumer. However, IMHO, if MM launched its product minus the marketing and branding it would most likely be a mid-shelf product at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS:

Out of business, or on the bottom shelf next to Old Crow, without the marketing? Wow, now that's a claim!!

Yes, indeed quite a claim. I'd reach for MM over any current Old Fitz, Weller SR or ORVW 90.

If you don't care for the taste of the whiskey, that's fine, but I don't understand why sucessful marketing is a bad thing, or why MM are sell-outs because they don't make bourbon with a group of elves in a hollow tree. Last I checked, the Van Winkles got their whiskey from a distillery (two of them actually) that has been owned by just about every big liquor company on the planet. What is now the Four Roses distillery has been owned by a bajillion BIG LIQUOR companies too. And I don't see anyone challenging Julian's or Jim Rutledge's integrity. In fact, if you want to talk about "the little guy" MM is the exemplar par excellence of "the little guy makes good". As the late Don King might say "Only in America!"

But maybe I'm biased because on the last MM tour I took, Bill touched me twice.

UPDATE: I just read your post above, Halifax. Note that the above rant isn't directed specifically at you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy this "it's just marketing" argument for any of the products to which it is usually applied. There is an adage in marketing that great marketing will get people to buy a bad product, but only once. Products simply do not succeed 'on marketing alone,' as frequently is claimed by posters on this site.

The product has to pay off whatever promises the marketing makes. That's not the same as saying that the products in question are great products, just that to the people who buy them, the marketing promise is in synch with their experience.

Some people will set up a straw man by offering their interpretation of the marketing promise and their opinion of the product, which invariably does not match up, and which is essentially irrelevant. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. If the product is successful, then the people who buy it must believe their expectations are matched by their experience.

To argue to the contrary is inherently insulting to anyone who enjoys those products, because you are saying they are ignorant sheep, easily misled by a pretty picture and a clever phrase into drinking overpriced swill. (What is the appropriate price for swill, anyway?)

The appreciation of fine spirits is not about feeling superior to other people. Well, maybe for some it is, but it shouldn't be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd reach for MM over any current Old Fitz, Weller SR or ORVW 90.

Really? I cut OWA to 90 proof and did a side by side with Maker's. I didn't take any notes, but thought I preferred OWA across the board. I figured WSR would hold up to it too, even though cutting OWA isn't exactly the same as WSR...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said earlier... I've bought tons of MM over the years. Got a handful of bottles sitting in my cabinet. I didn't buy those bottles because I knew it was the best product out there at that price. I bought MM because I, like other consumers, perceived MM to be the best in it's class. Hey, nothing wrong with that. I think what MM execs have done is absolutley genius from a business standpoint.

Had I not stumbled across SB I would have never discovered the joys of WLW SR, OWA, etc, etc. As a novice bourbon consumer I was not familiar with these brands. I was never made aware thru marketing or promos, and have never seen them in any bar.

Thankfully thru word of mouth and additional bourbon experience/knowledge I have been enlightened. That being said, word of mouth, although highly desirable, is no a single component for which to build a brand around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? I cut OWA to 90 proof and did a side by side with Maker's. I didn't take any notes, but thought I preferred OWA across the board. I figured WSR would hold up to it too, even though cutting OWA isn't exactly the same as WSR...

I stand by my assertion. I'm all about some OWA, but I don't think Weller SR is really up to snuff. Just too mild. I have some bunkered OWA 107/7 y/o, so the next time I buy some MM I'll do a side by side (with the OWA cut to 90) and see how it goes. I love tastings.:grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy this "it's just marketing" argument for any of the products to which it is usually applied. There is an adage in marketing that great marketing will get people to buy a bad product, but only once. Products simply do not succeed 'on marketing alone,' as frequently is claimed by posters on this site.

For something truly bad, agreed. For something passable (letter grade C), the product can succeed thanks to marketing efforts alone. It only has to be better than something else in its category.

The difference can be miniscule. The only thing that distinguishes a bad vodka from a good one is that the latter lacks a noxious rubbing alcohol smell. Thanks to a brilliant marketing campaign, Absolut has millions of people convinced that it's the best thing since mother's milk.

And once people have settled on it, their loyalty to it can be fierce. You'll never get them to try something else, so they'll never know that there is A grade stuff out there. The loyal MM drinker will never try VW Lot B, and will live out his life in blissful ignorance.

I've seen too many examples of willfull ignorance to discount it the way you appear to. I recollect, back in the 1980s, being part of a hunting party one member of which, at the evening campfire, pulled out a bottle of "bourbon" that was actually Yukon Jack, a liqueur based on Canadian whisky. Efforts by others in the party to convince him that his bottle was not bourbon only succeeded in bringing him to the edge of completely losing it. We left him alone after that (he didn't get invited along the next year, though).

(What is the appropriate price for swill, anyway?)

Absolut goes for $23.95 here in OR. Yukon Jack for $19.95.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally have nothing against MM. I drink it from time to time, especially in many bars where it is the best of (usually) limited choices. They have proven that they consistently make good whiskey.

But I, like many others, would like to see them also make some great whiskey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...And once people have settled on it, their loyalty to it can be fierce. You'll never get them to try something else, so they'll never know that there is A grade stuff out there. The loyal MM drinker will never try VW Lot B, and will live out his life in blissful ignorance...

And it took me a lot of years of being a willful arrogant to become okay with 'blissful ignorance'!

The point of drinking intoxicating spirits (of which, perchance to notice, bourbon IS one!) is not to be wise so much as to be blissful!

I'm pretty sure standard Old Crow will never commence blissfulness. However, I could enjoy Maker's Mark -- especially at someone else's expense -- enough not to be so arrogant and willful!

Thus, while I agree with your description of many bourbon drinkers, I think I, too, agree with Chuck that marketing alone won't transcend the execrable (I think another way of saying it is: "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's whiskey" -- or something like that:skep:).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy this "it's just marketing" argument for any of the products to which it is usually applied. There is an adage in marketing that great marketing will get people to buy a bad product, but only once. Products simply do not succeed 'on marketing alone,' as frequently is claimed by posters on this site.

I have a counterexample: Heineken. It's a middle-of-the-road pilsner. They may have improved their quality control in recent years (OK, decades), but in the past I have sampled many bottles of it, and every one was skunked, probably due to the green glass and poor handling.

I bet we've all had a skunky Heineken. It's such a common flaw that many people assume that it's the was the beer is supposed to taste. I once heard my uncle say, "who opened a Heineken" when we drove past skunk roadkill.

The vast majority of people buy Heineken because they've been told it's the best. When they get a little extra money or what to celebrate, that's what they get. When it tastes funny they assume that it's because they don't have a well-enough developed palate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who buys a consumable like food or beverage because it is the "best" is a marketers dream and they deserve to get fleeced.

I buy what I enjoy consuming and I don't give a damn what others think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? I cut OWA to 90 proof and did a side by side with Maker's. I didn't take any notes, but thought I preferred OWA across the board. I figured WSR would hold up to it too, even though cutting OWA isn't exactly the same as WSR...

OWA cut to 90 proof is WSR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, too, agree with Chuck that marketing alone won't transcend the execrable (I think another way of saying it is: "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's whiskey" -- or something like that:skep:).

Tim, I'm not talking about the execrable.

For something truly bad, agreed. For something passable (letter grade C), the product can succeed thanks to marketing efforts alone.

I'm talking about the mediocre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a counterexample: Heineken. It's a middle-of-the-road pilsner. They may have improved their quality control in recent years (OK, decades), but in the past I have sampled many bottles of it, and every one was skunked, probably due to the green glass and poor handling.

I bet we've all had a skunky Heineken. It's such a common flaw that many people assume that it's the was the beer is supposed to taste. I once heard my uncle say, "who opened a Heineken" when we drove past skunk roadkill.

The vast majority of people buy Heineken because they've been told it's the best. When they get a little extra money or what to celebrate, that's what they get. When it tastes funny they assume that it's because they don't have a well-enough developed palate.

An excellent example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OWA cut to 90 proof is WSR.

Good catch, Paul.

Yes, so the only difference would be the water that you use to cut the OWA versus the water that BT uses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OWA cut to 90 proof is WSR.

I know that they are the same thing, just that one is cut to 90 proof prior to bottling. However, I thought that there were other variables that don't make it EXACTLY the same if you buy a higher proof bottling and cut it yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old Forester uses different profiles for its 'Signature' 100 proof and standard 86 proof expressions. The 86 isn't just the 100 with more water. I suspect this is also true of the Wellers, though that is by no means assured. The easiest way to make a product at multiple proofs is to start with the highest, bottle that, add a little more water, bottle the next one, and so on.

Another factor, not applicable in either of these cases but applicable to Very Old Barton, for example, is that if the 100 proof is a bond, then it must be all from one season, whereas with every other proof point they can mix in older whiskey and even whiskey from other distilleries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that they are the same thing, just that one is cut to 90 proof prior to bottling. However, I thought that there were other variables that don't make it EXACTLY the same if you buy a higher proof bottling and cut it yourself.

Indeed. Barrel selection plays a role, plus OWA is now NAS, whereas WSR is 7 y/o.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heineken is an interesting case. I was mystified 30 years ago that so many people drank it when as often as not the bottles (in North America) seemed affected clearly by light. Not only, in my opinion, was it often not that beer-like, it was inferior to beers people could pay much less for. Status and mass marketing clearly played a role. Yet, for some 20 years at least, Heineken now is far better in quality due to faster shipping and other factors. But it is still a big seller! While this would suggest the enduring power of mass suggestion, I think other factors are at play, not exclusively, but they play a role. And they are linked to the fact that the majority of people who drink beer apparently don't like the taste. I read this not long ago and wish I could find the reference. Thus, it may be that the fresh product is to these people no better than the unfresh, they don't like beer in general regardless of its condition. So beer may be a special case in part at least. I won't of course deny the power of mass advertising although I still believe at bottom most large-selling products offer a certain basic quality. And consistency is as important to many as inherent quality - more so in some cases.

Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that they are the same thing, just that one is cut to 90 proof prior to bottling. However, I thought that there were other variables that don't make it EXACTLY the same if you buy a higher proof bottling and cut it yourself.

There might be. They may come from different parts of the warehouse. Only BT knows for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first whiskey -- actually, the first liquor -- I enjoyed drinking was Maker's Mark. It taught me that whiskey was more than a prop for wanna-be tough guys like Slash and David Lee Roth (I'm dating myself here). If for no other reason, I'll always have a soft spot for Maker's, even if I don't buy it outside of bars anymore.

That said, I was recently reminded of the power of Maker's Mark-eting. A colleague did me a favor, and knowing that he likes Maker's, I thanked him with a bottle of Weller 12. It's a personal favorite and impossible to find locally, so it was a meaningful gift in my mind. But the recipient was unimpressed. I told him Weller was similar to Maker's, and he thanked me and then said he'd pass it on to his bourbon-drinking girlfriend.

His reaction didn't offend me (it's not my business, after all), but it sure made an impression. This is a smart, generally open-minded, friendly guy but he was totally uninterested in the Weller. He drinks Maker's. Period. I didn't say another word about the Weller, as I suddenly felt like I was insulting his taste. Hopefully his girlfriend enjoys it.

Back on topic, I'll definitely try this new version of Maker's, but by the glass, not the bottle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.