Heavy weights of the Bourbon Industry

[Marvin]

Just read a reply from Linn on my post of the re-match between Bookers & Staggs and Linn asked the question if Jim Beam (American brands) and other distilleries would bring out better bourbon, or keep their heads in the sand while Brown & Forman and Buffalo Trace are taking over the lead. You have great master distillers and CEO's all to be considered "heavy weights" who really know their bourbons and in which way the market is heading. But!! I wonder who are the "heavyweights"? It seems to me that Bourbon.com just might be the biggest, so you can rest assured they are reading every post that comes up and I don't think that the CEO's will set back and not step up to the plate with better bourbon from their own distilleries. So, let's not give all the credit to the people that are running the show. I tip my hat to Jim Butler for setting up straightbourbon.com and of course to all of us who post our tastes and thoughts and wants. I think that maybe we are the "heavyweights" of the bourbon industry!!!You must remember this site goes all over the world and as long as we keep posting and telling the truth the bourbon industry will keep flourshing better in the future than it is right now. So I give round 3 to Jim Butler and people like Chuck, Linn, Bobbye Jo, and a host of others too numerous to mention that's a fan of bourbon. We win --- they win!!!!!!!!It doesn't get much bette than that.

These are my thoughts, what are yours??????

Cheers,

Marvin

[bobbyc]

Marvin, What insight! Many thanks to Mr. Butler as well. You should post more!

I do think at times , these guys don't realise that there's any room for improvement.( We've been doing it this way since the Garden Of Eden, no use to change now! Or as the Wax machine must think, " It's already perfect, how can we make that better?") Buffalo Trace and Brown-Forman, if those names aren't on your door , you are in a dust storm! I will concede that the dust isn't blowing too bad around the cliffs over looking the Kentucky River! ( Read Wild Turkey)

[bluesbassdad]

Marvin,

All I know about heavyweights, I've learned from stepping on the bathroom scale each morning , and most of what I know about bourbon and the industry, I've learned right here at StraightBourbon.com .

However, there is an enduring truth that is summed up in one sentence. Follow the money .

Granted, George T. Stagg is an outstanding bourbon, but will it increase the overall profitability of Buffalo Trace? Perhaps more to the point, given its limited run (so far), does it point the way for new products (or new marketing strategy for existing ones) that will achieve that end? Will such new success as Buffalo Trace might enjoy come at the expense of other producers, or will George T. Stagg and its successors expand the market for bourbon to the point where other producers can maintain profitability while losing market share, or even benefit by association?

Such questions are easily asked but difficult to answer. Whether we like it or not, this is the domain of MBAs and focus groups, of consumers’ whims regarding self-image, and of blind luck. (As examples of each, consider the market success of the Ford Taurus, Harley-Davidson motorcycles, and Microsoft DOS/Windows – none of which was/is the “best†product of its kind for the knowledgeable consumer.) Where the marketing of alcoholic beverages is concerned, the self-image component may be the dominant factor. Furthermore, complications such as government control and the rigidity of the three-tier distribution system also enter in.

We as connoisseurs of bourbon (or wannabes in the case of the undersigned) may well be providing guidance to those in the industry who choose the direction for their flagship products. However, our preferences may have less influence on the industry as a whole than we might hope. Do our purchases represent a significant fraction of the total profit of the industry? Are we trendsetters whose influence extends to the more typical consumer, Joe Gettabuzzon, whose favorite drink is Jack ‘n’ Coke?

I’m not sure I really care. Maybe it’s enough to know that our collective voice has some influence on the cream-of-the-crop releases, the ones that are the creations of the master distillers, not the marketing arm of the parent company. We can be reasonably sure that the existence of StraightBourbon.com plays a role in perpetuating the influence of the master distillers in product development decision-making.

Just as you said, Marvin, we are all indebted to Jim Butler for creating and continuing this forum, and to all the knowledgeable and lucid bourbon fans who share their experience.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[CL]

Dave, I think you hit the nail on the head. The CEOs are running businesses and their decisions will be made accordingly. SB.com won't/shouldn't have much influence on that.

I doubt if SB.com would be the reason a distiller releases a flagship product. There are only 250 of us here. If GTS was bottled based on our market, we'd have to buy 8 each (Bobby not withstanding) to sell it out. That's alot.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if SB.com had influence, because we do know our bourbon and some of us write about it publicly. The other nice thing about SB.com is that when the distilleries do hit the mark (like GTS or OFBB), they know the word will spread like wildfire and we will all rush out to buy.

I hope there continues to be a sizable market for flagship bourbons. (I am assuming there is based on all the special bottlings we are seeing.) I hope it gets to large enough to keep the specials coming and to have even more come out. But, selfish ol' me wants the audience to grow just enough to keep the prices sane. I don't need a bourbon bubble caused by new bourbon snobs.

At the end of the day, though, I am like you and don't care if we have influence as long as we continue to have plenty of good bourbon to drink. That's the bottom line.

[Barrel_Proof]

And rush out and buy we did! Based on bunker storage reports posted here and private communications with forum members, the sb gang acquired no less than 5 to 10% of the entire bottling of George T. Stagg!

[racer]

I think, S.B.com has an influence on the market. I didn't even know about George T. Stagg, until I joined the board. Thanks to Linn's help, I was able to find GTS. And really thank you Mr. Spencer. The scotchy purists, that i know, got a sight of the GTS, it made their heads spin. "Get me a bottle!" was the request. GTS and Booker's and other premiums are just good p.r. moves. The premiums brands got me into bourbons, but the quality and price of the everyday pours are what kept me.

mark h.

[bluesbassdad]

You make an interesting point, Mark.

How many others hereabouts are old enough to recall the phrase "...with Thunderbird styling!"? It was applied back in the 1950's to huge, boxy-looking Ford sedans that bore only a superficial resemblance to the small, racey, European-inspired, two-seater Thunderbird. I assume it sold cars; they used it for a few years, as I recall.

A savvy marketing department could certainly take a shot at creating a similar association between their top-of-the-line bourbons and their everyday pours.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[racer]

Dave, also premium bottlings would get people to try bourbon. I feel once people give bourbon a try, they might become regulars. I once brought out a variety of different types of bourbon, and poured for my friends. One reply was, "No wonder my dad drank this." Bourbon needs an upscale "This is america's best whiskey" feel. I sometimes think, if bourbon was imported, in pretty bottles, and had a label that required a little guide book to understand and pronounce, it would retail for unbelievable prices.

mark h.

[jeff]

SB.com definately has some influence, as Stagg is the direct result of a forum members suggestion to BT and ETL himself. Now if that isn't influence, I don't know what is.

[Marvin]

thanks jeff

marvin

[bobbyc]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />

A savvy marketing department could certainly take a shot at creating a similar association between their top-of-the-line bourbons and their everyday pours.

[ratcheer]

I read the WSJ almost daily. The only bourbon ads I recall seeing in the past year or so have been for EWSB Vintage. I only recall seeing that maybe 4 times.

Tim

[bluesbassdad]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />

Maybe you got deludged with a marketing compaign on the west coast for GTS .

[boone]

There are quite a few (national) ads for EWSB and Evan Willimas 7 year...The Wall Street Journal being one of them...

I am very shocked, that not one of ya, commented about the ad (Evan Willims 7 year) that was in Playboy? ...Hmmmmmm must not be a soul here that has that magazine ?

There is a black in white picture of a "homley" girl...Then right beside it is a picture of her----after time---in color---scantly dressed---and drop dead pretty ....Ya see fellas...ya get ya little lady to drink Evan Williams and she will look just like that lady in the picture...and iffin she's a pretty girl ta start with...just imagine what's she's gonna turn into? Ohhhhhhhhhh Yeahhhh!!!!!!!!

Hmmmmmmmmm I wonder if it works for DUDES

Actually, the ad is referring what happens over time...There is another one (ad) with a picture of a mound of coal then ya see a big dimond too...One of their jingles used to be Get Older, Get Better....

Bettye Jo

[CL]

That I did not know. I hadn't heard that story mentioned here before. Praytell, who can we thank?

[CL]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />

No, there's no use in painting myself in a corner when there is so much to enjoy.

[CL]

Well, get that scanner of yours working! We know you know how to use it. Post a scan of that ad!

We are too cheap to buy a magazine. We'd rather spend it on bourbon.

[MurphyDawg]

Not to be too crude, but it seems the add suggests the more EW7 I drink ( ), the prettier the girl gets.

Hmmmmm. . . .

TomC

[boone]

LMAO

Ohhhhhhhhh Yeahhhhhhhhhhh!!!

Bettye Jo

[Marvin]

Bettye Jo,

Saw the ad and now I know why Evelyn & I have been married for 39 years. Oh!!!!! I do love that Heaven Hill!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers,

Marvin

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Here's how I see it, Marvin. In any indusrty the consumer is king, and the world of whiskey is no different. A lot of money is spent in knowing who the consumers are what they want or think they want.

We here on StraightBourbon.Com are basically a free focus group of primarily bourbon enthusiasts. What we are talking is important and what we aren't talking about is just as important. While we don't hold sway of the markets we can and have swayed the views of some in the American whiskey business.

We're really not asking for too much as I see it: 1) better bourbon at 2) reasonable prices in 3) pretty packages (that aren't too expensive and don't drive up the price), and 4) a bit more honesty about where the bourbon is coming from (who really distilled it and where and when) and what the mashbill may be. That's not too much to ask for in my not so humble opinion.

Things NOT to ask for is the further Scotchification of Bourbon. The very last thing that I'd like to see is the further rise in prices to cover the cost of overpriced packaging or expensive advertising campaigns for the sole purpose of trying to elevate bourbon as the hooty-snooty whisky of choice of pompus asses everywhere as has been done with scotch. That tactic I think we can do without, and in all probability would ultimately backfire. The snob appeal of scotch only appeals to snobs in the first place. I'm just sorry that there seem to be so many of the shallow creatures around. I do realize that there are folks that really do like scotch and some are on this forum. These folks are obvioulsly not snobs or they wouldn't be here. No offence is ment to y'all and I do hope that none is taken.

I would rather see a simple "No brag - just fact" - (John Wayne) approach that would simply state that Bourbon is the very best whiskey on the planet - bar none (which it is) Point out why, as many numerous good marketing points exist without making anything up. There you would have all of the 'hoot' with none of the 'snoot'.

-Linn

[tdelling]

> The very last thing that I'd like to see is the further rise in prices to cover the cost of

> overpriced packaging or expensive advertising campaigns for the sole purpose

> of trying to elevate bourbon as the hooty-snooty whisky of choice of pompus asses

The way I see it, bourbon is a marketing-driven business. Quality is fairly irrelevant.

Image is everything. (There are a few of us who care about quality, but we're

such a small percentage of the market that we might as well not matter.)

Why do we even have high end bourbons now? Because "Fortune Brands" poured

all kinds of cash into marketing. Their winner: Knob Creek. I'm very happy that

this happened, because now people all across America are drinking high end

bourbon. The market was created not through education or good taste, but

by good old fashioned advertizin'. (Plus a decent product, but the decent product

would not be enough by itself).

I think bourbon will never appeal to snobs. The #1 snob drink is wine, and that'll

never change. Scotch, cognac, and (thanks again to marketing) vodka are

the snob-o-riffic distilled drinks of choice.

In my opinion, bourbon marketers should market to (1) beer geeks, (2) non-snob

scotch drinkers, and (3) the general public. I think Linn is right: snobification of bourbon

is the wrong road. Distller's Masterpiece? Garbage. Overpriced, overpackaged,

and an attempt to turn bourbon into something it's not.

The future of bourbon is the beer geeks. They learned to start profitable

businesses. They learned to play the small-to-non-existant-marketing-budget game.

They learned to fight the distributors and the legislators. And they did it because

they wanted higher quality and a wider variety. They were driven by passion,

not by their balance sheet and their marketing department.

Beer geeks are already starting to get into distilling. Fritz Maytag (Mr. Anchor Steam)

has a distillery. The hugely popular microbrewery called Dogfish Head has their

own distillery. Micro-distillers are are on the rise. The revolution will come from

the people, not from the big corporations with marketing budgets. No big company

would have the balls to make Conecuh Ridge, yet it sells like hotcakes.

Tim

[racer]

I agree with both of you. Linn has it right, when he speaks of quality. And Tim advertising is key to spreading the good-news. But quality and price is essential, if people are to be kept as regular bourbon drinkers. Having a whole, bunch of small specialty bourbon producers, would be fun. Then a person could just drive into Kentucky, buy bottles and explore. Kentucky has a lot for tourists, good music, good food(i prefer fried chicken over haggis any day! ), and accomodating weather.

mark h.

[Marvin]

Linn,

That was very eloquently spoken and I agree with your assessment of the situation. I don't mind if bourbon goes up over a long period of time as ultimately everything else does, but in the case of scotch I was drinking single malt scotch 15 or 16 years ago, give or take a few, and it was fairly reasonable, however, it is now out-of-sight and borders on the out-rageous!! I remember just 2 year ago I bought a Balvene 21 YO Portwood for $39 and now it is $84 at the same liquor store, but none of the scotch I every drank could ever hold a candle to any bourbon. Occasionally I feel at times I want something different. Since all these wonderful top-end bourbons are available I buy very little scotch anymore, maybe a bottle a year.

I can only imagine how beautiful that spring was where you got your water!

Cheers,

Marvin

[cowdery]

Your mention of Knob Creek is interesting because it is interesting what happened with that brand. I was doing some work with Jim Beam at the time so I have kind of an inside perspective, although nothing I'm going to say here is any kind of secret or privileged information.

Remember that Knob Creek was actually introduced more than a decade ago. After some initial success with Booker's, Jim Beam rolled out the Small Batch Collection consisting of Booker's, Baker's, Knob Creek and Basil Hayden's. Their attitude at the time was to support and promote the four brands as a group and see if one emerged as a successful brand in its own right. Knob Creek did. In other words, it was consumers who entered the world of the Small Batch Collection (SBC), tried some or all of them, and decided they liked Knob Creek the best. It was only after Knob Creek started to emerge on its own as a sucessful brand in its own right, independent of the Collection, that Jim Beam started to put some marketing support behind it. They introduced the 1.75 L (none of the other Small Batchers have one), they started doing advertising and promotion. The final indication that Knob Creek had really arrived was when they started mentioning it in the boilerplate section of their press releases, as virtually an equal to the Jim Beam brand itself.

The point is that it really was consumers who tapped Knob Creek as the "winner" in the SBC and only after that did the company start spending money to see how far it could really go. Exactly why Knob Creek emerged over the others has never been determined definitively, although there are many theories. Compared to the rest of the SBC, it was the oldest, the lowest price, and had the most unusual bottle. Maybe it was one or some combination of those things, or something else entirely. It didn't and doesn't matter. Consumers indicated that they liked it and the company responded accordingly.