MM Proof Change

[Restaurant man]

Exactly, Rock. If one claims to be a "Premium" brand, act like one.

:toast:

I'm betting the "market research" is driving this thing:shithappens:. Shortage my ass :horseshit: The sentiment that it's only a 3% drop is exactly why they are doing it. it's only a "little" less. Plus we are taking the high road and not under-aging our whiskey. Aren't we swell? I don't buy makers even though I have no problem with what's in the bottle. I just find reasons to buy something else. But I absolutely guarantee our sales of makers mark will be unaffected by the drop in proof. :soapbox:To quote the great Steve Martin in "the jerk" "it's a profit deal"

[qman22]

I'm a MM hater, so I won't be losing any sleep over the change. Plus the people ordering it in bars mixed with coke can now drink more before getting sick!

[tommyboy38]

It is what it isn't.

[OutlawSW]

It is what it isn't.

1st time I saw that, go Bulls!

[fishnbowljoe]

If this is true, it reminds me of the Knob Creek drought from a couple or so years ago. Things the make you go hmmmmmmmmmmm.... :skep: By the way, I still saw KC on most shelves during that drought.

[Gillman]

When the product was originally formulated in about 1954, 100 proof was the gold standard because it was part of the bonded definition. Maker's was set at 90, perhaps because Jack Daniels was at the time, and/or Mr. Samuels felt that was the best balance point. So not 100 proof but close to it.

Fitzgerald was 100 proof in the 50's IIRC and Pappy was opposed to lowering it but proof drops finally came, however bonded Fitzgerald continued to be available. Jack Daniels in recent years has made higher proof products available, the SB and the odd 90 proof special edition. I vat my own Jack to get one at about 90 proof in fact. So I'm good with how Jack has handled it.

With Maker's 46 coming out, the pattern of making only one product because it was the best and/or they sold all they made changed, and will change again should a drop in proof occur. If they do it, they should retain the 90 proof as a limited edition and might as well add older bourbon to it or do whatever would result in the brandy-like taste I recall Maker's had 30 years ago. I'd rather pay more for that Maker's than the same money for a brand which IMO (while decent enough) does not resemble the brand as it was in the 70's and 80's. If they do this, it will be a win-win so to speak, or close enough for our side of the equation.

Gary

P.S. I am aware that a 101 proof version of Maker's was made available for a time. That is a good precedent to retain a form of the 90 version in fact, or heck, bring back the 101.

Edited February 9, 2013 by Gillman

[wmpevans]

3.3% ABV and 6.6% proof!! Pretty big change to the whiskey.

I don't hate MM. It's just when your palette experiences so many other whiskies with more depth and dimension it seems simple.

Just another example of Beam being Beam, and just in it for mass production and maxing out the corporate buck.:hot: Their choice, and our choice not to buy the watered down juice.

I'll probably grab a couple of handles of the 90 proof and stick it in the bunker. I suspect 5 years from now when MM goes from 84 to 80 proof :rolleyes:I'll wish I had bunkered 10 handles.

[Enoch]

I'm betting the "market research" is driving this thing:shithappens:. Shortage my ass :horseshit: The sentiment that it's only a 3% drop is exactly why they are doing it. it's only a "little" less. Plus we are taking the high road and not under-aging our whiskey. Aren't we swell? I don't buy makers even though I have no problem with what's in the bottle. I just find reasons to buy something else. But I absolutely guarantee our sales of makers mark will be unaffected by the drop in proof. :soapbox:To quote the great Steve Martin in "the jerk" "it's a profit deal"

It seems that may want a larger proof differential between MM and M46 (84-94 vs 90-94) to justify the price differential, but don't want to say that so they "create" a shortage excuse.

[ErikH]

I don't buy the shortage excuse, either. I've never had any trouble finding it on the shelves; even in the liquor department of my local grocery store. Granted, what's available around Chicago might not reflect what's available elsewhere, but still.........

[doubleblank]

I wish I had a business where I could sell tap water for the price of whiskey.

Why not just do a national ad campaign suggesting that each buyer add a little water to their drinks to make that bottle of 90 proof last a little longer?

[squire]

In case you dusty hunters run across one (they made alot) Makers 101 has a gold wax cap instead of the standard red. In fact we called it Gold Makers. If you walked into one of our local liquor stores in say, 1980, and asked if they had Makers Mark they might reply with "do you want the red or the gold".

[OscarV]

Do you think they will do a special waxing for the change in proof?

Aw heck, why not?

[squire]

Don't hold your breath for that one.

[Josh]

As to whether the shortage is real, it's impossible to know one way or another without looking at the numbers ourselves. Some people seem to be assuming the worst just because it's Beam. But if it is for money, isn't making money what they're supposed to be doing?

One thing MM may be looking at is also growth. MM can be found pretty easily everywhere, but they want to keep it that way. American whiskey is continuing to grow domestically and overseas. They may be afraid of not being able to keep up.

As I said before (or somebody else said for me) I don't buy a lot of MM so it doesn't really get me worked up. When I do, it's at a bar or in the summer time to have something to sip after yardwork or while reading a book on the patio.

As for the tap water business, Randy, didn't they try to do that? Wasn't there a Weller Water at one time?

[squire]

Come to think of it there was a Jack Daniels bottled water at one time.

[OscarV]

It's not just MM, it seems like most bourbons are to young now.

All these new special releases are just over priced average whiskey.

[cowdery]

Everything they're saying is true. It's what they're not saying that is interesting.

Beam bought Maker's in 2005. In the package was an expansion plan, ready to go. Allied Domeq was about to pull the trigger but they got bought instead. Beam did some of the preliminary work, such as enlarging Maker's lake and upgrading their spent mash handling, but they have dragged their heels on the expansion itself, which will increase capacity by about 50%. I spoke with Rob Samuels this morning and he thinks they'll start the expansion "soon," but he doesn't know, and they've been saying "soon" for the last eight years.

Their first expansion, in 1996, cost $18.5 million. I've heard numbers for this one of $30 million or more. The plan is to do exactly what they did in 1996, which is build a third distillery exactly like the two they have now. Never seen the second distillery? Me neither, but I'm told it's just behind the original one. The fermenters are all stainless steel, not cypress, but otherwise it's identical.

The expansion, when it does come, will cost millions and will take at least five years to affect supply. Cutting the proof costs nothing and increases supply immediately. No one should be shocked or appalled to discover this is a for-profit business. Maker's is all about preserving the loyalty of its rabidly loyal core customers. Dale, who started this thread, is the most loyal Maker's drinker I know. He reported this without comment. The opinions of people who never or rarely buy Maker's don't really matter. It's people like Dale who matter. Well, Dale? How do you feel about 84 proof Maker's?

Rob says they're comfortable with this change, that it's the best way to relieve some of the demand pressure, and it doesn't change the taste, which is the main thing. Is that the main thing? Or is "same as it ever was" more important? Well, Maker's fans, what do you say?

Edited February 9, 2013 by cowdery

[jeffrey r]

Just got the following e-mail:

Dear Maker’s Mark® Ambassador,

Lately we’ve been hearing from many of you that you’ve been having difficulty finding Maker’s Mark in your local stores. Fact is, demand for our bourbon is exceeding our ability to make it, which means we’re running very low on supply. We never imagined that the entire bourbon category would explode as it has over the past few years, nor that demand for Maker’s Mark would grow even faster.

We wanted you to be the first to know that, after looking at all possible solutions, we’ve worked carefully to reduce the alcohol by volume (ABV) by just 3%. This will enable us to maintain the same taste profile and increase our limited supply so there is enough Maker’s Mark to go around, while we continue to expand the distillery and increase our production capacity.

We have both tasted it extensively, and it’s completely consistent with the taste profile our founder/dad/grandfather, Bill Samuels, Sr., created nearly 60 years ago. We’ve also done extensive testing with Maker’s Mark drinkers, and they couldn’t tell a difference.

Nothing about how we handcraft Maker’s Mark has changed, from the use of locally sourced soft red winter wheat as the flavor grain, to aging the whisky to taste in air-dried American white oak barrels, to rotating our barrels during maturation, to hand-dipping every bottle in our signature red wax.

In other words, we’ve made sure we didn’t screw up your whisky.

By the way, if you have any comments or questions, as always, we invite you to drop us a line at rob@makersmark.com or bill@makersmark.com. Thanks for your support. And if you’ve got a little time on your hands, come down and see us at the distillery.

Sincerely,

Rob Samuels

Chief Operating Officer

Ambassador-in-Chief

[GaryT]

As others have said, not sure why they didn't just raise the price. Or I wonder if they DID try that in select markets and found that demand slumped more than they desired. True, they'll increase profit if the price is the same and they lower the proof . . . although I wonder if they're setting everyone up for a double whammy. "Oh my - demand has picked up beyond our expectations, so we're raising the price now to help"

[squire]

The words "they couldn't tell a difference" says it all.

[MyOldKyDram]

They should just ship some of the extra in KY to other places. Soooooo much at the store today, handles and all.

[portwood]

As others have said, not sure why they didn't just raise the price. Or I wonder if they DID try that in select markets and found that demand slumped more than they desired.

Not that Ontario is a good indicator - LCBO being a monopoly there is often no rhyme or reason for pricing decisions - but price went up about 10% before Christmas. Don't know if this has affected demand.

[squire]

Oh, I get it. Their whisky is sooo good they hafta lower the proof to increase supply so everybody can get some. As ruses go that's a pretty good one.

[G-Rat]

I'm new to understanding the economics of the bourbon industry but I would think that raising the price would have the adverse affect that they are looking for, which seems to be stable and continual growth in all of the markets they distribute to. Raising the price is much more drastic from the average consumers perspective (not the whiskey crowds perspective) than lowering the proof is. If they raise the price in all markets they are still left with a shortage of whiskey, which in the long run hurts their brand more and the stability of that brand. In fact if they raised the price, wouldn't they be creating the same sort of situation (on a smaller scale) that they are in now? Less sales of their whiskey to the general public? Just a thought. Seems rather smart to me from a business perspective. I also think the letter he wrote is actually good relational capital for the average whiskey drinker. Puts a nice shine on something that will probably be an "experimental buy" for the devoted fan, to make sure it doesn't suck. IT SHOULD BE NOTED...I don't drink Maker's Mark. I just don't like it and I think it is already overpriced...I just don't think anyone is trying to pull wool over anyone's eyes. When you buy a product you aren't just paying for the product, they are also building the cost of them building a successful business into the cost of the product...at least I would hope they would be. Thats what a consumer always pays for. Who knows I might like it better at 86 proof...but probably not...

[msk2718]

While I enjoy lots of other bourbons, Maker's Mark is a sentimental favorite. It's sad to hear about this change.

In my opinion, it's hard to see how this won't hurt the brand. ("No changes, no compromises...", etc.). As for the alternative of raising the price, unless they lower the suggested retail, they are raising the price by selling more water.

Edited February 9, 2013 by msk2718