OGD proof change?

[squire]

Beam could well be correct in their market assessment. 80 proof is the camel's nose and the rest will follow.

[Josh]

Just got off the phone with a Mr. Name Withheld from Beam in Chicago and he answered all my questions and listened to me bitch, so kudos to him. In sum, what he said confirms what Chuck was told. He said the following:

1) The change was decided upon about a year ago and took effect about 6 mos. ago.

2) The goal was to shore up supplies of the BiB, 114 and presumably Basil Hayden, although he didn't mention BH specifically.

3) Commodity prices in KY were partly to blame for the short supplies of OGD.

4) The choices were between decreasing supply, raising prices or lowering proof. They chose the last option as the least of all evils.

5) The Bottled-in-Bond and the 114 are not going away. He said this at least three times.

6) Beam is committed to upholding the long tradition of the Old Granddad brand. Mashbill and everything else about the process is staying the same.

I told him that I and other enthusiasts are most concerned about the possibility of the Bond and 114 going away. He assured me, again, that they are not. He also said that if I had any other questions I should call him. He will probably regret saying that!

[squire]

Good for him, hope he's well informed.

[qman22]

That's great news Josh, thanks for the update. I hope whomever you talked to was being sincere

[mosugoji64]

Thanks for taking the call and posting notes, Josh. The info is reassuring. For now, at least. I'm normally a little cynical and think that business decisions are only valid for a day, but knowing that distilleries have to plan long term we may be safe for a while. We can take some comfort in knowing that they're not dependent on the OGD recipe to fill other bottles.

[Josh]

Good for him, hope he's well informed.

That's great news Josh, thanks for the update. I hope whomever you talked to was being sincere

Thanks for taking the call and posting notes, Josh. The info is reassuring. For now, at least. I'm normally a little cynical and think that business decisions are only valid for a day, but knowing that distilleries have to plan long term we may be safe for a while. We can take some comfort in knowing that they're not dependent on the OGD recipe to fill other bottles.

Thanks. I'm sure he was being sincere and he was relaying the information he was given. But like Brian said, how long those decisions are valid for is unknown. I remember when the age statement was dropped from OWA, supposedly because it wouldn't fit on the new label. We were told not to panic unless WSR lost its age statement. Then WSR lost its age statement too. I hope it's not like that all over again. I also hope that he passes what I said to him along to whomever he answers to in Deerfield.

[MyOldKyDram]

Think I'll be buying the occasional 114 here and there just in case. Even if nothing happens hey, got a bunch of good whiskey cheaper today than it will be tomorrow.

[smknjoe]

Think I'll be buying the occasional 114 here and there just in case. Even if nothing happens hey, got a bunch of good whiskey cheaper today than it will be tomorrow.

That's what I do.

Is 114 barrel proof? I know it used to be, but the barrel proof statement is not on the label anymore.

[Josh]

Is 114 barrel proof? I know it used to be, but the barrel proof statement is not on the label anymore.

I think you answered your own question.

[smknjoe]

......fair enough!

[squire]

Well, at least they keep it at 114, that's something.

[Halifax]

According to their website the 114 is Barrel Strength.

http://www.beamglobal.com/brands/old-grand-dad

[squire]

114 proof can be called barrel strength as a descriptive term without actually specifying the Old Grand brand comes out of the barrel at 114. It couldn't, really because barrels don't come out at exact proofs, that and Beam typically puts it's whisky in the barrel at 125 proof.

[cowdery]

I don't think the Old Grand-Dad brand is in any jeapordy but if they did discontinue something, it would probably be the 80 proof no one here likes anyway. I was in Binny's yesterday and they had the 86 still on the shelf. I almost bought it until I realized I'd still rather have the bond. So I bought a bottle of Larceny.

Of course their current plan could change. That's always true in pretty much all things and is certainly not unique to big whiskey producers.

So stocking up in fear of the brand or any of its expressions going away doesn't make much sense, but stocking up to take the sting out of inevitable future price cuts probably does.

[Josh]

According to their website the 114 is Barrel Strength.

http://www.beamglobal.com/brands/old-grand-dad

[ratcheer]

As the 86 proof OGD has been my go-to everyday pour for the past few years, I guess I need to stock up while it is still on the shelves (if there is still any left). Then, I guess I will need to find a new everyday pour. :skep:

Tim

[squire]

To say that a whisky over 105 proof is barrel strength is historically accurate because distillers in the past used lower distilling and barrel entry proofs. However that term can be a category rather than a specific reference. Beam now uses 125 as the Barrel entry proof (I would really like to be wrong about Grand Dad being lower but don't think I am) and since whisky aging in the warm climate of Kentucky typically gains in strength the dumping proof is going to be more than 125, not less.

[Halifax]

My dusty ND OGD 114 bottles read "114 Barrel Proof" on the neck label. Interesting that Beam would promote barrel proof on their website, but choose to not include it on the label. Somewhat of an inconsistent message there. Personally, whether it is barrel proof or not doesn't really matter much to me. I enjoy it just fine the way it is.

Come to think of it... Given all that is going on with premium bourbons these days, perhaps we're fortunate that Beam is NOT putting forth the effort to promote this as a premium barrel proof product. My guess is that a return of the barrel proof label would result in a significant price increase. I've never had the feeling that Beam really cared much about the OGD brand to begin with. Do they even promote the brand anymore? Heck... They won't even spen a few dollars to give OGD its own website.

[squire]

I believe it's a mature brand with a following so Beam doesn't have to do much more than keep cranking it out.

[cowdery]

I agree that Beam has used the term 'barrel proof' in reference to OGD114. The line extension was actually created by National and it used the term too. It is, however, highly unlikely that the product was ever actually barrel proof. For one thing, true barrel proof is always variable and either has to be expressed as a range, as Booker's does, or handwritten as Heaven Hill intends to do with the special edition of Elijah Craig 12. Although 'barrel proof' isn't a term the TTB specifically regulates, they might be subject to a challenge if it appeared on the label and isn't true. It's well established that you can get away with more in non-label media.

[Kalessin]

Hm. Not all stores in MA carry OGD products (Jim Beam and Makers Mark are the Kentucky bourbons that seem to be universally stocked). Many stores that do have OGD only have the 86 proof (and soon the 80 instead), but don't carry the BiB. Even fewer carry the 114.

[squire]

That's odd when you think about it because JB, MM and OGD are all handled by the local Beam distributors.

Just as well I guess, I'd hate to think what would happen if the Yankees really discovered OGD and Barton.

[jeffrey r]

Just as well I guess, I'd hate to think what would happen if the Yankees really discovered OGD and Barton.

I suppose something like this?

Edited March 14, 2013 by jeffrey r

[MauiSon]

In my area, I've only seen the 86proof. I guess I better crack a bottle and see if I like it more than the cheaper EWB (<$10) or the comparable WT101 ($15 vs. $17). I'm doubtful.

[squire]

Don't be giving me nightmares Jeffery.