Errors on COLA's going up?

[AGarrison]

Has the quality of COLA submissions always been so full of errors, or are they increasing due to the larger numbers of small distilleries?

Like this "Tennessee Crown Club" with a label stating "Texas Crown Club"

https://www.ttbonline.gov/colasonline/viewColaDetails.do?action=publicDisplaySearchBasic&ttbid=13081001000486

Or like this one (one of several) from Koval stating one grain on the front label and another on the back:

https://www.ttbonline.gov/colasonline/viewColaDetails.do?action=publicDisplaySearchBasic&ttbid=13047001000027

SKU had a great example from Zachory Boone where they claim a bourbon made from barley and malt mash:

http://recenteats.blogspot.com/2013/04/and-award-for-label-bs-goes-to-zachory.html

It just goes on and on. Nevermind the TTB employee just signs off without even a cursory look, the distillers dont seem to give a flip either.

[squire]

The real concern is collecting taxes.

[Lazer]

This generation doesn't no how to read good.

[Balcones Winston]

Whoever is approving those labels is very likely not a whiskey geek

[AGarrison]

uses special "chared" barrels. At least run the descriptions by a spell-checker.

I just dont get how this slips through the submitter. I can see ttb not caring on this one, but it just jumps out as no attention to detail.

https://www.ttbonline.gov/colasonline/viewColaDetails.do?action=publicFormDisplay&ttbid=13090001000053

[squire]

I'm just waiting for the COLA app that stresses special Chickapin Oak barrels.

[HighInTheMtns]

uses special "chared" barrels. At least run the descriptions by a spell-checker.

I just dont get how this slips through the submitter. I can see ttb not caring on this one, but it just jumps out as no attention to detail.

https://www.ttbonline.gov/colasonline/viewColaDetails.do?action=publicFormDisplay&ttbid=13090001000053

I believe these fools deserve their label that reads "chared" oak.

[squire]

Sometimes I think they're just words to take up space on the label.

[smokinjoe]

I believe these fools deserve their label that reads "chared" oak.

[mosugoji64]

I believe these fools deserve their label that reads "chared" oak.

[squire]

Alright, I went back and read the back label . . . gag me with a spoon.

[WhiskyRI]

I'm not even sure that back label qualifies as drivel - I need a drink after reading that label.

[Wryguy]

I would like to submit that whoever wrote that description on the back label is either not a native English speaker or they need a remedial grammar lesson. The mangled message they are trying to impart is just patently idiotic.

[squire]

It does appear the copy writer was given a list of buzz words.

[AGarrison]

I understand how the following graphic might distract from the words, but actually misspelling the main name is pretty funny. Of course it does have a resealable cap, which is what i always look for.

[cowdery]

I understand how the following graphic might distract from the words, but actually misspelling the main name is pretty funny. Of course it does have a resealable cap, which is what i always look for.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]15978[/ATTACH]

[AGarrison]

Cute, but it has nothing to do with the COLA. It's not the TTB's job to correct spelling. They don't even care how you spell whiskey.

Yeah, this whole thread to me is more about the filers than the gov. How someone can have so little pride in their product that they cant check the spelling is amazing, even for something like Express Load. I do find it odd when the TTB doesnt catch labels that have incorrect language about the grain (front claiming bourbon, back claiming 100% rye, for example).

[squire]

Would the customers for this stuff even notice?

[Trey Manthey]

Hey, they let this stuff slip through:

[sailor22]

Recently a Rum guy doing some research turned up some court documents that showed a famous Rum manufacturer was infusing it's "Rum" with macerated Prunes and Vanilla beans for flavorings. He contacted the TTB, sent the sworn court testimony of the Rum manufacturer that their juice had infused flavors, and asked them why the "Rum" wasn't labeled as flavored. When someone from the TTB contacted him and said they would look into it he was encouraged.

After a lengthy wait he contacted the person at TTB again and was told they they had been in contact with Matusalem but that no information about what transpired would be released. After several more requests he was told that if he wanted any info on what what the outcome of the inquiry by the TTB was he would have to file a freedom of information request.

Really disappointing, it's seems that the TTB doesn't really do anything much at all and certainly isn't transparent or receptive to complaints from consumers.

With all the new flavored, finished, infused, vatted, re-bareled and otherwise fooked with juice on the market we should hope someone is minding the store regulation wise.

[cowdery]

TTB simply has a policy of not discussing its enforcement actions. I think they should be more answerable to the public they are charged to protect, but that's the way it is. Presumably, they believe they will receive better cooperation from producers if they are discrete. If it comes to a point where they penalize somebody for something, that's public, but if they negotiate a corrected label or persuade a producer to change its practice, that's confidential. If you think that's wrong, write to your representatives.

I have one example of something being changed due to my own complaints to TTB, in the case of Jack Daniel's Rye.

TTB is not equipped to actually investigate label claims. They count on two things: (1) voluntary compliance, which in fact they get probably 99% of the time, and (2) competitors ratting out offenders. The majors don't hesitate to rat each other out, but the idealistic micro-distillers are still too collegial for that. They'll get over it.

[squire]

We're all in this together until the ship springs a leak.

[sailor22]

Well Matusalem is still using the same label and they have been proven to be infusing flavors. The TTB says don't bother us when asked for information on the inquiry. It's disappointing.

My suspicion is that since there is no firm legal definition of Rum that I am aware of the producers can always use the "traditional technique" or "traditional family recipe" ... "and it's always been called Rum" excuse. And the TTB is OK with that.

So many surprisingly bold fruit flavors mysteriously emerge from old multiple use Bourbon barrels and no one seems to be questioning it or doing anything about it.

Sorry to blow off steam about my Rum disappointments here on a Bourbon forum. Done now.

[squire]

So file under the Freedom of Information Act, that's what it's for.

[SmoothAmbler]

We once sent a very technical label to the TTB that talked about "high wines" and they rejected it because it was a spirit. I just had to laugh.