VOB BiB dropped age statement

[Josh]

Been too scared to check this thread until now.

How Sazerac/BT handles the Barton part of their business is the epitome of a conundrum wrapped in an enigma. I'm sure there is a plan, but danged if I have a clue as to what it is. So many things just seem not to make sense. :confused:

Doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me either. Maybe they're planning a line extension with that same mashbill or something. That's the only thing that makes any sense. And count me among those who think the naked 6 (or is it an inverted 9?) is rotten.

As for the mashbill, I've heard from multiple sources, including tour guide Pam who has worked at the distillery for many years, that VOB and 1792 are different mashbills. My tastebuds and sizable nose also testify to this. If anybody has any information to the contrary, please post it in the Whiskey Tree thread and we can figure it all out there.

[PaulO]

I stopped at a larger chain store at lunch today. This store normally carries VOB BIB and WL12. They had neither. They had only one age stated VOB 86. The rest were NAS. Given that they have heavily promoted VOB BIB over the past several months, I thought I would still find some. I guess age stated train has already left that station.

I remember when OWA lost the age statement. It seemed like I never saw paper label and new bottles together in the same place. It was like they let all the 7 year old disappear from stores before shipping the NAS stuff. As for the VOB 6 year, I may grab a couple, if I get a chance. I'm not holding my breath. They can keep their NAS stuff. There are plenty of other bottom shelf items to buy.

[393foureyedfox]

I am actually kind of surprised at all the backlash on this. I wonder it everyone will actually stick to their guns on this and refuse to buy it, and if so, what that response will mean to the bean counters at Barton. Cant wait to see how this plays out.

[smokinjoe]

I am actually kind of surprised at all the backlash on this. I wonder it everyone will actually stick to their guns on this and refuse to buy it, and if so, what that response will mean to the bean counters at Barton. Cant wait to see how this plays out.

Surprised at the backlash? I'm not surprised in the least. Firstly, as enthusiasts, we disdain the loss of age statements. These happenings rarely are a good sign for a whiskey. Secondly, the slipping in of the "6" for the "Aged 6 years" on the label reeks of subterfuge, and warrants our loud protests. And, don't be so quick to blame the "bean counters". They make zero decisions. They are just a tool in the process. They simply provide information and analytics to the people who do make the decisions.

[wmpevans]

When did Saz Corp buy Barton? I find it interesting that Barton plugged along for many years as an age stated 6 yr., and a favorite of many here, and then Saz Corp buys them and very quickly goes NAS.

This really is just about $$$, and reshuffling their assets to meet their corporate reqt.'s and needs with obviously little attention paid to brand loyalty, tradition, etc. and continuation of same.

Sad day.

[Josh]

The backlash on this will not go down like Maker's for a couple of reasons.

1) VOB is a much smaller brand than Maker's with a much smaller marketing budget and presence in the media. The Maker's proof cut got national media attention. VOB's age statement drop is getting social media attention but I would be surprised if it even made the Courier Journal. There's not going be mass outrage because the masses aren't even aware of VOB's existence let alone how great it is.

2) There is no VOB Ambassadors Club. The beautifully ironic thing about the MM debacle was how the Ambassadors, a group created by MM itself for marketing purposes, became the center of the uprising. They created this group, got it organized, got all these MM drinkers connected with each other and fired up about the product and then when they wanted to change the product all that energy was turned against them. All VOB has is us.

So I think all we can do is let them know that we're not happy and nag the hell out of the folks at Sazerac, especially about the 6 on the neck. They probably won't listen to us but it's worth a try.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Josh

[squire]

Sazerac purchased Barton in 2009.

[393foureyedfox]

1) VOB is a much smaller brand than Maker's with a much smaller marketing budget and presence in the media. The Maker's proof cut got national media attention. VOB's age statement drop is getting social media attention but I would be surprised if it even made the Courier Journal. There's not going be mass outrage because the masses aren't even aware of VOB's existence let alone how great it is.

this is why I was kinda surprised at the backlash on here. Maybe I should have said 'surprised at the level of backlash' instead of 'ON HERE'......I knew it'd make a stink on here, but not in the real world, where many people dont even know about Barton. I didnt even know it was bought by Sazerac. If this thread itself hadnt been started, how long would it have taken for the regular VOB drinker to catch the dirty neck label trick? quite a while, I am assuming.

I tend to think, knowing now that it's an acquired company and obviously the stocks are being shuffled elsewhere, that if everyone banded together and stopped buying it, that Sazerac is as likely to discontinue it altogether than bring the age statement back. Who knows....

[squire]

When Sazerac began acquiring distilleries (as opposed to partnering with them) the press release announcing the purchase of Buffalo Trace included the following sentence, "We believe very strongly in the global opportunity for Bourbon".

Sazerac will do what they damn well please with Barton.

[393foureyedfox]

Sazerac will do what they damn well please with Barton.

and they just proved that.

[JPBoston]

When Sazerac began acquiring distilleries (as opposed to partnering with them) the press release announcing the purchase of Buffalo Trace included the following sentence, "We believe very strongly in the global opportunity for Bourbon".

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuu............

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

[PaulO]

Is it just my impression, or has Sazerac basically trashed the brands they have acquired: lowered proofs, ages, and quality in general?

[squire]

Sazerac made a deal with the devil but then so have most of the others.

[luther.r]

It does seem incongruent that BT is doing all these innovative things like BTEC, single oak, warehouse X in the quest of being able to make the perfect bourbon, but simultaneously most of their offerings seem to be going downhill. I'd rather have an ER10/101 than any of their ER17s. This year's WLW and GTS were a shadow of their former selves IMO, the Wellers are getting worse and worse...

[shoshani]

I have an unopened case on hold for me to pick up tomorrow, but there may or may not be a kicker. The person I spoke with on the phone told me that the bottles he has on the shelf all have just the number 6, not "Aged 6 Years", on the neckband, but the case, which is still sealed, is stamped "Very Old Barton - 100 proof - 6 years".

He agreed with my opinion that there must be some regulation prohibiting marking the box with an age statement if the contents weren't, in fact, six years old. Based on that, I'm taking the case. (That and most of their locations are on backorder from the distributor.)

[squire]

The information on the label must be accurate but there may be an exception for using up outdated packaging, absent any intent to deceive.

[Gillman]

Is it not conceivable that the 6 on the new labelling is simply a design change, without any change to the age of the bourbon in the bottle? Has anyone received confirmation as to intention from the company?

Gary

[weller_tex]

Is it not conceivable that the 6 on the new labelling is simply a design change, without any change to the age of the bourbon in the bottle? Has anyone received confirmation as to intention from the company?

Gary

[squire]

Gary I'll concede it's conceivable but don't think it's believable.

[wadewood]

Is it not conceivable that the 6 on the new labelling is simply a design change, without any change to the age of the bourbon in the bottle? Has anyone received confirmation as to intention from the company? Gary

Gary - I did send an email and have received no response. Conceivable? I think only a lawyer would try to play that as possible explanation :.)

[Gillman]

It's not lawyerly caution really but more I was wondering what the 6 on its own means… But anyway I guess we'll all find out sooner or later.

Gary

[Flyfish]

Shouldn't there be a name change to reflect the NAS status? Something along the lines of NQAOB--Not Quite As Old Barton. Or maybe, Not Particularly Old Barton. Perhaps even PDYB--Pretty Damn Young Barton.

[callmeox]

By the reaction here, I think that the appropriate name would be Sorta Old Barton.

My guess is that Sazerac wants to leverage the warehouse space at Barton for their other distillery where they are running full blast. On our last tour, the bottom rows in the rickhouses were chock full of Paul Masson brandy (a Constellation brand) that they also bottle onsite so they can't do much to hurry those barrels along. Dropping the age statement on the VOB brands helps them turn stock over to make room for more profitable brands.

I'm a bourbon romantic like many others here, but you have to admit that 6 year old age stated 100 proof bourbon at less than 15 bucks out the door was a hell of a bargain. With sales growth at some of other industry members in the 40-60% over the prior year range, they're hustling to keep bottles in the pipeline.

Just my guess.

[Gillman]

Well put and IIRC by the way, VOB wasn't always 6 years old. You know those bottles which Liquor World had a couple of years ago, one was 80 proof and the other 100 proof (but the latter didn't last long), the ones from 20 years ago in a different shape bottle? I had the 80 (excellent), in fact 2 but didn't keep the bottles. My recollection is those were NAS but maybe I'm wrong.

Gary

[jwacky]

Is it not conceivable that the 6 on the new labelling is simply a design change, without any change to the age of the bourbon in the bottle? Has anyone received confirmation as to intention from the company?

Gary

I work in advertising/marketing and although I can't claim to be an expert on the subject, I can almost guarantee that they know full well that what's inside the bottle is changing. There's no way to justify the expense of a simple label change (And I say simple because very little else has changed from the overall packaging) without a significant cost decrease for making the product itself, especially considering the industry. Cost decrease in this case means younger bourbon.

McKenna BiB changed it's label but it's still age stated...