Gained Age Statements?

[Conquistador]

Thanks, all the posters, for making this a spirited debate (pun intended)! I'm torn; a part of me feels that smokinjoe's outlook is very possible under the right circumstances, but the other part of me (the more "practical" or perhaps "skeptical" side) feels that Quantum may be right (at least in the near term). What I don't foresee is the bourbon market continually growing the way it has. I think there has to be either a plateau or a contraction in the interest/sales/profit, somewhere down the line. As we all know, distillers need to plan their inventory years in advance. So my guess is that there will be a point where supply catches up with demand, and eventually supply levels overshoot demand (when we reach the plateau or contraction), resulting in some level of a "glut" again. At that point, I think we will see those now-feared NAS bourbons start to be consistently good. And dare I think it? Age statements may start returning to the mid-shelf brands, as a marketing tool. Everything goes in cycles.

[portwood]

Some might say that the OWA actually got better for some time after dropping of the age statement a couple of years back. Now, those same folks might say it has since degraded, but there were a lot of positive reviews that came out shortly after going to NAS.

It is always advantageous for distillers to make the first batch after a change a great one to appease the critics. Get good reviews for the batch after the change, everyone's worries are put to rest, then over time ....

For that reason, the first batches of something are usually much better than latter ones (Balvenie Tun 1401, Aberlour a'bunadh, etc) that is how they build the reputation.

[smokinjoe]

Thanks, all the posters, for making this a spirited debate (pun intended)! I'm torn; a part of me feels that smokinjoe's outlook is very possible under the right circumstances, but the other part of me (the more "practical" or perhaps "skeptical" side) feels that Quantum may be right (at least in the near term). What I don't foresee is the bourbon market continually growing the way it has. I think there has to be either a plateau or a contraction in the interest/sales/profit, somewhere down the line. As we all know, distillers need to plan their inventory years in advance. So my guess is that there will be a point where supply catches up with demand, and eventually supply levels overshoot demand (when we reach the plateau or contraction), resulting in some level of a "glut" again. At that point, I think we will see those now-feared NAS bourbons start to be consistently good. And dare I think it? Age statements may start returning to the mid-shelf brands, as a marketing tool. Everything goes in cycles.

Excellent points, Conquistador. As enthusiast consumers we may feel we're currently on the bad side of the cycle, but this too, will change.

[smknjoe]

So you want ORVW?

Yep, at $35-$40 a bottle. Which is what retail is currently supposed to be on that stuff. That would be my "daily driver" of a wheater.

[black mamba]

I think we are just going to be in a tough cycle for the next 5 years or so until production of mature barrels catches up with demand. In the meantime, losing AS could be beneficial if the distillers try to continue a flavor profile instead of just going for the quick cash by denegrating the quality. In my own mingling/vatting experiments, if you want to get something that tastes like 8 years old, you don't mix a 4 yo and a 12 yo at 50:50, you mix them at about 75:25 young to old. The older spirit really dominates the younger. Distillers could produce a mature tasting non-AS bourbon with a predominance of younger juice by adding just a little older stuff. This would help us all out until the mature barrels catch up.

[HighInTheMtns]

Yep, at $35-$40 a bottle. Which is what retail is currently supposed to be on that stuff. That would be my "daily driver" of a wheater.

I can dig it......