whiskies that fail to list State of Distillation?

[Old Dusty]

Templeton confesses - http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2014/08/28/templeton-rye-change-labels-clarifies-much-made-iowa/14770045/

[squire]

That statement also struck me as odd. Talk about being caught red handed.

[squire]

Good bullseye Wade in case I haven't already said it and if I have it's worth repeating.

[T Comp]

And what a confession. Two quotes stuck out to me in that piece:

1) Underwood said the decision not to state the whiskey's Indiana distillation on original labels wasn't an attempt to mislead consumers.

"Why we didn't do it, I can't answer that," he said.

(can't answer because to do so would contradict his prior statement.)

2) "The whiskey is not the most important thing," Underwood said.

(This is so bizarre from a sales and marketing standpoint that I can't adequately make a pithy comment)

[wadewood]

Here is the email I just sent to 4 contacts at the TTB:

Here are links to two articles in the Des Moines Register newspaper about Templeton Rye. Templeton Rye is a 5.36 (d) violator that I reported to you back in April.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2014/08/26/templeton-rye-iowa-indiana/14604225 - local reported breaks the story on truth that whiskey is really distilled in Indiana, not Iowa.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2014/08/28/templeton-rye-change-labels-clarifies-much-made-iowa/14770045/ - Templeton comes clean and will start listing product as Distilled in Indiana.

What I found interesting was "When asked about the regulation, Templeton Rye's chairman and president noted the label had received approval without qualms from the TTB. The motivation for the label change came purely from a desire to address confusion, they said, not after inquiries from the TTB."

[Ravensfire]

Nice - I like that. They should get this rubbed in their face and hopefully someone with some authority can find out who's rubberstamping and have a stern talk with them. Being a nice cushy government job, that's probably the most they can do.

[amg]

The issue here is that it was only a violation because the whiskey wasn't distilled in Iowa. If Templeton didn't explicitly tell the TTB that they were bottling MGPI whiskey, there's no way for the TTB to have known that this was a violation at the time of label approval without conducting an investigation of their business.

[sku]

The issue here is that it was only a violation because the whiskey wasn't distilled in Iowa. If Templeton didn't explicitly tell the TTB that they were bottling MGPI whiskey, there's no way for the TTB to have known that this was a violation at the time of label approval without conducting an investigation of their business.

[wadewood]

The issue here is that it was only a violation because the whiskey wasn't distilled in Iowa. If Templeton didn't explicitly tell the TTB that they were bottling MGPI whiskey, there's no way for the TTB to have known that this was a violation at the time of label approval without conducting an investigation of their business.

[Tony Santana]

"The whiskey is not the most important thing." That statement just blows me away. Does Templeton do anything BUT produce (however you might want to define that term) whiskey? I mean, that's what they sell and pretty much the sole source of anticipated profit, isn't it?

[Ravensfire]

I guess that's true if you assume no one from the TTB ever does any outside reading since it's been widely known for ages that Templeton buys whiskey from MGP, but it would be an easy fix. Just include a box on the label application form that asks for the state of distillation. Then the TTB agent can easily compare the form to the label and see if the state of distillation is listed on the label. That way there's no room for guess work.

[dcbt]

Also, DSP's report to TTB what quantities they are producing, their sales and purchases from other DSP's, so the TTB can easily figure out what is going on.

[amg]

Agreed that requiring the state of distillation on the application form is a no-brainer. I'm sure the bureaucratic process to have that form changed would be pretty daunting, though.

[cowdery]

In my interview with Mark Gillespie for WhiskyCast I talk about this at length. I even call the people at Templeton "assholes."

Even though they have promised to stop sinning and never sin again I stand by that assessment.

I note that this is the first appearance of this Underwood guy. Scott Bush has been the front man to this point. Although Bush was in the room, it doesn't sound like he said much. They're stilling lying, of course, when they say they never intended to deceive, since they never intended to do anything but deceive. Clearly, Underwood decided he had to step in and protect his money.

Also amazing that he called the whiskey "an afterthought."

All praise and honor to Wade. Now let's get some of those Texas assholes.

[IowaJeff]

In addition to those noted above, a couple of other quotes that stood out:

[after the explanation of distillation and aging in Indiana] "From there, Templeton blends the rye whiskey with other whiskeys and ingredients that augment the taste. The added ingredients are called "blenders," Chairman Vern Underwood said, "things that we add to it to make it as close as we can to the recipe that Keith's father had."

This is new to me. My understanding is 'rye whiskey' can't have any other type of whiskey in it, so the 'other whiskeys' would have to be rye. Would 'ingredients augmenting the taste' run afoul of the regs? It sounds like they are trying to hedge the lie (with anothe lie) that w hat’s in the bottle is derived from an old recipe.

I also like the line where Underwood claims that recreating the alleged Kerkhoff recipe would be impossible because of federal rules regulating proof and production of rye. Ha! The regs, which you chose to not follow anyway, don't stop you from making a spirit from a given recipe, it just requires you to label it appropriately.

[squire]

There are lies, damn lies, and damnable liars.

[sutton]

Nice job, Wade. Consumer advocacy at a grass roots level, very commendable!

I wonder if a distillery was ever in their original business plan, or do they feel compelled to follow through and produce a couple hundred litres to blend with the MGP ... of course, they'd have to then amend the label again!

[squire]

Yeah, a few head of cattle ain't a herd.

[Paddy]

After reading the article and catching up on the thread.... what sliver of integrity (and it was a very thin sliver at that) Templeton may have had prior to the article.... well to hell in a handbasket comes to mind, because it is totally thrown out the door after this cluster.

When caught red handed in the cookie jar, one should at least admit that they were in fact in the cookie jar. Chuck is correct.... they are a bunch of assholes and always will be. We can only hope that they now implode upon themselves!

Well done Wade!

[sku]

In addition to those noted above, a couple of other quotes that stood out:

[after the explanation of distillation and aging in Indiana] "From there, Templeton blends the rye whiskey with other whiskeys and ingredients that augment the taste. The added ingredients are called "blenders," Chairman Vern Underwood said, "things that we add to it to make it as close as we can to the recipe that Keith's father had."

This is new to me. My understanding is 'rye whiskey' can't have any other type of whiskey in it, so the 'other whiskeys' would have to be rye. Would 'ingredients augmenting the taste' run afoul of the regs? It sounds like they are trying to hedge the lie (with anothe lie) that w hat’s in the bottle is derived from an old recipe..

You are correct that rye whiskey cannot have other whiskeys added to it. This was a weird statement. My guess is they are just blending multiple barrels of MGP but who knows.

I'm not sure what you mean by ingredients augmenting the taste but keep in mind that Templeton is not labeled "straight" so they could lawfully use a small amount of flavoring additives.

[cowdery]

The added ingredients are called "blenders," Chairman Vern Underwood said, "things that we add to it to make it as close as we can to the recipe that Keith's father had."

That wasn't in the version I saw. The comment about 'other whiskeys' just struck me as something somebody might say if they didn't know what they were talking about. They might very well be screwing the pooch in another way, too. It is labeled as 'Straight Rye Whiskey' and the requirements for that are pretty strict. It can be a mixture of straight ryes made as different distilleries and still be labeled straight rye, so long as they're all from the same state. The 95 percent rye recipe was the only rye MGP made until late last year and MGP is the only distillery in Indiana that could be the source. Anyway, all very complicated scenarios so it just sounds to me like somebody trying to retain some of that Kerkhoff recipe fantasy even as he repudiates it. I'm willing to let that one slide.

I imagine Underwood has been looking at the financials but otherwise not paying a lot of attention to how Templeton does business. A series of high profile stories in the state's largest and most respected newspaper made him take notice. He may only have learned about some of this stuff in the last week or so himself. Now he's doing damage control. Something tells me Scott Bush got taken to the woodshed.

My question for Underwood would be this. Some of the Templeton stories seem really great, but how can you expect us to believe any of them?

I'll be really interested to see if all this affects sales.

Here's my blog post on it.

Edited August 30, 2014 by cowdery

[squire]

It struck me the guy was making stuff up to paint their product as unique and not just repackaged goods.

[Old Dusty]

I'll be really interested to see if all this affects sales.

As a stockholder in MGPI, I hope sales (or at least contracts for bulk) continue to soar. As a consumer I dislike these charlatans (along with the McLain and Kine/Michter's/Whistlepigs of the whiskey world) and refuse to buy their wares. I'm in a bit of a conflict here. But I LOVE MGP's business model. $0 on brand support, $0 on retail marketing, $0 for bottling, no label approval, no dealing w distributors or fickle consumers. Just run the stills until they crash and sell off the white dog or aged product in bulk to a seemingly never ending and voracious line of NDP's.

[sku]

It is labeled as 'Straight Rye Whiskey' and the requirements for that are pretty strict.

Good points Chuck, but check on this one again. I don't think it's every been labeled as "straight."

[cowdery]

You're right, SKU. It is labeled 'rye whiskey,' but not straight rye whiskey. For most purposes of this question it doesn't matter, but they can use rye whiskey younger than two years old. They probably would be smart to mix in a barrel or two or rye whiskey made in Iowa. Maybe Cedar Ridge will make them some.

The 'rye whiskey' designation is, of course, why they can't use any part of a moonshine recipe that includes sugar. Naturally, I find all of their stories hard to believe, but I find it especially hard to believe a moonshiner in the 1920s was making true rye whiskey. Templeton actually has an approved label for something called Templeton Rye Kerkhoff Recipe that is 90% cane spirit, 10% rye spirit. That's the 'real' Prohibition-era Templeton rye.