An Open Letter to Sazerac

[compliance]

I'm glad to see posts like this and I'm glad Sazerac took some notice and will hopefully consider the reaction of their fans when they do this shady stuff. BT was my favorite distillery when I started drinking bourbon, but within the last 6 months to a year I've had weak bottles of BT, RHF, Hancocks, etc. I'm tired of paying more for less and my spending is way down. If we want to make change we have to speak up and stop buying. Maybe that will do something and maybe it won't, but they can't disappoint me anymore after I've moved on.

[393foureyedfox]

vote with your wallets, thats all you can do. we, as enthusiasts, are a small minority in the whiskey market, but anyone who gets into it with any seriousness eventually wants to learn more, and when they do, first impressions are hard to change.

[BigRich]

vote with your wallets, thats all you can do. we, as enthusiasts, are a small minority in the whiskey market, but anyone who gets into it with any seriousness eventually wants to learn more, and when they do, first impressions are hard to change.

That's honestly about all we can do other than bitch and moan. Of all the examples form HH, WT, and Sazerac that were mentioned in the thread I haven't bought any of them in years. It's completely coincidental that this coincided with the growing availability of Four Roses and my shift to buying more of Mr. Rutledge's bourbon.

[e4tango]

Okay, perhaps once you've gotten your shorts out of a wad you could elaborate as to how. Quality or quantity? Seems you're in a long line of people who complain about the lack of availability and yet ignore the fact that the current demand of far exceeding supply. Are companies going to adjust in order to mitigate that as much as possible? Of course! Will that result in some unwanted compromises? Yes. There's no perfect solution for this and yet you (and that long line of others) seem to think that "your bourbon" should be earmarked especially for you and others who haven't had it yet should be given short shrift. But go ahead and rant to the president of a distillery (vs. the company that owns it) that offers a wider variety of products than others (meaning a lower supply of all from the get go) if you don't have the patience to wait a decade or so for the industry to adjust.

[wadewood]

This letter is not in the tone I would have took, but it does make valid points. Sazerac/Buffalo Trace has every right to change any product they make and price where they see fit. As consumers we can decide if we want to buy these products are not. That is simple enough.

If Mark Brown is reading, then I suggest stop the deceptive labeling. If you are going to drop an age statement, drop it but don't try to fool your normal customers with a number on the label that means nothing.

[squire]

I'm not bothered that Benchmark went to 36 months, it is after all a low proof mixer and performs that role well. Just take that big red 8 off the label.

[risenc]

Phil I have to disagree. If I allow someone to cheat me (overcharge) through lies and other deceptions that has a direct impact on me and if I continue to let them then I deserve what I get.

My concern is that all these millions of new whiskey drinkers won't know the difference, and thanks to some shady marketing will accept younger, lower-quality whiskey as equal to what came before. I'd like to believe that the collective consuming public has some sort of perfectly honed set of objective standards that won't accept anything but the best, and will punish companies that try to cut corners. But the reality is almost exactly the opposite of that. As a profane editor once told me about sub-par writing, people are perfectly willing to eat chicken s#!t as long as you tell them it's chicken salad.

[squire]

LBJ was also fond of using the chicken analogy and I have to agree it's apt.

[HighInTheMtns]

Okay, perhaps once you've gotten your shorts out of a wad you could elaborate as to how. Quality or quantity? Seems you're in a long line of people who complain about the lack of availability and yet ignore the fact that the current demand of far exceeding supply. Are companies going to adjust in order to mitigate that as much as possible? Of course! Will that result in some unwanted compromises? Yes. There's no perfect solution for this and yet you (and that long line of others) seem to think that "your bourbon" should be earmarked especially for you and others who haven't had it yet should be given short shrift. But go ahead and rant to the president of a distillery (vs. the company that owns it) that offers a wider variety of products than others (meaning a lower supply of all from the get go) if you don't have the patience to wait a decade or so for the industry to adjust.

Did you even read what I wrote? Just wondering, because your reply seems to ignore about everything I said.

For the last time: I don't care if they take the age statement off of Eagle Rare. I don't care if they lower its proof. I don't care if they discontinue it. I don't drink it. The issue I have is with the pattern of deception. Eagle Rare is a beginner bourbon. Eagle Rare is a bourbon for people who don't really venture outside their regular brand. Eagle Rare is not an enthusiast bourbon. I'm concerned more for those drinkers than for folks here. We notice shit like this. They don't.

Mark Brown is the CEO of the Sazerac company, not the president of Buffalo Trace distillery. I guess you think I should be mad that Bill Goldring didn't email me?

Anyway, I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, but dude... Learn what you're talking about first, then read what's actually been posted, then disagree with me. Because I'm sick of saying the same stuff over and over to people who didn't bother to read it the first time I said it.

And I don't know how Sazerac should deal with this situation. It's a tough one for them, but I do know that blatant deceit is not the best option they have.

Edited May 23, 2014 by HighInTheMtns

[dSculptor]

As a long time whisky consumer, I used to buy whatever, then I became a bit more aware of things, and one of those things that lead me down that road was information that was on the bottle. This small bit of info changed me from a casual uniformed consumer to a well educated consumer. I have to agree with the OP, they can do whatever they like just don’t try to deceit us with these # games. It pains me greatly to see this going on.

When push comes to shove, what choices do we really have? Don’t buy it anymore.. is it going to hurt them, I think not. That would be like trying to boycott gasoline. I suppose if there were great #’s involved it may work to some point. What about petitions? I wonder what effect that would have on a major distiller? Think they’d care? How about an online petition? Do you think that they are even aware of how many people this affects? After all I think nowadays it’s all geared toward the NEW consumers that really don’t care what a product “used to be like” only what it is now, and all the other guys who did know what it used to be like are just left behind wondering why.(Not that I necessarily know what a lot of them used to be like either). But this is of course…. IMHO!

[dcbt]

If enough people roar, the distillery will take note. Reference Makers Mark last year.

[squire]

Was the Makers Mark brouhaha the result of informed consumer protest or brand loyalist's revolt.

[sutton]

If enough people roar, the distillery will take note. Reference Makers Mark last year.

Perhaps there was a lesson learned there, but not in the way you'd think. Maker's announced the cut in proof in the media - and then the explosion of complaints occurred. The lessoned learned by the other distilleries, is do it slowly, subtlety, and above all ... quietly.

[dcbt]

Was the Makers Mark brouhaha the result of informed consumer protest or brand loyalist's revolt.

Touche. Point taken.

[393foureyedfox]

If enough people roar, the distillery will take note. Reference Makers Mark last year.

but that is because MM has a large loyal following, more due to advertising than anything else. With a name recognition like that, mainstream media were happy to take that story and run with it, and put it into the collective minds of the U.S., which easily got feedback back to the corporate decision makers, who want to continue to reap the benefits of their advertising dollars spent. I would venture to say that Sazerac doesnt have a following of the same type, for any of its labels, as MM. The size of the fan following and their devotion are the key elements here.

In the same year, JB dropped OGD from 86 to 80 proof, with barely any reaction. Two reasons, I see, for this. One is the brand following is relatively small. And two, when you offer 4 different proof points of the same whiskey (80,86,100, and 114), most any sensible person would tell you that you could cut costs and cut one of the two similar lower proof offerings without really pissing people off. I dont blame them one bit for what they did; it's a rich profile, and made sense to drop the 86 proofer. With MM only having one product (Im leaving MM46 out of this), ANY change to a loyally-followed brand like that will create hysteria.

[HighInTheMtns]

Was the Makers Mark brouhaha the result of informed consumer protest or brand loyalist's revolt.

In the age of social media these two things affect each other.

Worth noting: I know this post has spread organically, but I do not believe it's made it outside of whiskey enthusiast circles, so right now I'd call this one an informed consumer protest.

[squire]

I think the lesson to be gleaned is don't set up an official brand ambassador group for your customers.

[jonnyd]

ER isn't an enthusiast bourbon? News to me! I'm an enthusiast and I like it just fine. There are cheaper brands that are just as good with different flavor and I love them, but they don't have the same flavor profile of ER.

Edited May 23, 2014 by jonnyd

[risenc]

It's interesting that the MM kerfuffle was over something relatively minor. You drop the proof a couple of points and no one -- or almost no one -- will be able to tell the difference. But somehow, everyone and their granny was shouting about how the MM folks were destroying the brand. Here, though, you remove an age statement, you switch from single barrel to whatever -- that's serious stuff. But the peanut gallery is mum. I'm sure someone has a theory as to why, but not I.

[jeffrey r]

It's interesting that the MM kerfuffle was over something relatively minor. You drop the proof a couple of points and no one -- or almost no one -- will be able to tell the difference. But somehow, everyone and their granny was shouting about how the MM folks were destroying the brand. Here, though, you remove an age statement, you switch from single barrel to whatever -- that's serious stuff. But the peanut gallery is mum. I'm sure someone has a theory as to why, but not I.

By "peanut gallery", I presume you mean the world outside of SB? The reality is, MM is "the" bourbon to many people. MM is "the only" bourbon to many people. ER10 is popular, but has nowhere near the following of MM. Plus, one has to be aware and observant to pick up these subtle changes by BT. Dropping proof is perhaps a bit more visible and noticeable. Just my .02 cents.

[squire]

Because what Makers did was un-American. I read that on the internet.

[squire]

That or a Communist plot, I forgot which.

[HighInTheMtns]

I spoke to Mark Brown on the phone this afternoon, for almost an hour. I found him to be very courteous and upfront, and I'm still kind of blown away that the CEO of such a big company took time out of his day to talk to me. I feel like my concerns have been addressed, but I'll just try to summarize a bit and leave it to everyone to make up their own minds.

First off, regarding Barton "6" and Charter "8." Mark's opinion is that there are three general groups of bourbon drinkers: folks like "us" - the enthusiasts, the new crowd of bourbon drinkers who are ready to pay too much to get the bottles they want and tend to irritate people like "us," and the people who just want to go to the store and buy their same bottle and have it taste the same. He acknowledged my concerns about the numbers remaining, and said that it was debated internally, but that ultimately they opted to leave the number on the bottle in order to minimize apparent change for that third group of drinkers. According to Mark, the whiskey in VOB6 is currently 7 years old, and the whiskey in OC8 is 8 years old. He did not say that wouldn't change in the future, but he did say that they're committed to maintaining the flavor profile. He also pointed out that these were acquired brands; that age statements have not been a focus for Sazerac (BT, ETL, Blanton's...) and that they're doing their best to maintain these brands for their legacy drinkers.

Regarding Eagle Rare, Mark told me and specifically asked me to pass along, that Sazerac has no intention of removing the age statement from Eagle Rare, based on their planning through 2025 at least. It also remains a single barrel, for the most part. According to Mark, the change in labeling is due to logistics. Some Eagle Rare is now being bottled on the new bottling line while most Eagle Rare continues to be bottled in the Blanton's hall. The set up of the new bottling line does not allow them to bottle whiskey that meets their standards to be called single barrel, and so that verbiage is gone. The new bottling line also doesn't allow for the efficient application of a neck label (the pics of the new bottle confirm that there is no neck label - the stars are part of the capsule) and so the age statement was moved to the back.

In general, Mark told me that Sazerac's strategy is to try to keep good whiskey available to a wide range of customers, and that they don't intend to do things like price VW/BTAC out of the reach of ordinary consumers, even though they could. I can appreciate that.

I disagree completely with the VOB6/OC8 strategy, and I told Mark as much, but I can understand it a little better when I step back from my typical whiskey nerd perspective. I'm skeptical about ER, but what he told me makes sense based on the evidence available, and I'm willing to take it at face value and wait and see what happens. I really did get the impression that he was being frank and upfront with me, but most everyone knows how I feel about trusting guys who want to sell me whiskey. Right now, all I can say is that I really appreciate the responsiveness from Mark and Sazerac, I really enjoyed the conversation, and if I have a similar complaint in the future I'll reach out to Mark before doing anything else.

One other thing - Mark told me that the still at Barton is running 7 days a week, 3 shifts, 10 months a year, and the bottling line 7 days a week, 3 shifts, all year.

[Quantum]

Despite not being from eastern KY, Mark Brown seems like a solid guy.

[smknjoe]

Thanks for the info, Jim.