An Open Letter to Sazerac

[HighInTheMtns]

this doesnt seem irrational to me. When at a Beam tour last year, watching them dump KCSB (obviously, a single barrel), I found myself wondering.......If that barrel holds enough bourbon for 200.5 bottlings, they cant bottle that 0.5 bottle (375ml), since it is a 'single barrel' product, and putting that 375ml of leftover bourbon into the next barrel's worth would technically render the next barrel's bottles as NOT single barrel bottlings. Triflling, sure.......but Mark's got a point. I figure that 375 ml leftover KCSB gets diverted into the regular KC bottles, since they are small batch, and that wouldnt throw off requirements for either. Hence, it's convenient for the distiller to have both a SmB and an SB of a product line.

ya dig?

[393foureyedfox]

I bet that 375ml stays in the lines. Onesey twosey redirection of half bottles would be too inefficient for Beam.

The term Single Barrel has no legal definition.

[HighInTheMtns]

maybe. now I think youre disagreeing just to disagree with someone:skep:

[TunnelTiger]

this doesnt seem irrational to me. When at a Beam tour last year, watching them dump KCSB (obviously, a single barrel), I found myself wondering.......If that barrel holds enough bourbon for 200.5 bottlings, they cant bottle that 0.5 bottle (375ml), since it is a 'single barrel' product, and putting that 375ml of leftover bourbon into the next barrel's worth would technically render the next barrel's bottles as NOT single barrel bottlings. Triflling, sure.......but Mark's got a point. I figure that 375 ml leftover KCSB gets diverted into the regular KC bottles, since they are small batch, and that wouldnt throw off requirements for either. Hence, it's convenient for the distiller to have both a SmB and an SB of a product line.

ya dig?

[squire]

Ah ha, so that's it, Single Barrel Small Batch covers all the bases.

[Josh]

I'm late to the party, but thanks for spearheading this Jim. It's to Mark Brown's credit that he took the time to address all your concerns, even if the faux age statements are still BS.

[TunnelTiger]

I figured I'd get a response. I didn't figure it would be from Mark directly, and I definitely didn't figure he'd take so much time out of his day for it.

[sutton]

I agree that the VOB and OC label thing is deceptive, even if not intentionally so. At the same time, if they issue with the new line is that they can't completely guarantee that each bottle is purely from a single barrel, it also speaks to their integrity to remove the SB label when they (and probably only they) would know that they couldn't guarantee it, and even then probably only affecting very few bottles out of the total.

The fact that he took time to not only answer, but call a concerned customer who knows his stuff, is certainly worth praise even if we don't completely understand or agree with some of the answers.

[squire]

I completely understand which is why I don't agree.

[michaelturtle1]

I thought the deceptive labels were a TTB violation?

[callmeox]

I figured I'd get a response. I didn't figure it would be from Mark directly, and I definitely didn't figure he'd take so much time out of his day for it.

This thread has motivated me to complain loudly and publicly about Kate Upton and/or Jennifer Lawrence because, well...you just never know.

The staff have all been watching this thread and while the result has been much more positive than the beginning would have suggested, we are going to relocate it to a members only forum.

Feel free to PM me if you have questions.

[smokinjoe]

I have much respect and admiration for Mark Brown for calling Jim on this. Particularly, so quickly. It only confirms what I feel about BT, and all of the other legacy bourbon distillers...They really do appreciate their customers. For this I say, Thank you.

Still, I will continue to vehemently disagree with BT's decision to leave the unsupported numbers on the VOB and OC brands. I still believe it is willful deception, in that they admit they thought about it, and decided to keep it on the label because they did not want their customers to notice any change on it. Sorry, that's plain wrong, even if for the time being there still is age appropriate whiskey in the bottle. I hope they reconsider their decision.

It's easy to find and belabor the negative things we find in our hobby that we are so passionate about, and some of these things from BT are no exception. However, we must not fail to recognize all of the good. Starting with the fact that the CEO of the company personally addressed one of our own members concerns. Still mind boggling to me. Then, there are the plethora of outstanding products that they make, World-Class ultra premium lines like BTAC and PVW that are still affordable for most, experimental efforts that are continuously shared with their customers, new product lines like the EH Taylors, new products like Stagg Jr. and the ETL Commemorative, the ongoing reinvestment in their facilities, and so on, and so on. Particularly with what I have witnessed from the involvement with Mark Brown in this thread, I am confident that BT/Saz will continue to add to this list of good works, and that they will far outshine any of their missteps.

[dSculptor]

Just think, if the CEO of such a big company reaches out to address one person's concerns,what would happen if a whole bunch of people flooded him with the same concerns?

[HighInTheMtns]

I want to elaborate a little further... Mark didn't just call and address my concerns. The man took an hour out of his day and talked to me about all kinds of things. If I were local, it would have been a personal tour rather than a phone call. I'm still blown away.

Edited May 24, 2014 by HighInTheMtns

[smokinjoe]

Seed? Those are my people. Next time you gotta tell em KB sent ya!!! Great restaurant.

Dude, I'm makin' a living getting free drinks telling people KB sent me...

[flahute]

I have much respect and admiration for Mark Brown for calling Jim on this. Particularly, so quickly. It only confirms what I feel about BT, and all of the other legacy bourbon distillers...They really do appreciate their customers. For this I say, Thank you.

Still, I will continue to vehemently disagree with BT's decision to leave the unsupported numbers on the VOB and OC brands. I still believe it is willful deception, in that they admit they thought about it, and decided to keep it on the label because they did not want their customers to notice any change on it. Sorry, that's plain wrong, even if for the time being there still is age appropriate whiskey in the bottle. I hope they reconsider their decision.

It's easy to find and belabor the negative things we find in our hobby that we are so passionate about, and some of these things from BT are no exception. However, we must not fail to recognize all of the good. Starting with the fact that the CEO of the company personally addressed one of our own members concerns. Still mind boggling to me. Then, there are the plethora of outstanding products that they make, World-Class ultra premium lines like BTAC and PVW that are still affordable for most, experimental efforts that are continuously shared with their customers, new product lines like the EH Taylors, new products like Stagg Jr. and the ETL Commemorative, the ongoing reinvestment in their facilities, and so on, and so on. Particularly with what I have witnessed from the involvement with Mark Brown in this thread, I am confident that BT/Saz will continue to add to this list of good works, and that they will far outshine any of their missteps.

Totally agree Joe.

We live in a complicated world and it's easy to fall into coping with it by reducing issues to black and white situations in an attempt to easily differentiate the good guys from the bad guys, or who is in your tribe and who is not. This plays out most frequently in politics and religion but exists everywhere and we see it here sometimes with the age statement and declining quality discussions which prompts some to pledge allegiance to Four Roses only as one of the only distilleries left that has yet to outwardly struggle with the recent surge of demand.

In short, while we should still criticize and hold the feet of Sazerac to the fire about the things we care about, we can still celebrate and compliment them for the things they do right, which is a lot.

It IS possible to have both feelings at once and act on them.

[HighInTheMtns]

Dude, I'm makin' a living getting free drinks telling people KB sent me...

A friend of mine just moved to Atlanta. Should I tell her to start saying "KB sent me" at every restaurant she goes to?

[mosugoji64]

I'm even later to the party than Josh but definitely wanted to throw in a big "Thank you" to Jim for starting and sharing this. That Mark took the time to personally contact you speaks volumes about his character and earns a load of respect.

BUT ... I still disagree about the OC and VOB age statements and see their choice as deceptive. If the customers were buying "that 8-year Old Charter" or "that 6-year Barton," then leaving the number on the label is deceiving them. To say that they don't know the difference is either misguided or shows a lack of confidence in their customers' cognivive abilities. If, as he maintains, the customers are uninterested in the age statement and are buying the Charter/Barton name then eliminate the age statement. Period.

[Paddy]

Jim, I also appreciate the passion, effort and enthusiasm show here! Not that anyone cares, but I also agree with the mods decision to pull this thread off the public forum.

Once again, I am wowed by Mark Brown who appears to be one of the good guys. I believe he is the right guy in the right job, doing his best to keep the ship of products that we hold near and dear afloat, while many would probably vote to simply let us eat scrap.

Did we hear everything the way we wanted to hear it? No... but as Joe noted above, their responsiveness shown here, their obvious situational awareness as seen here and elsewhere, combined with their ongoing efforts to maintain some sense of normalcy while providing the broadest range of brands and flavor profiles that exist (while faced with unprecedented challenges to meet the market), is acceptable to me.

[danz]

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.

...

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. ...

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....

Thanks to you for sharing and to Mark Brown for taking the time. I had a discussion with Mark Brown earlier this year, though not this extensive. He also impressed me greatly with his engagement with fans and customers. He has done a lot to reach out to the community, even if we may not always agree with every decision or explanation. I am glad to hear they plan to keep Eagle Rare generally as it is.

[Merrymash Monk]

"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."

.

[squire]

If, as he maintains, the customers are uninterested in the age statement and are buying the Charter/Barton name then eliminate the age statement. Period.

[Rkkingsley]

BUT ... I still disagree about the OC and VOB age statements and see their choice as deceptive. If the customers were buying "that 8-year Old Charter" or "that 6-year Barton," then leaving the number on the label is deceiving them. To say that they don't know the difference is either misguided or shows a lack of confidence in their customers' cognivive abilities. If, as he maintains, the customers are uninterested in the age statement and are buying the Charter/Barton name then eliminate the age statement. Period.

Completely agree. When I read that their reason for leaving the numbers on the bottle was in service to the third group, something rubbed me the wrong way but I couldn't put my finger on it. If they wanted to do that group a favor, they wouldn't change the whiskey. As it is, they're doing the opposite; changing the whiskey, while leaving the packaging the same in hopes that the third group doesn't notice.

I get the need to change/drop age statements and products. That's life and business.

Props to Mark for reaching out. Classy move. But, the explanation still doesn't sit right.

[HighInTheMtns]

I'm impressed with Mark's honesty, but not the practices of his company. His answers raise questions regarding ER like for instance: Isn't there a quality control problem on this "new line" given his above description of it? And if so, what is BT/Sazerac doing to address the problem? And in the mean time, why are they bottling "some of" ER, (long touted proudly as a SB) on a line that the company knows cannot reliably bottle single barrel bourbon? This just can't be good for the quality and integrity of the product

I see no QC issue at all here. It's not labeled single barrel anymore. They're choosing to bottle it more efficiently.

And it's only been single barrel since they screwed it up in the first place. Look... Clearly I have my problems with BT, but let's not go out of our way looking for problems that aren't there. I mean, come on everyone. Making a choice not to purge the system after every barrel doesn't mean there is any kind of an issue with the new bottling line. That's making a huge leap based on the information you have.

Plus, like Gary said earlier, a little batching is only gonna help ER out.

Edited May 25, 2014 by HighInTheMtns

[mbroo5880i]

I recall hearing somewhere that some retailers ask BT to bottle their single barrel selections of OWA immediately following a run of Pappy.