The modern day use of bottled-in-bond statements

[Thig]

Very informative thread, and here I thought BIB basically meant 100 proof.

[squire]

It also means Buy In Bulk.

[shoshani]

Indeed the biggest opposition to the Bottled in Bond Act of 1897 were the established rectifiers (NDPs) who had grown large and wealthy buying bulk whisky from the distillers then creating brands of their own which were more often than not sometimes blending the whisky with grain neutral spirits and a little something added for color.

Also distillers themselves, a good many of whom produced strictly for the rectifying trade, and who advertised this rye or that bourbon in The Wine and Spirits Bulletin as being "unexcelled for blending purposes". Many of those did not intend their product to be drunk alone by the end consumer, and it's probably a good bet that such whiskey was sold young under the presumption that the rectifier would age it. Or blend it with aged spirit. Or do something with it; it didn't matter to the distillers, whose name would be left off the final product anyway, so nothing was reflected on them.

[squire]

Yes, there were distillers in it for the quick buck (somebody made the crappy stuff) as well as NDPs who were in it for the long haul and put out a quality product. Brown-Forman got started that way and their flagship brand Old Forester was originally a blended whisky.

[Harry in WashDC]

Also distillers themselves, a good many of whom produced strictly for the rectifying trade, and who advertised this rye or that bourbon in The Wine and Spirits Bulletin as being "unexcelled for blending purposes". Many of those did not intend their product to be drunk alone by the end consumer, and it's probably a good bet that such whiskey was sold young under the presumption that the rectifier would age it. Or blend it with aged spirit. Or do something with it; it didn't matter to the distillers, whose name would be left off the final product anyway, so nothing was reflected on them.

Somewhat off-thread but this comment got me thinking (which, in itself is (a) dangerous ( rare). MGP Ingredients now offers a range of bourbons (45% wheat, 21% rye, 36% rye), two ryes (51% and 95%), and even a 95% wheat whisky (as well as a range of "flavored" whiskies). Clearly, they have no use for the BIB statement, and neither do their reseller customers. But the fact that MGP has expanded its whisky offerings over the last year or so suggests that they think there is a growing market for NDP products. Knowing "How to Read a Whisky Label" may be as important as "What does 'Straight' Mean?" and "BIB".

[Dannabis]

I can't vouch for any Governments reasons, as they may have no reason for anything they do. Buncha willy nilly gobslobbers they are.

But as far as myself, BIB is an indicator of good product. I am personally enticed by Bottled In Bond statements and prefer these to the more common place 80 proof offerings.

I feel that BIB is still a strong guarantee of a very specific set of qualities for bourbon. A you will see, many other bourbons will slowly and possibly sneakily lose their age statements (and yet keep the number somewhere conspicuous and rather misleading) or they will lower their proof over time to make more product.

BIB guarantees at least 4 year old 100proof bourbon. Yum.

I've got a taste for OGD BIB, McKenna, Heaven Hill and I look forward to getting more Bondeds

I also enjoy

Rittenhouse Rye whiskey BIB

and have a bottle of Lairds Apple Brandy BIB waiting to crack and pour.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Dannabis

[jburlowski]

It's a nice thought to think that a Bottled In Bond designation is as important today as it was way back when when the term was created. Like, it really means something important. But here's the million dollar question: Are you willing to Pay for the assurances that it gives you? BIB is cheap now, because it means nothing. In the new bourbon world, it sounds like many think it does/will. If it's so important, it should command a price, right? If I'm a producer, I'm up-charging for it. You in?

I'm in agreement (more or less) with Joe. I feel BiB is an anachronism from the past. All it really tells you is the name of the distiller. (The proof and minimum age are readily apparent on the label.) Quality? ---- no guaranty of relative or absolute quality. As Joe pointed out, most of the current BiBs are lower price, lower shelf products. You'll have a better chance of higher / consistent quality if the distiller can combine distillate of different "seasons" into the final product.

House style? Most of the current BiBs are either huge batch / mass market expressions (e.g., HH Bibs) or limited release "special" expressions (e.g., CEHT). For the former, any of the non-BiBs in the same price range from the same producer will give you the "house style". For the latter, they are largely "one offs" that may or may not be indicative of anything.

Edited June 10, 2014 by jburlowski

[cowdery]

Lots of good stuff here but pay particular attention to SKU's post, because he spelled it out for you.

What's different now compared to a few generations ago is that now all whiskey production is regulated, not just bottled-in-bond, but bottled-in-bond is the highest standard. It's a label statement that actually means something. Today it's probably more like what it was always intended to be. It was never intended to be an official guarantee of quality, just of authenticity. The producers aren't enthusiastic about playing it up because compliance costs them money, but think about what you are getting:

A true 'single;' one whiskey made at one place, by one master distiller, in one season. (Jan-Jun or Jul-Dec)

A true statement of where that whiskey was distilled and, if different, where it was bottled.

No reason to look for an age statement because it is guaranteed to be at least four years old.

No reason to look for the proof, because it's guaranteed to be 100.

[VeryOldBatavia]

BIB's cult? May I join?

But first, allow me to welcome myself to my first post here. I've been drinking bourbon for less than a year, and I've been "on the hunt" for it for about six months. One of the things that really makes me smile is finding another BIB I don't have.

Back out the Mellow Corn and the Rittenhouse, and I believe that leave an even dozen bonded bourbons.

As Bernie Lubbers, the Whiskey Professor says, Stay Bonded!

[TunnelTiger]

Great pics for a first post! Welcome to the board VOB. First time I've ever even seen some of these, nice.

[squire]

It's a nice thought to think that a Bottled In Bond designation is as important today as it was way back when when the term was created. . . . . . . . . BIB is cheap now, because it means nothing. In the new bourbon world, it sounds like many think it does/will.

Traditionally the BIBs were the most expensive sitting at the top of their respective lines, however in the modern world that category has been redefined by Single Barrel, Small Batch, LEs, experimental releases, etc.

I believe the BIB category is more important today than ever for other reasons. In the modern business environment anyone who can obtain the license and financing can launch new brands of whisky to consumers through marketing alone and charge as much as the market will bear. Against this flood of wannabes the BIBs stand as a bulwark against the onslaught of overpriced products who don't qualify for the BIB designation. In a world rife with imitators with catchy labels, pseudo histories and high prices, BIB remains a standard against which knowledgeable consumers can compare.

Can the NDPs produce a BIB? Of course they can but won't because that would disclose too much about the product and would be setting themselves up for comparison and that wouldn't be good for business.

[squire]

Welcome aboard VOB, helluva collection you got there. I nominate you for a voting membership in the BIB club.

[PaulO]

Wow VOB, nice pics! I think you may have all the bonded whiskies currently in production. The only other bond I can think of is Laird's Apple Brandy. Does anyone know of any others? I'm asking about current production, not dusties. :cool:

[tarheel]

I'm in agreement (more or less) with Joe. I feel BiB is an anachronism from the past. All it really tells you is the name of the distiller. (The proof and minimum age are readily apparent on the label.) Quality? ---- no guaranty of relative or absolute quality. As Joe pointed out, most of the current BiBs are lower price, lower shelf products. You'll have a better chance of higher / consistent quality if the distiller can combine distillate of different "seasons" into the final product.

House style? Most of the current BiBs are either huge batch / mass market expressions (e.g., HH Bibs) or limited release "special" expressions (e.g., CEHT). For the former, any of the non-BiBs in the same price range from the same producer will give you the "house style". For the latter, they are largely "one offs" that may or may not be indicative of anything.

[squire]

When you consider the sheer volume of whisky produced by Heaven Hill during a single season the BIBs are merely a drop in the bucket.

[VeryOldBatavia]

Here is the list I've been using, borrowed from http://www.whiskeyprof.com/http:/www.whiskeyprof.com/

Only a few on the list I haven't found yet, and I really don't know if this list is current.

If there are any out there not on this list, I'm looking for them too!

Bottled In Bond Whiskies in Production

Old Heaven Hill B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

Heaven Hill 6 Year Old B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

Evan Williams B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

Old Grand Dad B.I.B. (Jim Beam)

Very Old Barton 6 Year Old B.I.B (Sazerac)

Kentucky Tavern B.I.B. (Sazerac)

Edmund H. Taylor, Jr small batch B.I.B (Sazerac) (there’s a Rye and a Single Barrel, but that is discontinued)

Rittenhouse Rye B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

Mellow Corn B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

Old Fitzgerald B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

David Nicholson 1843 B.I.B. (Luxco)

J.W. Dant B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

J.T.S. Brown B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

T.W. Samuels B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

Henry McKenna 10yr Single Barrel B.I.B. (Heaven Hill)

Old Tub B.I.B. (Jim Beam; Visitors Center Only)

William Heavenhill B.I.B. (Heaven Hill; Evan Williams Bourbon Experience Only)

[ramblinman]

Lairds its a brandy, but BiB, http://www.drinkupny.com/Lairds_Apple_Brandy_p/s0631.htm, mentioned earlier in this thread.

[PaulO]

I think the TW Samuels BIB may have been discontinued. I haven't seen one in years. I still see the 80 proof now and then. David Nicholson is still using labels that say DSP 16 (closed in 1992). It should say DSP 1. It's more or less the same as current Old Fitz.

[393foureyedfox]

TPS still lists it as in stock. $21 for a 1.75

https://www.thepartysource.com/express/item.php?id=3096

[cowdery]

Bonded certainly doesn't mean better, but it definitely means 'different,' and in this hobby different is good, in that we like to taste different things. A bond is the only way to taste what the distillers thought were their best choices when they had to select only barrels distilled during a specific six month period. When so much on labels today means nothing, I like something on a label that really tells me something. Although most bonds are not premium products, there is a strict limit on how far producers can go in cheapening them so that, in reality, most bonds are a very good value.

[smokinjoe]

Bonded certainly doesn't mean better, but it definitely means 'different,' and in this hobby different is good, in that we like to taste different things. A bond is the only way to taste what the distillers thought were their best choices when they had to select only barrels distilled during a specific six month period. When so much on labels today means nothing, I like something on a label that really tells me something. Although most bonds are not premium products, there is a strict limit on how far producers can go in cheapening them so that, in reality, most bonds are a very good value.

I hear what your saying, Chuck. I like the concept of Bottled In Bond for the same reasons you list. But, where I'm hung up, is on whether the structural boundaries give us little beyond an "ideal", versus a "reality", of the things you speak of, at present. Personally and unfortunately I guess, I think BIB is little more than the former, today. Would love to see it grow into something more meaningful. Based on many comments here, the enthusiast community certainly would welcome it. And, in my mind, could present a nice opportunity for the legacy distilleries to grow their businesses in the premium/ultra premium segments.

[mbroo5880i]

I agree Joe, I would love to see BIB carry more swag. The bourbon market is changing so quickly due to demand. More NDPs and even the distillers are changing products offerings more frequently than the recent past...new products, label changes, etc.

[PaulO]

TPS still lists it as in stock. $21 for a 1.75

https://www.thepartysource.com/express/item.php?id=3096

I used to see TW Samuels BIB in Louisville stores, than a few years ago it disappeared. Once a guy posted here that was a descendent of the Samuels family. He wanted a bottle, but said he couldn't find any. I generally avoid looking at TPS website. It's either depressing, or a big temptation to make a road trip and spend $$$.