Are Age Statements Verifiable?

[starhopper]

I know I'm probably opening up a can of worms by asking this question but here it goes.....

I just purchased a bottle of Orphan Barrel Barterhouse 20 year old bourbon.  I was wondering, what reasonable assurance do I have that the bourbon inside the bottle is actually 20 years old?

In this day and age of manufactured stories of miraculously found "missing barrels", how can I be certain that the age statement is factual?  Is there a govt inspector who oversees the process - or am I simply to take the word of the producer?

Edited April 18, 2016 by starhopper

[tanstaafl2]

It is a legal requirement if they put an age on the label but I don't know if there is anybody who is routinely checking to verify that it is true in all cases. Maybe there are occasional spot checks done but not even sure about that. We pretty much have to trust that the producer to do what they say they are doing.

You trust Diageo, right???

Edited April 18, 2016 by tanstaafl2

[starhopper]

That is precisely my concern ...if occasional "spot checks" are all the producers have to worry about, what is to stop them from exaggerating age statements?

Greed can make people and corporations do things that are not in the best interests of the consumer.

I wonder if this has ever been looked into officially?

Edited April 18, 2016 by starhopper

[p_elliott]

The law states that if they put an age on a bottle that the youngest bourbon in that bottle has to be that old. It can be older but not younger.

[Chuckles]

That's right, Paul, as I recall. Also (and someone correct me if I'm wrong),  to be called "straight bourbon," it must be aged at least two years, and "straight bourbon" aged less than four years must have an age statement on it, stating the youngest bourbon in the bottle. So presumably a "straight bourbon" with no age statement would be at least four years old--but haven't we all seen no-age-statement "straight bourbon" that was barely two years old, if that? And doesn't Stagg Jr. say something like "aged nearly a decade" on the label, implying 8- to 9-y-o whiskey but, I'm guessing, legally meaning nothing beyond 4-y-o straight bourbon.

 

[starhopper]

51 minutes ago, p_elliott said:

The law states that if they put an age on a bottle that the youngest bourbon in that bottle has to be that old. It can be older but not younger.

I guess what I'm saying is, apart from the actual "law" is there any enforcement of the law? Without enforcement, laws mean nothing (see people texting on the highway lately?)

[tanstaafl2]

I presume the TTB has oversight for this just as they regulate labels in general.

But the TTB can barely manage to get labels that are submitted directly to them for review and approval to be correct. Indeed, we have seen labels reviewed by the TTB that were not. Presumably they are the only Federal agency with oversight for this type of thing. I don't what if any role the states play. Beyond compliance with tax requirements, which is likely their primary concern, I have to think that oversight at the distillery itself is minimal if the TTB is so short staffed, as has been noted in the past, that they have been unable to regulate and correctly enforce something as relatively simple as label errors, be they deliberate or not.

So your concern about compliance with things like age statements and "truth in bottling" for lack of a better term seem well founded to me.

Edited April 18, 2016 by tanstaafl2

[starhopper]

And in this time of the resurgence of Bourbon and ever increasing prices, I would think that the the temptation to "fudge" the numbers would be ever-present for the companies.  If there is really no one to check what they actually bottle, then they could basically put any age statement on the bottle, slap a premium price on it, and watch us lemmings go crazy.

I'm not trying to be alarmist, but I DO think we take a lot of granted and at face value when perhaps we shouldn't.

I'd be interested in what Chuck Cowdery would have to say on this issue.

Edited April 18, 2016 by starhopper

[p_elliott]

I'm not so sure that the price they charge for a 15 year old bourbon would offset the taxes of putting a  4 year old bourbon in a bottle and saying it was 15.

[berto]

While the temptation to cheat might be present and the possibility of being caught due to lax enforcement might be low it's probably not worth the risk.  I can't imagine the feds would be kind.  Fines, loss of license, etc.  A small crafty place would be finished.  Aside from whatever penalties would be levied by the feds the negative attention of being caught wouldn't go over well with shareholders and customers of one of the majors.  Why jeopardize the income from Fireball, Jack, etc. (hundreds of millions) over the relatively small profit (hundreds of thousands) on falsely labeled product aimed at a small part of your overall market?    

[tanstaafl2]

12 minutes ago, berto said:

While the temptation to cheat might be present and the possibility of being caught due to lax enforcement might be low it's probably not worth the risk.  I can't imagine the feds would be kind.  Fines, loss of license, etc.  A small crafty place would be finished.  Aside from whatever penalties would be levied by the feds the negative attention of being caught wouldn't go over well with shareholders and customers of one of the majors.  Why jeopardize the income from Fireball, Jack, etc. (hundreds of millions) over the relatively small profit (hundreds of thousands) on falsely labeled product aimed at a small part of your overall market?    

Umm, Templeton Rye any one? It wasn't lying about the age (yet) but it was breaking the rules and lying about it all the same. Apparently fines, if any, they have paid has not yet deterred them.

[Louisiana]

It really comes down to whether you trust the company that your buying the whiskey from.

Buffalo Trace, Heaven Hill, Four Roses and numerous others have solid reputations.

I'm not saying Diageo would lie about the age of their whiskey, but you did question the age of Barterhouse 20 year.

Would you question let's say the age of Pappy Van Winkle 20 year? Just my thoughts on this.

 

[starhopper]

38 minutes ago, Louisiana said:

It really comes down to whether you trust the company that your buying the whiskey from........

.....Would you question let's say the age of Pappy Van Winkle 20 year? Just my thoughts on this.

 

...I'm just saying, maybe we SHOULD question it more considering the extraordinary price increases we are seeing based on age.  I stopped taking things on "faith" alone a long time ago - been burned too many times.

Edited April 18, 2016 by starhopper

[berto]

1 hour ago, tanstaafl2 said:

Umm, Templeton Rye any one? It wasn't lying about the age (yet) but it was breaking the rules and lying about it all the same. Apparently fines, if any, they have paid has not yet deterred them.

The feds don't seem to care all that much in this case.  Will that lack of care remain if a major lies about age?  I have no idea.  I distrust the marketing weasels but think the majors are playing it straight.

[Darwin]

What's the penalty for cheating on the age statement?   Does someone go to jail or is it pay a little fine and not admit guilt?  We see this frequently with the big corporations, but I tend to think the big distilleries are mostly honest and protective of their reputation.  The again I remember Templeton's recent shenanigans!      I will never buy their products.

Maybe Chuck can add to this.  

[Paddy]

Well anything is possible, but why in the hell would a reputable distiller take ANY risk and lie on a age statement when they can sell their young stocks to a NDP who'll do the dirty work for them and remove ALL the risk?  Heck, you can even get them to sign a non-disclosure and no one will ever really know whose product it is in the bottle! 

I wouldn't be as worried about getting caught by the TTB as I would be concerned about an internal 'leak' destroying a reputation that took years to build.  I get the question, but it just doesn't make sense to me...

[Enoch]

As my law professor always said..."everything is legal until there is a plaintiff".

[kaiserhog]

Diageo is a ruthless lot but they have to much to lose by fudging on age statements.  The only instance I rely on their age statements is with GD Hand Selected Barrel 9 year old.  I believe they offer a 10 year old Bulleit as well.  I know they are solid on their age stated malts and blended scotch whisky. 

I don't go for gimmicky "lost barrels"  just solid straight bourbon and Tennessee Whiskey.

 

[T Comp]

Let me get this straight. Major distillers been dropping age statements or coming out with nas for years (too lazy to look up when WT dropped it on 101 but what,  about 20 years) and getting enormous shit from enthusiasts. And now they're lying on their aged stuff. I'll leave my opinion on this as preposterous paranoia and not get vulgar. I also think we landed on the moon too. 

[b1gcountry]

What's the penalty for cheating on the age statement?   Does someone go to jail or is it pay a little fine and not admit guilt?  We see this frequently with the big corporations, but I tend to think the big distilleries are mostly honest and protective of their reputation.  The again I remember Templeton's recent shenanigans!      I will never buy their products.

Maybe Chuck can add to this.  

I'm not sure if you are asking for anyone to go to jail or not for faking age statements, but for me, jail would be over kill.

I've noticed a majority of people around here seem to judge the bottle by how it tastes, rather than what number is on the outside. The popular thumbs up gifted horse got seems to prove that. I don't know that the age statements really matter by themselves. I'm surprised they get so much discussion on the board.

I'm more worried about dropped age statements meaning they don't have enough barrels in reserve to toss away (into some cheaper product) the barrels that don't fit with the taste profile. The number itself doesn't matter to me. If it did, I would prefer to see something between 5 and 7.

[fenderbender4]

I think it's an important issue, at least for thought.  I believe there are lots of instances of something being "technically" illegal, but if the enforcement of a law isn't there, or the benefits of breaking the law, outweigh the repercussions, then people will do it.  Now, as to how pervasive the forging of age statements is, I really don't know.  I'd like to believe that the people who are involved have a shred of decency.

[starhopper]

7 hours ago, T Comp said:

Let me get this straight.... And now they're lying on their aged stuff. I'll leave my opinion on this as preposterous paranoia and not get vulgar. I also think we landed on the moon too. 

Thad - yes, please get it straight.  I did not say they're lying, I asked what is preventing them from lying? - or are we to take it on trust alone?

I also know we landed on the moon - plenty of available factual evidence for that. 

Edited April 19, 2016 by starhopper

[starhopper]

7 hours ago, b1gcountry said:

.....I've noticed a majority of people around here seem to judge the bottle by how it tastes, rather than what number is on the outside. The popular thumbs up gifted horse got seems to prove that. I don't know that the age statements really matter by themselves. I'm surprised they get so much discussion on the board.

I judge bourbon by how it tastes as well.  Most of my favorites are NAS.  However, as more and more producers market premium "limited" bottlings to us and try to convince us to shell out ever higher prices for bottlings with high age statements as their main draw, isn't it prudent to at least ASK the question?

Edited April 19, 2016 by starhopper

[Canarse]

While the large corporations that own the distillers have much to lose if they get caught, that hasn't stopped large corporations from cheating in other industries.  I personally trust the large, traditional distillers like WT, HH, BT, 4R BF and Beam.  The bottlers that are cashing in on the boom?  Not as much.  These old sourced whiskeys with elaborate back stories and high prices turn me off.  I generally avoid Diago and Luxco products.  The first few "craft" whiskeys I tasted were not good, so I wait good and long to hear many positive reviews before I pay the high prices for craft whiskey.  Like any boom market there are profiteers out there and they are not to be trusted.

[b1gcountry]

I judge bourbon by how it tastes as well.  Most of my favorites are NAS.  However, as more and more producers market premium "limited" bottlings to us and try to convince us to shell out ever higher prices for bottlings with high age statements as their main draw, isn't it prudent to at least ASK the question?

Sure. I'm just surprised how many comments any age statement threads get around here.