Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BottledInBond

OWA acronym conundrum

Recommended Posts

BottledInBond   
BottledInBond

So after buying my first bottle of the Weller Antique 107 today, I had a little frustration. Should we still be referring to it as OWA? The new label does not call it Old Weller Antique anymore. Just Weller antique 107. I know, I know it's blasphemous to suggest no longer using OWA, but it no longer accurately abbreviated the name of the product. What say ye?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
b1gcountry   
b1gcountry

If we are changing it, I recommend "MIA" because that is a better description

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clueby   
Clueby

I think I suggested  WA107 in a thread about the new labels. Yeah I wish I could FIND it no matter what you call it. I'm guilty of hoarding (or do we only call it bunkering here?) the stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CardsandBourbon   
CardsandBourbon

I've only found two bottles locally.  Both are in my cabinet now.  Still haven't seen any W12.  I think WA107 would be the way to refer to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0895   
0895

I think it would depend on which bottle you're referring to as well.

If I'm drinking OWA, I'm gonna say: "OWA"

 

If I'm drinking the new bottle,  I'll probably say "WA107"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0895   
0895
4 hours ago, b1gcountry said:

If we are changing it, I recommend "MIA"
 

 

You sir, are hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Charlutz   
Charlutz

I think we should leave it as OWA. The bourbon is still the same unless and until BT says they took the 'old' off for a specific reason. One of the principal reasons for the standardization of acronyms is so that the forum is easily and effectively searchable. I don't think a bottle redesign is enough of a change to split up the search terms. It is unlike EC12 and ECNAS, e.g., where the change in acronym signifies an actual change in the bourbon. My two cents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
garbanzobean   
garbanzobean
42 minutes ago, Charlutz said:

I think we should leave it as OWA. The bourbon is still the same unless and until BT says they took the 'old' off for a specific reason. One of the principal reasons for the standardization of acronyms is so that the forum is easily and effectively searchable. I don't think a bottle redesign is enough of a change to split up the search terms. It is unlike EC12 and ECNAS, e.g., where the change in acronym signifies an actual change in the bourbon. My two cents. 

I agree with Charlie.  Bourbon acronyms need not be up to the minute accurate.  Unless we decide that it is actually an entirely new product replacing OWA, it makes sense to leave  it for historical continuity.  That said, if someone decides we need to change it, the only acronym even worth considering is New Weller Antique = NWA.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
amg   
amg
11 minutes ago, garbanzobean said:

I agree with Charlie.  Bourbon acronyms need not be up to the minute accurate.  Unless we decide that it is actually an entirely new product replacing OWA, it makes sense to leave  it for historical continuity.  That said, if someone decides we need to change it, the only acronym even worth considering is New Weller Antique = NWA.  

Ha, I love it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Charlutz   
Charlutz

Nice, Eric!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

(O)WA 107 -- for those of us with OCD -- I'm guessing, about half of us...  :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richnimrod   
Richnimrod

If we're voting, I cast my ballot for sticking with OWA.   ...If for no other reason than trace-ability backwards through the old threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IncredulousNosco   
IncredulousNosco

I just thought I'd be the arsehole that tells everyone that these labels are not acronyms anyway. They're, in most all cases, initialisms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GeeTen   
GeeTen
On 3/18/2017 at 4:35 PM, IncredulousNosco said:

I just thought I'd be the arsehole that tells everyone that these labels are not acronyms anyway. They're, in most all cases, initialisms.

 

OK - you WIN!    :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JTaylor   
JTaylor
Posted (edited)
On 3/18/2017 at 2:08 PM, Richnimrod said:

If we're voting, I cast my ballot for sticking with OWA.   ...If for no other reason than trace-ability backwards through the old threads.

I agree with Rich... IF the bourbon hasn't changed. If they had removed an age statement or made some other significant change then I'd say it needs to be noted, but this (AFAIK) is still the same OWA with a new bottle and label.

Edited by JTaylor
AFAIK - As far as I know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
garbanzobean   
garbanzobean
On 3/18/2017 at 4:35 PM, IncredulousNosco said:

I just thought I'd be the arsehole that tells everyone that these labels are not acronyms anyway. They're, in most all cases, initialisms.

You are right.  And correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GaryT   
GaryT

What about something ala Prince ("the bourbon formally known as OWA", or TBFKAOWA)?  

 

With this being NAS, who can say if it is different from OWA.  But - being the geeks that we are - if feedback starts to suggest that it IS different, I would be in favor of changing the name for the sake of clarity.  

 

I was looking for the reference list of abbreviations, and couldn't find the damn thing, in which case it may not matter as long as folks know what you're talking about (so - if you don't think there is a difference, keep calling it OWA; but if you want to specifically make sure everyone knows you're referring to the new stuff because you think it is different, call it something else like WA107).   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tanstaafl2   
tanstaafl2
On ‎3‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 8:30 AM, Charlutz said:

I think we should leave it as OWA. The bourbon is still the same unless and until BT says they took the 'old' off for a specific reason. One of the principal reasons for the standardization of acronyms is so that the forum is easily and effectively searchable. I don't think a bottle redesign is enough of a change to split up the search terms. It is unlike EC12 and ECNAS, e.g., where the change in acronym signifies an actual change in the bourbon. My two cents. 

 

Of course there was a time not so long ago when OWA was in fact an aged stated 7yo bourbon. The abbreviation didn't change so I see no reason it should change now.

 

You could always just call it "new" OWA as versus "old" OWA! And I suppose the interim was really NAS OWA. So perhaps the current one is really new NAS OWA...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×