Barrel Price

[FasterHorses]

Saw on Peerless website that the cost of a barrel is around $27500. That would be 300 bottles at +-$90. Wonder what kind of luck Peerless will have at this price. If I were a LS owner, I'd probably go with a OWA, BT, 4R, something with a lower initial investment. 

[flahute]

Only about 257 bottles in a barrel (when full) so less than that due to evaporation. Retail is about $125 on these so that's 220 bottles. Not sure if that's what they get.

Either way, it's darn pricey. I'm hearing it's a tough sell for them.

[GaryT]

3 hours ago, flahute said:

Only about 257 bottles in a barrel (when full) so less than that due to evaporation. Retail is about $125 on these so that's 220 bottles. Not sure if that's what they get.

Either way, it's darn pricey. I'm hearing it's a tough sell for them.

With their extended aging process that consists of 24 WHOLE months . .  that's probably about right!  And @#$% crazy

[BigRich]

With their extended aging process that consists of 24 WHOLE months . .  that's probably about right!  And @#$% crazy

Definitely without peer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Richnimrod]

4 hours ago, BigRich said:

Definitely without peer

I wonder if that was a mis-spelling by Big Rich.     

I'm guessing he may have meant, 'Definitely without pour'....   

Because surely not many would be standing in line to pour this stuff at this cost.

[Mako254]

Just started showing up in my area about a month ago. Total has multiple cases and it doesn’t appear to be moving. 

[CUfan99]

Saw it out hunting yesterday in couple of places $110 - 125. And it looks like a bottle of motor oil for a Model A if I were to dream of such a thing. No huh uhh.

[flahute]

I've tried it and it's very good. Deceptively mature for only 2 years of age. They're able to come off the still lower and enter the barrel lower - both of which allow for better flavor at a younger age.

That said, I still don't think it's a $125 whiskey. I do look forward to seeing how it tastes at 4 and then 6 years but I shudder to think what the price will be then.

My local has the 2yr old sitting on the shelf and he says it's not moving at all.

[mbroo5880i]

A local bourbon hole has three single barrels.  I can't imagine they paid $27,500 for each barrel.  They originally priced it around $110.  I see it is now $89.99.  

[BottledInBond]

Like flahute said I do think it is a pretty good whiskey. And I like that I know where it was made and I kind of think the bottle is cool/original. But if I compare it to the 3 year Willett rye do I think it’s worth 3x? No certainly not. The bottle I have was a gift. I wouldn’t pay $125 of my own money for it.

 

I am interested to see what they do in the future. When they release something at 5 or 6 years will they still price it close to this level? If so I’d probably pay up for it. Now if they think they’re going to charge $150+ when their juice gets to 5 years or more I think they’re crazy. In some ways I’m thinking they’re hoping for a little bit of that “craft premium” with people paying more for a new and unique product when it first comes out. But a couple years in they need to compete with standard offerings on the market. 

[CUfan99]

16 hours ago, flahute said:

They're able to come off the still lower and enter the barrel lower - both of which allow for better flavor at a younger age.

Interesting. You can fit what I know about distilling into a thimble, but there's a contradiction in that statement based on the very general info I've heard. The head coming off the still is high alcohol and yuck due to highly volatile compounds, then the heart which is lower alcohol and pleasing taste, and last the tail is even lower alcohol with an unpleasant taste due to oily compounds. However the tails are often barreled when it will be allowed to age a long time (Scotch usually and some Bourbons & Ryes). The unpleasant oily tail becomes tasty and has a great mouthfeel only with extended age.

[lcpfratn]

Like flahute said I do think it is a pretty good whiskey. And I like that I know where it was made and I kind of think the bottle is cool/original. But if I compare it to the 3 year Willett rye do I think it’s worth 3x? No certainly not. The bottle I have was a gift. I wouldn’t pay $125 of my own money for it.
 
I am interested to see what they do in the future. When they release something at 5 or 6 years will they still price it close to this level? If so I’d probably pay up for it. Now if they think they’re going to charge $150+ when their juice gets to 5 years or more I think they’re crazy. In some ways I’m thinking they’re hoping for a little bit of that “craft premium” with people paying more for a new and unique product when it first comes out. But a couple years in they need to compete with standard offerings on the market. 

I agree that they are hoping that people will be willing to pay a "craft premium" for their product to try something new that's getting decent reviews, but I also think they've hurt themselves by being greedy with their initial pricing. There is a "craft premium" that some of us are willing to pay, and then there is a "ridiculous premium" that not many will be willing to pay. They chose the latter, and it could sour their reputation for the long haul unless their product is eventually able to develop into a product worthy of the price point they have chosen. And even then, as you stated above, they've got to compete with all the other offerings on the market, and that may eventually be their Achilles heel. I'm sometimes willing to pay a reasonable "craft premium" for worthy new distillery products, but their price isn't reasonable, so it doesn't surprise me that their product is sitting on the shelves. At this point, I'll probably never buy a bottle because there are better products available from both a price and quality standpoint, and there likely always will be as the overall supply of well aged Rye continues to grow.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[EarthQuake]

Yeah the price point on this stuff is just absurd. It's 2 year rye. I don't care how good their production method is or how nice it tastes for being 2 years old, it's still a two year old craft spirit. Even $60 would be too much. But $125, you've got to be kidding me.

 

I hope this is just an initial run designed to get them to cash positive while they wait for their juice to age, at which point the prices will come down to earth. I'm not holding my breath though. Honestly I like what they're doing in terms of production, but at this point I really hope they don't go bankrupt because they can't unload their 2 year old rye at $125 a bottle.

[flahute]

2 hours ago, CUfan99 said:

Interesting. You can fit what I know about distilling into a thimble, but there's a contradiction in that statement based on the very general info I've heard. The head coming off the still is high alcohol and yuck due to highly volatile compounds, then the heart which is lower alcohol and pleasing taste, and last the tail is even lower alcohol with an unpleasant taste due to oily compounds. However the tails are often barreled when it will be allowed to age a long time (Scotch usually and some Bourbons & Ryes). The unpleasant oily tail becomes tasty and has a great mouthfeel only with extended age.

Inclusion of tails has nothing to do with proof off of still if you don’t want them. 

[CUfan99]

8 minutes ago, flahute said:

Inclusion of tails has nothing to do with proof off of still if you don’t want them. 

It just seems the paradigm remains; if you wait longer to come off the still to attain lower proof you'll have a product that needs more age than one that comes off earlier at a higher proof. What I'm not accounting for out of ignorance are methods that allow them to get the heart at a lower proof without the oily compounds. 

[Charlutz]

I think what you’re getting at is there’s a lot more to making good whiskey than the numbers of entry proof, barrel proof, mashbill and age. It’s why craft whiskey made largely with a decade or two of experience by the master distiller has trouble matching a century of experience from the big boys. The learning curve is too flat for craft whiskey to earn the same buzz of craft beer which can turnaround product in a few weeks rather than 4 years. Toss in learning by trial and error and running down the other variables and that’s how you wind up with someone believing 2 year whiskey at $125 is reasonable. 

[flahute]

3 hours ago, CUfan99 said:

It just seems the paradigm remains; if you wait longer to come off the still to attain lower proof you'll have a product that needs more age than one that comes off earlier at a higher proof. What I'm not accounting for out of ignorance are methods that allow them to get the heart at a lower proof without the oily compounds. 

It's a different subject though that is not about what you want/need the proof off of still to be.

There are different ways to get to your deisred proof off of still. It's about your still design. If your still doesn't get your proof high enough on the initial run, you put the distillate into a doubler to raise the proof.

When distillers include too much of the heads, it's usually because they are trying to get more distillate, not because they are needing to lower the proof. Paradoxically, this is done for lower shelf whiskey that will not be aged longer and you can tell because too much heads tastes like wet cardboard which is what you often taste in the cheap BIB whiskies.

[flahute]

Whoops. Just re-read what I said above. 

Its the tails that produce the wet cardboard taste. 

[Guss West]

3 hours ago, flahute said:

Its the tails that produce the wet cardboard taste. 

 

I never knew that! 

 

Have you ever come across a comprehensive list of whisky flavor flaws and causes?  That would be interesting and useful information!