Don Birnam Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 3 hours ago, jshleffar said: The part missing from the bolded equation is that the barrel proof is 12 year (hearkening back to what you could experience a "few short years ago") and the NAS is not. Mea culpa! I was unaware of that. Though I stand on that if you switched the contents of the 94° proof bottles it would prove our perception of quality is psychological. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry in WashDC Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 (edited) 11 hours ago, smokinjoe said: .Unless things have changed, these levels from value, premium, super premium, etc, are strictly based on price, and the upper end of the range is not that high, as it tops out at a relatively low price. In other words, an “Ultra Premium” product price is much lower than many of us would guess. Many whiskies are bumped up to higher levels, simply because their new higher price points put them there. “Quality” And worthiness of segment placement judgements are arbitrarily perceived by the individual . . . I am awaiting an answer to, "How did you decide what is value, what's premium, etc.?" Also, I am awaiting how much "publicly available" info the DistSpirCoun can let me see re: its predecessors - the Bourbon Institute, the Distilled Spirits Institute, and the Licensed Beverage Industries, Inc. . Well, I haven't called, yet, but . . . The trend, though, shown by the chart, it seems to me, shows the volume of "value" has increased only a bit while the Super Premium has really grown. This is consistent with a previous poster's observation that bottom shelfers and top shelfers (LEs, too?) are squeezing the middle. If bourbon volume growth, overall is, say, 50% over those 8 years, it appears that "value" has not grown at that pace and SP has exceeded it. Since we are dealing with volume in the chart, every liter increase that does NOT appear in "value" must move up someplace. Those growth numbers suggest that most of the shifted liters moved up more than one tier - if one presumes that the number of liters allocated to each tier would be identical (that is, a straight line allocation of liters). If, however, the allocation had been done so the per cent of aggregate aged bourbon for each tier had remained constant year over year, the number of liters going to the bottom shelf should have been several times the number going to the highest. Because this was NOT shown by the chart, one can assume that the bourbon sellers were allocating proportionately more of their production to the top than they had in past years. Now, if we just had some solid raw data AND hard and fast definitions of terms, we could really talk about this instead of just woofing. Edited October 31, 2018 by Harry in WashDC 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flahute Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 16 hours ago, smokinjoe said: Unless things have changed, these levels from value, premium, super premium, etc, are strictly based on price, and the upper end of the range is not that high, as it tops out at a relatively low price. In other words, an “Ultra Premium” product price is much lower than many of us would guess. Many whiskies are bumped up to higher levels, simply because their new higher price points put them there. “Quality” And worthiness of segment placement judgements are arbitrarily perceived by the individual. For instance, as I may not believe a brand is worthy of a placement in Ultra Premium simply because of its lofty price, I similarly would believe Virgin 7yr 107 is more worthy than its placement in the Value segment. In addition, I’m not sure the numbers are adjusted for standard inflation, let alone the advanced inflation of pricing in many areas of the American Whiskey Market these past several years. In effect, the bourbon pricing market is out running the DISCUS measuring stick. I’ve often thought when seeing this info, that a bigger than “some” portion of the explosive growth of the Premium and above segments is the addition of popular mid market bourbons going there due to price increases, and not all by cognizant consumer demand for so-called Ultra Premium. 4 hours ago, Harry in WashDC said: I am awaiting an answer to, "How did you decide what is value, what's premium, etc.?" Also, I am awaiting how much "publicly available" info the DistSpirCoun can let me see re: its predecessors - the Bourbon Institute, the Distilled Spirits Institute, and the Licensed Beverage Industries, Inc. . Well, I haven't called, yet, but . . . The trend, though, shown by the chart, it seems to me, shows the volume of "value" has increased only a bit while the Super Premium has really grown. This is consistent with a previous poster's observation that bottom shelfers and top shelfers (LEs, too?) are squeezing the middle. If bourbon volume growth, overall is, say, 50% over those 8 years, it appears that "value" has not grown at that pace and SP has exceeded it. Since we are dealing with volume in the chart, every liter increase that does NOT appear in "value" must move up someplace. Those growth numbers suggest that most of the shifted liters moved up more than one tier - if one presumes that the number of liters allocated to each tier would be identical (that is, a straight line allocation of liters). If, however, the allocation had been done so the per cent of aggregate aged bourbon for each tier had remained constant year over year, the number of liters going to the bottom shelf should have been several times the number going to the highest. Because this was NOT shown by the chart, one can assume that the bourbon sellers were allocating proportionately more of their production to the top than they had in past years. Now, if we just had some solid raw data AND hard and fast definitions of terms, we could really talk about this instead of just woofing. I remember seeing the pricing tiers for this sometime in the past year though I don't remember where. What I do recall is thinking to myself "Geeze, these tiers are way off. What they think is Premium is really not that Premium." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VAGentleman Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 (edited) From DISCUS Value under $12/bottle Premium $12-20 High end $20-30 Super premium $30+ https://www.distilledspirits.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Distilled_Spirits_Council_Annual_Economic_Briefing_Feb_1_2018_Final.pdf Edited November 1, 2018 by VAGentleman 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cranecreek Posted November 1, 2018 Author Share Posted November 1, 2018 41 minutes ago, VAGentleman said: From DISCUS Value under $12/bottle Premium $12-20 High end $20-30 Super premium $30+ https://www.distilledspirits.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Distilled_Spirits_Council_Annual_Economic_Briefing_Feb_1_2018_Final.pdf Thanks much VAgentleman ! This was what I seen when I said that the mid-shelf now extends to the top. There are a bunch of $30 whiskies on the shelves now but they sure ain't "Super-Premium" in any other regard than price ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stump1998 Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 Such a great read, been gone a couple months with a move but glad to be back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts