Old Hippie Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 On 1/1/2021 at 3:09 PM, FasterHorses said: Wonder why BF would sell.. ive read where this (ET not ET BiB)is the best selling whiskey worldwide. As part of this deal B-F Jettisoned Canadian Mist as well. This lets them put all their focus on the premium/ultra premium sector. Except for the BIB, ET and CM were just muddling along and I assume there is not enough profit in those brands to spend against growth. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz June Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 1 hour ago, Shell said: Jazz June, Sorry that I didn’t see you had already posted the Forbes article on most popular American whisky globally. No worries. Thanks for joining in on the conversation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shell Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 On 2/1/2021 at 9:20 PM, Shell said: As far as largest whiskey/whisky sales globally: According to Spirits Business' data, Johnnie Walker sells 18.4 M cases annually (in 2019) - outselling Jack Daniel's 13.4 M cases. However, 4 Indian whisky brands all sell more whisky - with McDowell's No. 1 Whisky selling 30.7 M cases. As the second largest country by population, India is a huge market - with of 1.39 billion people as of 2021. Shell Chuck Cowdery corrected my statement about Indian whisky brands. He pointed out: "McDowell's and the other leading Indian 'whiskies' earn those quotation marks because they're not actually whisky by international definition, because they are not made from grain. They are made from sugar cane so, technically, they're rum." Thank very much to Chuck for this clarification. The European Union follows a strict definition of whisky (since 1989), requiring distillation from cereal grains. According to the Scotch Whisky Association, India has no mandatory definition of whisky, does not require whisky to be distilled from cereal grains or to be matured, and allows for the use of molasses, neutral alcohol, and flavorings. (From the Indian perspective, Indian distillers accuse the EU of protectionist trade barriers with its rules against marketing molasses-based spirits as whisky. While they refer to their whisky products as 'blended malts', this would not meet the Scotch industry definition of blended malts. Scotch Whisky Regulations define blended malts as a blend of batches of single malt scotch from more than one distillery, must contain only whisky made from barley, and can't contain spirits distilled by continuous distillation. ) Shell 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shell Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 Added note about Indian whisky: Since 2014, we've seen very highly regarded single malts coming out of India - from 100% barley, grown and distilled in India. Amrut was the first and received high acclaim in 2010. These meet the Scotch industry definition of single malt, but are not called Scotch since not distilled in Scotland. These are not the molasses/sugar cane-based whiskies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shell Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 To get back on topic of Early Times Bottled-in-Bond Straight Bourbon availability: There's some good news. I reached out to the President of Sazerac about Early Times Bottled-in-Bond Straight Bourbon availability. He said that Sazerac is definitely continuing Early Times BIB. An order for MI left the distillery and will land at the distributor this week, with the bourbon expected on retailers shelves in the next week or the following (depending on order cycles from the wholesalers). Shell 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishnbowljoe Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 6 hours ago, Shell said: To get back on topic of Early Times Bottled-in-Bond Straight Bourbon availability: There's some good news. I reached out to the President of Sazerac about Early Times Bottled-in-Bond Straight Bourbon availability. He said that Sazerac is definitely continuing Early Times BIB. An order for MI left the distillery and will land at the distributor this week, with the bourbon expected on retailers shelves in the next week or the following (depending on order cycles from the wholesalers). Shell And how is Mr. Brown? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shell Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 On 2/3/2021 at 9:18 PM, fishnbowljoe said: And how is Mr. Brown? Mark Brown, Sazerac's CEO, indicated that the 1792 Distillery will be the new home to distill Early Times BIB. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulO Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 I'm ready to do the side by side, B-F vs. Barton version. Very Old Barton 100 is definitely in my wheel house - probably one of my favorite budget pours. I'm cautiously optimistic. Of course, the new bottle could come with a cork stopper. Then it's "allocated" and goes into the manager's office after the partial case arrives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad-proof Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, Shell said: Mark Brown, Sazerac's CEO, indicated that the 1792 Distillery will be the new home to distill Early Times BIB. How likely would it be for them to keep the mashbill and yeast specific to the B-F recipe? Or will it be more than likely a repackaged VOB BIB? Edited February 9, 2021 by dad-proof sic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishnbowljoe Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 5 hours ago, Shell said: Mark Brown, Sazerac's CEO, indicated that the 1792 Distillery will be the new home to distill Early Times BIB. Appreciate it Shell. "Thank you sir, may I have another?" Biba! Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz June Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 To add to this thread and in the name of science, I did a tasting that I will call "Early Times: past, present, and future." I poured each of the following into one of five Glencairns: A. 1979 bottle date Early Times KSBW mini, NAS/80 proof, presumably distilled and bottled at DSP-KY-414 (Brown-Forman) B. 1994 bottle date Tom Moore BiB, NAS/100 proof, distilled and bottled at DSP-KY-12 (Tom Moore - now Barton 1792) C. 2017 purchase Very Old Barton BiB, NAS/100 proof, distilled and bottled at DSP-KY-12 (Barton 1792) D. 2017 1st release 1792 BiB, NAS/100 proof, distilled and bottled at DSP-KY-12 (Barton 1792) E. modern Early Times BiB liter, NAS/100 proof, distilled at DSP-KY-354 (Early Times) and bottled at DSP-KY-414 (Brown-Forman) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz June Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 As for the results, I correctly identified the Tom Moore BiB and modern Early Times BiB. The Tom Moore BiB had the medicinal wood nose I associate with dusty bourbons and was a solid if unspectacular pour. Modern Early Times BiB has a solid flavor profile and is great for a $25/liter bottle you can sip or mix in a cocktail. Unsurprisingly, it lacks great complexity, but hey so do many bourbons on some of the higher shelves. The 1792 BiB fell flat for me. I actually thought it was the 80 proof Early Times because it was so flat. Light body, not much finish to speak of, a disappointment. I picked up some dusty notes on the nose, but that's probably my imagination and what you get when it isn't truly a blind tasting. This was my first taste of it, hopefully it improves as the bottle gets some air. The VOB BiB I thought was the 1792 because it is a much better pour. It had a fair bit of rye spice on the nose, mouth feel was medium, nice dose of spice came through with some caramel sweetness as well, not a ton of depth or complexity, had a medium length finish similar in flavor to the mouth feel. The liquid didn't quite deliver on the strength of the nose, but this was a nice interplay between spice and sweet with a reasonable finish. Punches well above its price point and I hope the non-bonded 100 proof version continues with the quality of this expression. I thought the dusty Early Times was actually the VOB BiB because I liked it and thought it reached a solid/good value BiB level. Despite much past enjoyment, I under-estimated the Very Old Barton. I think Early Times BiB becoming a nationally distributed version of the VOB BiB with a similar QPR would be a good result. The profile I associate with the 1792 brand/mash bill is probably closer to the Brown-Forman Early Times BiB, so that may be the more likely direction for Sazerac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulO Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 Going back to the days of 8 year age stated 1792 and 6 year bonded VOB - I always preferred the VOB by a wide margin. I've tried several different versions of each over the years. The 1792 has a dry tannic note that interferes with my total enjoyment. The VOB is more sweet and round classic Bourbon. I've wondered if those two are even the same mash bill. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Loblaw Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 I saw more of this on the shelf. Still with the Early Times and BF DSPs. I believe the Early Times DSP was included in the sale, but obviously the BF one was not. What are the rules about BT continuing to release with the BF DSP? Are they allowed to do so until existing stocks run out as presumably these were all bottled prior to the sale? If BT elects to keep the product exactly as it is now would all they have to change is the bottling DSP from BF to 113? Again, if they included the ET DSP with the sale I would think they can still use that if distilling there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz June Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 2 hours ago, Bob_Loblaw said: I saw more of this on the shelf. Still with the Early Times and BF DSPs. I believe the Early Times DSP was included in the sale, but obviously the BF one was not. What are the rules about BT continuing to release with the BF DSP? Are they allowed to do so until existing stocks run out as presumably these were all bottled prior to the sale? If BT elects to keep the product exactly as it is now would all they have to change is the bottling DSP from BF to 113? Again, if they included the ET DSP with the sale I would think they can still use that if distilling there. A BiB product needs to identify where it was distilled and where it was bottled. So Sazerac would identify the acquired stock as distilled at DSP-KY-354 (Early Times), but would need to identify where it was bottled too (I assume it would be DSP-KY-12 meaning Barton). They bought aging stocks, so they are still in the barrel and Sazerac will have to bottle them. The DSP would not actually move with the product though. Old Forester 1897 would continue to show that it was distilled at DSP-KY-354, for example. A DSP can move, although I'm not sure of the exact rules around that. I have read that it was tied to the still itself, but not sure on that. If one facility is completely closed and a new one opened, then the DSP can move. A bottling hall also can have a DSP number without there being an active still. Brown-Forman didn't sell any physical facilities to Sazerac, so no changes in DSPs here though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz June Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 On a barrel pick at Barton this week, they were distilling Early Times. I was told they are using the same mash bill that B-F used and that they will be retaining both the Kentucky whiskey and BiB products. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulO Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 36 minutes ago, Jazz June said: On a barrel pick at Barton this week, they were distilling Early Times. I was told they are using the same mash bill that B-F used and that they will be retaining both the Kentucky whiskey and BiB products. I didn't imagine they would go to that length. It's good news if they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad-proof Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 7 hours ago, Jazz June said: On a barrel pick at Barton this week, they were distilling Early Times. I was told they are using the same mash bill that B-F used and that they will be retaining both the Kentucky whiskey and BiB products. Same yeast, too, I wonder? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinjoe Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 1 hour ago, dad-proof said: Same yeast, too, I wonder? ^^^^Mashbills,shmashbills...This would be an interesting development...Though, it ain’t happening. Therefore, there surely will be differences in the flavor profile. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz June Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 1 hour ago, dad-proof said: Same yeast, too, I wonder? Didn't ask that, but I would think not. Has anyone heard of yeast being included in a brand sale? Aging stocks and mash bills going with the brand seems fairly common, but I can't recall anyone including the yeast. I guess everyone isn't as generous as Pappy was with Bill Samuels. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulO Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 In the past, I had heard that some distilleries buy a commercial dried distiller's yeast in bulk. Other distilleries have their own proprietary yeast strains that they cultivate and maintain. I can't say which practice is employed at either Brown-Forman or Barton. No doubt some of you all know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwg13013 Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 While I think JD is good, it shows advertising in being number one. I have noticed and wondered why JD is dead center in every liquor store I've been in. I have asked several times, but never got an answer. I have had choices 4 times the price, and I like ET BIB a lot. I think Sazerac is not dumb, and they will try to keep ET, and ET BIB close as can to what they have been. Why find new customers, when you already have old customers. It's not like they are an auto insurance company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinjoe Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 I’ll say, certain Brown-Forman and Barton whiskies do share varying degrees of a banana note across the palate, IMO. Yeast “similarities”? Perhaps. Regardless, if Barton is able to adjust that note appropriately, they could get reasonably close to ET. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flahute Posted July 17, 2021 Share Posted July 17, 2021 1 hour ago, Jazz June said: Didn't ask that, but I would think not. Has anyone heard of yeast being included in a brand sale? Aging stocks and mash bills going with the brand seems fairly common, but I can't recall anyone including the yeast. I guess everyone isn't as generous as Pappy was with Bill Samuels. Jim Beam distills Old Grand Dad and brought over the yeast when they bought the brand. It's the only example of that I know of. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcgumbohead Posted July 19, 2021 Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/17/2021 at 7:57 PM, flahute said: Jim Beam distills Old Grand Dad and brought over the yeast when they bought the brand. It's the only example of that I know of. I like OGD BiB and 114 quite a lot, young Beam? Ah no thank you, yes yeast matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts