Direction of the industry

[kbuzbee]

I'm interested to see if people feel there will be better and better offerings.... or, whether the best bourbons and ryes have been 'hanging about' in warehouses for some time (Mitchner, some(?) of the Van Winkle ryes...) and when they are gone things will go downhill?

It's not just product, of course, but people. Booker Noe passed away last year, Jimmy Russell is passing the reigns as we speak, etc. Are there new young 'Turks' taking the industry to new heights or, once these giants are gone, they are just irreplaceable?? (it's tough to phrase that without offending just everyone but please take it in the spirit intended ;-)

What I'm interested in here are people's perceptions on the Bourbon industry over the next 10-20 years. What can we expect???

My perception (as someone who knows NOTHING about the industry) is we are seeing some wonderful new offerings. I hope that trend continues (or accelerates?).

Cheers,

Ken

[gr8erdane]

Well Ken, probably the same thing was said about 50 years ago before Booker, Jimmy, Elmer, and the other guys we all revere starting pumping out the bourbon. Sure some labels are shadows of their former selves, but look at the great bourbons that have just appeared in the last 10-15 years. Buffalo Trace gets lauded a lot for their new bottlings, BT, Stagg, ER17 etc (not to mention all the experiments that Ken keeps alluding to). Look at what HH is about to do in launching the Bernheim wheat whiskey. I'm excited about the resurgence in bourbon being seen all over the world. I also am finding that I spend more time these days reminiscing about the "good old days" just like my dad and his dad before used to. Someday these will be the good old days our kids remember fondly. "Remember when you actually had to type into a computer....".

To sum it all up, I raise my glass to the Grand Masters we all adore tonight, but also to those who they have been grooming to take over. Our future is in their hands. Let's just hope they remember the lessons they learned and keep those darned marketing people from making too many changes. (Not that I dislike marketing people, they put their pants on just like we do, one tenticle and a time)

[ratcheer]

And I believe I recently heard that Elmer T. Lee has retired or semi-retired at Buffalo Trace.

Tim

[TNbourbon]

And I believe I recently heard that Elmer T. Lee has retired or semi-retired at Buffalo Trace.

Tim

[Isoflex]

I worry that the bourbon industry will become more and more corporate and not as much family oriented. However, I find that the industry as a whole is VERY concerned with consumer satisfaction and consistently turns out a quality product from top to bottom (try some Rebel Yell or Fighting Cock to see what I mean).

Again though, the recent reductions in the proof of many bottlings is an area of concern (more water equaling more profits in the eyes of the bean counter).

2 cents from a person who barely has 2 nickles to rub together.

[BourbonJoe]

I worry that the bourbon industry will become more and more corporate and not as much family oriented.

[ratcheer]

Well, there you go.

Tim

[ratcheer]

The way I see it, there is one thing we can do. Support the products (by buying them) of the remaining American family-owned distilleries. As far as I know, that means Heaven Hill and Buffalo Trace. Are there any others?

But, even that has a flip side. If those remaining American owned companies become more and more successful, it will make them takeover targets for the multi-national corporations. As we all know, a $400 million target can do little to resist a $50 billion force (or, whatever the numbers may actually be).

Tim

[kbuzbee]

I agree, For years (too many to count) I've enjoyed Bourbon. Though I live in Ohio I was born in Kentucky. My parents both drank Bourbon (Kentucky Tavern to be precise, Dad with water, Mom with 7up both on ice). I had my first tast around 6 (dip a finger kind of thing ;-). Dad thought I'd hate it... I never told him.... it was pretty good! But until very recently, I'd never paid much attention to the distilleries. Bourbon came from Kentucky, period. It was American.

Then I started reading about these megalith companies who own every brand in every country (play Star Wars music with loud Darth Vader breathing!). I found that more than a little depressing.... Having worked for large multinational corporations (including IBM) I have seen how even seemingly innocent cost cutting measures have destroyed entire brands, gutted departments etc. I do applaud those distilleries who remain independant. I wish I could support them more but we don't see much of their product here..... We do have some EC and EW offerings but only like one of each.

That was certainly 'part' of my thought asking the question.... Is this a real issue or just me being paranoid??? Large companies are run by lawyers and accountants, not craftsmen. I know there are lots of folks out there (both consumers, like me and distillers) who have been watching this process and I wanted to hear what people have been seeing.

Maybe we'll see a strong resurgence of the small independant distiller (although I still won't be able to buy any in Ohio ;-( similar to the coffee industry. Not long ago almost all coffee was from the megas like Maxwell House. Then small upstarts like Startbucks came along and showed savy consumers they could have a better cup (ok, at like 20X the price, but still). Now Starbucks is a mega-multinational and you see the next generation of small upstarts (we have one here in Ohio www.daybreakcc.com) producing incredibly high end coffee that puts Starbucks to shame.

I know it takes a lot more capital to start a distillery than a coffee roastery but the scenarios seem very similar, to me...... Could happen....

Enough paranoid ranting,

Cheers,

Ken

[musher]

But, even that has a flip side. If those remaining American owned companies become more and more successful, it will make them takeover targets for the multi-national corporations. As we all know, a $400 million target can do little to resist a $50 billion force (or, whatever the numbers may actually be).

Tim

They can only be taken over if they're publicly traded. That would eliminate, I believe, Heaven Hill and Sazerac (owner of Buffalo Trace). Other than convincing the current owners to sell (perhaps by making them an offer they can refuse), I can only imagine that they would have to resort to illegal business tactics to force them to sell.

[kbuzbee]

My wife and I discuss this kind of thing all the time. The problem is you lack the historical perspective and, frankly, there is no very reliable way to gain that perspective. You can get glimpses but I would be stunned if someone could get an accurate idea of what people think today based on, say, reading today's press 70 years from now.... Even talking to people who were alive in that period, their memories are colored by the 70 years they've live since then........

For example, we hate the way the courts are creating laws from the bench today. We view it as not what the founding fathers were trying to accomplish with the initial 3 headed government. 100 years ago, did people worry about the same thing??? (or something else that has now happened and we just accept as 'the way it is'???) Makes you wonder.....

Your point is excellent. Only 30 years from now will we be able to look back and say, 'Wow, 2005 was the golden age of Bourbon' or 'Can you remember that horrid stuff we used to drink in 2005??? Man this stuff is so much better!'.

In the end, you always do the best you can with what you have.....

Thank goodness we're not living during Prohibition!

Cheers,

Ken

[kbuzbee]

I think it's very easy for a much larger company to offer twice what a company is worth, if they want the brand OR if they just want them off the playing field. More insidious, they produce a whisky that is 90% as good for 1/2 the price until the small independant can't stay afloat (not that anything like that would ever happen in business, just saying..... ;-). Neither of these things is remotely illegal. Sure, you'll have your dedicated fan base but in the end, the whole thing seems very much like the Shop Around the Corner in You've got Mail.

Cheers?

Ken

[TMH]

You have cause to worry, what with the Japanese, French and god knows who else running the show at most distilleries.

I'm sure the Bourbon pioneers would be rolling over in their graves if they knew that foreign interests were calling the shots. Very sad. Let's hope it does not become sadder.

[angelshare]

I'm not sure which Japanese company owns an American distiller and would be surprised if its quality went down, given the fact that Japanese are more interested in quality than most Americans.

[/rant]

[mbanu]

It's hard to say. The bourbon industry is sort of being pulled in a bunch of directions, I think.

Light liquor being easier to mix with (increasing sales) and cheaper to produce (lowering expenses) encourages distilleries to consider raising their distillation proofs, following the rum model of success.

Heavier liquors being more distinctive and expensive to produce means that they can command higher prices and work better as luxury items. This encourages distilleries to consider lowering their distillation proofs, following the scotch model of success.

Bourbon seems to be a bit stuck, though.

Although it's had some success in foreign markets, among Americans bourbon seems to struggle with image problems compared to scotch and cognac. And since quite a number of scotch and cognac drinkers are buying the drinks just for the image (unfortunately), a quality spirit with a disrespectable image will have trouble in that market, regardless of quality. (While an inferior spirit with a respectable image will get along just fine on flimflam and bullshit, like those luxury gin and vodka makers , but that's for a different rant.)

On the other hand, though, there are a couple things which I think make bourbon distillers reluctant to go chasing after rum and vodka by upping their distillation proofs and turning into light whiskey.

For one, they tried that already, and for whatever reason, it didn't work.

For another, it seems like lighter whiskeys sort of run against the sort of thing the bourbon industry has been working towards the past hundred years. Why go through all that hassle to keep blended whiskey and tennessee whiskey seperate from genuine bourbon if you're going to change the way you make your bourbon to copy them?

From the recent bottlings and the amount of money being spent on giving bourbon's image a face-lift, it looks like they're making a grab at the scotch market. How bourbon will change from now more or less depends on how successful they are, and in which ways. If it's a success, then hopefully distillation proofs and barrel proofs will go down, and the standard minimum ages and bottling proofs will go up.

However, if it's successful, that also possibly means that bourbon as a whole will get more expensive. It'd be a terrible shame if in its rise to success the price of bourbon shot up so much I could no longer afford to drink it.

[CrispyCritter]

Not that I dislike marketing people, they put their pants on just like we do, one tenticle and a time

[CrispyCritter]

From the recent bottlings and the amount of money being spent on giving bourbon's image a face-lift, it looks like they're making a grab at the scotch market.

[boone]

The way I see it...

Bourbon seems to be a bit stuck, though.

[TNbourbon]

...It's amazing, what we bottle...Vodka, Gin, Rum, Brandy, Tequila, Cognac, Schnapps, Copa, Wine, Liquors in a incredible amount of flavors...

[kbuzbee]

However, if it's successful, that also possibly means that bourbon as a whole will get more expensive. It'd be a terrible shame if in its rise to success the price of bourbon shot up so much I could no longer afford to drink it.

[kbuzbee]

This Bourbon Industry is strong...Reason being, We have a good product and we have "the force" behind it to keep it strong I am proud to be part of it and most proud that my family of distiller's played a major role is this "Great Bourbon Industry"

[BourbonJoe]

I agree it's sad that something as special Bourbon could be owned by non-US companies, but I'm not sure blaming the Japanese and French is correct.

[TMH]

I agree it's sad that something as special Bourbon could be owned by non-US companies, but I'm not sure blaming the Japanese and French is correct.

[Marvin]

Been a while since I've been on-working a lot of hours-but I couldn't agree with you more!! With Max at the helm and people like yourself, the industry can't do anything but move forward.

Cheers,

Marvin

[Ken Weber]

This has been a very interesting thread! I for one do not believe we have yet experienced the "Golden Age" of bourbon. Speaking with Elmer, there were several terrible bourbon brands in wide distribution decades ago. We made perhaps the largestselling bourbon at one time (during WW II), Three Feathers. Elmer said it was so bad that after the war when other bourbons became available, it dropped out of sight overnight. Likewise, there were brands we made like Cream of Kentucky that we excellent bourbons, but just faded from the market. I believe the first release of Eagle Rare 17 was actually Cream of Kentucky.

Much of the taste of early bourbon brands was a credit to the Master Distillers' experience, as well as the warehouse managers' knowledge of cherry aging locations. As science played a small role, these men were artist who pursued their craft with the passion to produce the very best. As we learn more about what makes a better whiskey, we are able to blend that artistry with technical knowledge to POTENTIALLY create a better bourbon.

Enter the huge business concerns were the primary focus is on maximizing the wealth of the shareholders. You see fine whiskies that have been aged less and less time, proof being decreased, used cooperage being used, etc. Each of these improves the bottom line in the short term, but may destroy the brand in the long run. Still, every brand has a life cycle. Jack Daniel's is currently selling 8,000,000 cases, yet it will someday go away. Just as a point of reference, if there had been a Forbes 500 list (major businesses) in 1900, only 5 of those companies on the list even exist today! So, a common thought is to milk the brand for all it is worth today, then reinvent it tomorrow with a new name, heavy advertising campaign, and some new unique selling point.

That being said, I believe that some companies are more interested in the bottom line than pursuing their passion to produce the finest whiskey they can. If I were accountable to a number of stockholders, why would I jeopardize my career by investing hundreds of thousands of dollars in an experiment that, even if it works, will take at least 10 years to make it to market, long after I have been fired because there was no immediate return of their investment?

Enough of the doom and gloom! I applaud the work being done by some of our bourbon brethern (and sisters!). Four Roses Single Barrel is a very nice expression, as is the concept for HH new wheat whiskey. While I have not yet tasted the wheated whiskey, my hat is off to the folks at HH for having the courage to give it a shot! I am chagrined that we did not think of it first!! As long as we have the people who can blend art and science together, without concern for short term profit, I am confident we will be making better whiskey well into the future. We are working with Julian to produce better tasting wheated whiskies; my big regret is that Pappy is no longer around so that we could work with him.

Boy have I rambled! Sorry about that. Bottom line, brands will continue to decrease in quality as companies strive to meet quarterly budget goals, while innovative companies will continue to produce high quality bourbons/whiskies with new brands coming on line. I think the future will bring several fantastic products that will exceed the quality of what we have today!

Ken