Consolidated Statements

[cowdery]

For some reason, attachments are not allowed in the Bourbon of the Month thread.

We were discussing there the annual Bourbon Whiskey by Various Periods of Production Remaining in Kentucky Warehouses statements. The one for 2004, the most recent one I have, is attached.

By the way, although it says "bourbon," my assumption is that it includes all aging whiskey, i.e., rye, wheat and Kentucky Whisky as well. The state seems unlikely to be only taxing bourbon.

Enjoy.

Consolidation 2004.PDF

[Rughi]

I notice that while Heaven Hill had only about 1/2 as much total stock as Beam, they had the most barrels for every category older than 4 years. That's a pretty big pipeline of well aged product.

I especially note that they have 1/2 of the world's supply of Kentucky whiskies in the 8+ years category.

Way to go HH!

Roger

[TNbourbon]

And, Roger, note that in 1997 -- months after losing its distillery -- Heaven Hill still outstripped everyone except Wild Turkey in barrels warehoused. Max took it to the 'max', and guessed right, even in vicissitude.

[Sijan]

very interesting - thanks much for posting!

too bad it doesn't continue to break things down past 8 yrs old...

[OscarV]

For some reason, attachments are not allowed in the Bourbon of the Month thread.

We were discussing there the annual Bourbon Whiskey by Various Periods of Production Remaining in Kentucky Warehouses statements. The one for 2004, the most recent one I have, is attached.

By the way, although it says "bourbon," my assumption is that it includes all aging whiskey, i.e., rye, wheat and Kentucky Whisky as well. The state seems unlikely to be only taxing bourbon.

Enjoy.

I came across this thread via another.

This statement is interesting, I would also like to see a current one.

I have several questions after looking this over.

What did Maker's Mark do with the 279 barrels of 8+ year old whiskey?

Who is Stone Castle Properties?

Four Roses, are you holdin' out on us, where's that 14574 barrels of 8+ year old stuff?

And will Heaven Hill sell the "not up to snuff" of the 121456 8+ year old barrells to KBD?

Consolidation%202004[1].pdf

[barturtle]

I'm gonna guess Stone Castle to be Kentucky Bourbon Distillers.

[ThomasH]

I think stone castle properties is/was the company that was owned by the Withrows who previously bought the Old Taylor distillery from Jim Beam.

Thomas

[cowdery]

Stone Castle is the outfit that owned the Old Taylor facility. I know the warehouses there were in use at that time, but was unaware that the Withrows ever owned any whiskey. These statements can be a little weird and I have been frustrated in my efforts both to explain them and obtain a reliable source. All of the distilleries have them and that's where I usually get copies.

The information on which they are based comes from the Kentucky Revenue Department, but they don't prepare the consolidated statements. For many years Liberty National Bank, in Louisville, prepared them. I'm not sure who does it now but I think it's the Kentucky Distillers Association.

KBD always tells us they age whiskey they own in their warehouses, yet I've never seen them on this statement. I can't explain that either.

[OscarV]

KBD always tells us they age whiskey they own in their warehouses, yet I've never seen them on this statement. I can't explain that either.

yeah, I know what you mean,....

hit the link below.

I will agree that I can be impressionable, but don't you get the impression that not only do they age, but they also distill, ever since 1935.

www.kentuckybourbonwhiskey.com

[nor02lei]

but they also distill, ever since 1935.

www.kentuckybourbonwhiskey.com

Oscar,

They soon will!

Leif

[cowdery]

Oscar,

They soon will!

Leif

Just to put this in perspective, they've been saying that for 15 years.

[nor02lei]

Just to put this in perspective, they've been saying that for 15 years.

That may be the case Chuck but common sence tells me that this new building and equipment cant stand unused for much longer business wise. Drew told me they were waiting for some spare part that was needed to get started.

Leif

[koji]

About Stone Castle,

From the date on that sheet 2004? was it, I think the number of barrel

from that year is all Wild Turkey stock.

I have a picture of inside the wharehouse that year.

Koji

[cowdery]

Koji,

The thing is, most of the distilleries have off-site warehousing, including down there along Glenns Creek, and their barrels are in their totals. In other words, it's who owns what, not where it is. On the other hand, since this is a consolidation prepared by someone (KDA?) from public record tax documents, perhaps it was just a mistake. In other words, the source document identified both the owner (Wild Turkey) and the location (Stone Castle) and the compiler goofed.

Because I think you're probably right, it probably is some Wild Turkey that was stored there rather than some whiskey owned by Stone Castle.

[cowdery]

Leif,

I sincerely hope you're right. It would be a wonderful thing.

[bourbonv]

Chuck,

Withrow owned some whiskey and bottled it as "Stonecastle" bourbon for the Japanese market. This was just before he died. I do not know what happened to his staocks of whiskey after he died, but I suspect some other independent bottler acquired it for their brand.

Mike Veach

[cowdery]

Interesting. Thanks, Mike. Seven-hundred-eighteen barrels is a lot of whiskey, a significant investment. I wonder what it was?

[bourbonv]

Chuck,

I remember tasting it and thinking "Wild Turkey" which would make sense because Wild Turkey was leasing space in the warehouses, but I could be wrong. I was drinking with John Lipman and we had several others before the Stonecastle. My taste buds were not exactly at peak performance at that point.

Mike Veach

[fussychicken]

I notice that while Heaven Hill had only about 1/2 as much total stock as Beam, they had the most barrels for every category older than 4 years. That's a pretty big pipeline of well aged product.

I especially note that they have 1/2 of the world's supply of Kentucky whiskies in the 8+ years category.

Way to go HH!

What in the world are they going to do with all that old whiskey? Here is what I can think of right now they are using it for: (Let me know if I am missing any)

EWSB (10 yr)

Henry McKenna SB (10 yr)

EC 12 yr

EC 18yr

EW 12 yr (Japan)

EW 15 yr (Japan)

Rittenhouse Rye 21 yr

Is that really enough of a product line to justify 121456 barrels? If not, maybe that means we can expect some new and interesting premium whiskeys over the next 10 years!! :yum:

[jburlowski]

What in the world are they going to do with all that old whiskey? Here is what I can think of right now they are using it for: (Let me know if I am missing any)

EWSB (10 yr)

Henry McKenna SB (10 yr)

EC 12 yr

EC 18yr

EW 12 yr (Japan)

EW 15 yr (Japan)

Rittenhouse Rye 21 yr

Is that really enough of a product line to justify 121456 barrels? If not, maybe that means we can expect some new and interesting premium whiskeys over the next 10 years!! :yum:

Don't forget the portion that they will sell in bulk to KBD and others....

[fussychicken]

I was looking at this consolidation sheet again yesterday, and just can't wrap my head around the chart at the bottom. Why is the bottom right part of the chart missing?

Is it saying, for example, that from the whiskey produced in 1996 only 107,739 barrels made it to 8+ years? Even after my morning coffee, I still can't figure it out. If the bottom right part of the chart wasn't blank it would make sense to me, but I can't figure out why it is.

BTW, does anyone have any newer (or even older) statements they would be willing to post? Thanks!

[barturtle]

I was looking at this consolidation sheet again yesterday, and just can't wrap my head around the chart at the bottom. Why is the bottom right part of the chart missing?

Is it saying, for example, that from the whiskey produced in 1996 only 107,739 barrels made it to 8+ years? Even after my morning coffee, I still can't figure it out. If the bottom right part of the chart wasn't blank it would make sense to me, but I can't figure out why it is.

BTW, does anyone have any newer (or even older) statements they would be willing to post? Thanks!

What it's saying is that in 2004 all whiskey from 1996 is over 8yo.

What I find interesting is the percentages of total industry wide stock, who comes in third after Beam and Heaven Hill? Four Roses...yes Four Roses

[fussychicken]

What it's saying is that in 2004 all whiskey from 1996 is over 8yo.

But if you add up all the 8+ whiskey from the 8 years on the bottom chart, it is way more than the amount of 8+ whiskey listed on the main chart.

My guess is that they want you to know that in 1996 there was 107,739 barrels of 8+ whiskey and that although some of it may be in the 2004 stock, most of it probably isn't. In other words, it seems like the 8+ column on the chart on the bottom is the same thing as the line in the main chart that says "Total each year as of December 31, 2004"

But this doesn't seem to explain the 1-7 year portion of the bottom chart.

When I look at the 1-7 year portion on the bottom chart, it makes sense to me if I look at it like this: Take for example the 1997 totals under 7 years. It lists 516795. To me that is probably what was distilled in 1997. And then as you go up the 7 year column, generally you see that number reduce. In other words, out of the 516795 barrels that were filled in 1997, the number of barrels remaining is being reduced as you go up. This also makes sense when you consider that you need 4 years to call yourself KSBW, and you can rightfully see a huge drop at the 4 year point.

The problem with looking at it like this, is that in some cases, the numbers go slightly UP in some years! I'm not sure how to explain this except for possible mis-calculations from earlier, or maybe possible bulk purchases or transfers from other states.

[barturtle]

I would guess something like transfers from other states as well to explain the increase in stocks.

150,000 more 6yo barrels in 2000 than there were 5yo barrels in 1999

70,000 more 6yo barrels in 2001 than there were 5yo barrels in 2000.

The timing of these interests me, this is the same period as Dickel being shut down, could barrels have been brought into UDVs S-W facility for aging before being shipped off to wherever they are having things bottled these days?

Also of interest is B-F, with it's wildly varying numbers of barrels from any one year, could they send stuff down to age in TN at in it's JD warehouses? and bring back up for final aging? Before you say you can't , remember Early Times ain't a straight, and I'm not sure how long JD needs to age in TN to be considered TN whiskey, but heck 5 years sounds good to me if they may have been running short on space.

We would need these sheets from those two years, as well as sheets from TN and AR and IN and wherever else these companies bottle and age whiskey, to be able to draw any further conclusions.

[barturtle]

A thought about the 400 barrel "batch" of Ambassador bottles from Makers made me look up this thread...

It used to be written that Makers produced 38-40 barrels a day before expansion (38 Book of Bourbon, Regan 1996; 40 The Philosophy of Maker's Mark)

The first expansion occurred in 2000, however looking at the numbers here, in 1999 MM produced 26,501 barrels (and some of those may have already been dumped for sale) this is 72 barrels a day even if they were working 365 days a year...they had doubled production by 2003 at 56,307 and in 2004 produced 179 barrels a day (working 365).

So if this is truly double production (they built an entire separate distillery beside the original), does this mean that this 38 number is really a bunch of bullshit and they were actually capable of producing 90 barrels a day?

And I believe now they have a third distillery in there too, so add in another 50% and you have 270 barrels a day...

Anyway, what brought all of this up was thinking about the 400 barrel batch, as I said. So if they aren't really set up to do batches of this size, then this batch would actually be multiple batches, but all with the same label and no identifying marks...so how the hell do I know that my bottles actually contain any of the whiskey that had been aged in the barrel with my name on it?