Jim Beam Black Age statement

[Jaysus]

He is a pic I snapped at the state store this week (wanted to show the t-shit packaging to a friend)

[craigthom]

Since you mentioned beer, have you noticed the effect the hop shortage is having on small brewery IPAs?

[Jaysus]

Since you mentioned beer, have you noticed the effect the hop shortage is having on small brewery IPAs?

absotivley... and on homebrewing. Hop prices have nearly doubled at my LHBS.

[Sijan]

Very glad to hear that JB Black is not losing the 8 year old age statement here in the US. It has long been a favorite everyday pour of mine.

[felthove]

Damnit! Damnit! Damnit!

It's only a matter of time before the age statement disappears here, too.

I know there's a shortage of extra-aged whiskey, etc., yadda, yadda, whatever and ever amen.

Again I ask, how can Beam not have a single age statement over 9 years and yet have a shortage of 8-yr-old product? The hell with it...I'm going back to beer.

In all seriousness, I am finding myself drawn to beer consumption as I watch prices climb, age statements vanish, proofs diminish, and quality slide.

Sure, there are lots of NAS products that drink quite well: ETL, BT, WT Rye, WT 101, etc. come to mind. Sure, good whiskey is good whiskey, no matter how old it is or what the proof is. Sure, the only reason for all of this is lack of aged whiskey to meet demand.:skep: (I'm skeptical as I don't expect the age statement will suddenly reappear on any of these products when the "shortage" is over - the shortage will end, given ramped up production and warehouse space at the top 3 American whiskey producers, right???).

Sometimes I think bunkering is silly, that I don't really need all of this whiskey sititng around, that I'll be able to pick up a bottle of OGD 114 whenever this one's empty. Then I watch as the rest of the English-speaking world loses age-stated Beam black and wonder how much time I have to stockpile a few bottles.

I'm tired of excuses, including those we make here, for the American whiskey industry's failure to continue satisfying the demand for traditional products: BIB, age-stated, and otherwise; even as they scramble to generate "new" products that they can charge exorbitant prices for. What's the saying? You don't make money by selling more cars. You make it by selling more car. Witness Parker's Heritage, Stagg, etc. Roger has lamented the fact that some truly superb individual barrels are sacrificed to maintain profiles for EW Black, Old Taylor, and other cats and dogs. I understand the sentiment, and to some extent I agree. But I also lament the fact that barrels are held back for premium bottlings at the expense of age statements, proof, or quality in the everyday bourbons that have been the cornerstone of American whiskey.

A scattershot rant, as I look back. Oh, well. I'm in no mood to focus the argument: I just finished my taxes, and I'm a bit tired.

If I could go to the store tomorrow and buy a couple of handles of Beam black, I would. Guess I'll have to wait until Monday.

Great post. One of the reasons I love this place.

[cowdery]

I just learned that Brown-Forman has cut the proof of Woodford Reserve, also just for non-U.S. markets. No change for the USA. The new product is in the pipeline now.

I just talked to Chris Morris about it and he says it was driven primarily by consumer preferences and the fact that, especially where bourbon is not well developed, most other spirits products are 80 proof and even lower.

I suspect Beam and BF are doing it for the same reasons, which would be a combination of the reasons both have stated. The international consumers, especially the mainstream ones (not the crazies like us) tend to prefer a lower proof. Chris said the international standard for premium expressions is 86.4 proof, but even a lot of the prestige single malts are 80.

But, obviously, everybody in the whiskey biz is trying to make the whiskey they have go as far as possible and watering it certain helps.

Chris says that since Woodford bottles by bottle size, when the 70 cl bottles are up, they mix a batch of the lower proof, and make a lot of adjustments to filtering and stuff to keep the taste as close as possible. It's not just a batch of the U.S. expression with a little more water.

[barturtle]

Consumer Preferences? Isn't that the same thing they said when they lowered the proof of Jack Daniel's globally?

[cowdery]

Yep, and there's pretty good evidence that it's true, outside the U.S. Maybe not so much here, although once-upon-a-time most American whiskey was sold at 100 proof and now most of it is 80 and consumer preference was, legitimately, the reason.

In the JD case, the fact that it saved them about $11 million a year in taxes didn't hurt either.

[HighTower]

Chris said the international standard for premium expressions is 86.4 proof

Chuck,

Does this mean WR will be 86.4 proof or will they make it 80 proof?

Good thing I have a stash!

Scott

[barturtle]

It seems like I recall not all that long ago reading about a push for premium scotches to be bottled at 46% or 92 proof...I may be wrong, but it seems right. I recall this was the point where they didn't have to chill filter and all that jazz.

Hell, if they want to sell water, sell water, the markup in that market is enormous, and without the major taxes on beverage alcohol to boot.

[cowdery]

I'm a little uncertain. The new international Woodford is either 88 proof or 86.4 proof, but it's definitely not 80 proof. And the U.S. version is remaining at 90.4 proof.

Another thing I didn't mention above is that many younger consumers, here and around the world, are not so much adopting bourbon or whiskey as they are adding it to a portfolio of spirits they regularly drink, including vodka, gin, rum, tequila, liqueurs, etc. With spirits in general you're even more likely to find things at 80 proof and no higher, and outside the U.S. where the rules are different many major spirits brands--Capt. Morgan and Southern Comfort are two examples--are sold at 70 proof.

We, my brothers, are not the mainstream, I'm afraid.

[SBOmarc]

We, my brothers, are not the mainstream, I'm afraid.

[jburlowski]

I'm more than a little skeptical...

Just how are these "consumer preferences" expressed? Have sales of 90.4 proof WR suddenly dropped dramatically? Is there a nascent, quasi-temperence movement out there agitating for lower-proof spirits?

I don't think so... I would guess that the folks that want / buy lower proof spirits are doing so based on price and that they are mixing / diluting them to whatever proof they want.

Why doesn't WR (and the other brands) just say so so.... that they are trying to maximize profits and be on with it (nothing wrong with that).

But, please, please, don't say that the consumers "made me do it".

[TNbourbon]

I'm more than a little skeptical...just say...that they are trying to maximize profits and be on with it (nothing wrong with that).

But, please, please, don't say that the consumers "made me do it".

Or, say that the "consumers 'allowed' us to do it'"! But, your point is made, and probably correct.