Tag: Macallan

The Times They Are A Changing

Things haven’t stayed the same.

Nothing ever stays the same. That is, unless you are dead. You’ll be dead forever, and that’s a fairly long time, but until you are dead, very little will fail to change over the passage of time. Perhaps the things that seem not to change are actually changing so slowly that we fail to notice; continental drift and the speed that my wife thinks that I plan and carry out DIY are great examples. One recent task that I’ve just completed took close to 8 years of gentle spousal reminding. Mind you I think the prompting me to start the task every six months was a tad excessive.

A graveyard. People have been in it for less time than some of my DIY projects. Or since I last wrote a blog.

The passage of time is a tricky one to gauge. It didn’t seem so long ago in the 1980’s that as a young air cadet that I was humming the U2 song “With or Without You” to myself, whilst admiring the view in a glider close to sunset above Findhorn Bay. The Joshua Tree album that the song came from was to become one of my favourite albums, but it’s hard to imagine that it was released about 37 years ago. If only things were so pleasant for the whisky industry in the 80’s, for the industry had entered a decennium horriblis that would make the late Queen Elizabeth II not worry so much about the awful year she once had. Nonetheless, despite many mothballings, closures, demolitions and reopenings, the industry did indeed recover and has come back to rude health. Things aren’t the same now though, but this is just my opinion, as is what follows.

Whoever is reading this will have some sort of relationship with whisky – whether it be as a drinker, investor, collector or directly involved in the industry. One thing that ties all these together is the price of whisky, although two of these groups will be paying attention to potential resale values. But in the current ongoing cost of living crisis that seems to be dragging on longer than my DIY projects, all of these groups of people are continuing to feel the pinch. But with less disposable income and the inflation of the whisky bubble slowly losing puff, for those who have collated a collection of bottles now may be a good time to work out what the plans are going to be for the future. For the destiny of these bottles may not be as rosy as it looked when you first started. 

It is never easy to calculate what’s lies ahead, especially if the market is starting to become unpredictable, certainly for the collector or investor. Everybody has expected growth, but I think it’s been presumptuous that it would continue for nothing grows forever. You can’t look into the future using rose tinted glasses and very few collectors have the privileged information an auctioneer has when it comes to selling and buying bottles. One thing that will be sure and certain, there has to be a demand for the bottle that you have bought, otherwise your potential buyers are going to be few and far between.

It was the chance purchase of a Chivas Blend that led to an interesting conversation with an auctioneer that not only confirmed my previous advice given in this blog, but also led me to re-evaluate my spending plans. I had been telling him why I had purchased the Chivas Century of Malts blend, which was little more than a curio. I had enjoyed the sample I had reviewed in the past, though it wasn’t earth shattering. What I liked about it was the bottle and the fact that it may at least hold its value going forward, and wouldn’t be a bad drinker if need be. However, the conversation came down to this:- who is going to buy it?

Nice bottle but what market does it now fit into?

Even though an auction purchase may not be a current bottling, it needs to be considered what fuels somebody to make such a purchase of whisky? There are many things such as an admiration of the brand, maybe it’s the style of whisky you like or just because you think it will generate income, but the auctioneer told me it’s his opinion that it’s marketing for a brand and the chatter it generates that drives demand, often carrying over for the brand’s discontinued bottles, despite them no longer being actively marketed. Ever wondered why Macallan is so popular, despite much of their whisky being no better (and often worse) than others? It’s down to the marketing.

Ever since the Macallan watercolour and line drawing adverts of the 1980’s appeared beside the Times Crossword, this had targeted a specific market – Quite educated, not stand-offish, who enjoyed a little joke,’ as the copywriter that was co-responsible for these adverts, Nick Salaman, described them. Or namely people that were highly aspirational and had (to be a bit more succinct -) money to burn. But at that time, Macallan was still universally seen as a decent whisky, with the standard off the shelf bottles being held in high regard. This to my mind was probably the most distinct way of making a Scotch whisky brand aspirational and exclusive through a targeted advertising plan in recent times. That same advertising has been reprised as the cover art for the Archival series Folios, however this seems to be more a plan to separate people from their money as an investment. Perhaps Macallan are quite happy that they have a no longer need to advertise to people who are quite educated, as that standard has slipped and the disposable income has risen. Like it or not, there is a strong demand for that brand based on its reputation for making good auction prices and perhaps some aspiring to be the sort of people who do the Times crossword.

A hark back to the advertising of the 80’s and also my accidental flipping. Crossword skill not required. Pity the whisky isn’t so good as it was back in the day.

Advertising and premiumisation of brands has been a topic amongst the chattering classes of social media for a while now. Generating a buzz will create demand – Bowmore linking with Aston Martin, Macallan with whoever chooses to prostitute themselves that month, Ardbeg with incessant releases, some brand owners whacking the prices up with no discernible increase in value and Glenmorangie with what seems yet another tale from their whisky storybook. Whatever we enthusiasts think of this constant bombast, the plain and simple fact is that it works. Despite the challenges the industry faces, let’s not be too ignorant of the fact that producers are still shifting shedloads of whisky and making a fortune (for now at least), regardless of a slowdown in sales and signs of a bigger slowdown ahead.

What has this to do with the auction market and where the industry lies now? Getting down to brass tacks, just as investors need to have an exit strategy having been brave enough to invest in a cask, the same considerations should be in place for those who collected or invested in bottles. Now’s the time to think beyond what is worth collecting and look towards who is going to buy them, for even the “safe” premium brands have taken hits in the recent downturn. There’s many bottles failing to make even the original retail price, and in some cases much less once extra fees are considered in getting your bottle to market.

The final character in this piece; those totally ignorant of the current market values. They can be spotted by setting unrealistic reserves on their bottles or overpaying for bottles that really have no business being charged so much for. In the former case, nobody can fail to be surprised when the bottle is left sitting on the shelf without a single bid. Bit like that bottle of Bells at the back of the cabinet nobody wants to drink.

Who will buy it?

With this in mind I’ve started to re-evaluate the situation with my collection. I’m a lot more reticent in describing myself even as a small level whisky collector. More realistically I’m a collector / hobbyist / accidental hoarder. The latter is easy to do when I buy bottles I plan to drink, only for it to take a place in the store. Despite having many bottles that could easily be described as desirable, my attention is moving to the bottles that were borderline collectible in the first place. It’s now more than likely that they’ll be getting drunk now, or given as presents. Thank goodness they were never being relied on in going up in value.

And thus we come to the crunch. I’ll repeat again – who will buy it? With a personal example; I can say that I never succumbed to the hype over Game of Thrones, but I did go down the Flora and Fauna route. Eminently more desirable than GoT bottlings in many cases, with the Blair Athol, Benrinnes and Dailuaine being the standouts from those still in production. The Clynelish 14 was surprisingly decent too, even without the later proprietary bottling at 3% stronger. But what about the other bottles? Some of them are rarer (or should I say less common) in their own right, but will anybody want a complete set? Perhaps for the set with all 17 white caps. But even if a buyer is there, will they pay the price I expect? That may be a longer wait. These were never marketed, and were never premium whisky, but given a few of the bottles now are rare and in higher demand than the others, they should realise a profit, but that’s not a guarantee at all.

The price of whisky has made the days of buying one for drinking, one for keeping and one for selling almost impossible for many. Collecting sets also gets harder.

The concerning fact is that nobody is alone in this situation. I bet even in my social media circles there’s more than a few of you that own more whisky than you can safely drink in your lifetime; unless you it’s required for a week long wake after your funeral to consume it all should that be your ultimate wish. I think everybody with a hoard, be it an intentional collection or an accidental accumulation of bottles, needs to start thinking of what the endgame will be. And this could be a problem for not individuals, but the whole industry. A recent report by the Scotch Whisky Association suggests that exports of whisky from Scotland have dropped 18% in value with a 10% drop in volume. While only India showed a significant increase in value, markets like the US, France and China have dropped. A 18% drop in value may not seem a lot but remove just under a fifth of a birthday cake and you’ll see it is a sizeable amount. But why should that bother us?

Where would I start? Because it should concern us.

Regular followers of the blog, or the Facebook page will know that I’ve been predicting doom and gloom for some time. Of course, anybody can predict something often enough and it is likely to eventually happen to some degree, which doesn’t make them a genius, only good at predicting inevitability. In the past ten to fifteen years, the industry has massively ramped up production. Diageo built Roseisle, Glenfiddich and Glenlivet expanded, other sites reopened, and others ramped up production; Macallan built Tellytubby land, and have since made it as impossible to get to by charging an extortionate amount to get in, see a distillery and then have the chance to buy its overpriced products, lifestyle items or have a bite to eat. At the time of writing, the cheapest entry price on the website was £80. That’s a very expensive tea and scone, which you’ll have to pay extra for. It’s this sort of cavalier pricing schemes that have encouraged other brands to be bolder in price raises, and those who aspire to the brand to pay them. Idiots.

The whisky industry has long cried out about the lack of aged stock as a reason for their going to NAS, using more refill casks, or prices going up. They soon will not be able to use that as an excuse for poor products or rising prices. With a background of falling sales volumes as the global cost of living crisis continues much longer than was anticipated, some have been caught on the hop. Producers clamouring for premiumisation and market position have raised prices. A recent example is The Glendronach raising an old favourite, the 18 year old Allardice to £195, has just made it unaffordable for many. Lets remember it was £75 in 2017, plus was using over aged whisky, along with no chill filtering. Has the cost of the whisky per bottle really gone up 160% in 7 years? No, it hasn’t. This in my opinion is marketing to the gullible by the greedy.

The good old days. When it had Billy Walker’s signature on it and the non-chill filtered statement. Oh and a price tag of £75. It’s all gone horribly wrong after the purchase by Brown-Forman

My opinion is that this tactic will come back to haunt producers using this and similar practices when people refuse to pay the engorged prices. Besides, now that consumers have been spoonfed by the industry that young whisky isn’t bad whisky, many more people see 5-8 year old being perfectly drinkable, and some producers with provenance are releasing this at good prices and good quality. Step forward Loch Lomond distillery and take a bow. This may at least give more volume sales and in theory will enable producers empty their warehouses quicker, but are the profit margins as good? The caveat here could be that some producers might think we’ll accept less and pay more. They’d do well to ignore that feeling as it would be foolish to try and convince the knowledgeable that a young whisky costs as much to produce as an older one. I’d say it’s much easier to make an older whisky seem premium to generate more profits.

The glass loch of bottles in the groaning shelves and cupboards of enthusiasts and collectors is something that will also play its part. Why buy whisky when many of us have some cracking drams in the stash? While I may not be cracking open the 1979 St Magdalene Rare Malts soon, I’ve got plenty more to be getting on with. Yet again, there’s another reason for many more people not to buy new bottles if they are in a similar position. This should worry the industry a bit as people will not need to consume at the same rate they once did.

Nice packaging. £150 on release on 2017, but easily auctions under that, and still available at retail if you know where to look. Might as well drink it.

To focus our thinking a bit more, I’ve an interesting tale to tell. At a table of friends enjoying a post-Aberdeen Whisky Festival curry, an acquaintance told me of an interesting anecdote that should focus the minds of all collectors who view their prized possessions as a potential pay day in the future. He told me of a relative who used to collect old tin train sets, and used to tell his family that it would be theirs and make a pretty penny in the future. He would later stop saying anything, as he had hit a problem – the people who were likely to buy his collection were dying off, and their collections were getting sold. So it has a double whammy; a saturated market with few buyers. Prices then start to sink faster than the Titanic. In whisky terms, lower secondary prices compared to RRP mean there’s a good chance fewer people will be relying on the retail market for their drinking whisky and simply buying from auction, supplied by those who bought high and are forced to sell low.

Always a good bet. This one will be drunk. Plenty will jump on it at auction if I sold it.

So what whisky bottles will sell? Impossible to say though we come back to marketing and hype being an indicator. Macallan, Ardbeg, Glenmorangie, Glenfiddich and Glenlivet spend millions annually for marketing. This keeps those brands in public consciousness. Springbank as well, although not as well known globally, will continue to do well due to the producers inability and refusal to increase production. These items are always going to sell, providing you’ve got a realistic knowledge of what to pay for them and expect to get in the future. Again though, just because they will sell, doesn’t mean to say you’ll make money – you need to have the right bottles, but what may be popular now may not be so sought after in 15 years. Factors will depend on the amount released, cask type etc. for instance I have a collection of the first three bottles that were released from Glenallachie distillery after Billy Walker took over. That could be argued as a selling point, but you need your buyer to know what he is looking at, and at auction you need two of them in competition. It’s more than likely not going to happen.

Another cracking distillery. Another cracking release. Only worth stashing to drink in the future. Do we forget at times it’s meant to be drunk and not all collectors do it to make money?

I’ve reached a point in actively advising people not to invest in whisky, be it bottles or casks unless you know what you are doing and can afford to take a loss. With news of exports being down, a cask investment could be a bad idea, unless you will bottle it yourself. Many overpriced casks will not now reach the values imagined. With availability of casks being increased, perhaps Indy bottlers can afford to pick and choose, but even some independent bottlers are struggling. Could a fall in prices come too little too late?

Independent bottlers give drinkers respite from clumsy distillery pricing and releases, but not always one to build value in the future. All the right words on the bottles and both cost me £55. (Left one inc. postage, right one bought in store)

Similarly, the secondary bottle market may be following a similar trajectory. Picking up a 1980’s bottle of ten year old Glenmorangie for example, won’t make you rich, as there were so many of them produced. Neither will that 1980’s bottle of Bladnoch or Ardmore. That bargain at auction of sub £50 is that for a few reasons – nobody wants it. If it hadn’t made any increase in value over 40 years, it’s not going to, again due to the volume made and the fact that both distilleries are still in production, for now at least. Remembering my anecdote above, the people these releases were probably more relevant to people who are now dying off. Who will pay lots for standard, 40% chill filtered and coloured whisky that’ll be probably be suffering from old bottle effect? (I’ve yet to find an 80’s bottling that doesn’t), especially with a market full to the gunwales of fresh, vibrant whisky?Unless you are buying a niche bottle from the past with healthy demand, you’d have to find somebody who wants to buy it. Not only that, you need someone to pay you lots of money for your bottle. It would be easier to find a drop of unicorn pee in the Atlantic Ocean. That item will need to be something that is genuinely collectible, such as old silent distillery bottlings that were well regarded, especially rare ones, or something in genuine demand, I think we’d almost be better to start drinking what we hold.

I’m probably in the minority, but it is now getting tedious to hear of new distilleries opening or being planned. I have no skin in the game and very little insider knowledge, but I’m sure that if something of the opinions that I have voiced in this piece resonate with you, then you probably feel the same. New releases for me don’t offer anything new to the wider church of whisky. You’ll definitely taste something very similar somewhere else, possibly a lot cheaper as well. Marketing, premiumisation and greed have seen me want to just ignore the multitude of releases. It’s not that I want to become an iconoclast, perhaps I’m, along with many others are just getting fed up of being taken for granted by the wider industry. I’ll keep my interest in the distilleries that I value, but it’s my opinion that the industry is very much on the wane for a period. Hopefully we’ll see some more much needed correction, and I don’t think it will be a short period that it occurs over. While it’s unlikely there will be a similar bust of the 80’s, I’m sure some new distilleries, or those who heavily lean on one market are now worried. 

New distillery, inaugural bottle, 50% abv. Only 5 years old though and mass produced. Perhaps not going to make a fortune for the collector. Will this new distillery struggle in a shrinking market? Hopefully not.

Indeed, it would be a very foolish strategy for brands to rely on price hikes to maintain profits on decreasing volume sales during a period when there’s a lot more whisky waiting and people don’t have as much cash to spend, and a collection to drink. It’s also tedious to hear of overpriced whisky releases with no idea as to how many have been put into the market, with companies hoping the diehard fans will bail them out. As Mark Wahlbergs’ character Mike Williams said to the BP company man in the film Deepwater Horizon “Hope ain’t a tactic”. And we all know how that ended. The industry should perhaps not rely on or abuse the goodwill and loyalty of its customers so much.

We all know how this started through foolish decisions. And we all know how it ended, with effects still being felt in the environment. Is the industry adding to the disaster by pumping more spirit into a smouldering market?

While this is just my personal view, and I’d be happy to be proved wrong, I think the spirits industry isn’t in a healthy shape, and I don’t know how far it will bounce back. I can only comment on how I see impacts of various economic and geopolitical situations that are now adding increased pressure on the bubble created in the whisky industry. Young people are starting to reject alcohol in growing numbers, often due to price and health concerns. You can’t easily hook a young person on an expensive brand if there are cheaper options. That’s where the marketing execs who cultivate a lifestyle image to lure people to perceived status that comes with their product. Increasingly, overseas domestic markets such as China are emerging, with their cheaper and lesser quality stealing volume sales from long developed markets. There’s a myriad of reasons that would make the primary and secondary pricing increases unsustainable for many brands in my opinion, and I’m far from the only one that thinks that way. A recent well written article written by industry insider going by the pseudonym Fletcher Findlay on Dramface (click here to read) explains a bit more in detail about the potential state of the industry. And when you feel you haven’t had enough doom and gloom, well known and not anonymous whisky writer Dave Broom also has some words of wisdom (link to article)

So, have fun while the party is still going. Spend wisely. Don’t assume you can collect and make money. Enjoy what you have – it may send a message that current prices are unsustainable to those who need to hear it.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own apart from

Deepwater Horizon – (public domain / USCG)

Buy Better, Not Harder

Are you getting value or a bargain. Or neither?

There has been a bottle kill in the Scotty’s Drams household. But not the kind of bottle kill you would expect when reading a blog mostly concerned with whisky. This one is probably more important than any spirit as you can take it any time, any place and is vital for a decent fish finger sandwich. Of course, I’m speaking of Tomato ketchup.

Mrs Drams has repeatedly said that she doesn’t like the Heinz Ketchup as it’s tasteless, but she’s used to the more piquant Polish variety from the Eastern European shelves of the supermarket. A discussion ensued in which she said that Heinz was expensive, tasteless and that I should just buy the Tescos own brand sauce which is every bit as good. Being the good husband that I am, I acquiesced to her instructions in ordering a massive bottle of the Tesco brand in our next delivery. Shouldn’t be a problem, I mean how different can they be?

You see that’s where I made my first error. You should never listen to your wife on important decisions such as baked beans and tomato ketchup choices. The Tesco ketchup was ok, but it wasn’t Heinz. It was thinner, it was more vinegary and there wasn’t much more tomato taste if I were to be honest. I’ve counted down the days until the sauce bottle runs out as I’m too tight to bin it and purchase Heinz. Children are starving in Africa therefore I am not going to be responsible for wasting food. That’s the principle that I held onto with my supermarket Glen Keith and tried to with my Jura Journey. Both were very unloved but the GK showed signs of promise after 4 years of oxidation. Unfortunately the Jura became pleasant smelling but ineffective and expensive drain cleaner.

While the Tesco ketchup didn’t really float my boat, it is considerably cheaper than the brand with 57 varieties, but was cheaper better? In this case it wasn’t for me but Mrs Drams probably thought so. Similar happens with other shopping when looking for value and deciding whether to go for supermarket copies or the premium brands. So how do we start deciding what is a good value when we think about whisky? It perhaps could be similar to picking your groceries as there are so many subjectives, which doesn’t make it easy at all. Price is often the foremost and easiest thing thing we as whisky enthusiasts use to help us decide on a purchase. Some of us will have a budget and will need to stick with it, so bargains cannot be ignored. Pricing is a tricky thing to get right, as there is a problematic human trait that often assumes that the quality of something is directly connected to the price. Would Macallan be seen as a premium brand if you could buy a bottle of 18 year old for under £100? After all you can buy a few 18 year old whiskies (Glen Moray, Speyburn, Ledaig, AnCnoc and occasionally even Glenmorangie if on offer) for this or less at the time of writing. Some are a bit pricier, for example Glendronach 18 which can be bought online for £180. Is it much less of an enjoyable prospect than the similarly aged Macallan? The Double Cask 18 retails at around £300 and the Sherry Cask 18 is currently retailing around the £360 mark. I just don’t think our taste buds can actually taste the difference in price? What actual difference in experience are we getting?

I’m going to argue that the difference in value can be down to your perception of the brand. Is picking up a Macallan 18 at auction some 25% below retail cost a bargain, or is it good value? The crux of my thinking is that value is very much different to a bargain, for if you can buy that expensive whisky cheaper, then that would be a bargain, but it’s pointless in achieving such savings if you don’t like the whisky – the value is not there for you. And here is the difference. Value to me is getting something that gives you the satisfaction or performance of something you’d pay a lot more for normally – such as a whisky that cost £35 but tastes every bit as good as a £200 whisky you’ve recently tried. In reality that could be argued you got a bargain as well as good value.

Human nature towards value and bargains can be fickle and this can be shown in a disastrous period in the history of US retailer J.C Penney. The firm wasn’t performing as expected, so they called in Ron Johnson to pick things up and turn the business around. He had an impressive portfolio, having managed Target and being responsible for the design and running of Apple Stores. He had invited to be on the board of JC Penney and became CEO in 2011. One of the first things Ron Johnson did was spark a rebrand, trying to attract a younger crowd, something that he was used to at Apple, which a core of people see as attractive, modern and trendy – something that they wanted to and could easily identify with.

People like to identify with brands that reflect their image and status (or at least how they perceive themselves). But more about these bottles later.

Johnson went a few steps further, such as discontinuing JC Penney’s store brands, replacing them with boutiques with branded merchandise, and ending the constant discounting and reliance of coupons, replacing it with fair and square pricing. Gone were the likes of 3 for 2 offers on clothing, replaced by better quality individual items for slightly higher prices than the bargain prices, but the more expensive items would last as long as the three bargain items combined as an example. What Johnson did was alienate his most loyal customers – lower middle class women, basically mothers, who wanted to snag a deal on homewares and clothing. Nor did he manage to snare the new customers the business needed, with the younger generation still seeing JC Penny’s as the uncool place your granny goes for cheapness. The man who was brought in to build up a business created one of the biggest American retail disasters.

What has this got to do with whisky? You see people resonate with experiences that reflect how they see themselves; it’s known as the self-reference effect. And it means if you don’t think a shop or experience offers an image that is reflective of how you identify yourself as, then you are more likely to avoid it. Human behaviour being what it is shows that people want to radiate success; to associate with being the best, eating the best foods, drinking the best beverages and supporting the most successful sports team (And in Scotland, that is Kingussie Camanachd shinty squad before anybody comes out with 55 titles or whatever it is). People want to feel good and when they make a a purchase of something that is perceived to be good, there is a rush of chemicals in the brain giving them a warm and fuzzy feeling for a while. So it is little wonder we’ve seen Bowmore tie up with Aston Martin and Macallan tie up with whoever wanted to prostitute themselves that week.

Bargains can be had. Value questionable.

And these sorts of things are in my opinion the very acts that are driving the relentless march towards premiumisation. Essentially building a brand and marking a price point which may or may not reflect the production costs, such as Talisker 18 and it’s rise to stratospheric pricing levels. But it’s not fair to level the gunsights solely at Diageo, regardless of how you feel about them. Take a look at Brown Foreman and how much Glendronach has rocketed in price for its core range. Not so long ago, I could pick the 18 year old off the shelf for under £80. That was a bargain and great value when you consider the blending practices in place by Billy Walker that saw you getting a much older average age than the age statement would suggest. That’s superlative value. Similarly, the 21 is now in the region of £240 from a former price of around £120. I’m glad I bought mine back in the day. Mind you, it’s getting harder to source – a contact in the whisky retail industry suggested it’s mostly getting sent to the US, as that’s the market they want to target. And my insider also suggested that the removal of the NCF statement is because it is most likely getting aggressively filtered to prevent Scotch mist when ice is added. Doesn’t matter to me; at that price, I’m out.

Noticing that I had handfilled on a special day got me a little more value on one Glendronach. But only just.

Without continuing to beat producers with a stick over pricing, there are some bottles that can justify a higher price. Is it value? No. Is it a bargain? No. Is it worth it? Subjective. I’m thinking of the likes of Convalmore. Last seen in Diageo’s special releases in 2017 at £1200 RRP, many decried that for a 32 year old whisky. You’ll probably never see it again as a special release as it has now been elevated to the Primo and Ultima range of super premium branding with an even larger price tag. Let us cool our jets before we erupt in self-righteous anger over another whisky taken out of the hands of the common drinker – the distillery closed in 1985, and was used as blending whisky. There was very little Convalmore available otherwise. Now by 2023, nearly 40 years later, there can’t be a lot left. As it’s genuinely a rarity, this will be what drives prices. And for good measure, the 36 year old 1977 Special release in 2013 was £600, so regular drinkers haven’t been imbibing Convalmore for some time, unless they had an independently bottled spirit; even then, try finding one – Convalmore has been blend fodder for years. Pity, as it’s actually a decent dram.

Where brands can cost more – with a twist in the tale!

People get hung up on name and image, and that often clouds judgement as to what is good value. Let me wind this piece down with a couple of examples, including some useful advice. Firstly, we’ll look at the world of bottled water. For when I fancy a drop of water in my whisky, I take bottled. Mainly because it’s not full of chlorine, hasn’t already been through somebody a la London water and it’s easier to store it at room temperature without risking health issues. When thinking of a good brand of water in Scotland, many will fail to see past Highland Spring. And why not? it’s a good spring water, and I’ve never felt any ill effects by consuming it. But go to Tesco in Scotland especially and look at their own brand Perthshire water, especially the label that shows where the source and bottling was. Then compare it to the Highland Spring bottle label. Let me be the one to tell you that there is only one water producer in the village. Armed with that knowledge, would you then prefer to buy the Tesco own brand water, or do you stick with the image affirming Highland Spring? Let’s not forget it’s the same water in a different bottle, and 43% cheaper. It’s clear to see where the value lies in this case, without a doubt.

Bottled in Blackford, Perthshire.
Major hint:- there’s only one spring water company in Blackford, Perthshire. Is it worth an extra 43% for the branding and different packaging?

Moving to whisky and developing the analogy of the spring water, let’s compare two bottles from the same distillery. While the Signatory Macallan is a year younger, it’s birth was facilitated by the same barley, mash tun, washbacks and stills as the 18 year old. It’s even in a 1st Fill sherry butt, similar to the 18 year old. But this is a single cask, not chill filtered like much of the low strength Macallan are, and I’m assuming cask strength. The 18 year old is a batch produced whisky which may have older stock in it, yet is only 43% abv. However there is a minimum £220 difference in price. For very similar DNA whisky, you are getting charged a premium for the name. Is it value? I’d suggest not. At least this has an age statement unlike some of the NAS guff they put out with people thinking it’s worth a fortune.

Similar age, albeit a year between them. One is cask strength

For true value, we need to look beyond the labels. Find your own inner Aberdonian (grumpiness and butteries optional), and not part with your money for fancy packaging and marketing if all you plan to do is drink it. The independently bottled Macallan is by far the better option, as it’s not been chill filtered, it’s a superior alcoholic strength, and when you drink it, although Macallan isn’t on the label, YOU KNOW that you are drinking a whisky that many other feels* think it’s appropriate to spend well over the odds for. I pity all the markets in the Americas and in particular Asia who think whisky like this is premium and get fleeced as they don’t get the same access to often superior independent bottlings.

Many own brand products in supermarkets are made in the same factories as the premium labels – the Highland Spring water being an excellent example. As prices rise and more brands look towards premiumisation, it’s important to look at what that brand offers you before making a purchase. All we really need is delicious whisky at fair prices. I can’t afford to buy an Aston Martin, and I don’t give a toss about the artwork of Peter Blake. It’s just fluff created by brand marketeers to strike a chord and separate you from your hard earned cash. I never wanted to be like Beckham when I bought a bottle of Haig Clubman, I don’t want to knock somebody’s lights out when I buy a George Foreman grill. All I want at the end of the day is good value whisky.

It’s not too hard to ask for is it?

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

*feel(s) – it’s a Doric word. If you are reading this then you’re on the internet. Look it up if you are interested. All you need to do is change the vowels.

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

TB/BSW – Accident by design?

Taste Review #152 – Thompson Bros. TB/BSW

Is there such a thing as a happy accident? I certainly can’t say that up until now that I’ve ever had one (and I’ve had a one or two). My first car that I bought was written off in a rear end accident in Manchester while on the way to Cornwall. When giving the RAC recovery man the postcode for our destination, I think he was disappointed to hear me say the first letters were TR and not PR. Preston would have been an easy run, but Falmouth in Cornwall guaranteed his Saturday night out on the town would be trashed, pretty much like both ends of my car.

The car that shunted me was in a worse shape.

While that car was written off, the next car that followed was an identical copy, only it had a lot of reliability issues. I decided to trade it in and when all that was required was a 3 week trip offshore before I handed it over to the garage and received a Focus in return, 3 days before my departure my rear end took another direct hit. A bit of frantic phone calling saw me deposit the car at a garage before I left for work, and picked it up again on my return. How I kept a straight face when trading it in when asked if it had any serious accident damage I don’t know. Well, it wasn’t that serious…

Next car, next bash. Only damage visible. A new boot floor crumple zone needed. Just a minor bit of damage.

Thankfully it was several cars later before the next accident. Some doddery businessman decided to pull out to overtake without checking his mirrors and didn’t see me overtaking him. Minimum damage, but another insurance claim and a change of underwear. Nowadays I tend to avoid trouble, though the wife has been using our CR-V as a bumper car.

But it’s not just motoring accidents can cause mayhem and expense, this can also be the case in the whisky industry. I’ve heard tales of leaks in systems meaning fermented wash being held in the washback for over 500hrs, valves being opened that caused a loss of precious liquid, and of course we can’t forget the almost obligatory distillery fires that happened in the past. But the story of this whisky reviewed today has another type of accident that I’m not so sure was an accident at all. There is a rumour which I’ve heard from a couple of whisky retailers that the dram in consideration today isn’t really a blend as such, but is as a result of a new make having been put in a cask that previously contained Famous Grouse. Apparently the whisky is Macallan and was matured for 12 years. The story develops that the Grouse had affected the maturing spirit so much it had to be classed as a blend. Furthermore the rules on age statements meant that it had to be given a statement a lot lower than 12, which now gives us an idea how old Grouse is.

Great whisky. Not so great bottle design. Does the 6 years refer to the artist?

Accident or not, we have to find out whether this is an accident which is covered with fully comprehensive insurance or a hit and run by an uninsured driver.

Thompson Bros TB/BSW

Region – Blend Age – 6 y.o Strength – 46% abv Colour – chestnut oloroso Cask Type – Sherry / Blended Whisky Colouring – No Chill Filtered – No Nose – Figs, raisins, golden syrup, sultanas, hobnobs, milky coffee. Palate – Fruit cake, toffee, maple syrup, chocolate. Quite spicy building after the mid palate, with ginger, nutmeg, making an appearance. Medium body. Finish – Spicy on the finish but not too hot not overpowering. Nutmeg, cinnamon, orange zest, chocolate and a hint of more fruit cake.

The dram

Conclusions

I’ve had this article on draft for over a year, as I had attempted to review a new release at the point it was released, but it hasn’t really worked out that way, so quite a few of you who are reading this will have tried this whisky. Certainly most of the people that I keep contact with on Twitter have, so they will know that this is a banger. A complete bargain of a whisky and only £34. Thompson Brothers have knocked this one out out of the park.

I suspect I can taste the Famous Grouse, as it always makes me think of biscuits, whereas normal Macallan doesn’t. Not that I drink a lot of Macallan as I feel there are better things to be investing my time and money in when it comes to dramming . I’d hasten to add not because I think Macallan is a bad whisky, but rather I feel there are better out there and much better value, plus don’t come with the same marketing or aspirational b/s that artificially hikes the price.

Whether or not this was an accident is anybodies guess. The industry is full of stories that get told to visitors at distilleries during their tours, some of which are little more than a marketing hook, nobody liking a ropey story on a release more than Ardbeg. Or anybody who has visited Ben Nevis distillery can’t fail to snigger at the story of Hector McDram, which is a shame, as otherwise it’s a good tour. In summary, I’ve my doubts that in the case of the TB/BSW story was an accident at all, simply due to the amount released. There seems to be a few different batches, so I wonder if only the first cask was a mistake, but the rest were deliberately made, perhaps There was only supposed to be around 1000 bottles initially, but this seems unlikely judging by the number of people I have seen online enjoying it. It would be nice to have some sort of confirmation whether or not this bottling has exceeded that number or if more of the same will be forthcoming. I also doubt that there is a consistent recipe, as I’m sure Thompson Brothers would consistently ruin bottles of Macallan by putting it in a Grouse cask. Personally, I’d be considering coke.

Regardless, if you see this blend, buy it. You won’t get a lot more value for your money out there. It’s a banger.

Yours in Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

The Sherry King Of Speyside.

Taste Review #103 – Macallan 10 old vs new

We’ve come to the last in my old vs. new reviews and I’ve saved what is one of the best known name in whisky until last. Macallan. This has been one of the hardest comparisons to be organised, as COVID got in the way of me reaching my old 1990’s bottle of 10 year old Macallan which was damaged in a flood. As I had consigned this to a drinking bottle it would have been perfect for this cause. Conveniently I had managed to pick up a 1990’s miniature at auction, as the 70cl Macallan 10 year olds are now reaching £400 at auction, and I am not paying that just to do a review.

MIA bottle (Macallan Is Annihilated)

The newer bottle was also procured at auction, and it is currently easy to purchase, despite being discontinued as an age statement. It is in a much different box, with the white Easter Elchies box being discontinued mid 2000’s. The range was rebranded slightly in 2004 with the introduction of a second 10 year old in the core selection with the addition of the Fine Oak edition, which introduced spirit also matured in American Bourbon casks. As to the Sherry Oak, sometimes when there is a rebrand, this is a chance to do a slight recipe tweak, so we’ll see if this is the case in this instance.

The 10 year old Sherry Oak was discontinued in 2013 and the 10 year old Fine Oak was discontinued in 2018. The youngest Sherry Oak is now the 12 year old.

With old and new bottles procured, it was then a case of finding time to taste them, Given I realised that this would be probably the closest comparison out of all the drams in this series, I wanted to give this time, so I could fully appreciate both drams. You can probably guess what happened next – at each attempt to get some adequate time to do any tasting, I never got my days chores finished in time or my daughter would decide that she didn’t want to settle in the evening. On one occasion I shot myself in the foot by having a strong curry, thus knocking my tastebuds out. This wasn’t boding well for getting the old versus new series completed.

Mini Macallan Malt Moment

But, as I am fond of quoting, John Lennon once said “Life is what happens when you are busy making other plans.” And indeed that is the case. It’s also quite appropriate to quote a member of the Beatles, as my feelings towards them are similar to Macallan – I feel both are overrated. I know that I will have lots of people shooting me down over this statement, either for the musical or whisky assumption or perhaps both, but I just don’t see the quality in Macallan when I can taste similar whisky (or better) for a lot less money. Glenallachie 15 is my preference to the Macallan 18 and it has the bonus of being much, much cheaper.

I’ve reviewed the Macallan old style before and have also visited the distillery. You can see my last review of the old style Macallan by clicking on this link. In this review, I had also the samples given by the distillery, the 12 year old double cask and the 15 year old triple cask which I didn’t review due to the small amounts, but the sherry cask 10 year old blasted both drams way out of the park. Since then it has been my intention to compare the old version of the 10 year old with a like for like modern equivalent, which has also been discontinued since 2013.

As a bit of a laugh, during my research for this review, I came across this on a website speaking about the history of Macallan. I am sure that you will spot the error straight away.

Correct still pattern; wrong location. (cranesltd.co.uk) original article here

The miniature bottle I have was bottled in the 1990s and shows the Easter Elchies farmhouse. The 70cl bottle of the newer spirit was released around the mid 2000’s. This particular bottle was released pre 2010, before Macallan started using Hologram stickers to deter forgeries.

Macallan 10 (1990’s)

Region – Speyside Age -10 yr old Strength – 40% abv Colour – Chestnut Oloroso Sherry (1.2) Cask Type – Sherry Colouring -No Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Sherry, raisins, dates, tobacco, butterscotch, apricot, slight funk from the bottle. Palate – All components in the nose were in the palate. Mouthfeel had a medium body, slightly oily. Finish – Medium – Toffee, dried fruits, slightly drying, gentle oak notes.

Macallan 10 from the 1990’s.

Macallan 10 (mid to late 2000’s)

Region – Speyside Age -10 yr old Strength – 40% abv Colour – Chestnut Oloroso Sherry (1.2) Cask Type – Sherry Colouring -No Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Sherry, milk chocolate, marmalade, tobacco, raisins. Hint of acetone. Quite a light nose. Palate – thin mouthfeel, sweet on arrival, the raisins appear along with a bitter oak tannin Finish – medium / short The alcohol disappears quite quickly, leaving chocolate, raisins and a bitter note on departure.

Macallan 10, circa 2010 or slightly earlier making an appearance on my cooker.

Conculsions

Confession time – I seriously expected the old one to totally romp home on this one. So much so, I was worried that this preconception would affect my judgement. However, nothing could have prepared me for how close both these drams were. I have often poured scorn on Macallan in the past, which has to be said now was unfair and unjustified in this instance. The fact is that both drams tasted very similar is testament to their focus on quality. My surprise was compounded when I looked back to the review I wrote last year and found I nearly got exactly the same tasting notes.

So perhaps I should chastise myself a little bit and loosen the belt of cynicism that I have around brand promotion and give into the fact that 1990’s Macallan and 21st century Macallan of this bottling are not too much different. But before we give into back slapping and high fives, there were a few small details that need to be taken into account, as to my palate they were different.

The mouthfeel on the newer bottling was very slightly thinner. The overall experience was more bitter and sharp compared to the older expression. The older expression also had it’s issues, but the only one I could find that stood out was that there was a slight funk to the sample, which was definitely caused by the fact it was in a miniature bottle. Therefore I predict that this was caused by the seal. Had I been able to taste from my damaged 70cl bottle that is currently languishing in a store 70 miles away, the presence of a cork seal would have maybe improved the sample experience for the better.

Older dram on left. Like two peas in a pod.

I can definitely say the newer example has a slightly lighter mouthfeel as well as a shorter finish, but it isn’t a bad whisky in any sense of the word. I found it had more bitter oak in it, something I didn’t get in the miniature sample, nor the sample I had in my last review which had came from a 70cl bottle with a cork seal.

I spent a few minutes discussing this with one of my friends who is a bit of a Macallan fan. He correctly told me that the distillery will try as hard as possible to keep the same flavour profile, so there is unlikely to be a big difference in the recipe. What he did say is that he’d heard that the 10 year old age statement was retired due to it being so expensive to keep producing as there were more and more older barrels being needed to maintain the flavour profile, so it was axed and the 12 year old age statement continued from that point.

I’m going to enjoy the rest of this 10 yr old bottle; the miniature got finished in this review. The 70cl bottle was £120 at auction including fees. The miniature was £40 at auction so this hasn’t been the cheapest of reviews as well as not being the cheapest. But it needed to be done. Perhaps once I get access to my store, it will give me and my friends a chance to compare like for like with both drams having been sealed by a cork.

Was the older dram better? I have to say yes, but I think it is due more to my preference. £120 is expensive for a ten year old whisky yet the 10 year old releases in the white boxes that show the Easter Elchies farmhouse painting now regularly sell at auction for over £400 including fees. There must be a reason for that, and perhaps it is that others also agree with me that the older one is better. However I think that eventually when supply of the older dram tightens due to them being drunk, the price of the more recent bottling will rise in value.

My final opinion is that if you aren’t really studying the drams, it would be hard to tell the difference. You will get a good experience regardless of what expression of the Sherry Oak you try. The Fine Oak reportedly is not as good, and I’m not opening my bottle to find that at out – not just now anyway.

This is my final review in my old versus new whiskies. It’s now time for me to mull over some conclusions and I look forward to publishing them. I hope that you have enjoyed this series, please consider looking at the index of my tastings using the link below to let you see my other reviews of this series.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

except – screen shot of Macallan History Page – included under fair use, copyright cranesltd.co.uk

Kicking It Old Skool

Taste Review #52 – Macallan 10 (Old Style)

No. I am not trying to get down with the kids. I am definitely not a cool person. But today’s review will be a refreshing piece of nostalgia, and we are going to be looking at whisky that many being produced today need to learn from. There may be a bit of Macallan bashing, but this is purely incidental, certainly not intentional and could be equally aimed at many other distilleries.

1990’s Macallan

How many of us remember a time when whisky was good? Hasn’t it always been good? Can it get any better? With Single Malt Whisky having exploded over the past couple of decades, the choice has never been better. However with this taste review, I want to put a concept to you. I want each of you who reads this to think about it to yourselves. And if you can be bothered, I’d appreciate feed back, either in the form of a comment below the article, through facebook, instagram, e-mail or even twitter. If your only means of communicating with me is carrier pigeon, then by all means send it, however I can’t promise that my dog won’t eat it. So if you are General Melchitt and your pigeon is called Speckled George, definitely don’t send it. (Fans of Blackadder Goes Forth will get the reference!)

I’m going to put to you the concept that some whisky is not better than it used to be. I would say it is demonstrably not worse per se, but definitely not as good as it used to be. I would say this has happened and continues to happen due to the large amounts of different editions through different age statements, non-age statements, cask finishing and the lack of decent aged stock available. This is something that all distilleries will suffer from. Each one is trying to obtain, keep or improve its market share.

For a while, I have felt that this applied to Macallan. This is not because I want to rebel against Macallan, as everybody seems to like them and I don’t want to rebel like a stroppy teenager. It’sbecause I feel the focus has moved. While I still believe that they do still make quality whisky, I feel that quality is definitely subdued. This was highlighted to me during a visit to their distillery in October last year.

The building itself is a marvel. You will have never seen a distillery like it, and I doubt if we will ever see one again, certainly not in the near future. Outside it looks more like an extension of Tellytubby land, but inside you can see the architectural masterpiece it is. The tour is good value too, albeit it seems very corporate, although now thinking about it, this is not a mistake. This is deliberate.

The Macallan archive is a wonderful masterpiece, with hundreds of bottles on the soaring shelves. But it is here we start to make our comparisons. One of my bugbears with Macallan is the amount of NAS they are releasing. To look across the way, we see the shop, where many of the products there have no age statements. But as I said before, some of what I am saying about Macallan can be applied to many distilleries, as aged stocks run low.

Macallan has been known as a distillery that exclusively used sherry casks, and one of the six pillars of Macallan is the quality of their casks. However, since 2004, they have been releasing whisky that has been made not just in sherry casks, but now uses Bourbon casks. Not that I have a problem with this as such, as this doesn’t make a bad whisky. However, it just isn’t as good as what has gone before from Macallan in my opinion.

one of my old style Macallan bottles

The tour I took at Macallan also gave us a sample of 12 year old Double Cask which is matured in American and European Oak, and the 15 year old Triple Cask which is also matured in a Bourbon cask. This, as far as I know isn’t the result of re-racking but a mixture of casks in the vatting prior to bottling. I never got a chance to try them at the distillery, as I was driving – and of course we all know drinking and driving is definitely not cool. So I got them to take home.

This fact was something that excited me, as I had a sample of a 10 year old Macallan from the 80’s or 90’s which I had been given by Matteo at the Speyside Whisky Shop, and I really wanted to write a review that compared all three, but the samples from the whisky tour just didn’t give me enough to write an objective review. However, although both drams were quite pleasant there was something that was very obvious to my palate. The old style whisky blasted the other two into outer space. Just no comparison.

Here are my tasting notes for the older whisky.

12 Year old 1990’s Macallan

Region

Speyside

Age

10 years

Strength

40 % abv

Colour

Deep gold

Nose

Proper sherry nose. Dates, plums, raisins, tobacco note, hot chocolate powder. More of a toffee note appears when water added. 

Palate

Instant, intense sweet hit on the arrival, with pretty much every note in the nose also on the palate. 

Finish

Medium to long, gently fades away. Slightly drying in the finish, toffee, dried fruits and a hint of spicy wood.

The dram

Conclusions

What I write now may be paraphrased from another article that I have written elsewhere about Macallan, but I’ll try and keep to the appropriate portions here.

I am indebted to Sorren at ocdwhisky.com for an article he wrote about whisky blogging. One of the things he said was that no whisky manufacturer deliberately makes a bad whisky. I know I might have had a bit of a rant over Jura Journey and Glen Keith, but Sorren is right. It’s just tastes are different, and you can’t like everything. However, that doesn’t mean that distilleries can get away with reduced quality whisky.

Of course, with a shortage of aged stocks, plus a decline in sherry drinkers has probably meant that sourcing quality casks has become harder and certainly more expensive for Scotch whisky producers. I would contend that Macallan has safeguarded the premium casks for their more expensive whiskies, which can cost thousand of pounds. However, they aren’t going to be doing that exclusive for whisky that is in the sub £100 bracket if they can get away with it. Use of Bourbon casks reduces the demand for sherry casks. This is something Macallan has been releasing since 2004. So, my concept I am trying to get you to think about is that have Macallan (or other producers) slowly weaned us off the premium whisky and onto something that is still good, but not as good?

I certainly feel this way, as the old-skool sample that I had was absolutely fantastic, and I almost regret giving my brother-in-law a small sample of the small sample I received. In a normal state of mind I wouldn’t have shared, but my brother in law is a good bloke and he very much appreciated his share. Is it a case of what we used to get as a standard 10 year old is now the quality standard for the 18 year old or above? I may have to take the plunge and buy a more expensive bottle to find out, or chum up my more generous Macallan drinking friends.

This is why I feel that with Scotty’s drams it is good to use the samples of older whisky, in particular my bargain basement miniature buying at auction is actually a valid exercise. The ten year old Macallan in the picture above is auctioning for around £300. The 12 year old I’ve seen as high as £450. A smaller sample is good for reminding us what has gone before and gives us a point of reference.

What is your take on this subject?

Slainte Mhath!

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

Sorry for the double publishing – there was an error generated that caused the link to display incorrect information. It won’t happen again. Actually it probably will, but I will still be sorry.

This blog is written as a hobby. If you liked this article, consider following the blog by clicking on the icon at the bottom of the browser page somewhere to get tastings, visits and articles to your email inbox. Or join me on my other social media channels below. Also, feel free to share, and spread the whisky love ❤️❤️

Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo credits

All Photographs – author’s own.

Profits and Losses

FOMO should not rule your whisky journey.

It has been a nailbiting and momentous week here at Scotty’s Drams HQ. I lost my job as the premier hypocrite of the Strathspey and Badenoch area, when my Macallan Folio 5 did sell at auction and I made the grand total of £37.20 after taking auction fees into account. I don’t even have the title of the worst flipper in the world, as at the same auction, some people were taking losses over £230 on their Macallan Easter Elchies Black 2019 release – one of the many Macallan releases that did not have numbers confirmed and turned out to be a lot more than people anticipated.

In other auction action, I submitted a bundle of whisky miniatures to a couple of auctioneers, and the items at Whisky Auctioneer in Perth did a lot better than anticipated. I had the opportunity to buy around 50 nips from a guy locally who was selling them on behalf of his mother, as they belonged to his late father’s estate. I paid £50 for them, as I didn’t really have time to inspect them properly and I had no idea of what they were worth. Imagine my surprise when the total hammer price was £211! With me being me, (and the local area as well as the whisky world being very small), I had told him that if it made much more than £50, I’d give him the profits, so nobody could think I was taking the mickey or taking advantage of people. Believe it or not, I do want Scotty’s Drams to be known to have a smidge of integrity! It has been a great result for myself, but especially to the recipient of the extra cash and I am glad it is going to a good cause.

The final thing that I want to point out for this week was the news that retailers were slashing the prices of the Game of Thrones editions as released by Diageo in collaboration with the HBO series. The Whisky Exchange and Master of Malt were offering around 30% discount on the 9 bottles, and I had seen on line that another retailer were said to be offering 40%. You can imagine the response on the social media channels about people who feel conned that they paid significantly more to collect the series. I will remind you that I warned about this in my article I wrote about the Game of Thrones whisky set back in November 2019. Click on the link if you want to be reminded of what I said.

I’ll not go over old ground, as this will make the article unnecessarily long. However, I can understand the angst of people who feel conned, but why did they pay so much in the first place? They believed the hype of a limited release that was never really going to become rare – not in the next 40 years or so anyway……. I bet the person who paid £1400+ for his set at auction feels especially aggrieved, especially for one of two things – a lowering of the retail price will crash the auction price. This is definite for the short term and most likely for the medium to long term. Why do I think this? It is only the truly gullible or those who cannot get it any other way will pay more on an auction site than it costs at retail. Secondly, now the retail price has dropped, potentially many are going be offloading it ASAP if they don’t want to drink it, thus probably ensuring a very easy supply to secondary market at auctions. Additionally, because of such a large price drop, the perception of quality has been damaged and any last vestiges of thought about the range being a collectable commodity that will make healthy profits have been blown away.

We have to also remember that people thinking it was a limited edition were conned into thinking this, or what is much more likely that they chose not to look at the facts. This whisky was released in massive numbers, probably tens of thousands of bottles per each edition. Coronavirus is still rarer than GoT whisky. The only way it was limited was that Diageo has probably set a limit in the time for these products to be marketed. I doubt they consciously limited the production over that period, given the amounts in circulation.

Let us put that into some sort of perspective – in December last year Bruichladdich released 3000 bottles of their Octomore X4 series. This is the quadruple distilled single malt, that is part of a series that has been released as spirit and at 3 years old. When it was placed in their online shop, the website crashed as people tried to get hold of a bottle. I was lucky, and after 4 hours trying I managed to get 2 bottles. Still, when you look around, you can still get hold of it at auction, albeit at substantially more than the £150 release price. I bought 2 as I intend to drink one and put the other alongside my other X4’s as a collection. Even at 3000 bottles, which is only around 10 casks worth of whisky, this is not especially rare. How much less rare is the GoT whisky? I do hope that you have got my point here, as we now have to expand on what probably drove the demand.

I came to this thought based on another article I had read online. Another blog / review site I like reading during my online wondering is The Dramble. Indeed I recommend it. It has a collection of writers, although most of the content is written by its co-founder Matt Mckay. He recently wrote an article about the Talisker Distillery Exclusives, and he raised an interesting point about these distillery exclusives, and how some people feel this is unfair as they are missing out if they can’t get to the distillery. I had to laugh as they certainly missed the point of exclusives. Matt touched briefly on the FOMO fanbase. For those of you who aren’t as hip and down with the kids and street language, I can tell you that FOMO stands for ‘Fear Of Missing Out’.

Let us face it, some of us do have moments of fear that we are going to miss out on something. I am no different. Back in those dark, dark days when I was on the Macallan mailing list, I entered the ballots and crossed my fingers. I never wanted to flip any bottles – I wanted to own something that would be worth a bit of money in the long term. Of course I was trying to avoid paying the money the secondary market would eventually command. So it comes to pass that I guess in the case of the Folio 5, I have to be honest with you and I took my eye off the ball. The unforced error of not really noticing there was no commitment to limit the numbers to the same level as usual was a mistake many had made. After all, no numbers were officially confirmed for Folio 4, and it was accepted around 2000 bottles were released. Surely Macallan wouldn’t do the dirty and release 20,000 bottles, ensuring 18,000 could not collect the full set? That’s exactly what they did.

The problem I feel with limited releases (and I speak only as an enthusiast with no part in the whisky industry) is that too many people have seen the profits that some people have made and are now only too keen to buy a whisky and hopefully make the same profit. Those with little experience also misunderstand the meaning of limited release. A limited release can still have hundreds of thousands of bottle released as long as it’s only sold for a fixed time. Releases such as Ardbeg’s annual release, coupled with pretty much anything Macallan releases on a limited basis normally initially makes money and drives the flippers and those determined to obtain a bottle to buy and sell in a frenzy similar to that when a lamb is dropped in a pool of piranhas. This has perhaps provoked people who do not normally buy whisky as an investment to perhaps want a piece of the action. It is a very dangerous game to play with no knowledge and people have, and do get financially burnt by it. I’ve been buying and selling whisky for 6 years now at auction, and I know – even I get caught out sometimes, but I accept the swings and roundabouts of what I collect.

The only way such a release of whisky could ever hope to become rare and expensive is if people drink it. And while with GoT this is still theoretically possible, the whisky released was never the best products the distilleries were capable as of and there was just so many bottles released. I’ve tasted a couple of the GoT editions, and they are pretty so-so. Not bad but not good either.

So why have the prices dropped so far? I would guess that now Game of Thrones is completed and no new episodes are to come, the series has dropped out of immediate public consciousness and now they are not buying it in the same amounts. My limited experience with retail in other areas would suggest this creates excess inventory to get rid of and to do this then the easiest way is to drop the price.

Fear Of Missing Out – not having the whisky from your favourite TV show, or not being able to collect it in order to make a profit at a later date is probably what has driven this release. Possibly a bit of intrigue to see how each edition ties into each family in the story. But to be fair, it isn’t just limited to the gimmicky release that GoT obviously was. It is the same with every release from Macallan, Ardbeg, Bruichladdich amongst others. Our admiration for the brand, our desperate desire to have something no other collector has, or at least have it first, or to even just get a couple to flip so those desperate enough can get their hands on it blinds us to some harsh economic realities if we don’t take into consideration the realistic supply an demand in the future.

And here is the crux – FOMO often takes our attention from the most important thing – the whisky itself. Consider that in the whisky world that fully missing out is a rare thing – what’s on the market will eventually come around again, at least in the secondary market, and when it reappears, it may come back cheaper. FOMO is driving a monster in the whisky market which has the risk of eating itself, something those who have felt cheated over Game of Thrones are now realising, but it can be applied to those who overpay for anything. I’ve seen Macallan Folio 5 auction for a hammer price of £900. If that person failed to win the original Macallan ballot, how silly do they feel now when they could have bought mine at auction for £320 rather than overpaying the first flipper that came along? The signs of the greatly increased out-turn were all there when they were appearing on auction sites before the Macallan Ballot was complete, so why would you pay nearly 4 times the RRP?

Marketing is something that we as whisky geeks that we all have to be aware of, as it so often promises something and very often does not meet our full expectations. Fair play to Diageo – they shifted shed loads of non-premium whisky at non-premium prices and those who know very little about whisky or have duller palates are suddenly exposed to nine distilleries in the Diageo stable. Where they will not get people continuing to buy GoT bottles as it is limited, they will then most likely start buying the more profitible (for Diageo) releases from these distilleries after they made GoT fans more aware of their offerings. Diageo really couldn’t lose from this venture.

The important thing to bear in mind is that if we are true whisky geeks, FOMO should never really guide us – our palate should in the first instance, but I have to admit that I can miss this myself, and often become a bottle chaser, which is an unhealthy habit. FOMO and bottle chasing can and does lead to missing out on other things, though you often miss that point as well. How ironic.

For those amongst you reading this who have more experience than me, I hope that you are nodding your head in agreement, for you know the truth that things will eventually come back around. You may have to wait somewhat. I have that feeling with the Dailuaine I lost out on in the week previous to last. We have to move on….

In summary –

  • Don’t always believe the hype on new releases.
  • Never plan on making money, and only spend what you can afford to drink. That is what you might be doing if the price crashes
  • Make sure you know how many are being released
  • Don’t be afraid to miss out. There are thousands of fantastic whisky expressions out there, and because you don’t have one, this means you have money for another.

Yours In Spirits.

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

This is written as a hobby, and I appreciate your likes and shares, either on WordPress, or why not visit one of my other social media channels. Lets spread the whisky love!

Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

My dirty secret

Confession is good for the soul…. supposedly.

This week is going to be much better than last week. Because I am writing my Saturday article on Monday, this will mean that I have no confession on Friday that I have nothing prepared. In fact, the way I feel now, that confession would be much better. Indeed I’d rather just not give you all a Saturday article and admit failure than give up the source of my shame.

For this, it grinds my insides even more than telling you that since my wee accident with the garage door, to this point not a drop of alcohol has passed my lips. It’s kind of ironic that a chap who writes a whisky blog and collects bottles has become temporarily tee-total. I have to confide that my whisky sin is worse than that.

Much worse.

It is an old proverb that says that confession is good for the soul, but this time I have my doubts, for the evidence of my shame will be on the internet, not just here but on another site for all to see, only you won’t know which one as there are some details that you just don’t need to know.

I’ve become a hypocrite.

Now that the truth is out, I can continue along the same theme as my article from last week in which my Macallan Folio 5 arrived. With the news so much more had been released than the 2000 per edition previously, it wasn’t going to meet my expectations. As I said last week, my intention had been to swap for a Folio 4, and maybe sell in the long run, but with Macallan reportedly releasing 18,000 more Folio 5 than Folio 4, the price of the former will never achieve the price of the latter.

Of course, I could always sell it on without a profit, but just cover my costs, but I do have a small amount of morality left, and I couldn’t sell my bottle to somebody knowing that even though they were just paying essentially what I paid, the price of the bottle is likely to fall below even that. That’s just taking advantage of people.

Lastly, I could always drink it. But I’m sorry, no Macallan NAS at £250 is worth that. Plus, when we take in consideration the excessive packaging, that alone must take up at least £20 from the RRP, and once drunk, what do I do with it? I’m not a Macallan collector in that way at all.

Even if I sell it to another punter who will drink it, I’m not sure my conscience will let me sleep at night knowing that I’ve met somebody face to face, or even a follower of my blog to sell them a whisky which in a couple of months will be a lot cheaper. That’s not how I roll.

So, with morals securely stored in a dark place, I made contact with an auctioneer to arrange pick up of my box. We had a nice chat about Macallan (Whisky Geek Scotty was in check this time!) which in my opinion could summarise the conversation by saying Macallan have definitely made an impact to the secondary prices of a few of their recent releases.

Indeed, the auctioneer made a very good point about how Macallan really should look into their application of the ballot system and how it really should be for known amount of limited bottles, something buyers of Edition 5 and Easter Elchies 2019 are probably thinking too. I’ve an article about that written, but will give it a break with the Macallan writing after today. Just to give your senses a rest if nothing else.

In all fairness, I should have seen the warning signs and not just blindly entered the ballot. No evidence of the likely age and no numbers of Folio 5 released. Plus there was a commitment to buy if you won the ballot, unlike the Easter Elchies 2018, which gladly at £750 they did give you a little breathing space.

The conclusion? I’m glad it’s going but I do hope that I recover most of my money from it, if not make a small profit. As from the comments from last weeks article, take the money and spend it on something you’d really enjoy drinking. That’s a great point, and already something has already popped up. Not telling you what it is, as you may outbid me.

As an aside to this article, my dealings with the auctioneer revealed that I could not set a reserve higher than the RRP. This is a great move as it helps limit the rip off profiteering that some online auctioneers facilitate. Of course, the price may go higher, but that is because of what people are willing to pay rather than people being taken advantage of through limited availability and the crazy prices some of the greedy, impatient or ill-informed are prepared to pay.

And these people all do exist. A quick look at an online auction reveals just under 120 bottles of Folio 5 available. Some ill-informed person has already bid £560, yet still hasn’t met the reserve, which means the auctioneer is essentially helping the greedy.

On the other side, there is bottles there still for sale under RRP but there is just over a day to go as I publish this and these may well make a profit yet. But seeing this gives me squeaky bum time, though it reinforces my belief that the price will plummet. Indeed, out of 118 bottles, 42 will still fail to make a profit going by current bids and not including the cost of getting them to the auction house.

Perhaps Macallan planned this mass release deliberately to ensure more whisky gets drunk, and I have to grudgingly doff my cap to them, but given the demand for the brand world wide, I am still sure if they were open about the amount produced it would sell out. Either way, do they care about the secondary market? They sell their product anyway, and surely that is all that matters? This is part of the Macallan article I am attempting to write, but my keyboard just defaults to ‘rant lock’ and I don’t fancy libelling anybody.

With that, it’s now time to go and think about what dram for later on. After all it’s Saturday night!

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Slainte Mhath!

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

This is written as a hobby, and I appreciate your likes and shares, either on WordPress, or why not visit one of my other social media channels. Lets spread the whisky love!

Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link

Flipping Hell!

It’s not nice to sit under the Sword of Damocles.

We come to Friday once more, and I am looking for a thought to provide you all with this week. It has been quite a week for me with a lot of stress. A couple of weeks ago, my car was involved in a minor collision and this was the week it was going in for repair. I’m lucky enough to have an insurance company that are quite generous when it comes to providing a hire car when mine is off the road, so I was lucky enough to be given a Toyota Aygo.

Lucky? No. These small cars are really only good for the city. I have driven an Aygo over one hundred miles from Aberdeen to home over twisty country roads and let me tell you that it wasn’t fun. Given we have had really bad weather and have a good blanket of snow, I opted to pay a little bit extra and get something bigger. I was given a Vauxhall Insignia which was a lovely car to drive but a bit longer than I realised. When backing the car in front of my garage, the sensors must have been covered in dirt from the slush on the roads, and the net result was that I backed the car into the garage door. Conclusions – car not a mark; the garage door seemingly a write off.

The car before a trip down the A9. Nice and clean only for another 30 mins.

Of course, the weather was bad with snow and heavy winds, and the garage roller door was out of the guides on one side so I got plenty of fun with some hammers, spanners and pry-bars to get the door back into the guides. I didn’t care at that point if the door would ever open again, as long as I could get it wind and watertight once more. But I knew eventually that I had to make a hard decision – do I leave the door as is, for I don’t use it that often, or do I pay for a replacement? After paying a 4 figure sum just before Christmas for a new oil tank, I wasn’t really wanting to take the hit of a new electric door. I knew that the choice of doing nothing could become very inconvenient. Sadly, it was realistic to say that a new door was the only option and I had a £1500 bill staring me in the face. It was unexpected that when my local friendly garage door supplier turned up a couple of days later that he didn’t give me a quote. Thankfully he was able to repair the door in such a way it will survive another couple of years given the amount of use it gets. All ends well. I still haven’t had the dram to celebrate the avoidance of financial disaster!

So what has this got to do with whisky? Well, last Friday my package from Macallan turned up, the recently balloted Folio 5 which is part of the Archival Series. Costing £260 including postage, I entered the ballot without knowing too much about the whisky I was hoping to win. However, this is not that uncommon with Macallan releases nowadays. But, given the fact that previous Folio releases have been about 2000 units and usually keep at a price well above the purchase, then I thought it would be a safe bet.

Macallan Archival Series Folio 5

Well, after the ballot was concluded, with my whisky contacts and on various forums, I noticed that quite a lot of people had actually won a bottle in the ballot. Far too many for my liking. Research suggested that Macallan had done the dirty and possibly released 20,000 units. This is a bit of a kick in the teeth, as it would mean 18,000 people will never be able to collect the full collection, and the value of the other four editions is now going to smash through the roof as those who do wish to collect the full series will be forced to pay for a much rarer whisky. This can only get worse as future editions are released (there are still 19 releases to go).

Of course, caveat emptor should be the phrase first and foremost in mind, but I feel in whisky terms I have metaphorically smashed the car into the garage door and have a tough decision to make in terms of what to do with this whisky. It may serve me well to give you another metaphor that would sum up my feelings adequately, I felt like the pigeon who didn’t notice there was glass in the french windows, and is now lying stunned on the patio waiting for the neighbours cat to get me.

To be honest, I bought it with the intention of not collecting the full set, but keeping it back to sell at a later date when the price settled. I had no intention of flipping it, as you should know by now my views on flipping. In the back of my mind, my thoughts were that if there was only 2000 made, I might be able to swap it for a Folio 4, which has the music of James Scott Skinner on it (I used to play the fiddle, so it was relevant). But now I am stuck with a bottle that I feel doesn’t fit my collection policies, won’t necessarily increase in value and I’ve no interest in drinking. And £260 isn’t a small amount of cash to splurge for no return.

Book with marketing blurb

And now I have to face the difficult decision – do I flip it, do I keep it and hope for the best, do I sell it to somebody that didn’t get one at a price that covers my costs, or do I drink it? I’ve opened more expensive bottles but I’m just not interested in Macallan. I’ve drunk too many insipid drams in recent times to be opening an NAS that cost so much. It should be nice to be in the position that I am to own such an item, but the responsibility of what to do with it hangs like the Sword of Damocles above my head, pretty much like it did with the garage door.

I’ll be honest with you, I am really tempted to flip it. I feel really let down by Macallan’s marketing practices, and I have since removed myself from their marketing data base. This has been the final straw that has broken this donkey’s back. I have had deep misgivings about the brand for some time, and this is one of the articles I have been trying to write for some time, but haven’t managed to articulate my thoughts in such a way that is readable. It seems I am not the only one, and have seen quite a few articles saying similar things. I also have written a diatribe against flippers, but again, the article is just too rough to be released without offending people. The possibility of being a hypocrite also fills me with dread.

So what’s it to be? To flip or not to flip. #sipdontflip – as in last week’s review? Or sit tight and take the loss in the meantime and hope it gets better? Let me know your opinions, either by commenting on Facebook, or below this article.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here

This is written as a hobby, and I appreciate your likes and shares, either on WordPress, or why not visit one of my other social media channels. Lets spread the whisky love!

Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own