...where distraction is the main attraction.

Friday, June 29, 2012

Fear and the New Whisky World


Johnnie Walker


Enter Macallan.












I'm a terrible lover.






Everyone else





So...what now?






I'll do both.


  1. It is interesting that Macallan has chosen to manage their supply problems by (literally) diluting the whisky. From a basic supply/demand perspective, it would have made at least as much sense to go the Oban route - publicly announce the supply issues and significantly raise prices. If they wanted to go NAS, why not introduce a new line below Fine Oak?

  2. Wow! Great piece! I was looking for more information about this and ended up finding your wonderful summary, with some interesting quotes from that guy at K&L. :)

    Keep up the great work!

  3. Jordan, I agree that this is a curious approach, especially by removing such an iconic product. I also would have expected them to do a shortage-announcement-followed-by-price-hike approach. Unless they are seriously low on some part of their supply.

    I'm wondering if "Gold" will be a Fine Oak-type product. I'm not seeing any other hints that the Fine Oaks will be returning.

  4. Thank you David D! Someone ought to tell "that guy at K&L" that I appreciate his excellent, important work as well!

  5. I wonder what's going to happen to the no age Cask Strength?

    1. It'll get more expensive. I'm kidding (sorta). I'm not sure of its fate either. I hope they keep some version of it.

    2. Since cask strength whisky is quite popular with the more serious malt enthusiasts, Edrington better keep a cask strength option available. With the way George T Stagg sells out every year, you'd think every whisky and whiskey distillery would have a cask strength option in their range.

    3. I hope so. It may depend on how serious/factual their malt stock situation is. I can't image they'd pull it entirely, seeing that people will pay a premium for cask strength whisky.

  6. Great post and you are a lot more polite than I would be with respect to the press release like post on the Master of Malt site.

    In my opinion, the real reason Macallan is losing the age statement is because there is a shortage of whiskies to meet age statements in the near future. Age statement scotch can be produced, but just not at the volume currently. In order not to lose market share (which is enormous for Macallan in the US) they are still delivering the product but without the age statement.

    This shortage of sufficiently aged whiskies to maintain age statements is not unique to the corporate owners of Macallan. Diageo with its Johnnie Walker product line has just replaced the Gold Label 18 year age statement with a "Gold Label Reserve" that no longer carries the age statement. Again the question is why? The company will basically serve up some marketing hog wash that does not stand up to any measure of scrutiny.

    That being said, as you have pointed out, age statements by themselves are not necessarily indicative of quality. However, less than 12 yrs, I find many malt whiskies to be a little too untame.

    Thanks for the post and the integrity not to basically parrot Macallan marketing materials.


    1. Hi Jason, thanks for the comment!

      I find it less easy to be polite about Diageo (a company born from questionable business ethics), but since I regularly shout about that drinks giant, I kept those gripes to a minimum in this post. While the Macallan PR made me laugh (probably not their intent), the news itself filled me with both a curiosity about their brand switcheroo and a bit of wistful sadness about the vanishing of old favorites.

      I agree with all the points in your comment. I do like wilder crazier young malts, but at the same time, I'm getting grumpy about the companies turning out younger and younger whiskies -- I know they're running shorter on older stock, but some of these youngsters are only half-baked. And I am unwilling to pay big $$$ for them.

      I really enjoy your site! Excellent post on the BrewDog / Diageo mess!