The 'Finish' of any alcoholic drink retells the story

[393foureyedfox]

i, for one, already wont buy anything below 90 proof, and rarely even then will i go below 100 proof. i almost always wont even consider anything below 100, despite any reviews on it. if it lacks the high proof 'kick in the mouth', i want nothing to do with it, id rather have a glass of tea or lemonade. and i know im not the only one who feels that way.

[GBrough]

i, for one, already wont buy anything below 90 proof, and rarely even then will i go below 100 proof. i almost always wont even consider anything below 100, despite any reviews on it. if it lacks the high proof 'kick in the mouth', i want nothing to do with it, id rather have a glass of tea or lemonade. and i know im not the only one who feels that way.

i dont go below 90 proof unless it is scotch.

[Bob Barker]

I will buy under 90 proof but it has to be a special product. The higher proof bourbons just pack that wallop of flavor that I love.

[393foureyedfox]

exactly.........except ive seen nothing under 90 that has that kick

[Squire]

Doug, John is giving voice to what I was thinking. In Countries overseas Bourbon is already being sold at 75 proof in 700 mil bottles and it's just a matter of time before we get the 'international container, lower proof is healthier' argument put before our lawmakers.

[MauiSon]

I enjoy a number of 80 proofers - FRYL, OO, dusty WT80 ('94), even a dusty Mattingly & Moore ('80). Do they have less intense flavor? Sure, but I can adapt and enjoy. Those two dusties have a tobacco-dominant flavor that I've only caught a glimpse of in modern whiskies. I find it harder to adapt to really intense flavor, my taste buds all light up and my eyes start flashing 'TILT' (and that often doesn't score as a good finish).

[393foureyedfox]

yeah, i dont doubt that bottle sizes will go to 700mL at all. next time they consider a price increase, i bet they just try to quietly change the bottle size to 700mL and just slip it by. Ice cream companies did that years ago, and for the most part, it caused no backlash. i still, however, doubt we will see proofs go below 80. sure, some companies will create 'new' 'whiskies' that may be sold at 70 proof or so, but i pretty much doubt any well known and liked brands will try that.


speaking of lowering proofs, ive notices this lately.........while debating an Ezra purchase, i see four on the shelves. the 80, the 90, the 99, and the 101. if you look closely, the new ezra black "90" bottles being restocked say in tiny print at the bottom of the label "40% ABV" even though it is still labeled with a BIG '90' at the top center of the label. older bottles say '45% ABV' at the bottom. kind of misleading! plus, why bother to have TWO ezra 80 proofers? maybe i better grab some of that ezra 7/101 ive been debating before its gone too!

[Squire]

Very misleading and intentionally so just as other distillers, Buffalo Trace, Wild Turkey, and Heaven Hill to name a few, have done. Price usually doesn't change either.

[EllenJ]

A retailer friend of mine sent me this photo of three bottles, all received in the same shipment. I'm not sure who fills cases of Ezra Brooks these days; last I knew it was Luxco (nee David Sherman), but might have changed.

But now don't go thinking, just because this is the first you've seen it, that such practices are anything new, or something that the Ezra Brooks marketers just now dreamed up. Far from it. Here's a photo of two Wild Turkey bottles showing how the old, familiar "8 Years Old" suddenly became "Old No. 8 Brand".

[Squire]

Even a brief review of the history of whisky labels will tell the same story, unfortunately. It's not a sign of the times, rather it's been the practice for as long as whisky has been bottled.