Would You Like To Buy Bourbon Straight From The Barrel?

[Mike]

(See attached map.)

This is the same map I used when I recently travelled to SE KY. I went to the 'moist' city of Cumberland and found 'Tucker's Whiskey Dispensary' with a few bourbon treasures on sale.

[bunghole]

HEY! Who voted 'NO' ?

Too Drunk To Vote ima can understand.

[bunghole]

As long as the customer left the gift shop with a properly sealed bottle, and the distillery accounted for it as they would for any other bottle sold at the gift shop, I don't see any impediment to actually withdrawing it from the barrel in the consumer's presence.

When one of the distilleries starts doing it, I hope they will give Linn proper credit.

Thanks Chuck! That's very kind of you to say.

Linn

[Stoopsie]

ima thinks straight from the barrel sales would really benefit a distillery's image as a proactive pro-enthusiast move. While sales wouldn't be strong enough to really effect the bottom line, it would literally be 'feel good' marketing at it's best. Distillers without any single barrel bottling such as Maker's Mark would benefit greatly as would Jim Beam.

I'm sure that Kentucky distillers could get whatever state variances that might be needed. Getting the B.A.T.F. to grant a special variance or modify the regulations in some small way to allow such sales is not out of the question.

ima

I think we all would like to do this whenever we were at a distillery giftshop. Fill your own bottle. Without having to design a new brand or label, Beam could have fill your own bottle of Booker's, BT - Stagg or WLW depending on which barrel you pick. HH, Woodford, Four Roses and Wild Turkey would follow suit and build a brand and label, if it was a big hit at the other distilleries.

[bourbonv]

The real problem is that the distillery could not do barrel sales because they can only sell those bottles that are available to distributers as well. I do not see the government allowing distributers and retailers selling whiskey straight from the barrel. Too many chances of fraud and watered down whiskey.
Mike Veach

[cowdery]

Not a problem:

Retailer to distributor: "I want ten of those bottles drawn straight from the barrel at the distillery."

Distributor to retailer: "Okay."

Distributor to distiller: "I want ten of those bottles drawn straight from the barrel at the distillery."

Distiller to distributor: "Okay."

Not the same? Not attractive enough to the retailer? Doesn't matter. It satisfies the requirements of the law.

You're absolutely right that they can't have barrels anywhere except the distillery, but that doesn't mean the product -- which, after all, is the whiskey in the sealed bottle as far as the law is concerned -- can't be made available to the state's retailers, as the law requires.

Retailer wants to go to the distillery and watch them draw the bottles? No problem.

I don't even see a problem if the consumer (or retailer) is handed a whiskey thief and allowed to fill the bottle him or herself. So long as the correct paperwork makes the round from the distiller to the distributor back to the distiller-as-retailer, and the tax is paid, the law is satisfied.

This is a great way for the distiller to really take full advantage of the fact that the distiller and the specially-licensed retailer are in the same place.

Linn, this idea just keeps getting better and better.

[bourbonv]

Chuck,
That is a very good solution that would meet the legal requirments. Good thinking. So let us think about how this would actually be done.

1) A label for barrel proof whiskey would have to be approved. Probably with no age statement so it would not matter if the barrel was 6 or 10 years old. The proof would have to be written on the label when bottled.

2) The barrel would have to be dumped and gauged for proof and taxes and the whiskey placed back in the barrel. There would probably be some shrinkage in this step but probably no more than a gallon or two, depending upon how they do it. I know Julian thought about consolidating some barrels of Pappy 23 but ruled out the idea because of the shrinkage, but that would have been done in the main dump room. The distiller would probably want to go back to a smaller dump area such as can be found at the Stitzel-Weller cooperage house where up to 6 barrels could be dumped into individual hold areas so the barrel could be repaired. Smaller amount of loss in the process.

3) The distiller would need trained personel to handle the sales. People who could do the math to figure proof, use a whiskey thief and other problems that may arise.

4) They would need to make sure other legal requiremnets are met - proper size bottles and such.

With all of this, they could do it. Great idea Linn, now let us see if a distiller will actually do it.

Mike Veach

[bunghole]

ima happy that almost everyone thinks that straight from the barrel sales at distillery giftshops is a good idea. Distilleries are quite used to absurd amounts of redtape and record keeping/paperwork, so some small extra amount of the same should pose no big problems. Once one distiller does it others will follow. Plus straight from the barrel sales was a distillery tradition until prohibition. Not to offer the same to today's distillery visitors/consumers just seems downright unpatriotic!

Let's make America a better place to live with a bunghole in every distillery giftshop and return to one of America's finest traditions with straight from the barrel sales of uncut & unfiltered straight bourbon whiskey!



Happy Independence Day Everyone!

ima

[bourbonv]

Linn,
The idea is a grand idea. It would be a great thing to do for both distiller and consumer. The only thing that might prohibit it from happening that we have not discussed are the prohibitionist and the politicians they control. If it looks too much like somebody is enjoying something pertaining to an alcoholic beverage, you can depend upon these neo-prohibitionist stepping in to prevent it from happening. If they think the laws are allowing it to happen, they will push to have the laws changed. It will take some effort on a distiller's part to get this done, but once one does it, I think the others will join in quickly.

Mike Veach

[White Lightning]

The big problem is taxes. The government wants to make sure that the three tier system stays in place because there is a different tax at every tier. Selling from the barrel cuts out two different tiers.

Mike Veach

... that, and the way I understood things is if the proof varies would that not require an altered label which would have to be registered per variation - or no?

[bunghole]

Well Mike, the anti-everything nazis are out there on both sides of the political fence. If you're out having fun doing anything that involves alcohol; tobacco, or firearms then they do their damndest to crucify you.

When I thief out my bottle I'm going to wear a full length mink coat; a pair of large loaded Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum revolvers, wave the Confederate flag while whistling "Dixie" and smoke a nice Churchill. Afterwards I will go hunting and kill a deer and eat it!

[angelshare]

When I thief out my bottle I'm going to wear a full length mink coat; a pair of large loaded Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum revolvers, wave the Confederate flag while whistling "Dixie" and smoke a nice Churchill. Afterwards I will go hunting and kill a deer and eat it!

Careful with that cigar next to the barrel, Linn!

[bourbonv]

Label approvals are not needed for slight proof variation of Bookers and I doubt Buffalo Trace gets a new approval for Stagg every year. There is probably a loophole to allow for barrel proof variations already. Good question though.

Mike Veach