Fine Liquor

[J. Walter Weatherman]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

[SKO]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

That's not to say it's not also for people who do like whiskey. It's a respectable bourbon that the non-connoisseur set can enjoy, too.

I just suspect that the latter is where Beam sees the dollar signs. (With the caveat that it's the former that offers the social proof that makes Maker's "okay" for the latter to drink.)

[flannj]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

Well, hell, if I've already decided to hitch on the fancy pants (with belt) and get something fancier than a $15 bottle of Jim Beam, I'm fine with paying an extra couple of bucks for Maker's Mark. Oh well. As far as top shelf bourbon goes there's always Woodford, 1792, Knobb, or this local stuff that is absolutely fantastic. Your loss, Maker's Mark. Someone else will bring out my inner Cyndi Lauper.

Bourbon makes you masturbate?

Oxygen makes him masturbate.

Well, this took a bit of a digression, didn't it?

Par for the course around here.

[Slaky]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

That's not to say it's not also for people who do like whiskey. It's a respectable bourbon that the non-connoisseur set can enjoy, too.

I just suspect that the latter is where Beam sees the dollar signs. (With the caveat that it's the former that offers the social proof that makes Maker's "okay" for the latter to drink.)

"Bourbon people" and I don't mean Louis the 16th and his descendants will generally say that Maker's Mark is crap.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

That's not to say it's not also for people who do like whiskey. It's a respectable bourbon that the non-connoisseur set can enjoy, too.

I just suspect that the latter is where Beam sees the dollar signs. (With the caveat that it's the former that offers the social proof that makes Maker's "okay" for the latter to drink.)

"Bourbon people" and I don't mean Louis the 16th and his descendants will generally say that Maker's Mark is crap.

Assholes maybe.

[Slaky]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

That's not to say it's not also for people who do like whiskey. It's a respectable bourbon that the non-connoisseur set can enjoy, too.

I just suspect that the latter is where Beam sees the dollar signs. (With the caveat that it's the former that offers the social proof that makes Maker's "okay" for the latter to drink.)

"Bourbon people" and I don't mean Louis the 16th and his descendants will generally say that Maker's Mark is crap.

Assholes maybe.

I an not a bourbon person so I guess they're probably assholes.

[CT III]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

That's not to say it's not also for people who do like whiskey. It's a respectable bourbon that the non-connoisseur set can enjoy, too.

I just suspect that the latter is where Beam sees the dollar signs. (With the caveat that it's the former that offers the social proof that makes Maker's "okay" for the latter to drink.)

"Bourbon people" and I don't mean Louis the 16th and his descendants will generally say that Maker's Mark is crap.

Assholes maybe.

I an not a bourbon person so I guess they're probably assholes.

They could just be dumb.

[SKO]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

That's not to say it's not also for people who do like whiskey. It's a respectable bourbon that the non-connoisseur set can enjoy, too.

I just suspect that the latter is where Beam sees the dollar signs. (With the caveat that it's the former that offers the social proof that makes Maker's "okay" for the latter to drink.)

"Bourbon people" and I don't mean Louis the 16th and his descendants will generally say that Maker's Mark is crap.

Assholes maybe.

I an not a bourbon person so I guess they're probably assholes.

They could just be dumb.

"Bourbon people" are awful. They combine the elitism of other critics (what? You actually drink Jim Beam sometimes?) with the idea that, since it's bourbon, they're manlier than thou in addition to their refined tastes.

[Slaky]

I don't know if this is a big deal, but Maker's Mark to Dilute Bourbon by 7 Percent

Clearly this isn't the best way to save a buck, right?  

Wouldn't raising prices versus (quite literally) diluting the product and brand be a better option?

Meh. Do you really think the TDubbses of the world will notice a drop from 90 to 84 proof? It'll still be a step up from Jack and Beam at 80.

I'm less worried about the drop in proof than any noticeable change in flavor. I mean, I know that diluting the product at the distillery is different than just adding water to it at a bar or whatever, but, it's Maker's Mark.

Did you get outraged when they apparently monkeyed with the aging time in the past? Or did you have no idea at the time because they didn't feel obliged to announce the changes in a press release? Seems like that'd potentially threaten the flavor more than dilution, particularly if you're ultimately drinking the stuff on the rocks or adding a bit of water yourself.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was...

I'm thinking this guy would have rather spend $1 more per bottle than having his drink messed with.

And he's on record as being the cheapest guy on this message board.

I don't think SKO is their primary target consumer. Maker's is the easy-to-drink whiskey for people who don't necessarily like whiskey. As long as it stays approachably sweet and mixes well with Coke or sour mix, I think it'll hold its ground.

The stated reason for doing this is demand outstripping supply. Yeah, maybe diluting it will detract a bit from their aura of higher-end authenticity, but I think that expecting this to kill the brand is kind of like saying, "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Really? Never been my interpretation. But I'm no fancy city slicker. It's definitely smooth, but I wouldn't consider it whiskey for people who don't like whiskey.

That's not to say it's not also for people who do like whiskey. It's a respectable bourbon that the non-connoisseur set can enjoy, too.

I just suspect that the latter is where Beam sees the dollar signs. (With the caveat that it's the former that offers the social proof that makes Maker's "okay" for the latter to drink.)

"Bourbon people" and I don't mean Louis the 16th and his descendants will generally say that Maker's Mark is crap.

Assholes maybe.

I an not a bourbon person so I guess they're probably assholes.

They could just be dumb.

"Bourbon people" are awful. They combine the elitism of other critics (what? You actually drink Jim Beam sometimes?) with the idea that, since it's bourbon, they're manlier than thou in addition to their refined tastes.

A friend of mine and his wife had another couple over, recently, for a night cap. They missed their train so my friend said he'd open this new bottle of Rye Whiskey he likes for the group. The male friend, who had proclaimed himself a whiskey snob, was handed a glass of the rye. He smelled it. Put it down. He did not take a single sip.

To me that's the definition of a total asshole.

Sure, I like craft beer but if I'm offered a Lite or a Bud or whatever at someone's house I'm going to drink every last drop.

[SKO]

A friend of mine and his wife had another couple over, recently, for a night cap. They missed their train so my friend said he'd open this new bottle of Rye Whiskey he likes for the group. The male friend, who had proclaimed himself a whiskey snob, was handed a glass of the rye. He smelled it. Put it down. He did not take a single sip.

To me that's the definition of a total asshole.

Sure, I like craft beer but if I'm offered a Lite or a Bud or whatever at someone's house I'm going to drink every last drop.

I just don't really care for pissing on a booze other people enjoy and making them feel bad for enjoying it. Hell, even after having had Knobb Creek, Woodford, 1792, Booker's, etc, I can still enjoy drinking Jim Beam on the rocks because it doesn't taste like ass to me and it's cheap. When I see people who can take down Seagrams or Five Star and actually enjoy it, I think "good for them." They can get drunk without breaking the bank.

All of this is null and void if you're drinking Canadian Whisky, of course. Have some self respect, people.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

At the very worst, Maker's Mark is the Newcastle of whiskeys.

[Bort]

At the very worst, Maker's Mark is the Newcastle of whiskeys.

QFT

[Slaky]

At the very worst, Maker's Mark is the Newcastle of whiskeys.

QFT

So it's a gateway whiskey?

[SKO]

At the very worst, Maker's Mark is the Newcastle of whiskeys.

QFT

So it's a gateway whiskey?

It's definitely the first step up the higher-end bourbon ladder.