tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post596482472561184233..comments2024-03-17T14:10:05.912-05:00Comments on The Chuck Cowdery Blog: Diageo's Latest Mischief: Screwing Up Tennessee WhiskeyChuck Cowderyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-39029090203106077242014-03-18T08:38:57.091-05:002014-03-18T08:38:57.091-05:00It's interesting that Jack Daniels is attackin...It's interesting that Jack Daniels is attacking this one aspect of the definition of Tennessee Whiskey when they have themselves tried to "duck and dodge" the rules. For example, did you know that some of their special whiskey products that are claimed to have been charcoal mellowed are only actually passed through a tube (yes tube!) of charcoal. I would say that the tube was about 6 inches wide and 2.5 ft long. "As long as it passes through this tube we can call it charcoal mellowed" (with laughs). While I'm at it I have major issues with the deception that they pass upon to the tourists/customers on a daily basis. Jack Daniels likes to make everyone believe that their whiskey is "drop by drop" but in reality it is flows through those vats at several gallons per minute. The ONLY charcoal mellowing vats that show "drop by drop" are those that the tourists in Lynchburg pass by each day. In the meantime, Brown-Forman and Jack Daniels are conducting research to see just how fast they can get away with on rushing it through those vats. I could go on and on about all of their deceptions! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-80458202224336350492014-03-18T06:03:13.821-05:002014-03-18T06:03:13.821-05:00Interesting that the new bill also leaves out the ...Interesting that the new bill also leaves out the requirement that the charcoal filtering must use maple charcoal.Jim Manleynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-46568393354626203762014-03-17T14:50:19.001-05:002014-03-17T14:50:19.001-05:00Here is what seems to be missing online. The prop...<a href="http://cowdery.home.ix.netcom.com/~mbky/TNWhsky.pdf" rel="nofollow">Here is what seems to be missing online. </a> The proposed new law is first, followed by the law as passed last year. Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-31507184927140318612014-03-16T08:04:32.650-05:002014-03-16T08:04:32.650-05:00If someone's messing with Dickel, I'm not ...If someone's messing with Dickel, I'm not going to be happy.<br /><br />However, I looked up the full text of both bills (they are available). In the 2013-4 session, both House and Senate bills are identical and only deal with fines and revocation of licenses. <br /><br />Could the bill numbers be wrong?<br /><br />Here's the full text of the senate bill:<br /><br />SENATE BILL 2441 <br />By Green <br /><br />AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 57, relative to alcoholic beverages. <br /><br />BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE: <br /><br />SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 57-1-201(b)(1)(A), is amended by adding the following language at the end of the first sentence of the subdivision: <br /><br />However, the commission shall not impose a fine on a license or permit holder for the same type of violation more than three (3) times in a two-year period. The commission shall be required to suspend or revoke the license or permit instead of imposing a fine after the third violation within the two-year period. <br /><br />SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring it.mruprighthttp://mrupright.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-62400408877897469302014-03-15T16:47:24.808-05:002014-03-15T16:47:24.808-05:00First off...hands off my dickel you philistines!
...First off...hands off my dickel you philistines! <br />Secondly. ..not that I often defend brown forman, but they do make a early times using new wood<br />Thirdly. .stop telling people how good dickel is!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16022188692701340598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-90463861593934719682014-03-15T14:37:06.649-05:002014-03-15T14:37:06.649-05:00@ portwood:
New barrels are an expense, too. Con...@ portwood:<br /><br />New barrels are an expense, too. Consider: Let's say Diageo reuses 20% of their Dickel barrels for a refill before shipping them off to mature Johnnie Walker components. That probably doesn't make too much of a difference to JW, a bit more second-fill bourbon as opposed to first fill. No doubt, a fair portion of Scotch is already second-fill, or beyond. Meanwhile, they can either reduce their new barrel purchases at Dickel or increase their production volume without increasing barrel purchases, and then use a mix of new and refill barrels for Dickel. 20% refill barrels probably doesn't make too much of a difference in the flavor profile, particularly since Dickel gets the charcoal treatment.<br /><br />There might also be second-order effects. Allowing reuse of barrels might decrease the demand for new barrels slightly, lowering prices. I don't know enough about the elasticities of the barrel market to be sure, however.<br /><br />That doesn't mean I support the idea, just that I can understand how Diageo feels it could be profitable.theBitterFignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-37345631444338648912014-03-15T09:42:04.525-05:002014-03-15T09:42:04.525-05:00All you can find online are the abstracts. That...All you can find online are the abstracts. That's not the whole bill, which apparently has not been published.Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-80143702957485633692014-03-15T09:03:07.171-05:002014-03-15T09:03:07.171-05:00Seems to me HB2330 and SB 2441 for the 108th regul...Seems to me HB2330 and SB 2441 for the 108th regular sesion 2013-2014 is just about "requires commision to suspend or revoke a license or permit instead of imposing a fine after the third violation..."<br /><br />Nothing in this bill about barrels.<br /><br />Am I looking at the wrong bills? Do you have a link to the ones you mention?<br /><br /><br />Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07978498728692952121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-44173019528260705782014-03-15T08:38:11.258-05:002014-03-15T08:38:11.258-05:00Mmm... sub-two-year-old Dickel from a massive 4th ...Mmm... sub-two-year-old Dickel from a massive 4th fill hogshead. Just what everyone has been clamoring for!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-27361884788709638652014-03-15T07:38:34.898-05:002014-03-15T07:38:34.898-05:00I don't get it! Diageo is probably the biggest...I don't get it! Diageo is probably the biggest user of ex-bourbon barrels in the world (their Scotch distilleries benefit from relatively low cost wood).<br /><br />Why would they advocate change in American whiskey law, thereby increasing their costs significantly in the Scotch (and rum) business?<br /><br />Re-use of wood in America will reduce availability of ex-bourbon wood for use elsewhere in the world, thereby:<br />a) increasing costs for other whisky producers, and/or<br />b) significantly changing the taste profile of all other whisky <br /><br />As the biggest producer of Scotch (and a large produder of Rum) both of those outcomes would impact Diageo the most...<br /><br />portwoodAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-78102653343641009982014-03-15T07:09:24.035-05:002014-03-15T07:09:24.035-05:00Have they said why? I knew the micros were agains...Have they said why? I knew the micros were against the law that was passed. What does the big galoot want to do that they can't now?scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06223114724563467033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-44033949040705163602014-03-14T23:50:35.179-05:002014-03-14T23:50:35.179-05:00Considering what Brown-Foreman did to Early Times ...Considering what Brown-Foreman did to Early Times thirty years ago, and the way they've dropped the proof of Jack Daniels over the same period, this sounds less like defending quality and more like simply attack a competitor to me.Doctor Tarrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02722106527742038069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-36185858058628940312014-03-14T22:55:23.733-05:002014-03-14T22:55:23.733-05:00Yes, Scott, Diageo is "advocating using reuse...Yes, Scott, Diageo is "advocating using reused barrels" and worse.Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-92212587977075481072014-03-14T22:41:06.998-05:002014-03-14T22:41:06.998-05:00I'm confused. Is Diageo advocating using reus...I'm confused. Is Diageo advocating using reused barrels? How is it "this is about Diageo"?scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06223114724563467033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-8387164584633171512014-03-14T21:30:35.846-05:002014-03-14T21:30:35.846-05:00Surely, this doesn't pass. The sad thing is t...Surely, this doesn't pass. The sad thing is that Diageo doesn't have a clue that they possess one of the hidden gems in the world of Whiskey.<br /><br />Truly stunning that one company could possess such a tin ear.kaiserhoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18214148630816519490noreply@blogger.com