Marketing: Bowmore

[El Presidente]

For those that enjoy the nuance of brilliant marketing 

 

 

The Bowmore 32 Year Old "No Corners To Hide" is an exceptional whisky crafted exclusively for Travel Retail, designed in collaboration with the renowned artist Frank Quitely, who has illustrated for Marvel and DC Comics, and Bowmore's Master Blender Ron Welsh. This limited edition expression celebrates Bowmore's rich heritage and mastery in whisky-making, offering a sublime tasting experience that reflects decades of maturation on Islay's shores. As the myth behind No Corners to Hide goes, back in 1837, on a clear winter's evening, the devil visited the church in Bowmore. Strikingly round in shape, purposely built, in preparation for such a visit as there were no corners in which the devil could hide. Despite the best efforts of the local congregation who chased the devil from the church to the Bowmore distillery where they bolted the gates and locked the doors, the search proved fruitless and the devil had vanished. The devil was never found, but it's believed that he hid himself in a cask, where ironically, there too are no corners to hide. An initial 30 years of maturation in ex-bourbon American oak hogsheads reflects a timely occupation in cask, much like the devil's own alleged escape. This was followed by two further years in Essencia barriques to bring an unusually distinctive character to the fore, again combining beeswax, incense and struck match. Bottled at 47.3%, the 32 Year Old offers aromas of zesty Seville orange peel, old cigar box, Manuka honey, salted caramel, and light gorse flower. The nose features a touch of licorice, sweet fresh tobacco, oak spice, nutmeg, peppercorn and cloves, vanilla, peat smoke and iodine. The finish is mouth warming with flavors of dry grass and subtle smoke. Each bottle comes complete with a signed print from Frank Quitely, alongside original sketches and notes from the whisky making process. Distillery: Bowmore, Bottle Size: 70cl, Strength: 47.3%ABV, Region: Islay, Country: Scotland, Age: 32. Auction Note: Kruse GWS hereby disclaims any provision of in-house shipping services for this lot. The conveyance of the lot shall be orchestrated by an independent third-party shipping agent which will be coordinated by the auction house. All of the items in this sale are located in the United Kingdom, and will be shipped from the United Kingdom. By engaging in this auction, the bidder warrants and assures that they have attained the requisite legal age for alcohol consumption and undertakes to present valid and legally recognized proof of age upon receipt of the lot. The bidder explicitly acknowledges and assumes accountability for any shipping costs (as they are not included) as well as all pertinent Value Added Tax (VAT) or import fees. Shipping costs will be invoiced separately from your auction purchase invoice once they are calculated based on the winning bidder's location. The seller(s) in this auction warrant the genuineness of each lot. This is a sealed, unopened bottle. All sales are final. Special Note: Given the recent surge in demand and the rapid escalation in the valuation of exclusive whiskies, whiskey has emerged as a preeminent asset class for investment. Whiskey investments have exhibited superior performance vis-a-vis global stock markets and various other categories of collectible assets.

 

 

 

[BoliDan]

If you're going to spend $1500 on a liter of alcohol it's nice to have something besides an empty bottle after you drink it.

These 30+ years are pretty gimmicky. I've talked to a distiller who said quality of aging spirits is on a bell-curve over time. Meaning you will reach the best quality at a point in time and then quality starts to degrade in complexity and flavor. Too much angel's share leads to cloying sweet and wood flavors. Honestly I've found bourbons 4 years old can be much better than 10 year. Ardbeg Corryvreckan is one of my favorite peated scotches and its only 3 years. Not saying I wouldn't love to try these 30 year olds. But I'm not willing to pay that price to maybe be disappointed.

[El Presidente]

2 hours ago, BoliDan said:

If you're going to spend $1500 on a liter of alcohol it's nice to have something besides an empty bottle after you drink it.

These 30+ years are pretty gimmicky. I've talked to a distiller who said quality of aging spirits is on a bell-curve over time. Meaning you will reach the best quality at a point in time and then quality starts to degrade in complexity and flavor. Too much angel's share leads to cloying sweet and wood flavors. Honestly I've found bourbons 4 years old can be much better than 10 year. Ardbeg Corryvreckan is one of my favorite peated scotches and its only 3 years. Not saying I wouldn't love to try these 30 year olds. But I'm not willing to pay that price to maybe be disappointed.

The in's and out's of the value proposition are forever debatable be it whiskey, wine or cigars. 

However, when it comes to marketing, this has been very well done. Storytelling at its finest. 

[Ken Gargett]

2 hours ago, BoliDan said:

If you're going to spend $1500 on a liter of alcohol it's nice to have something besides an empty bottle after you drink it.

These 30+ years are pretty gimmicky. I've talked to a distiller who said quality of aging spirits is on a bell-curve over time. Meaning you will reach the best quality at a point in time and then quality starts to degrade in complexity and flavor. Too much angel's share leads to cloying sweet and wood flavors. Honestly I've found bourbons 4 years old can be much better than 10 year. Ardbeg Corryvreckan is one of my favorite peated scotches and its only 3 years. Not saying I wouldn't love to try these 30 year olds. But I'm not willing to pay that price to maybe be disappointed.

the bell curve thing you mention is undoubtedly correct. have discussed that a number of times with distillers - they do get frustrated with the concept that the number one yardstick of quality is age as it really does devalue their work. the issue is that the bell curve varies for each - it might be the three years you mention or it might be thirty years. all part of the distiller's skill in recognising it and blending accordingly. but i'm am the same. be very happy to try these very old whiskies but far less happy to pay this sort of money. 

[BoliDan]

2 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

the bell curve thing you mention is undoubtedly correct. have discussed that a number of times with distillers - they do get frustrated with the concept that the number one yardstick of quality is age as it really does devalue their work. the issue is that the bell curve varies for each - it might be the three years you mention or it might be thirty years. all part of the distiller's skill in recognising it and blending accordingly. but i'm am the same. be very happy to try these very old whiskies but far less happy to pay this sort of money. 

Indeed. I should have also mentioned the top quality over time will depend on the product. It certainly could be 30 years. But I just dont trust large producers that may go against the advice of the head distiller. 

[Ken Gargett]

17 minutes ago, BoliDan said:

Indeed. I should have also mentioned the top quality over time will depend on the product. It certainly could be 30 years. But I just dont trust large producers that may go against the advice of the head distiller. 

exactly. they pay big dollars to these guys. if they are not clever enough to listen to them, the future is not bright. 

[Woody Hayes]

Years ago, I read a serious article stating hundreds of aged scotches were scientifically tested for age accuracy. Almost 30% were not even close to the age indicated on the bottle. I don't know how viable the conclusion was.

[Ken Gargett]

3 minutes ago, Woody Hayes said:

Years ago, I read a serious article stating hundreds of aged scotches were scientifically tested for age accuracy. Almost 30% were not even close to the age indicated on the bottle.  I don't know how viable the conclusion was.

you do hear stories of that and i have no doubt that plenty have fudged the figures. but given they blend these things and there might be some 40 year old material and some 5 five old material, i am not sure how the machine identifies that. 

[Edicion]

The best whisky marketing advertisement is still this one:

https://youtu.be/fZ6aiVg2qVk?si=V-iPrF8lizHsSG3x

 

[Shakey]

Huh. They put it down for 30 years and then decided to age for another 2 in something heavy-handed like Essencia barrels. Begs the question - how far off from the goal was it on tasting after 30 years? The guys who run Pure Malts tastings in the US call this a “hail Mary save”. 

[RDB]

I see this kind of thing as a perfectly harmless way to recycle funds from the very rich. Much more sustainable than building projects, luxury vehicles and exotic destinations.

[Fugu]

On 7/22/2024 at 6:42 AM, BoliDan said:

These 30+ years are pretty gimmicky. I've talked to a distiller who said quality of aging spirits is on a bell-curve over time. Meaning you will reach the best quality at a point in time and then quality starts to degrade in complexity and flavor. Too much angel's share leads to cloying sweet and wood flavors. Honestly I've found bourbons 4 years old can be much better than 10 year. Ardbeg Corryvreckan is one of my favorite peated scotches and its only 3 years.

An anecdote: In good years and time allowing I used to make wine from sloe. One year, in a fit of experimental curiosity, I wanted to try and let a few litres mature in cask before bottling. Ordered a mini oak cask of five litre volume from a barrel maker. (Mind you, not one of those decorative display casks, but a real, light-toast cask made from French oak from an industry supplier.) After about four months when the wine was done I wanted to rinse and clean the cask. Following a thorough flushing with water I filled in a litre of the cheapest clear (neutral taste) 80-proof spirit, in preparation for final dry preservation. Let it work for some hours, not more than a few days iirc, while turning and shaking the cask now and then. After draining that wash I thought - hmm, that aroma smells really good. Took a sip, and ... bam! Turns out a very nice "whisky". Totally enjoyable! Notes of smokey oak, noble woods, vanilla, prune fruitiness, hint of honey sweetness and even some interesting mineral notes on top. Perhaps only lacking the peaty and oxidative aspects of a real whiskey. Sure, different surface/volume ratio. Eye opener with regard to the temporal factor nonetheless!

[Jack]

On 7/21/2024 at 1:42 PM, BoliDan said:

If you're going to spend $1500 on a liter of alcohol it's nice to have something besides an empty bottle after you drink it.

Closer to US$5,000