Lounge Lizards This Week: Kelner LE 80 with Writers' Tears Copper Pot Still Blended Irish Whiskey/Cigar Aficionado's 2025 Top 25/ Bam selling his (or Rooster's?) Trinidad Fundadores/Klaas Kelner cigar created for his father's 80th birthday


Recommended Posts

Posted

:cigar:

 This week the Lizards pair the Kelner LE 80 with Writers' Tears Copper Pot Still Blended Irish Whiskey. The guys discuss Cigar Aficionado's 2025 Top 25, chaos erupts when Gizmo provides a major update on Bam selling his (or Rooster's?) Trinidad Fundadores and the guys smoke a Klaas Kelner cigar created for his father's 80th birthday. PLUS: Nicaragua's Effect on Cuba and Cuban Cigars, Bam's New Buzzer, More Blind Rating Episodes?, Davidoff Diademas Finas Inspiration & More

  • Like 2
Posted
11 hours ago, TomsRibs210 said:

Seasoned listeners will recognize that the saga of Rooster’s Fundadores transcends “inside joke” status and now exists as our modern Homeric epic. Not since Odysseus clawed his way back to Ithaca has there been such a treacherous journey in the single funniest segment in Lounge Lizards history.

Centuries from now, scholars will regard this episode as at least ten times more culturally significant than anything Homer ever scribbled down.

What makes this triumph of the human spirit even richer is the long arc. The seeds were planted over 15 months ago in Episode 154, when the boys first discussed how Fundadores had fallen out of favor. Fast forward to Episode 176 (March 25, 2025), when Gizmo raises the etiquette of selling to friends and whether one should apply a markup to those closest to you.

At that moment, Bam Bam stood at the crossroads: silence… or truth. One path preserves peace. The other detonates a Watergate-level conspiracy. Thankfully, for the sake of Lizard Nation, Bam chose chaos.

Bam: “My only experience in buying among us was honestly from you, Giz.”
Rooster: “Hello!”
Bam asks: “I bought a box through you?”
Rooster responds: “I sold you a box of the Fundies—”
Senator chimes in: “—that then he re-sold at a profit! How f****d up is that?”

Consider the entertainment we nearly lost had Bam stayed mum.

A tremendous episode. On behalf of the listeners, thank you, Bam, for once again being a one-man gang in service of elite content for Lizard Nation.

All jokes aside, the ethical dilemma posed here is an interesting one - was Bam in the wrong for not first offering the box to Rooster (at the price he originally paid)? Does the passage of time negate any such obligation (if one ever existed)? And, not that a substantial financial gain has been made, is there a new obligation on Bam to share some with Rooster (and, if so, how much)? Future philosophers and their students could study these questions ad nauseum, lol. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, TommySnark said:

All jokes aside, the ethical dilemma posed here is an interesting one - was Bam in the wrong for not first offering the box to Rooster (at the price he originally paid)? Does the passage of time negate any such obligation (if one ever existed)? And, not that a substantial financial gain has been made, is there a new obligation on Bam to share some with Rooster (and, if so, how much)? 
Future philosophers and their students could study these questions ad nauseum, lol. 

My view is that he should split the profits with Rooster. It would be equally problematic if Bam would have sold them back to Rooster at the original price for Rooster then to sell them on BR at a huge profit, too. 

Posted
16 minutes ago, TommySnark said:

All jokes aside, the ethical dilemma posed here is an interesting one - was Bam in the wrong for not first offering the box to Rooster (at the price he originally paid)? Does the passage of time negate any such obligation (if one ever existed)? And, not that a substantial financial gain has been made, is there a new obligation on Bam to share some with Rooster (and, if so, how much)? 
Future philosophers and their students could study these questions ad nauseum, lol. 

The ethical questions that have been posed are valid and remain polarizing...though as I've said, if I was in Rooster's position I truly wouldn't care after all this time. If I sold him the box a month ago, sure, but we're talking 3 years or so. With that being said, I truly don't believe this is a box Rooster procured. He and Senator seem to think so, but I think I'm the one who got this box for him at cost when I ordered my own box in late '21.

I sold my box long ago, so unfortunately I don't have box code details to compare. We will never know.

I'm so glad you all enjoyed this lunacy as much as I did!

  • Like 4
Posted
5 minutes ago, LizardGizmo said:

With that being said, I truly don't believe this is a box Rooster procured. He and Senator seem to think so, but I think I'm the one who got this box for him at cost when I ordered my own box in late '21.

I sold my box long ago, so unfortunately I don't have box code details to compare. We will never know.

Time to convene a Kangaroo Court! 

  • Haha 1
Posted

Rooster needs to get over this now. Even if it was the box he sold to Bam, once you sell something it’s no longer yours. The new buyer / owner has the right to do whatever they want. It’s sour grapes on Rooster's part, that he’s not benefiting from the increase in value. 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 1/14/2026 at 11:40 AM, LizardGizmo said:

The ethical questions that have been posed are valid and remain polarizing...though as I've said, if I was in Rooster's position I truly wouldn't care after all this time. If I sold him the box a month ago, sure, but we're talking 3 years or so. With that being said, I truly don't believe this is a box Rooster procured. He and Senator seem to think so, but I think I'm the one who got this box for him at cost when I ordered my own box in late '21.

I sold my box long ago, so unfortunately I don't have box code details to compare. We will never know.

I'm so glad you all enjoyed this lunacy as much as I did!

And, Giz, I’d like to recognize and re-emphasize this point you’ve (repeatedly) made on the issue, ie, the passage of time. Senator seems to disregard the two-plus years between purchase and sale as irrelevant, but it’s clearly not - especially with large stores of cigars, was Bam supposed to remember where and when he bought every single cigar in his collection? Is he required to keep a log of all transactions? And to do so forever? Just to avoid the appearance of impropriety on any later day sale? Personally, I think that’s a silly proposition. I’m happy to give Bam the benefit of the doubt (again, assuming it’s Rooster’s box at issue) that he truly forgot where he procured it and simply wanted to sell off a box he was no longer interested in. 

  • Like 3
Posted

I want to emphasize how wonderful the reviews of the cigar and spirit were in this episode!  My mouth was salivating and I was dreaming that I could have the experience the Lizards were having. I fear that may have been lost in the Fundadores Saga detailed in comments above. I immediately purchased a box of the cigars and then went to the local liquor store for the Writer’s Tears. Last evening I poured a glass and the spirit is as good as they say!  Only $35 in Ohio!  What a find and thanks to the Lizards for an incredible episode!

  • Thanks 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.