Comments on: Inevitable: Maker’s Mark reverses decision to cut alcohol content

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 25 May 2013 15:30:59 +0000

[...] …. Might be worth investing in a couple of bottles, even though I don't drink. 16 posted … Inevitable: Maker's Mark reverses decision to cut alcohol content … [...]

By: astonerii

astonerii — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 22:41:43 +0000

My bad. You are right, you cannot keep a premium brand without premium quality. At least, should not. I am not a big alcohol drinker, so in this game I am not an expert, but it certainly seems lots of premium brands remain premium even with lack luster quality items. Ever seen the crud they pass off to women for purses? Plastic bags for hundreds of dollars. astonerii on February 17, 2013 at 5:33 PM

By: astonerii

astonerii — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 22:33:37 +0000

I didn’t mean to imply that. Just the opposite. I think they thought they could maintain a premium brand name without the premium brand and (in a few years) the diluted form would become permanent. But they also thought the price-demand curve wasn’t going to permit raising the prices much, maybe because of the economy. So they chose the easy way out: lying. And, I’m no expert on making the stuff, but I suspect expanding production isn’t done overnight for something made with traditional methods. i.e. this was a long term move.

Fenris on February 17, 2013 at 4:23 PM

My bad. You are right, you cannot keep a premium brand with premium quality. At least, should not.
I am not a big alcohol drinker, so in this game I am not an expert, but it certainly seems lots of premium brands remain premium even with lack luster quality items. Ever seen the crud they pass off to women for purses? Plastic bags for hundreds of dollars.

By: TexasDan

TexasDan — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:55:25 +0000

Then again maybe it’s brilliant marketing.

reddevil on February 17, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Yeah, except I read the press release. They weren’t faking that much stupid.

By: Dusty

Dusty — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:40:47 +0000

Don’t they teach the New Coke/Original debacle in business school?

[reddevil on February 17, 2013 at 3:25 PM]

I think you’ll find it’s an elective and offered in the early morning so students choose to take, Short Cuts 101 which is in the afternoon and doesn’t require attendance or home work.

By: sauldalinsky

sauldalinsky — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:31:34 +0000

Bourbon by definition is made in Kentucky. What’s the other 5%?

oldernwiser on February 17, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Ashley Judd’s house.

By: wolly4321

wolly4321 — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:29:24 +0000

Is the stuff any good? Never tried it.

Did try Jack Daniels honey this weekend. It’s great.

By: BierManVA

BierManVA — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:27:36 +0000

Either lying or deluding themselves. A little math tells us they added water about equal to 7% of the total volume of 90 proof whiskey to make it 84 proof. 7% isn’t just a ‘touch’, I can taste that. Fenris on February 17, 2013 at 3:53 PM

Can you taste the water that is already in it at 90 proof?

By: oldernwiser

oldernwiser — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:26:10 +0000

Kentucky produces 95 percent of the world’s bourbon supply,

Bourbon by definition is made in Kentucky. What’s the other 5%?

By: Fenris

Fenris — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:23:55 +0000

For the person who argued about them to add 7% to the price instead of cutting 7% of alcohol volume, price and quality are not directly related at a rate of one to one…

astonerii on February 17, 2013 at 4:06 PM

I didn’t mean to imply that. Just the opposite. I think they thought they could maintain a premium brand name without the premium brand and (in a few years) the diluted form would become permanent. But they also thought the price-demand curve wasn’t going to permit raising the prices much, maybe because of the economy. So they chose the easy way out: lying. And, I’m no expert on making the stuff, but I suspect expanding production isn’t done overnight for something made with traditional methods. i.e. this was a long term move.