Maker's Mark Announces, Cancels Lower Proof "Due To High Demand"

[FunnyJohn]

From 90 to 84 proof

[jparrott]

Wheated bourbon is a sacred trust. MM's insistence on no-age-statement, low-proof whiskey has put it on the outs with enthusiasts for years. So count me as unsurprised.

[deangold]

An artisan producer weathers a shortage via raising prices, allocating output, anything but cutting quality. How much do you want to bet that when the shortage is over, they bring out a second line, more expensive product which is just the original blend? And keep the cheaper crap as their flagship.

Rantesd as I eye my bottles of Four Roses single barrel, Kentucky spirit, Noah's Mill and Rowans Creek.... decisions, decisions....

[RWBooneJr]

Shockingly, the following post I left on Maker's Mark's Facebook page lasted only minutes: "I, for one, am excited about the changes to Maker's Mark. I'm sure it will be delicious with all this New Coke I've been hoarding."

[zoramargolis]

Shockingly, the following post I left on Maker's Mark's Facebook page lasted only minutes: "I, for one, am excited about the changes to Maker's Mark. I'm sure it will be delicious with all this New Coke I've been hoarding."

No snark on the rocks for you!

[DonRocks]

This isn't that much different than Burger King changing their pickles.

Maker's Mark was already terrible, so now it's going to be a little bit more terrible.

[SeanMike]

This isn't that much different than Burger King changing their pickles.

Maker's Mark was already terrible, so now it's going to be a little bit more terrible.

I wouldn't say it's terrible as much as I'd say "undistinguished". It's a sweet, light bourbon that I feel has its role in some drinks, and can be useful in creating infusions where the whiskey isn't going to fight with the ingredients. Beyond that, I don't typically recommend it as a "straight" whiskey, but not because it's bad. Just because it's light in taste.

To me, the ABV drop? Eh. Whatever. The only time I buy Maker's Mark (which I haven't done in ages) has been for infusions, and in that regard...whatevs. We'll see how I feel next time I need something for those.

[FunnyJohn]

Best reaction so far from Stephen Green (aka VodkaPundit, over at PJ Media):

"I’d take a Bulleit for Maker’s Mark."

[DonRocks]

I wouldn't say it's terrible as much as I'd say "undistinguished". It's a sweet, light bourbon that I feel has its role in some drinks, and can be useful in creating infusions where the whiskey isn't going to fight with the ingredients. Beyond that, I don't typically recommend it as a "straight" whiskey, but not because it's bad. Just because it's light in taste.

To me, the ABV drop? Eh. Whatever. The only time I buy Maker's Mark (which I haven't done in ages) has been for infusions, and in that regard...whatevs. We'll see how I feel next time I need something for those.

You do see how they don't care about you as a target audience, right?

[DaveO]

I've always been a huge fan of my favorite alcohol, which = STRONG. for the time being Makers Mark has dropped in attractiveness.

[SeanMike]

You do see how they don't care about you as a target audience, right?

I haven't been their target market in years. But that doesn't, on its own, make a product good or bad.

[DonRocks]

I haven't been their target market in years. But that doesn't, on its own, make a product good or bad.

This statement has bugged me all day. I think when it comes to cocktails and liquors, your taste (and by extension your purchasing habits) is a pretty good arbiter of quality. If you're not interested in something, that's a sign that it might not be very good. Yeah, okay, you may have a personal disdain for Ouzo (or whatever), but you *love* Bourbon, and the fact that you don't care much for this except as a "mixer" ...

As an example, I sometimes text Jake Parrott when I'm in a liquor store, staring down a wall of unknown Bourbons, and base my purchasing decision entirely on his thumbs up or thumbs down. He has a much more extensive knowledge than I do, but our palates are pretty well in sync, and, similarly, I knew from that very first Negroni you made me that you know what the hell you're doing.

[SeanMike]

This statement has bugged me all day. I think when it comes to cocktails and liquors, your taste (and by extension your purchasing habits) is a pretty good arbiter of quality. If you're not interested in something, that's a sign that it might not be very good. Yeah, okay, you may have a personal disdain for Ouzo (or whatever), but you *love* Bourbon, and the fact that you don't care much for this except as a "mixer" ...

As an example, I sometimes text Jake Parrott when I'm in a liquor store, staring down a wall of unknown Bourbons, and base my purchasing decision entirely on his thumbs up or thumbs down. He has a much more extensive knowledge than I do, but our palates are pretty well in sync, and, similarly, I knew from that very first Negroni you made me that you know what the hell you're doing.

But that's the thing - I'm not the target market because it's not my style. It's light and sweet. Many people don't want a complex, strong bourbon (or other whiskey). They want something they can sip on without much trouble, or add to a mixed drink where it's not going to overwhelm the other ingredients. That's a perfectly acceptable, IMHO, standard to have, and if that's what they want Maker's is the whiskey for them.

(Yes, Maker's spells it "whisky" but no.)

I see Maker's as a beginning bourbon. Hey, you've got something with more flavor then vodka, great. It's not actively bad, like (for instance, and IMHO) Jim Beam white label, or Bowman's generic label. It's perfectly fine and you can find it just about anywhere (I haven't seen the supply woes they went on about but I don't work on that side of the bar). Once you've gotten into Maker's, there's such a plethora of other whiskeys out there that it takes some time to get to know them, and you just learn by seeing what you like. "Oh, you like Maker's? Well this one is going to be spicier and less sweet, but not dramatically so. Now let's move on to..."

It provides a crucial niche. You don't just jump into Willett and Bulleit, for instance. Most liquors seem to have a product or two in their genre; I consider Bombay Sapphire, Tanq 10, and Hendricks to be similar in the gin category, and have all three of those (and Maker's) on my shelf. Someone new to gin can get introduced to it slowly, then work up to more complex products such as Royal Dock Navy Strength.

[lperry]

But that's the thing - I'm not the target market because it's not my style. It's light and sweet. Many people don't want a complex, strong bourbon (or other whiskey). They want something they can sip on without much trouble, or add to a mixed drink where it's not going to overwhelm the other ingredients. That's a perfectly acceptable, IMHO, standard to have, and if that's what they want Maker's is the whiskey for them.

Thank you for making this point. I like MM in cocktails, particularly in Tiki drinks that call for bourbon. It mixes very nicely, giving the drink that bourbon "something" that it needs without giving it other flavors that it doesn't need and that might actually screw up the harmony of the drink. Makers will also give a nice flavor to your derby pie or banana bread, and the latter will be all the better for macerating the bananas and spirits overnight.

We typically have MM in the cabinet along with something more complex, Wild Turkey Rare Breed right now, I think, and both get used, just for different purposes. Do I care about the proof? No. It won't change how I use it.

[DonRocks]

You don't just jump into Willett and Bulleit, for instance.

I did.

[SeanMike]

...and now they're saying that they'll stay at 90 proof.

[deangold]

Whew... would hate for corporate crap to get crappier!

[ad.mich]

I don't love MM as anything other than a rail bourbon, but for real Dean? I'm 1000x times more annoyed at those 'small batch' brands that are actually buying their liquor from LDI. Like *GASP* Bulleit.

We'd all be better off if those Big Bad Corporate Brands all listened and responded to customer feedback the way MM did in this situation. I'm still not going to drink a lot of MM, but I'll tip my cap their way in this instance.

[Escoffier]

They've decided NOT to change the alcohol content in any way.

[deangold]

I tasted one of the first bottles of Maker's brought into LA and it was something special. A year or two later, it was not. Today it is corporate crap. We carry it since it is asked for so much just as I carry Tanq and JW Black.

But our rail is Johnny Drum. And we sell Noah's Mill, Rowan Creek, Four Roses Single Barrel and Wild Turkey Kentucky Spirit. Oh yeah, Willets too. We sell one bottle's worth of MM every two or there months. In that same period we sell bottles of the others I mentioned. Cases of our rail.

And I could not give a shit less where or who actually distills these bourbons in so far as they drink great. They could be made in a bathtub or bought from a huge factory. They are blended well and honestly. They are distinctive, they are fun to drink. In other words, they are far from corporate crap.

Maker's Mark announced to the world that their bean counters are in charge and then proved that their bean counters balls are the size of those beans {probably navy bean or great northern at best}.

Fetzer's Bonterra Organic is no different than any other corporate crap beverage alcohol just because they get the organic label on it. I don't cheer it as one of the largest organic brands, I scorn it. Just as I scorn the wasted popportunity that Whole

Foods now is.

Since there are no bean counters at Dino, I just do what I think is right. And I think calling Maker's Mark Corpporate Crap is the right thing to do. Just because there is more over hyped even corporatier crappy crap put there is no reason to not do so. I just hope at the end of every month, when it comes time to write my rent check, there is enough to cover it.

[RWBooneJr]

I've had the pleasure of downing Maker's Mark with Bill Samuels on a few occasions over the years. I like him, and I like his Bourbon. It may be the Bourbon equivalent of white bread, but it's good white bread. And often white bread is a better choice than some other kind that "bread afficionados" might find "more interesting." So I applaud Makers' decision not to change their product. It was a dumb idea from its inception, but I suppose I have the occasional dumb idea. Hopefully the pressures that led to it won't affect the product in more subtle ways going forward.

[jparrott]

BREAKING: Makers Mark to continue bottling its whiskey at too low a proof.

[DonRocks]

BREAKING: Makers Mark to continue bottling its whiskey at too low a proof.

It's fascinating. All of a sudden, the 90-proof version is a "connoisseur's Bourbon" and a precious commodity. Think this was done on purpose?

[SeanMike]

It's fascinating. All of a sudden, the 90-proof version is a "connoisseur's Bourbon" and a precious commodity. Think this was done on purpose?

I've seen a lot of conspiracy theory-style ramblings thinking they did it all on purpose. I'm not one to attribute malice where incompetence can be blamed.

[DonRocks]

I've seen a lot of conspiracy theory-style ramblings thinking they did it all on purpose. I'm not one to attribute malice where incompetence can be blamed.

SeanMike, the *last* thing I would accuse Beam's marketing department of is incompetence - think of all they've done.

This is the same company that developed the undrinkable black cherry-flavored Red Stag to transition Cosmo drinkers into Bourbon.

To hear Fred Noe discuss the virtues of Red Stag with a straight face was jaw-dropping.

[SeanMike]

Let's rephrase then: not incompetence, but rather a self-delusion of what they could sell the public, given previous "wins".

[Mark Slater]

SeanMike, the *last* thing I would accuse Beam's marketing department of is incompetence - think of all they've done.

This is the same company that developed the undrinkable black cherry-flavored Red Stag to transition Cosmo drinkers into Bourbon.

To hear Fred Noe discuss the virtues of Red Stag with a straight face was jaw-dropping.

Remember how their expert handling of the purchase and management of Sonoma Cutrer turned a credible brand into supermarket swill.

[SeanMike]

Don, since you mentioned the Red Stag, I thought I'd mention this:

http://matthew-rowley.blogspot.com/2010/11/beams-red-stag-i-confess-ii-kinda-like.html

I respect the heck outta Mr. Rowley.

(I still haven't had the urge to spend money to try Red Stag, though.)

[DonRocks]

Don, since you mentioned the Red Stag, I thought I'd mention this:

http://matthew-rowley.blogspot.com/2010/11/beams-red-stag-i-confess-ii-kinda-like.html

I respect the heck outta Mr. Rowley.

(I still haven't had the urge to spend money to try Red Stag, though.)

You should try the Red Stag sometime, SeanMike. Preferably in front of me as I'd very much like to see your face when you do.

My hypothesis, for whatever reason, attracted some attention. For example, Scott Lyon decided to cite it in his case study about Marker's Mark. The only thing I'd add is that I'm not accusing anyone of "foul play" regardless of intent, and I'm only speculating about what the intent could, in theory, have been. Even if this were the case, I suspect plenty of marketers out there wouldn't see any foul play in this at all, and I'm not sure I would either.

[SeanMike]

You should try the Red Stag sometime, SeanMike. Preferably in front of me as I'd very much like to see your face when you do.

You buy, I'll try. Though Hogo almost definitely doesn't have it (which is where I'm going post-exam today).

[Dr. Delicious]

Similar to what SeanMike said above, in my own maturation as a whisk(e)y drinker, Makers Mark was a useful gateway whisk(e)y, if you will.

[DonRocks]

Jason Wilson of The Washington Post chimes in.

Although his tone is somewhat flippant, I largely agree with what he says. Anyone else?

[deangold]

Since I am on a roll trashing corporate bev-alco, the other night Carla, one of our barkeeps, was playing around with a couple of cocktails, making three versions each.

On cocktail #1, the first version was watery, boring and something I would never allow to be offered. Of course, i had no idea what was in the cocktail, they were served double blind to me. When I commented on the quality of the cocktail {I think my words were something along the lines of "that tastes like dishwasher splash mopped up off the floor with booze in it}, it was revealed as having Maker's Mark in it. I mentioned that I prefer to never use Maker's in a cocktail, reserving it for folk who call for it and can't be talked into a quality beverage.

Cocktail #2 was another trio, again served double blind. #1 and #2 versions were each in their own right great drinks {they varied by the Amaro content} while #3 earned another acerbic comment and a spit take. Yep, it was maker's Mark again. They wanted to see if my first reaction was a lucky guess.

I think that Carla, after finishing her course at the therapist, will never make me a drink with Maker's in it again*.

To thouse who say Maker's is sufficient for a cocktail, to me it is noticibly not up to Johnny Drum or the bottle of Early Times we were getting rid of in the first experiement.

* a touch of hyperbole added to leaven this story with humor, just like a touch of truth leavens politcal speaches without constituting the whole.

[darkstar965]

I'm not a spirits or mixed drink kind of person. It's exceedingly rare that I order a cocktail of any kind with just two in the past 9 months that I can recall (both enjoyable--one at R24 about which I posted and another at Willow that Chris Cunningham made for me a few nights ago, a blood orange margarita with jalapeno syrup). So what has that got to do with Bourbon and Maker's Mark? Not much other than to affirm that a true whisky neophyte is at the keyboard right now.

So stated, I have a trip to Kentucky upcoming in the next few weeks and will have some free time while there. Didn't even enter my realm on thinking to do a Bourbon Tour or distillery visit as I know so many visiting the area do. But, because I have an interest in food, drink, the near-infinite number of cultural connections with those two things, and business, this Makers Mark "controversy" caught my attention and I've been following. Won't weigh in with a view since I don't think I've ever tried the stuff but wanted to share something.

I've been reading RW (Johnny) Apple's "Far Flung and Well Fed" and there's a section in it on bourbon, a drink about which he's pretty dismissive broadly though with a bit of respect for Makers Mark years ago well before the dilution idea of recent months. The relevant section is quoted below or you can read the entire piece, with Makers Mark mention, here. I found this interesting. Maybe some of you will too.

So what makes the new bourbons special? Some are older, which means they have spent more time in contact with the oak that tames some of
their fire and gives them the tastes that connoisseurs love -- vanilla, smokiness, caramel, with hints of peaches, cloves and honey. Some are
stronger, cut with little water. They offer the same sort of pleasure a good Cognac does, with their complex perfumes and their amalgams of fruit, sugar and spice flavors, begging to be rolled around the mouth. They are meant to be drunk slowly, perhaps with a good cigar. In their rustic quality, they resemble Armagnac, with the flavor of corn, not grapes.

But deluxe bourbons differ less from mass-produced brands like Jim Beam or I. W. Harper than single-malt Scotches differ from Dewar's or Cutty Sark. The Scotches are blends of one or more single malts with neutral spirits, but all the straight bourbons, whether standard or deluxe, are 100 percent bourbon. Premium bourbons are shamelessly ballyhooed by the advertising and public-relations fraternities. A distiller may tout the special
mashbill, or recipe, he uses for his premium brand, when in fact he uses much the same formula for both the cheapest and costliest products in
his range. A lot of nonsense is put about on the subject of ''secret'' strains of yeast. Labels fairly drip with hyperbole, as in this on
Blanton's Single Barrel, a mahogany-hue product of the Ancient Age Distillery that started the whole deluxe craze in 1984: ''We believe
this is the finest bottle of whisky ever produced.''