Page 1 of 1

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:59 pm
by Malcolm
From here.
The major competitor of Jack Daniel's wants to slightly change up the definition of "Tennessee bourbon."

Current law:
By law, bourbon must be made of a grain mix of at least 51 percent corn, distilled at less than 160 proof, have no additives except water to reduce the proof and be aged in new, charred white oak barrels.

Some distillers want to bring used barrels in because they're cheaper.

Competitors, you ask?
"This isn't about Diageo, as all of our Tennessee whiskey is made with new oak," said Diageo executive vice president Guy L. Smith IV. "This is about Brown-Forman trying to stifle competition and the entrepreneurial spirit of micro distillers.

Bullshit. This is entirely about Diageo. You may recognize them as a major spirits company that gets a piece of about half of everything you imbibe.

David McMahan, a lobbyist representing Dickel and Popcorn Sutton Distilling, said the law passed last year would require all Tennessee whiskies to taste like Jack Daniel's.

"It's not unlike if the beer guys 25 years ago had said all American beer has to be made like Budweiser," McMahan said. "You never would have a Sam Adams or a Yazoo or any of those guys."

While I can agree a bit with that statement, they're arguing over a goddamned label.

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:25 pm
by Leisher
Republican state Rep. Bill Sanderson:
"There are a lot of ways to make high-quality whiskey, even if it's not necessarily the way Jack Daniel's does it," Sanderson said. "What gives them the right to call theirs Tennessee whiskey, and not others?"

Sanderson acknowledged that he introduced the measure at Diageo's urging, but said it would also help micro distilleries opening across the state.


I wonder how much he cost?

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:07 pm
by Malcolm
Thing is, I buy more micro distilled whiskey than Jack or Jim. I don't give a flying fuck if it's legit Tennessee bourbon. I hate erring on the side of protecting an artificially tight and draconian law, but if the state wants to brand the characteristic booze produced from it, so be it. Scotland does the same thing, so does Mexico.

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:31 pm
by Vince
Malcolm wrote:Thing is, I buy more micro distilled whiskey than Jack or Jim. I don't give a flying fuck if it's legit Tennessee bourbon.
Truth.

As a recovering alcoholic that drank Jack as my poison, I wouldn't have stopped if the Tennessee label came off.