Best of Scotch Blog - World's Most Expensive Scotch

On the day you read this, I should be recovering from Bruichladdich day and my birthday, which happened to serendipitously take place on the same day - May 28th. Today, if I am up for it, I'll be visiting Caol Ila, the Port Ellen Maltings, and avoiding alcohol at the Whisky Ceilidh.

More rants about expensive stuff:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted - December 05, 2005

World's Most Expensive Scotch

If you found this via a search engine, I must admit that I've played a trick on you. But it's not a cruel trick - it's for your own good.

If you read on, you'll find out about those "most expensive Scotches" you've been Googling.

If you are a regular reader, I think you'll find this discussion quite interesting.

Today's article is not to talk about "The World's Most Expensive Scotch," but instead to vent about how I am tired of reading about rare and expensive Scotch and the people who buy it.

The question: "Why is it that every time some wanker (see also: drunken, rich fool) spends way too much money on a rare bottle of Scotch, it's given so much media attention."

Everyone is familiar with the stories:

• The six bottles of 1937 Glenfiddich on sale at the Hong Kong Airport for $48,000 each.
• Johnnie Walker releasing a new blend at $28,600 per bottle to celebrate the real Johnnie Walkers' 200th birthday.
• The Dalmore 62 that went for £25,877 ($44,000) in 2002.
• Or my personal favorite: how this year another bottle of the same vintage was bought at a London hotel bar for $55,000 and how the purchaser uncorked it on the spot and consumed it with friends.

Now the fine folks at Whyte & Mackay and William Grant & Sons, are happy to promote the fact that their products hold the distinction of being the most expensive bottles of Scotch ever sold, but at what cost?

While I understand that positive exposure and free press are a great thing, in this context, and in my estimation, it simply reinforces the widely held misconception that Scotch is for silly old rich men, Dot Com millionaires or Traders with expense accounts.

I wonder if there is a correlation between the release of the "most expensive" stories and a noticeable increase in sales? I also wonder if such stories have the effect of solidifying any "for the old & stodgy" perception that Scotch may have amongst the general public.

All in all, I would really like to know if these stories ar a net positive or a net negative. Both for the companies mentioned as well as the sector as a whole.

I'm guessing that the short term bump in brand recognition is not worth the long term effect. But I've certainly been wrong before. So lucky for me (and for you) I have access to people in the industry who can and will share their viewpoint with us...

Name withheld, Major Distillery

Yes, I'm tired of the emphasis on expensive, as opposed to "good." These frivolous purchases ARE over-hyped - but at least the Dalmore was enjoyed, and isn't sitting on the shelf of some collector.

Mark Reynier, Bruichladdich

There are two types of person who will support these extraordinary prices: The Collector and the Show Off.

Pride and the ‘reflected glory’ of being the most expensive malt (“Look what some nutter has paid for a bottle of our malt – so our malt must be really special”) keep it in the public arena.

It is certainly nothing to do with quality - it is all to do with rarity for collectors. The ultimate ‘supply and demand’. Anything ultra rare will fetch astronomic prices: 1787 Chateau Lafite @ $156,450 a bottle is not a reflection on extravagant drinkability – but rarity. Worse – single malt does not improve in bottle. It will taste the same today, as the day it was bottled. And a collector will go to any lengths to complete his collection.

Sure, some City Boys in a restaurant, spending excessively (I’ve seen it myself) on company money is another story. That is showing off; one-upmanship. And that is entirely their prerogative – their company’s budget.

Congratulations to the restauranteur!

Jimmy Robertson, Morrison Bowmore

We would rather pick up a lot of awards for our 12 year-old, 17 year-old and 25 year-old--affirmations of quality that the average guy out there can actually go out and enjoy.

At Frankfurt this year we introduced a Bowmore 16 year-old unchill-filtered, cask strength at 75 Euros (KE - which has just arrived in the US at about $90) and I believe that will do a lot more for our image than a few bottles sold at a few thousand Euros - in that a hell of a lot more people get to try it than if we did a super super deluxe!

Ronnie Cox, The Glenrothes

To see a fine wine or picture break record prices is not an unusual story. Being for a moment on the side of the producer, I would hope these would offer a true excellence combined with unbelievable rarity, but there are lots of other reasons that motivate the purchaser.

It is not so extraordinary that Rare Old Malt Whiskies should be considered in the same light. Purchasers pay what they want and with their own justification criteria ; no rule against that. But, if I personally, wanted to enter this world, now as a consumer and a Scotsman at that, the wee sample would need to do a great deal of convincing.

Robert Ransom, Glenfarclas

We have recently released a 50 years old Glenfarclas, to celebrate the bicentenary of the birth of John Grant, who purchased Glenfarclas in 1865. With a recommended retail price of GBP 2,250 per bottle it offers excellent value compared to the bottlings you have referred to! I am pleased to say the rate of sale has exceeded our expectations.

Brett Pontoni, Binny's

It's a good perspective, the one thing I can tell you is that the breadth of people stories like this reach is narrower than you might think.  We face the problem you bring up all the time in both wine and spirits. The fact is the vast, vast majority of business and interest is in the price range real people actually regularly purchase in, but for some a disproportionate amount of attention is paid to the high end.  I usually turn it on its ear, because I can prove that:

a.) you don't have to spend a ton of money for a great whisky,
b.) at a certain price point you're buying rarity, not necessarily the best whisky, and
c.) age isn't everything.

It's good to add perspective to the issue.

Dave Robertson, JMR Easy Drinking Whisky

I suggest that it is a positive 'cause it suggests to some consumers that whisky can be rare, expensive and very, very exclusive.  It brackets whisky with the top fine wines, top champagnes, luxury cars, jewellery, etc.

Of course this is classic aspirational marketing, but why not.

Who are we to say that someone has to be old/stupid/crazy to buy something rare and expensive - caveat emptor (buyer beware) and for those lucky enough to have the means to access this rarified world - good luck!

Just look at top fashion brands, car brands, holidays, travel and you see that it is not just the "old money" classes that choose to experience the best.

Rory Steel, William Grant & Sons

 The coverage of the Glenfiddich 1937 leaving the distillery even surprised us. We issued the story in Scotland and it went around the world on the Press Association wires and was covered extensively from there.

I wouldn't say from the coverage that I have seen that it implies Scotch is for 'silly old men', but rather that it's a defining moment in the history of the world's favourite single malt distillery (in much the same way the world's oldest Model T Ford being sold would create media interest).

As I'm sure you are aware, the Glenfiddich 1937 was a truly remarkable find and there can be few other single malts to have aged so long. It is the amazing story of the 1937, together with the price tag, that seems to have appealed to media. This underpins that Glenfiddich is a quality product, so you're right, the coverage probably does benefit us, but measuring any direct impact on sales is nigh on impossible.

If you look at the record prices paid by collectors for vintage wines, it's far more than for Scotch, but wine doesn't have an image of being for the elite, fuddy duddies. Collection of these vintage wines may have the image for being for the 'silly old men', and this could be the same for vintage Scotch collectors, but to say that these types of story depict an image that is applied to drinkers across the whole Scotch or wine categories' range is, in my opinion, misleading. Besides, you just need to see the commentary from people such as Angus Winchester in  the UK to see that Scotch is having a resurgence and is fast becoming the fashionable drink of choice in style bars.

As always, blunt responses from industry insiders (much appreciated), and varying opinions (also much appreciated). It's obvious that the whisky industry in Scotland does not "vote as a block."

I agree with a good portion of William Grant & Son's response.

I'll definitely agree that maybe I went a little too far with the "Silly old rich men" comment. I'm a "man," I've often been called "silly," and to your average college-aged person, I'm sure I'm "old." As for "rich" let's just say that writing about Scotch hasn't started paying the bills yet.

But what the heck, I like to stir up the pot :)

I WILL disagree with promoting Scotch as the next fashionable thing.
Fashions tend to come and go very quickly. Polyester suits were fashionable at one point.

Comments

[Lyn Reid]

I have a bottle of Glenfarclas 1979 bottle 492 of 750 i was wondering if you knew if it was valuable