Pleasure/price ratio for choosing a whisky

[charlano]

I have talked that to some friends some times ago. Here is the situation: you can buy two(2) bottles of 2 different whiskies that you really enjoy for the same price of one(1) bottle that you enjoy even more, but not twice as much. What do you chose to do ? Do the pleasure/price ratio is important to you ?

[RogerB]

It varies. If it's something that I haven't tried yet, but have heard good things about, then I'm willing to spend a little extra to check it out. I keep the less expensive stuff around to drink on a more regular basis, while tapping into the higher end bottles on more special occasions.

[lbacha]

Alot of what drives me is trying something new, if I was just going for what I like I could stick with 4-5 different scotches that are easy to get and inexpensive but to me the joy of scotch is trying new and exciting drams. So I will pay extra to try something different even if it isn't any better than a cheaper dram.

Len

[The Third Dram]

Is the pleasure/price ratio important to you ?

At all times, and regardless of the relative costs of any whiskies in question. I therefore voted for the second of your four options.

That's not to say I won't occasionally elect to go for a single, rather extravagantly expensive bottle rather than opting for two 'solid' whiskies that add up to a similar price point as the first. But even in this case, I will quite carefully measure how that first bottle's attributes actually merit its asking price (could be a combination of rarity and quality or otherwise).

[Yello to Mello]

Its hard with ratios because pleasure/price isnt linear unless you graph log(pleasure)/log(price), but I think its inverted anyway.

Typically when the price (x) goes from, lets say $40 to $100 there are units of pleasure(y). Put those same units of pleasure into the equation and start with $100, you then go to something like $400. Even then when you get up there in the price, the error in pleasure increases as well.

Its a complex function.

[dramtastic]

If I'm buying a whisky for the first time whether it's cheap or expensive I personally have no idea about the pleasure factor until I've tried it. Maybe it was recommended or well reviewed, but I may find it pretty average. Sometimes a cheaper whisky may give me more pleasure than another whisky I have bought at the same time that's 2-3 times the price(sometimes a lot more) . Most of my repeat purchases however are usually the ones wth a better value pleasure/price ratio.
Take Talisker 10, it costs me around 75 bucks Australian. I've never had a whisky that's twice the price that's anything like twice as good. So there is an infinitesimal chance that a whisky that cost 3,4,5 times the price or more will be that many times as good again. Or something like Nikka from the Barrel, costs me about AUD25 which I score 90/100. The best of the best whisky's I've had go to around 95/100(and that's maybe half a dozen different expression's) and cost AUD150-300.

Which begs the question why I've ever bothered spending $150-300 dollars on a whisky. Curiosity and rarity value I guess.

[robbi@laurenson.com]

I put a high importance on price/pleasure ratio, but the pleasure factor can be quite variable as there may be several 'dimensions' of pleasure. The obvious is taste/nose, but there may also be pleasure deriving from uniqueness or rarity, an association with an event or a significant period in a distillery's history. And so on. For example being able to taste an associated range of whiskies at once such as the PC5-8 series would allow one to see the development of a whisky. Even if some are less than stellar, the overall value may be high enough to justify buying them.

[jazz lover]

Higher pleasure and quality.

[mikeymad]

I am with Jazz these days.

I use to be all about cost per beverage. Now that I have a lot of stock, I only buy a few bottles, so my quality (pleasure) for a purchase a lot of times outweighs the price (within reason).

Cheers,

[MacDeffe]

Quality whisky has quite often NOT been treated as good whisky lately, but more as marketing tools for big companies

The object of us REAL whisky fans has been to avoid the traps set up by these companies to realise that their whiskies isn't gods gifts to the whisky world

Judge whisky by taste

Steffen

[dramtastic]

Spot on MacDeffe

[matteo]

I'm with you Steffen

[The Third Dram]

The object of us REAL whisky fans has been to avoid the traps set up by these companies, to realise that their whiskies aren't god's gifts to the whisky world.

Unfortunately, Steffen, the market for whisky (and, alas, especially single malt Scotch whisky) has transformed quite dramatically over the last 25 to 30 years. Where aficionados once searched far and wide for esoteric (yet, paradoxically, often rather reasonably priced) bottlings from both distilleries and independent bottlers, we are presently somewhat spoiled for choice (albeit often at a considerable cost!).

This market adjustment is certainly not unique to the whisky scene. It has also, over the same period in time, pervaded parallel 'luxury' consumer items such as wines and cigars. If you think we whisky drinkers are having a bad time of it, just ponder the fact that many a Classed Growth Bordeaux red wine has increased 10-fold (or more) in price over the same interim. Ouch!

That many distilleries, their parent companies and others in the whisky business have taken advantage of this situation - after all, the profit motivation does represent the bottom line when it comes to survival - is no surprise. And perhaps, it also comes as no surprise that willing consumers (maybe well informed or maybe not so much) are lining up to pay for the 'privilege' of snatching bottles that boast of being limited editions or of somehow displaying attractive characteristics way beyond the norm.

How long has Johnnie Walker Blue Label been successful?

Judge whisky by taste.

Truer words were never spoken.

[robbi@laurenson.com]

For those of us lacking a 30 year old collection or a fat wallet, there are many whiskies which we will never even be able to judge by taste, be they good or be they bad. My only consolation is that the proportion of those unreachable whiskies that are actually good is likely sinking ever lower. My hope is that reachable gems don't vanish altogether.

[jazz lover]

Amen Robbi.
I still can't get my hands on an Ardbeg 25 yr. 1975 OMC..

[jazz lover]

LOL Nick I stand corrected.

[The Third Dram]

I still can't get my hands on an Ardbeg 25 yr. 1975 OMC..

Considering how much of that particular release was actually bottled and how much has already passed over peoples' lips (thankfully, one set of those lips was my own), your hands have an incredibly fortunate 'reach'.

What a whisky!

[Muskrat Portage]

I take a different approach to whisky. Cost is only a factor when it comes close to my limit for purchasing one bottle - around $250.00 for something I know I want.

Generally I look for something that I don't own and/or that intrigues me, based on some research and asking questions of the merchants. There's also "impulse buying" which is my worst habit- leading to owning two or more of the same bottle which has been repackaged just to fool me!

I would purchase one I really want, over two lesser priced bottlings. The pleasure is the quality I perceive in the product, price comes a close second.

Musky

[Gearóidmuar]

I mentally categorise whiskey as being of two kinds.
Lobster whiskey and chicken whiskey.

A lobster whiskey is a whiskey with a fantastic taste, but a taste that's so tasty that your taste buds get whacked by it and you don't appreciate the taste of the second or third one. Examples would be Laphroaig, Talisker, Highland Park, Redbreast 15 yr. old, Yamasaki 12 yr old, Midleton Very Rare, Arran 10yr old. You don't want to eat lobster all day.

A chicken whiskey is one that has a nice taste which you do not tire of, but is generally less explosive in taste. You could drink it all night and still enjoy it.

Examples. Johnny Walker Black Label, Paddy, Black Bush, most Glenfiddich, Famous Grouse Blend, Tyrconnell, Locke's 8yr old single Malt, DYC (Spanish whiskey which is great stuff).

There is of course another category which I would call tripe whiskey! Not for me.
J&B 15yr old take a bow.. etc. etc.

[dramtastic]

I mentally categorise whiskey as being of two kinds.
Lobster whiskey and chicken whiskey.

A lobster whiskey is a whiskey with a fantastic taste, but a taste that's so tasty that your taste buds get whacked by it and you don't appreciate the taste of the second or third one. Examples would be Laphroaig, Talisker, Highland Park, Redbreast 15 yr. old, Yamasaki 12 yr old, Midleton Very Rare, Arran 10yr old. You don't want to eat lobster all day.

A chicken whiskey is one that has a nice taste which you do not tire of, but is generally less explosive in taste. You could drink it all night and still enjoy it.

Examples. Johnny Walker Black Label, Paddy, Black Bush, most Glenfiddich, Famous Grouse Blend, Tyrconnell, Locke's 8yr old single Malt, DYC (Spanish whiskey which is great stuff).

There is of course another category which I would call tripe whiskey! Not for me.
J&B 15yr old take a bow.. etc. etc.

Interesting way to look at it. I thinking along the same lines when I first tasted Hibiki 21 the other day for the first time. It is so rich and full of a multitude of flavours that one dram was enough. Definitely a Lobster whisky if there ever was one.