Serendipity deja vu

[Aidan]

What is it with Glenmorangie and messing up thier malts... (from 1999)


A THREE YEAR OLD WHISKY WAS MISTAKENLY MIXED WITH A 21 YEAR OLD MALT PRODUCED BY THE MAKERS OF GLENMORANGIE.

BUT THE FIRM TURNED A POTENTIAL DISASTER INTO A SUCCESS AS CONNOISSEURS RUSHED TO SNAP UP THE ROQUE 3000 BOTTLES. A BOTTLE OF 21 YEAR OLD MALT FROM THE FIRMS GLEN ELGIN DISTILLERY WOULD NORMALLY SELL FOR AROUND £60

BUT THE ONE OFF SPECIAL KNOWN AS 80:20 HAS BEEN SNAPPED UP FOR JUST £12.99.

WORD SOON GOT AROUND AND CUSTOMERS BEGAN FLOCKING TO ODDBINS WHICH HAD SECURED THE WHOLE BATCH.

WHISKY EXPERT DAMIEN RILEY-SMITH OF WHISKY MAGAZINE SAID YESTERDAY. EVEN THOUGH IT HAS A BIT OF THREE YEAR OLD IN IT IT SHOULD BE A FANTASTIC WHISKY.

THIS IS INCREDIBLY RARE BECAUSE BLENDED WHISKY WOULD NORMALLY CONTAIN 30 OR 40 DIFFERENT WHISKIES NOT JUST TWO LIKE THIS ONE. HE SAID THOSE THAT MANAGED TO SNAP UP A BOTTLE COULD BE SITTING ON A GOOD INVESTMENT.

RILEY-SMITH ADDED I THINK COLLECTORS WILL LIKE THE QUIRKINESS OF THE WHOLE THING AND THAT COULD MEAN A GOOD FUTURE VALUE.

[Deactivated Member]

That's not deja vu, it's avant vu (or something). It would be interesting to know if the "accident" happened at the same facility, and was perhaps committed by the same operator.

"...That's your second warning!" (Ron, you know whose voice that is!)

[Aidan]

The Serendipity accident is a case of deja vu, as it turns out. That's what the title means.

[Aidan]

Oh, and there's a bottle for sale somewhere on eBay. It's called 80:20, or something like that.

[Deactivated Member]

I'm afraid I was cynical at the time of the Serendipity "accident" and this looks really fishy to me. At a guess, they had some bland and overaged Glen Elgin that was not fit for sale so they decided to tart it up with some sweet, young Glenmorangie, pass it off as a collectors item and hope the attendant publicity would shift a few extra bottles of the proper stuff. For this to work, you have to mix it with another distillery's product to result in an "accident" - otherwise you would just end up with a 3 year old single malt. It worked so well, they repeated it with the Ardbeg.

[Arthur Motley]

It sounds unbelievable, but it does happen - I know of a third Glenmorangie mix-up at Broxburn when I worked for the Society. A cask of very old Glenlivet and a cask of very old Glenfarclas got mixed which obviously rendered two expensive old malts useless for SMWS purposes. Something to do with holding tanks not being emptied between bottling runs if I remember rightly... Was too angry at the time to listen properly!

To many customers Serendipity sounded more likely to be a marketing trick than a mistake, but I fully believe that lightning struck a third time.

[Arthur Motley]

P.S - And why would you take Ardbeg 17 (£50 a bottle whisky and very, very scarce) and dilute it with Glen Moray (£20 a bottle whisky) and sell it for £29.99. That is not the kind of thing people do on purpose.

[irishwhiskeychaser]

That is a very good point. The 17yo was basically wasted and they tried to make the best of the situation. Whether it was a bad cask or not they could of put it to better use and profit. And when I say bad I mean not up to the high standards used by all distilleries. I would reckon there are very few undrinkable casks out there, just great casks good casks and casked used for bulking up.

I suppose people naturally think the worst which is in human nature. And of course there is nothing better than a good conspiricy theory

Nice to see you on the boards Arthur

[Deactivated Member]

Perhaps, although to be fair the Ardbeg 17 was hardly setting the world alight with rave reviews. If you had a very bland version that you didn't want to sell as Ardbeg, and for which you couldn't get a decent price from blenders, why not sacrifice it for a marketing gimmick? The amount of publicity it generated was huge - people still talk about it - and it sold some very ordinary whisky at £30 a bottle into the bargain. Who knows how many extra bottles of 10, Uigedail, Extremely Young, etc. they also shifted.

I have no idea whether this really was an accident or not. But it seems to have been milked for all it is worth - and the very old Ardbeg in the mix seems to get younger by each telling! Fair play to them.

[Aidan]

Was it the 17 yr old that was mixed with the Glen Moray? I thought it was older stuff.

Anyway, I'd say it was a genuine mistake, but one they marketed very well.

For what it's worth, I really like the Serendipity. I think I'm one of the few, though.

[Deactivated Member]

OK - so it's a marketing ploy - and why not?
The real test is whether there is a market for the potion and if it actually tastes any good. From what I've read so far, Serindipity is a reasonable dram. Surely that's all that matters?

Marketing always sells a dream or image that a target audience aspire to. So why not sell the quaint image of a knarled old distiller making a cock up and discovering a wonderful new concoction?

Ultimately it depends on one's own gulibilty. I would suspect that most on these forums - and a good many other whisky lovers - are not taken in by such yarns but seek the truth in the taste. If these marketing polys attract new whisky enthuiasts along the way, then so much better for the industry - as long as it is kept under control and not to the detriment of the core product.

[Aidan]

Yes, every distillery markets its whisky in some manner. It's their responsibility. Nowt wrong with that.

[Deactivated Member]

Marketing always sells a dream or image that a target audience aspire to. So why not sell the quaint image of a knarled old distiller

This works best for people who have never been to Broxburn

[Deactivated Member]

Marketing always sells a dream or image that a target audience aspire to. So why not sell the quaint image of a knarled old distiller

This works best for people who have never been to Broxburn

Shush - you'll spoil it!

[jazzy jay]

I have a bottle of 80:20 got it as a present 11yrs ago how much is it worth anyone know?

[corbuso]

This is the bottle from the SMWS? Not much more than its initial value, I would think