In a way we should be grateful to collectors, because if all the whisky ever made was drunk straight away, many great whiskies would have disappeared very quick, not giving any one else the chance to try said great malt many years down the line. That said, there is something just wrong about the high prices attached to some bottling’s, but it’s a market out there and a bottle will only be worth what some one will pay for it, and I guess its these collectors that people become resentful of, the ‘any bottle, any price’ collectors.
My sentiments exactly DT, and much better said than I ever could!
I do not have a problem with people who collect with the intention of trying what they have collected some time, or even people who collect, and sell some of it to buy other nice things (preferably whisky!
That kind of collecting holds the respect for the people who made it, and also respects the purpose of whisky: it's a drink. It's art in a bottle, and the bottle is only the wrapping...
On the value of bottles: bottles like f.i. Black Bowmore first edition or like Ardbeg 1967/1995 (53,7%, Signatory, C#575, Pale Oloroso) or like Glen Garioch 1971 (59.6%, Samaroli, 2280 bottles, sherry, 75cl, circa 1988) or like Springbank 12yo 100 proof (57.1%, OB, imported by Samaroli, early 80’s, 2400 bottles) have become collectors items because they were extremely good...thus people who tasted it were prepared to fork out a few more quid to have it again...so the price has risen because of quality and rarity...
I resent the high pricesetting for bottles such as the Ardbeg 1965, because it has not proven yet that it is worth the price...they just asked because they know what a hype Ardbeg is right now.
As I said before, I have no problem with expensive bottles who earned the price...I do have a problem with bottles with no proven "track-record" wo are made expensive, just because they can.
But hey, I probably am naive...