5 whiskeys worth secondary prices!  

100% agree that there’s plenty of great whiskey out there at those price points

Thank you for watching

Pull the bandaid off and grab one….. you will be a little disappointed but, you can share it w friends, and blind it w them

Thank you for the feedback!

Thank you!

Those all could easily be added to the list

What does OFBS go for on secondary?

@@BeThereAgainProductions depends on the pick. Better know store might go around 120-130. Most go for 100-110

Never had it, need to try some

lol love it!!! Thanks for watching

Tasting notes are touchy, I feel like most people have some similarities and can be wildly different

I love the Rebel Cask picks!

First it’s important to know that I love Makers…. Cask, 46 Cask, all special releases, most private selects

Some state are definitely better than other for bottles. In Indiana you might have to hunt around a bit for JDSBBP

That sucks….100 all the time here

lol… point was we would all pay a little extra for some elite bottles but not necessarily full secondary

I can get on board with that

Where is "here"?

Reno, NV

Would you agree that over long periods of time that if a bottle has a small amount of whiskey it will go bad through oxidation? For example if you have a bottle with 10 ounces, will it ever go bad? I can tell you from experience that it will. I had a bottles of blantons that was about 20 years old and half full, it was undrinkable….. just curious to your thoughts. We know for certain that oxygen effect alcohol over time, which is why this product is extremely effective in wine, as it does have a lower alcohol content which makes that process much faster

​@bourbonbattles7285 First - you kept a bottle of whiskey open and half full for 20 years?!?!? Jesus. There is something wrong with you. Whiskey is meant to be enjoyed and shared, not adored like a catholic Saint. But to get to the issue at hand - Listen, you are shilling a product you don't understand. It's designed originally for wine using a neutral gas - none reactive like argon. But the problem isnt being reactive and oxidizing. Don't use vacuum seals or the wine preserver gas sprays that contain a neutral gas. In my experience, if stored properly, whisky can last for years, up to at least a decade, with only minor changes - mostly a slow muting & fading of the volatile chemicals and aromatics that become aerosolized in conjunction with the evaporation of ethanol. What you are suggesting - using a neutral gas preservative- actually messes MORE with the volatile flavor and aroma compounds than aging or, as you falsely presume it to be "oxidation." Let's address that first misconception. Don't call it oxidation. This is spillover concept from wine. It's wrong for whiskey. I have a background in Nuclear Chemistry. Oxidation refers to a specific chemical reaction that involves a transfer of electrons between molecules (specifically, the stripping of electrons from the chemical that gets “oxidized”). Given the high proof of whisky, classic oxidative reactions at the air-liquid interface in bottles are unlikely to be contributing in a major way to changing characteristics over time (a fact borne out by empirical testing). Furthermore, there are actually two separate issues potentially at play here - the repeated air exchange each time you pour from your bottle, and the expanding volume of air in the bottle over time. You might not have thought of the first one, but it seems a lot more likely that it is not the new air going into the bottle that is having any effect, but rather the repeated escape of the headspace air moving out of the bottle (i.e., the air exchange). The reason for this has to do with vapor pressure in a bottle - ethanol is more volatile than water, and so (in gas form) takes up more of the headspace. Every time you pour from the bottle and exchange the headspace you are effectively diluting your whisky minutely, by effectively increasing the relative amount of water to ethanol inside the bottle until the new headspace reaches an equilibrium with the liquid. The ethanol carries with it the aromatic and flavor compounds that give whisky its smell and taste. Basically, every time you exchange the air, the headspace refills with higher volatile components from the liquid - which then get depleted on the next pour, starting the whole process all over again. And over time, the volume of that air headspace in the bottle keeps growing, accelerating the pull-out of volatile molecules each time it is replaced. At least in theory, this could lead to a reduction in flavor over time. In theory. I haven't seen or heard of this in practice. But there's a bigger problem. What happens when you chance the gas ratio in the bottle? Well, that's why wine lovers created neutral gas preservatives like the one you are hocking. Wines lower alcohol content makes it vulnerable to oxidation. Unlike wine, whisky is not vulnerable to being oxidized. So what happens when you change the gas in the bottle? Well, you've now changed the interaction between the headspace gas and the volatile compounds. You've added more gas to the bottle, and likely pushed out any air remaining in the headspace that contained the original aerosolized flavor and aroma compounds. Which means the whiskey has to give up more to reachieve equilibrium. See this study by Fan (link 1), the most popular neutral gas spray - Private Preserve Wine Preserver - consistently induced greater flavour change than any other condition beyond indirect sunlight (!). While exposure to regular air had noticeable effects when the whisky volume was very low (e.g. 150 mL in a 750 mL bottle), these were almost twice as noticeable when wine preserve spray was used. Simply put, wine preserve was considerably worse than just regular air exposure in a bottle. See also these (unblinded) results from the Scotch Test Dummies.(link 2) On the basis of these findings, I strongly recommend you do NOT use neutral gas sprays in your whisky bottles. But more importantly, you - Joe Gruss- should stop giving advice on the internet. You really give bad advice. Link 1: web.archive.org/web/20190514103457/www.marcusfan.com/whisky/openbottlestorage.php Link 2: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8BHAn4SKdBY.htmlsi=MczTksBVEB33Cj1A

@@scottfromoahu2896when you refer to bottles that are stored properly, are you referring to open bottles or sealed?

@@thatsboot out of sunlight, away from huge temp variations, preferably cool area. Sunlight and heat kill alcohol soluable flavor compounds.

Awesome write up Scott! Bourbonbattles probably didnt know. But man, as someone that took many undergrad chemistry classes I followed what you said and loved it. I tried to explain this to someone last week but you put it way more succinctly.

100% agree on the bias. My point with Blantons in my comment about if you don’t like bland, you don’t like bourbon, is it Blantons is a very traditional bourbon. There are a lot of arguments to be made over proof, etc. That being said, the height is surrounds Blantons is huge, and I agree with you that it’s not worth the price point that they get at retail. What I love about Blantons is that I can have people over and blinded against an expression that is a fraction of the cost and they almost always pick the whiskey other than Blantons for example, Evan Williams, bottled and bond, Elijah, Craig, small batch, etc., that is fun for me to set up for people

​@@bourbonbattles7285was wondering if I heard you right. I get your point... but "pay $100+ for this to show your friends that they prefer $25 bottles over it" is a strange take. I like Blantons fine... but I think it runs into the problem of sub 100 proof unfinished whiskeys that you can get so much bolder flavor by just going up in proof... and there are cheaper bottles available that are up to 20, 30 or more proof higher... that are good themselves... so unless you just need something lighter for your palate... it's not really a"good" purchase. It's a great bottle for letting friends try and gifts. And its perfectly good to sip if you avoid thinking about what other whiskeys 75$+ could buy.

@@iansammons2730 everyone has different tastes, i like blanton at its price point.

I agree with that! There are so many great bottles out there that people are not talking about. You don't have to spend a ton of money to get a great tasting bottle.

A great reason why you should make relationships with the stores that you frequent

ECBP could easily make the list

Which of the 5 bottle selection do you disagree with w

I didn't write the original comment, but I agree. 4 of the 6 basically aren't secondary prices because they are essentially the same as retail. Weller is the only one that is significantly above retail (as for Four Roses, you may not find your exact recipe, but in general they are available at retail). I also agree with the other commenter that Blanton's isn't worth retail, so why pay secondary? Also Jack Daniels Barrel Proof is basically a shelfer at this point. The rye is a little harder to find, but even that is becoming widely available.

@bourbonbattles7285 Ok, let's do this. First, your premise is garbage. No one should be paying secondary for readily available bottles. Yes, these aren't shelfers, but I've been seriously collecting bourbon for only two years. I've seen 20 Bookers at retail, 5 releases of 1792 full proof, two dozen Blanton's, multiple yearly releases of 4R SBBS, and Blanton's is so fucking common and average that it's basically 5'11". Second, you don't actually communicate what makes these worth secondary. Even if you did, you'd still be wrong but you provide no tasting notes, no talk over quality, and no comparison as to why this bottle is (which assumes the premise that another bottle is not). Let's talk about this bottle by bottle 1. Bookers is about a seven year old high proof whiskey. Seven years. There's no way anyone should pay 120 for seven year old whiskey. Rule of thumb used to be 10/year. Got it inflation sucks so it is more but Telling them it's OK to spend that much is stupid. Second, you didn't even get the prices right. Nationwide SRP by the local Beam rep is 105. BoozApp has a "fair price" for 2024-01 around 150. So you aren't even in the ballpark on your prices by the first bottle. OK, you sourced the price "from Facebook." That's amateur . Every bourbon club I know warns people to stay off Facebook 90% of the time, it's scammers, not flippers. 2. 1792 full proof. It's a fairly common release. Nothing special. Not allocated. So encouraging someone to spend secondary on that is also stupid. You got closer to the prices as BoozApp puts it as 79.32 for a fair price. 3. Four Roses SBBS Store Pick, in particular OESO. This time, you went the wrong direction, saying 150. That's nuts. BoozApp has it at 100 for fair price, and I've seen six 4R SBBS in the last three weeks in my area. Yes, we have it good, BUT -again- this isn't an allocated product, nor is it truly comparable to a retail 150 whiskey. 4. WA107. Formerly OWA. Fair enough. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut. 5. BLANTON'S? Listen, more has been written on the internet about the actual worth of Blanton's than about the last two presidential elections. "Better than Blanton's" "as good as Blanton's" "Blanton's alternatives." There's too much content on such a basic, boring-ass bottle, which makes it a basic boring-ass pick. To encourage someone to pay secondary for a bottle that will be on sale until the end of time is stupid. Especially when an SP 93 proof Elijah Craig kicks it's ass. In summary, you picked 5 tater bottles and told people to overpay them. That is not the kind of content we need on this platform.

@bourbonbattles7285 also, don't go spamming my local Facebook group with your lame content.

I see it routinely on secondary for $100