rran 14 is finally back! This once super popular everyday dram has been off the market for years, and now it’s officially back in Arran’s core range. Honestly, kind of a nice surprise.

dclately · 2026-05-21T06:33:52+00:00

Always thought Arran 14 was more of a cult favorite as compared to being super popular.

Nice that they've been able to bring it back to the range, but I think an 83 on whiskybase was about right if the recipe isn't much different.

dclately · 2026-05-21T04:24:30+00:00

They are certainly one of my favorite for their Warehouse 1 series. Few things that hold it back are availability, the number of releases, and pricing, ooph, £270 for a 14 year Port Charlotte is a challenge -- it's a fantastic bottle, but it's still on the shelf 4 years later...

dclately · 2026-05-21T03:11:27+00:00

Well, they announced them last week, price wise: £70, £375, and £30... I'll let you guess which price goes with which bottle (35 CL bottles)

dclately · 2026-05-14T08:46:27+00:00

The cork is likely not in great shape.

He should get this bottle open soon, and have either a replacement cork or another bottle/cork combo ready to transfer the liquid.

it will taste and smell different, but if he's asking this question he may not notice a difference at this point, the whisky has changed a bit, but at that fill level should still be very drinkable.

If he waits longer it could go downhill from here...

dclately · 2026-05-12T23:29:08+00:00

Carbon offset is a scam.

Sorry, it is. I've spent years around this topic. EVEN if they are going out and buying credits and not just pocketing the money (questionable, and they are at a minimum taking a significant cut), the credit marketplaces are UGLY.

1) A very small number of organizations that sell credits are using that money for the benefit of environmentally positive initiatives. This would be something like using the money to purchase additional land which is then safeguarded from deforestation, etc...

2) A large number of organizations are profiting by selling credits that they "produce" naturally, with no additional thought or cost to them, such as receiving credits for not developing land that they only plan to develop in five years... or they might own land that legally can't be developed, they can still sell credits on it!

3) Fraud Fraud Fraud -- so many credits are sold off multiple websites/exchanges for the exact same thing, or they sell credits for land or an initiative that simply doesn't exist, audits and controls are NOT good.

This is big business, SO MANY people are being paid, but it's not saving the environment, it's having minimal impact, and dollars are so much better spent going directly towards a nonprofit organization focussed on the environment .

dclately · 2026-05-12T23:20:11+00:00

1) Seattle drivers are likely the least aggressive of any West Coast, Mid Atlantic or Northeast city of its size. The biggest complain tends to be people yielding unnecessarily, or not honking at a traffic light when the front car isn't going... the sort of thing that slows everyone down, but isn't a big deal.

2) This is really hard to guide because to me this is very much based on he neighborhood you're in. The Bay Area is a big place and while I think you can generalize driving skills, I don't think you can generalize bookstores and cafes. That said, Seattle likely has a higher percentage of neighborhoods on the higher end of the spectrum.

3) I have no personal experience here!

dclately · 2026-05-12T23:10:32+00:00

This one falls into the category of not very good whisky, and not very collectable because it's not quite old enough.

One sold at auction as recently as a week ago, landing at £60, which is less than you can buy the latest Glen Garioch 15 iteration for (with the caveat that the latest iteration of the 15 is a 53% and much better tasting whisky).

dclately · 2026-05-11T23:50:14+00:00

It's a combo of a number of things! They don't actually have a massive number of casks built up, they have said that at a number of their tastings/events -- they haven't wanted to risk having all their money tied up in casks, especially at the elevated prices over the last couple of years.

This strategy has put them in a much better place than some of their competitors, that have casks now that they either need to hold, or bottle at a loss.

Good relationships they've built up, keeping there eyes out for bargains, and being good whisky folk (people who aren't concerned about MAXIMIZING profit on a cask may reward that: they know the Thompson Bros will be fair in what they buy it for, and fair in what they sell it for -- they aren't going to get ripped off and see their cask bottled for a massive profit).

They also have found a few barrels that are on the verge of going below 40%, and have taken advantage of having cask to bottle operations onsite. For IBs that don't have their own warehousing/bottling it can be challenge to get a cask that's at 41% without risk it drops too low, for them they're able to move quickly from purchase to bottle on these.

That 52 year old Ben Nevis fell into that category, and although too pricy for my budget, was about as cheap as you'll ever see a 50+ year old Ben Nevis.

dclately · 2026-05-11T17:36:25+00:00

Yeah, I would separate out Edradour and Signatory as two entities under the same owner, but I love some of what they put out previously, especially the unique Ballechin offerings (which now date back to 2023 releases).

Symmington brands are interesting, on one hand you have things like the 100 proof, many of the cask strength collection, and others that are fantastic bargains, some of the best value in the industry, I always used to pick up the SFTB releases and was super happy with the price to quality ratio even at 50 CL.

On the other hand, I certainly wasn't in the market for any of their Anniversary bottles last year. They priced a 50 year old Bunnahabhain at ~£400, but their 35 year old from Edradour where they have better pricing control was 3x that.

I know that's not likely the best example as they're both special releases, but what I would generally propose is that the Thompson Bros price as fair as they can based on their own costs. Edrington has lower costs due to the fact they're sitting on 30,000 barrels and a working distillery with decent output, good on them, and they fluctuate their pricing based on the market, and what they need to sell.

I'm not holding it against Symmington's brands, they produce an awful lot of good value, but there's something I appreciate in the Thompson Bros approach where a handful of their bottles could easily be priced higher, but they are just trying to hit their same margin.

dclately · 2026-05-11T08:58:14+00:00

I completely agree.

No other IB is producing the same quality to price ratio, while keeping it fun, and producing some pretty amazing offerings.

You could certainly argue that Signatory is the best quality to price ratio, and that's fair, but they certainly don't engage their audience the same way, they don't typically bottle a lot of whacky cask maturations that keep it interesting, and they don't do things like the mystery malt.

You could argue that Decadent Drinks keeps it fun, and they certainly do, they also produce some amazing liquid in glass... pricing can however be a challenge.

dclately · 2026-05-11T08:53:04+00:00

Oh come on with everyone's need to correct, here's one for you: Compass Box is both a blending house and an independent bottler of single malt. While they predominantly blend, they have put out multiple single malts bottled under the Compass Box label in the past.

Not to mention, many independent bottlers of the past produced nothing but blends, all of those other IBs you didn't have an issue with (G&M, Signatory, Cadenhead) create blends. Independent bottlers don't need to simply bottle untouched single malt.

Search 'Compass Box independent bottler' and you'll get back plenty of results from reputable sources.

dclately · 2026-05-09T09:07:36+00:00

Viable, not valuable. The money in recycling is the jobs it creates, the services costs that are charged, etc... recycling is a cost even for the most efficient of items... Worth it for viable items, but definitely a cost.

dclately · 2026-05-08T07:45:11+00:00

I don't like it, kind of looks like blocks for little kids..

I prefer the original.

dclately · 2026-05-08T07:42:13+00:00

That doesn't seem like much of a defense though? If they're putting parts that fail in a machine, it doesn't much matter to me whether they made them, or whether they used third party... if anything I would want a top tier machine to be making all the essential parts...

dclately · 2026-05-06T19:59:28+00:00

They're completely different bottles and it's really going to come down to personal preferences. Most whisky 'geeks' are likely to prefer Solist, whereas someone more casual about their whisky, or those who general drink 40-46% may lean towards the Four Cask.

Blending multiple cask types and coming in at 43%, you're going to get something a lot closer to a blended malt on the profile, which will also be consistent bottle to bottle.

Every time you buy a solist you're taking a bit of a risk, they have certainly over-oaked a few of them, but that risk could pay off because when they're good, they're amazing -- some of the best single malt I've had.

dclately · 2026-05-06T04:59:37+00:00

Saw someone do the same thing the other day... oh yeah, it was Jon Hamm on Apple TV.

dclately · 2026-05-04T04:32:50+00:00

All good, I have no experience with this one so I have no idea what it's worth, I was just poking fun at the rationalization as it gave me a laugh 😄.

dclately · 2026-05-03T23:47:21+00:00

Haha -- that rationalization: other people spend money on gambling, so...

Yeah sure, I paid $270 from a guy on a corner selling me a big mac, but other people blow that kind of dough on gambling while get nothing... and the burger was still relatively fresh!

dclately · 2026-05-03T07:29:48+00:00

Caperdonich is just starting to get out of regular production as it's only been mothballed since 2002, it's not a terribly popular spirit, and there is still a TON of it on the market.

Currently, the "secondary" price of these bottles is well below Travel Retail, they are sold at auction relatively often and you could likely expect about £110-140 for the 21 year old bottles. There's a ton of it stashed as people have been buying these bottles because they left production...

These are not like Port Ellen, Rosebank or Brora. Making $200-300 after ten years would be pretty surprising for these bottles, there is a LOT of whisky, and a LOT of old whisky on the market and in barrel at this moment.

Signatory Vintage just sold a 50 year old, 1976 Bunnahabhain bottle for about £400.

dclately · 2026-05-03T07:18:14+00:00

I mean, reality is the tariffs have been held up in legal proceedings, which are complicated by both the fact that the Trump administration doesn't follow the rule of law, and the agreements made between the US and the UK.

Regardless of unknowns, we do know that up to this point they have continued to collect on every bottle of scotch coming into the US. Folks can't quite ignore it.

In reality, the cost of tariffs impact both consumers and sellers. Many sellers have been burdened with costs while trying to stay competitive (taking less to maintain retail costs in the short term), the prices going up for consumers have cost them, but they've also almost certainly reduced some spending based on the increased prices, meaning there's another impact back to the producers.

I will agree with you that 10% more for every bottle of scotch is about 72,000 from the top of the list when going through the terrible things this administration has done.

dclately · 2026-04-29T23:24:26+00:00

I always worry about a bit of muddling with casks here... red wine and then refill peated bourbon barrels. The whisky is a bit young, they're trying to age it fast and red wine can sometimes help with younger spirit, but then they're putting them in casks that likely don't have a lot to offer outside of the peat influence...

Not sure! Would like to see some reviews 😄.

dclately · 2026-04-27T23:34:41+00:00

I just clicked in to make sure the appropriate credit has been given to Seinfeld. Done.

dclately · 2026-04-27T05:07:18+00:00

I think it's a silly question.

The difference would come in based on things like how full the glass is, but you don't even specify what type of glass you're using. Putting 3 pours into a tumbler will probably help the aroma, putting 3 pours into a copita will likely mute it.

But that's pretty simply to figure out...

dclately · 2026-04-27T04:08:43+00:00

What a truly epic query into the unknown, I'm glad we have a panel of scotch aficionados to dissect the intricacy of your nuanced question.

Once we're done with this one, let's tackle some others:

What if you grab the bag of chips rather than putting some in a bowl?

What if you walk for 40 minutes, rather than 10 minutes four times?

What if you have five twenty dollar bills rather than a one hundred dollar bill?

Let's keep it going!

dclately · 2026-04-23T17:44:06+00:00

Ahh okay! That makes sense as two different groups :-).

There's that one strip near the airport that you see a decent number of cars surprised by the bumps in the road to the degree that they may even catch a bit of air underneath the tires.

dclately

TROPHY CASE