It’s Friday, which means it’s time for a new
Ask Away. This week we’re asking the Monkeys: How important is transparency to you?
Hessel
I see transparency as something valuable, but not essential. If your product is good and fairly priced, that’s fine by me. It can certainly add value to your concept, like with the
Turntable whiskies. But if it’s a mediocre independent bottling with a hefty price tag, the lack of transparency is enough for me to avoid that bottler in the future.
Daan
I agree with Hessel. Most standard blends aren’t transparent about what’s inside. Sometimes there are dozens of whiskies in the mix, so it’s almost impossible anyway. That doesn’t mean the flavor can’t be good. Recently I tried a standard Glen Talloch, which sits at the budget end of the market. I was pleasantly surprised by this non-transparent yet tasty blend at a ridiculously low price.
Simon
Hessel and Daan make strong points. A lack of transparency combined with the price can make me leave a bottle on the shelf if it’s too expensive. With a cheaper bottle, say around fifty euros, I won’t mind it as much. But if you’re asking more, I’ll start asking more questions and setting higher expectations.
Ilse
Transparency isn’t a must for me as long as the whisky tastes good. But when an independent bottler, like Compass Box for example, is very open and specific, I do find that interesting. With CB it’s fascinating to see how a beautiful blended malt is put together.
Rox
I wouldn’t say it’s absolutely key, but I’m also not the type to buy a lot of independent bottlings. In those cases I do want to know exactly what I’m getting for my money. No offense, but these days anyone can become an independent bottler, and I’m not going to buy blind.
That’s why, for years, I’ve tended to stick with the established names. I do notice I’m becoming more of a fan of Whiskydudes, but there you have it: they offer transparency. And I’m also a bit of a fan of Turntable, who are of course very transparent in the blending landscape!