back to article $10,000-a-dram whisky 'wasn't even a malt'

A Swiss Hotel bar has apologised to a Chinese fantasy novelist who paid $10,000 (£7,649) for a shot of rare whisky – only to discover the single malt was a fake. The Devil's Place Whisky Bar at the Waldhaus Hotel in St Moritz boasts that it has the world's largest collection of malts, with 2,500 stocked in its bar and …

  1. frank ly

    Appropriate

    It was a fantasy drink for the fantasy novelist. The incident will probably inspire him to write a novel about it. A win-win situation.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: Appropriate

      Frankly, a most deserving drink for a most deserving person. Online personality. Love'em. The only person more deserving would be a Reality TV personality.

    2. JLV

      Re: Appropriate

      the hotel contacted him on its own and offered a refund so he's not out of pocket

      he's returned the favor by praising their service

      hotel had the bottle sitting around for a long time, apparently.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Carbon dating ?

    Bit old school no ?

    Anything claiming to be from before 1942 will be free of the radioactive buzz that everything in the world since then (*) now has.

    Which is why pre-1942 wine bottles are very valuable.

    (*) = except the steel sunk at Scapa Flow, which is still being recovered for use calibrating equipment that needs as close to zero radioactivity as possible.

    1. Lennart Sorensen

      Re: Carbon dating ?

      Things have been radioactive forever. It's part of reality.

      Some things are just more radioactive than other things.

      For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor

    2. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: Carbon dating ?

      Which is why pre-1942 wine

      It still has lead. Plenty of it in fact. The inter-war period predates the high performance low cost diesels developed during the war so nearly everything that had an engine was petrol driven.

      This is on top of the lead deposited by unscrubbed output from coal burning plants and coal burning stoves in every house. In fact, the latter was probably a much bigger net contributor to early lead contamination in agricultural produce than the lead in the petrol.

      I would much rather have an occasional alpha or beta particle from residual radioactivity than lead thank you. While there are DNA repair mechanisms to deal with low level breakage from radioactivity, there is nothing to remove lead once it gets into your system.

      1. Dr Dan Holdsworth
        Boffin

        Re: Carbon dating ?

        Actually there are mechanisms for coping with toxic heavy metals in pretty much all organisms. In humans, metallothionine proteins are one of the main methods; these simply grab onto heavy metal ions and sequester them. Generally, a person's bones contain most of their sequestered lead, mercury, radium and so on, meaning that crematoria chimneys need fairly effective scrubbers to prevent the more volatile heavy metals like mercury from being re-emitted.

    3. Lysenko

      Re: Carbon dating ?

      Steel picks up Cobalt-60 because of the huge amount of air circulating in a blast furnace. Bones pick up Strontium-90 because it is chemically compatible with Calcium and gets biologically concentrated, but Whisky?

      There's no "concentration" step in play, it's just background to vegetable matter to product. Even if you did detect a post-war isotope it wouldn't be distinguishable from environmental background level.

    4. Joe Werner Silver badge

      Re: Carbon dating ?

      There are a few cosmogenic radionuclides. 14C comes to my mind, or 10Be. Those are present all around, and have been produced continuously without any human influence.

      What could maybe be detected is 137Cs (not sure about the isotope, too lazy to check, sorry). Detecting this means it is definitely past bomb. At least that isotope is found in plant material, not sure if you find it in distilled products... it is what I would look for first: get the spectrum of the decay activity of the bottle. Non-invasive, doesn't use up any of the produce. But 14C dating is nice as well ;)

      Oh, and I believe a human has an activity of 8 kBq... ;p

    5. Gene Cash Silver badge

      Re: Carbon dating ?

      "If it wasn't for Carbon-14, I wouldn't date at all"

      1. Joe Werner Silver badge

        Re: Carbon dating ?

        "If it wasn't for Carbon-14, I wouldn't date at all"

        Geologists would try and date everything ;-)

    6. Daedalus
      Boffin

      Re: Carbon dating ?

      Wow. I thought techies knew a little science, but no.

      OK, Carbon-14 is produced continuously by cosmic rays hitting nitrogen in the upper atmosphere. It mixes quickly with the rest of the carbon and gets absorbed into plants. Its half-life is over 5000 years. Once the plant dies, the carbon in the plant matter no longer exchanges with atmospheric carbon so the natural decay process starts reducing the C-14/C-12 ratio. You can measure the ratio by various means. The whole system is calibrated against samples of wood etc. of known age, and yes, nuclear weapon testing did have an effect, but it is allowed for.

      1. MT Field

        Re: Carbon dating ?

        That's approx what I remember. But given the half-life is 5k years it would be pretty inaccurate for measuring in the ~100 year scale. Very useful for dating early humans and their artifacts.

        By the way, I don't believe whisky of any sort improves once it's been bottled, whether that was by a scots artisan or a fraudster. It's cask time that makes it special.

        1. Daedalus

          Re: Carbon dating ?

          That's approx what I remember. But given the half-life is 5k years it would be pretty inaccurate for measuring in the ~100 year scale. Very useful for dating early humans and their artifacts.

          That was my first thought. Something along the lines of : they figured it couldn't be 1878 because of the lack of decay. However it turns out that with extremely accurate mass spectrometry that is available nowadays, you can date even recent objects to a year or two of accuracy. Basically they can count atoms now, instead of measuring the level of C-14 radioactivity.

  3. DCFusor

    Old lead better

    Old lead from shipwrecks is better than old steel (and older yet) because, being lead, it also has some shielding properties. It's highly valued for use in Gamma Spectrometer "castles" to keep out the ambient radiation to the extent possible. Also ancient lead flashing on some old buildings...now sometimes a theft item.

    Yes, I work with radiation.

    1. jason 7

      Re: Old lead better

      Yeah there was a documentary on a few years ago where salvage folks were hunting for a WW2 cargo wreck that apparently had loads of silver on board.

      They saw a load of bars and pulled them up to find out they were lead. They said at the time they were still worth pulling up for the reason you stated. So they did. Then luckily they found the silver too.

    2. Steve the Cynic

      Re: Old lead better

      "Also ancient lead flashing on some old buildings...now sometimes a theft item"

      They say that back in the 70s, the folks responsible for maintenance of York Minster paid for a complete rework of the flashing by having the mediaeval lead flashing processed to separate the silver from it. The amount of silver recovered from the lead was more than enough to pay for the whole job.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If someone offered to sell me a $10,000 dram of whisky I would knock them back as taking the chance with one of these is a shot in the dark.

  5. lglethal Silver badge
    Pint

    Give Credit where its due

    The Swiss Hotel were contacted by some Whiskey experts to suggest that the bottle didnt look right for a Macallan 1878. The Hotel under their own steam (and at their own cost), sent off samples to be tested, and once the samples came back, they flew out and personally apologised and returned the blokes cash.

    You have to applaud the Hotel for there honesty!

    If that had happened in the US, the hotel would have denied everything, probably tried to get a gagging order against the experts who told them about the false looking bottle, denied everything and would have fought any attempt to have the liquid tested. Then if it eventually did end up getting proven they would sue the testers for loss of income, issue some statement about "buyer beware" and held on to the money for as long as possible (i.e. until they got sued by the customer).

    But nope in this case, adults were involved, an honest mistake was repaid and everyone walks away happy. It's not a whiskey but this --> is for the hotel owners!

    1. Mephistro
      Thumb Up

      Re: Give Credit where its due

      Well said! We're so used to seeing companies "running with the money" that when we see one acting with some honesty, we immediately suspect some malarkey.

    2. Franco

      Re: Give Credit where its due

      To be honest it's a very sensible move by the hotel, as they will no doubt have a very large clientele of whisky connoisseurs willing to pay high prices for their rare whiskies.

      BTW and I know I'm being pedantic but the spelling of whisky is important. Scotch is ALWAYS whisky and never whiskey which is used for spirits distilled in Ireland and the United States.

      http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/jhb/whisky/swa/chap1.html

      1. Pen-y-gors

        Re: Give Credit where its due

        but the spelling of whisky is important

        I would normally agree with you, and in current usage we'd be right. BUT 'thasn't always been so. Until at least the early C20 they seem to have been interchangeable:

        "ASK FOR HAIG'S Glenleven Old Scotch Whiskey. - Pure and Wholesome-Over Seven years old" (Rhyl Record, 1895)

        "DUNVILLES WHISKY Obtained Gold Medal, The Highest Award for Irish Whisky. At Paris International Exhibition ROYAL DISTILLERIES. BELFAST" Llandudno Advertiser 1901

        "PETER DAWSON'S Scotch Whiskey, 3s. 6d. a bottle, absolutely the finest whiskey in the world. Sole agent, Percy C. Vollam. " Llandudno Advertiser 1906

        "BRECON. WORKHOUSE WHISKEY WEAK. At the guardians yesterday were recommended by the medical officer (Dr. Parham) to obtain bettol whiskey for patients. It transpired that only 3s 3d per quart was paid for the whiskey, and thi Mayor (Mr Aneurin George) remarked that whiskey at that price was not worth drinking. It was decided that the medical officer deal witII the matter. S Wales Daily News 1897"

        More entertaining boozing history at www.pint-of-history.wales or twitter @peintohanes - history of pubs in Ceredigion!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Give Credit where its due

          You are seriously holding the capability of the Welsh press to get the spelling correct for both Irish and Scottish distilled spirits as an example of the correct spelling?

          Might as well ask an american how to spell colour...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Give Credit where its due

        Scotch is ALWAYS whisky and never whiskey

        But whisky IS whiskey.

        Oh... you meant to put those in quotes..

        </pedant>

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Give Credit where its due

      I agree it's noble of the hotel to be completely honest and not get any publicity.

      I'm sure a lot of people will view this hotel as a potential destination that has nothing to do with this widely publicised story.

      In fact I would go so far as to question why they got it tested in the first place.

      Moi cynical? Never.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Give Credit where its due

      "If that had happened in the US..."

      Need we read any further? Just select the 'regional bigotry' option and let the hate flow, right Iglethal?

      1. Gene Cash Silver badge

        Re: Give Credit where its due

        'regional bigotry' option

        Pfftt... as an American, I agree with Iglethal totally. Not bigotry when it's truth...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Give Credit where its due

          Gene Cash sez:

          > "Pfftt... as an American, I agree with Iglethal totally."

          Yes, we are aware there are self-haters among us.

          1. Paul Crawford Silver badge
            Trollface

            Re: @Big John

            "Yes, we are aware there are self-haters among us"

            You don't have to feel so bad about yourself, just cheer up and let your feelings go!

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @Big John

              I feel fine about myself. I'm not smugly bigoted and don't feel justified in insulting whole nations full of people I have never met. Unlike you UK types.

              Try a small experiment. Look for posts here where Brits insult Americans and the nasty names used, you'll find plenty. Then look for Americans making blanket statements about everyone in Britain and list the pejorative terms used. Good luck with that, there won't be a fraction of the smug derision you Britons spew.

              Nah, we don't worry much what you think of us. It's mostly incorrect anyway.

    5. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: Give Credit where its due

      But nope in this case, adults were involved,

      No, in this case, PR consultants were involved. They got a gigantic piece of positive PR out of this. PR to which you and me are continuing to contribute.

      Think of all the PR which would have been lost as a result of a gag and god forbid negative PR generated.

      Think of all the other bottles with 10K stickers on them waiting for the next sucker with a fat wallet.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Give Credit where its due

      Answer me this ...

      If the tables were turned and a Swiss gentleman was swindled in a Chinese bar, would a refund ....

      Oh, never mind, already can guess the answer.

    7. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Give Credit where its due

      Yes, but that's an hotel with a clientele which is better not to make angry.... they are not the "average citizen". In such a situation, if you lose your credibility your business will go bankrupt very soon, and your bottles in some auction...

  6. Aaiieeee
    Paris Hilton

    Does it mean anything that from the tasting they were unable to tell it was fake?

    The fact I prefer to mix it with coke tells you everything you need to know about me and whisky.

    I wonder what the bartenders expression would be at asking for $10k whisky and then mixing it?

    1. Jean Stone

      My guess would be something ranging from 'looking like they've just been slapped in the face with a herring' to 'apocalyptic'.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        This guy paid for a fantasy and he got it. Money well spent. Now he gets his moolah back and a great story too. How lucky can you get?

    2. Franco

      This may be apocryphal, but I was told a story by a brand ambassador for one of the Islay distilleries when I was last over there that she had seen (on more than one occasion) service refused in Scandinavian whisky bars if anyone asked for anything other than water or ice. I think it was somewhere in Stockholm she told me about, and the customer demanded to see the manager who backed the barman and told the customer if he was trying to buy expensive malts and mix them he was doing it purely to show off.

      Adding ice to a single malt can be a contentious enough subject, adding a mixer would have the purists up in arms. If that's how you like it then fine, but it's pretty pointless buying an expensive whisky then.

      https://www.thegentlemansjournal.com/article/ever-put-ice-single-malt-scotch/

      1. PhilipN Silver badge

        Ice or water - pffft!

        When you quaff whisky you should first pinch your nose so it is not diluted by too much saliva.

        Sheesh - Amateurs!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Ice or water - pffft!

          Not if its cask strength; my current bottle is a smidge over 64% (thats ~130% for USians) and you really need to add water to get the full flavour - has to be the right water of course :)

          1. Montreal Sean

            Re: Ice or water - pffft!

            A drop or two of water to open the flavour, sure.

            Ice though? That causes too much of a change in the taste. It dulls it somewhat.

            That said, to each their own, I only know what I like. :)

          2. Mark 85

            Re: Ice or water - pffft!

            (thats ~130% for USians)

            Err.. no. The 130 is proof not %.

      2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        I was going to France, and asked a friend if he wanted anything. Decent brandy, he says. Spend about £30. Then, that would get you a 15 year old single malt, and with lack of French sin taxes and a favourable exchange rate, he got some rather nice brandy.

        So he tells me about how lovely it is, and how he keeps cheap stuff around, for friends who don't appreciate the good stuff, but still insist on drinking his anyway. Not something I'd do, though I keep cheap blended whisky / bourbon around for mixing and cooking.

        So having told me all this, he buggers off to the kitchen, and instead of coming back with a balloon of the good stuff, he's clutching a highball with ice and coke!

        Shameful! I'm still not sure if he was just being a snob, or had convinced himself that his discerning palate could taste much of anything over the coke.

        To be fair, I can tell decent gin from cheap crap in a G&T. But we did a "tasting" at a friend's leaving do and went through a nice bar's gin selection. Yummy! From Gordon's up to the £40 a bottle boutique stuff, and the only one I could taste any real difference with was Gin Mare. £35 from Waitrose, and very nice indeed. Not sure I'd pay that for it as a mixer though. For martinis I might.

        1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

          To be fair, I can tell decent gin from cheap crap in a G&T.

          Likewise. Got some very nice rhubarb gin recently. Nice even on its own (and even more nice the Mediterranean tonic)..

          Hmmm.. gin..

        2. KroSha

          @Spartacus

          With gin, you'll always get a much wider range of flavours than with Scotch, as the flavours are what it's all about. Gin is easy to differentiate, which is why there are a plethora to choose from at the moment, all with their own distinctive taste.

          Gin Mare is one of my favourites as well; try Bulldog or Martin's Icelandic gin. They're nice. But you're right, too nice to be drowned in tonic.

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: @Spartacus

            KroSha,

            I'm not sure how wide the difference in gins really is. They're all pretty perfum-y. The Botanist, that my brother gave me for chrimbo, was much nicer than Gordon's in a martini, very little different in a G&T and still not very nice neat.

            I've only had one gin that stood out from the crowd (other than the fruit flavoured stuff, yum Edinburgh Raspberry). That was the Cotswold Brewery Sipping Gin. Which was genuinely delicious neat.

            I admit that I'm not a huge gin fan, and similarly I suspect you're not a huge whisky fan. There's a massive difference between a 10 year old Jura (which is about as bland a malt as I've tried) and say Caol Ila (which is heading towards TCP).

            In both the cases of gin and whisky, the alcohol and flavour are so heavy, that you probably have to educate your palate quite a lot, before you can make many distinctions. Gin isn't really my bag, though since I've started making martinis, it's more becoming so. But I've also been venturing into rum of late - my current favourite being Rumbullion.

        3. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          To be fair, I can tell decent gin from cheap crap in a G&T. But we did a "tasting" at a friend's leaving do and went through a nice bar's gin selection. Yummy! From Gordon's up to the £40 a bottle boutique stuff, and the only one I could taste any real difference with was Gin Mare. £35 from Waitrose, and very nice indeed. Not sure I'd pay that for it as a mixer though. For martinis I might.

          If you are tasting gin, you really should do it neat. Take a small amount and swill it around your mouth until it stops burning, then swallow that and take a swig to taste it. Gin Mare is one of the few that is nice neat at room temperature, as the olive and Mediterranean herbs soften it a little. If you are looking for a G&T, you may as well go for something cheap and full of juniper, or something with a strong flavour that isn't damaged by the tonic, like a rhubarb gin.

          ...and if you like Gin Mare, it's cheaper closer to the source, around €30 a litre in Barcelona.

    3. Hans 1

      You do not mix The Macallan, I hope .. we are not talking lousy bourbon or blend, here ... now, I don't like Cola, so I even drink lousy blend straight, I don't have a sweet tooth, so I avoid Bourbon ... I do love a Single Malt and I can tell the difference, even between some Single Malts (especially the smokey ones) ... no expert, though ...

    4. Pedigree-Pete
      Mushroom

      Mixers....

      @Aaiieeee

      Apoplectic I'd guess...unless he/she was Scots in which case a drop of lemonade or Irn Bru is often the perfered additive. PP

  7. Pen-y-gors

    Even the experts sound iffy

    Whisky/Whiskey is matured in casks. Once it is bottled it stops developing flavour and character. So by saying 'the bottle is wrong' for an 1878 MacAllen is strange. It could have been bottled anytime in the last century or more. Although it's possible there was only one known cask that was bottled in e.g.1980 and the bottle is wrong for that bottling.

    It's worth paying for the good stuff. The most expensive whisky I ever bought was a bottle of 1956 Glen Grant that cost £80 in 1996. I drank the last measure in 2006. Very nice too. The same stuff, bottled in 2008 is now selling for about £1500!

    £80 seemed quite a lot then, but if you reckon that at the time Grouse, Haig etc was £40 a bottle if you bought it in a pub!

    So today? Cheap blends are £2.50-£3 a shot in a pub, so at least £70 a bottle. I'd say going up to £150 or £200 a bottle for a special occasion is well worth it. Or even buy two bottles and keep one for 20 years!

    1. lglethal Silver badge
      Boffin

      Re: Even the experts sound iffy

      I think you might have misunderstood. The Whisky in this case was supposedly bottled in 1878.

      So presumably the experts know what type of bottles Macallan used to bottle there Whisky in 1878, and what type of labels they used. Since this bottle doesnt match the bottles Macallan used in 1878 and the label was different it raised suspicions. Justifiably so.

      Nothing to do with when the cask was laid in this case...

      1. Pen-y-gors

        Re: Even the experts sound iffy

        In that case, what kind of cockwomble blows €10,000 on a whisky that has been in suspended animation in a bottle for 139 years?

        1. Orv Silver badge

          Re: Even the experts sound iffy

          For me the fact that it doesn't age in the bottle would be part of the appeal. I could sip it and know I was tasting exactly what people in the 19th century were tasting. It's like a tiny bit of time travel.

          1. midcapwarrior

            Re: Even the experts sound iffy

            Well then take a trip up the arctic, dig down below the permafrost layer and you can taste what people before the last ice age tasted.

          2. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

            Re: Even the experts sound iffy

            It's like a tiny bit of time travel.

            It's also why whisky bottles that get found in shipwrecks are so expensive (unless the cork has failed - in which case it's worthless).

            There's even a good aftermarket for empty rare whisky bottles. Sadly, it's mostly so that scammers can refill them with cheap spirit and then reseal them to sell to people who don't know better - which is why mine go to the recycling..

        2. phuzz Silver badge

          Re: Even the experts sound iffy

          "what kind of cockwomble blows €10,000 on a whisky"

          Someone who, A) has that kind of money, and B) wants to let everyone know that.

    2. wallaby

      Re: Even the experts sound iffy

      I once worked part time in a hotel bar, a guy asked me for a bottle of JD one night (Why the hell that bilge water when there are so many good malts on the market) - I told him I could only sell it by the measure so that would make his bottle £117-50 he said fine - put it on his credit card.

      I pointed out that a 5 min journey up the road would take him to a wine shop where he could buy 3 bottles, pay for the taxi, and still have change out of the £117.50 but he said no, put it on the card.

      No accounting for stupidity

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        Re: Even the experts sound iffy

        wallaby,

        JD is quite nice with coke occasionally. I don't like either of them on their own, but they seem to work quite well together. I've picked up a few cheaper bourbons to have around as mixers with coke, and they aren't as nice that way - while also not being drinkable straight. I should probably try some Makers Mark or Woodford Reserve to see if they're better.

        I did the Jameson's distillery tour a few years back. And they had a tasting at the end, to show how good Jameson's is. Their two comparators were JD and Johnny Walker - so it's not like they set the bar very high. We then tried some of the older, more expensive, stuff and to be honest you could barely tell it from their bog-standard. Which is perfectly drinkable, though nothing special. Sainsbury's are selling a Glen Moray for £18 - which is about the same price - but far nicer.

      2. Dr Dan Holdsworth
        WTF?

        Re: Even the experts sound iffy

        This sort of thing goes on everywhere, but racecourses seem to be a magnet for it.

        Years ago, my father and I were working on York racecourse as bookies, on the cheap side where the big hospitality tents are. York as a course has peculiar betting patterns; the punters bet like mad, flat out for about twenty minutes before each race, then about five minutes before the off everything goes quiet, and you'd better have a balanced book by then or you're stuck standing something.

        Anyway, we were standing, hoping to get a few quid more on a mid-ranker horse returned at 8-1 with us, 10-1 elsewhere. No great matter; punters rarely compare odds. Up comes some chap with a tenner, rather more than we wanted so we told him he'd get better odds else where, even pointed out the better odds. Nope, wanted 80 for 10 with us, so we took it and made a backbet with next door of 80 for 8.

        Two quid profit and I still don't know why the guy was so insistent on betting with us, and not someone else. The horse lost anyway.

      3. Orv Silver badge

        Re: Even the experts sound iffy

        I pointed out that a 5 min journey up the road would take him to a wine shop where he could buy 3 bottles, pay for the taxi, and still have change out of the £117.50 but he said no, put it on the card.

        My guess is that was a company expense card. ;)

        There also *are* people in the world for whom half an hour of time is probably worth more than that figure.

        I remember a story way back, when LeVar Burton was on Star Trek. He took a road trip in his BMW, and it broke down and got towed to a dealership. It was under warranty, and he could have waited for it to be fixed. But he was in a hurry, so he just bought another BMW. For most of us that would be pretty damn stupid, but at his level of wealth (and time commitment), saving a day of his vacation was probably worth the trade-in loss on a late-model Beemer.

    3. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge

      Re: Even the experts sound iffy

      "It's worth paying for the good stuff."

      .. but it is very subjective,.... a couple of years ago I did the tourist trip around the Glengoyne Distillery, and had a sample of their 12yo and 20yo, the 20yo I personally found too phenolic, so exited through the gift shop with a bottle of their 12yo as that was far more to my taste (and pocket :-) )

      Glengoyne is a lovely distillery to visit, btw, pretty much what you imagine when you think of a distillery, three lovely copper swan necked stills, set in quaint buildings, certainly captures the romance.

    4. DJSpuddyLizard

      Re: Even the experts sound iffy

      It's worth paying for the good stuff. The most expensive whisky I ever bought was a bottle of 1956 Glen Grant that cost £80 in 1996. I drank the last measure in 2006. Very nice too. The same stuff, bottled in 2008 is now selling for about £1500!

      Yes, but like you say, " Once it is bottled it stops developing flavour and character."

      So the '56 Glen Grant you bought in 1996 is not "the same stuff" as the '56 Glen Grant bottled in 2008. Keeping a bottle of whisky longer means that it's older, not that it's matured more, and may be less valuable than the same year's whiskey bottled in a later year, as you just demonstrated.

      In the hotel's case, the tipple was expensive because it was thought to have been very old and rare.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Why did they get it tested?

    You are all overlooking the one question that brings this story into disrepute.

    If they had concerns about the authenticity of the Whisky then you would test it before you sold it.

    I call publicity stunt.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why did they get it tested?

      and before some smart arse comments about some whiskey aficionado seeing the bottle on the internet I would then ask why that person hasn't visited this Guinness book of world records whiskey establishment and viewed the bottle before it was posted on the internet.

  9. Not also known as SC
    Trollface

    And the drinker didn't even realise?

    1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      And the drinker didn't even realise?

      Not everyone has either a good sense of taste or a good knowledge of whisky. Of course (he says with becoming modesty) some of us have both.

      But sadly, I don't posessess the ability to make multi-millions per year.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Seems an odd thing to mention...

    "Mr Zhang has reportedly earned $100m from his work, grossing $16.8m in 2015. You can see why it was worth a trip to China to say sorry."

    Completely! I mean if one of us plebs had bought a shot of the stuff, there would have been several million reasons less to say I'm sorry, right?

  11. Tom 7

    Never ever do that.

    A single dram of a whisky you dont know is like a single line of a poem - probably unenlightening. Some times you will be delighted by the tastes but sometimes it takes a few more to 'understand' the complexities of the drink,

    I'd imagine no-ones favourite album made sense the first time they heard it.

    Having said that - shame the pretentious twat got his money back - he could have learned a useful life lesson.

    1. Joe Werner Silver badge

      Re: Never ever do that.

      "A single dram of a whisky you dont know is like a single line of a poem - probably unenlightening."

      Hm. Nice analogy, but no cylindrical smoking thing, I'd say. I'm not a real wine or whisky expert, but I know that I can spot many characteristics (well, those relevant to me) of a drink from a single serving. You need to have a clear mind and palate for that... best if you don't know the price before you try it (!)

      Fun episode on our honeymoon: hiking in Switzerland, stayed someplace, no proper dinner clothing, but we were well treated - they are used to that type of customers, I guess. Especially after I started discussing high quality grappa with the maitre (yes, those are nice, I have these at home and know those very well, yes, that one is actually one of our favorite distilleries - you have anything really special/ quaint?) What we got was good, interesting, but nothing I'd get a bottle of, still a nice experience.

      1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

        Re: Never ever do that.

        high quality grappa

        Almost as rare as an honest politician..

  12. Kevin Pollock

    Apparently whisky/whiskey does "age" in the bottle

    Until a few years ago I was also under the impression that, once bottled, high alcohol spirits do not change. But I think the reality is that they do *develop*....whether you would classify that as "aging" is a different thing. With all of those complex chemicals in the bottle it's inevitable that something's going to happen.

    I think this review by Ralfy on YouTube covers the topic, but as I'm on a train at the moment I haven't had a chance to listen to it to make sure it's the right one.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIpaKQ8pueg

    This is only one opnion, of course. And I'm not sure how you would establish any kind of sensible control. Even if Ralfy had tasted the same bottle many years ago would the difference in flavour be as a result of the development, or because his own taste buds have changed over the years, or even because his memory of that original tasting might be uncertain. If this is the example I'm thinking of it's a bottle that was sent to him by a channel subscriber, so he didn't even taste the original sample.

    Perhaps if you were to cryogenically freeze some whisky to try to prevent chemical change it might offer a good control against a "room temperature" sample. I'm sure there's a PhD topic in there somewhere - and all you have to do is include the term "Global Warming" in the funding request and you're sure to get approval.

    (Note, before your finger hits the down vote button I would like to point out that I am not an AGW or Climate Change denier, but it's common knowledge that research funding priorities tend to go with fashions).

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Apparently whisky/whiskey does "age" in the bottle

      upvote because of Ralfy! Great fun, prarticularly once he gets going with his brother, Big Clive.

  13. DagD

    On the bright side...

    At least it was a Non GMO.

    (on the dark side, it probably had trace amounts of DDT).

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: On the bright side...

      DDT was discovered in 1874 but not used as an insecticide until 1939.

  14. Roger Kynaston
    Joke

    Does anyone else

    read through all the comments here and hear them all in a broad glaswegian voice?

  15. Gobhicks

    Cough, choke, splutter...

    ... "20ml dram". What? Really? 20ml is barely a nip, much less a dram.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon