10 ms·

I suspect it will take a while for all of this text to be digested and for people much smarter than me to find a lot of nasty stuff in there. Meanwhile, I foun

• ranit 11y ago
  France is not part of TPP.
  • melvinmt 11y ago
    France is part of TTIP negotiations which probably will cover the same stipulations.
• deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
• pmelendez 11y ago
  <jokingly tone> The most amusing part to me is the glorification of Bourbon and Tennessee Whiskey. IMO, They don't stand a chance in front a good Scotch or even a Rye. </jokingly tone>
  • corin_ 11y ago
    I know this is purely subjective, but personally I genuinely haven't found a bourbon I like, while I love plenty of single malts (not just from Scotland but also Irish/Japanese). Maybe someday that'll change for me or maybe I'm just destined to not be a fan of Bourbons - I have plenty of friends who love them. Haven't tried Tennessee. (But as a Brit I completely approve of your joking, too)
    • freehunter 11y ago
      It's a different flavor. Sweet, instead of smoky. It's completely okay in my opinion to like scotch and not bourbon, or the other way around. I like scotch, but I prefer bourbon. The smoky flavor turns me off a bit. Everyone has a personal choice, but I'm of the opinion that if you don't like Maker's Mark, you probably won't like bourbon.
      • GordonS 11y ago
        Only Islay malts are typically smokey, and it is certainly an acquired taste. Malts from other regions of Scotland vary a lot, and as a point of interest, many are matured in bourbon casks because it imparts sweet notes.
        • br3w5 11y ago
          I tried an Islay malt recently (https://www.masterofmalt.com/whiskies/caol-ila-12-year-old-whisky/ https://www.masterofmalt.com/whiskies/caol-ila-12-year-old-w...) that was matured in bourbon casks which softened the smoky flavour somewhat - very nice
          • GordonS 11y ago
            Caol Ila is probably the 'lightest' of all the peaty Islay malts (from memory, I think it proclaims this on the bottle too).
            • br3w5 11y ago
              Yes it's certainly lighter than others I've tasted (Laphroaig and Lagavulin). I do like the smoky taste - what smaller distilleries are there that are heavier on the smoky taste?
              • corin_ 11y ago
                I'd recommend Ardbeg. I also love Talisker, from the Isle of Skye, which can be a bit sweeter but still quite smokey.
  • wil421 11y ago
    Blasphemy! For me a scotch is something totally different than a good Bourbon or whiskey. A good bourbon like Pappy's shouldnt be compared to a smokey peaty scotch like the Laphroaig quater cask I have in my cabinet. For me Bourdons are a daily drink and Scotch is for a celebration. Anyways Japan and now Taiwan have been winning the most recent awards.
    • diakritikal 11y ago
      Global Whisky awards are pretty much based on who lobbies the hardest and with the largest brown envelope - in Scotland we view the whisky industries global awards to be about as reputable as FIFA and Sepp Blatter
  • nickpsecurity 11y ago
    wil421 has the right idea: different types of whiskey for different people. Your Scotch and Rye barely stand a chance in Tennessee because people grew up drinking "real" whiskey that tasted different. And over there, the "real" stuff they grew up around tastes nothing like ours. Discussion is really apples to oranges. I do like how what I hear about Scotch matches what I know of Tennessee: the best stuff is brewed for locals with the exports being knockoffs. Except a few things like Jack Daniels where the standard brews are widely available. Best stuff comes from the moonshiners, though. :)
    • groby_b 11y ago
      Well, given the fact that Jack Daniels can't sell to the locals (they distill in a dry county - sucks to be them ;) they're by default widely available.
      • nickpsecurity 11y ago
        I was saying local to Tennessee but you maybe onto something haha. I've never toured the facility because it's a dry county and they just give you lemonade. The offices and distributors closer to where I lived were a different story. ;)
    • tptacek 11y ago
      I don't think this is true of Scotch either. Go there sometime (it's an amazingly beautiful place for a road trip) and bounce from distillery to distillery. Some things you'll notice: * Go to where the locals shop and they're selling the same brands the whiskey specialty stores sell. * The gas stations have better Scotch selections than most US liquor stores. * The expensive distillery-only products are generally the most interesting whiskies, and they're the stuff least likely to sell to the locals. * Virtually all of the distilleries, and most of the best distilleries, are owned by gigantic corporations that own portfolios of distilleries. The entire Scotch industry is an export industry. No doubt there's quite a lot of bad Scotch exported, but it seems to me like more or less all the good Scotch is exported too.
      • 11y ago
• cryoshon 11y ago
  This is the clause demanded by some of the alcoholic beverage manufacturers, which is to say they paid for that specific clause to be implemented even though it has no real global benefit and may harm smaller local groups in NZ producing similar goods. This should not be seen as a surprise to anyone.
  • maxerickson 11y ago
    What problem is it going to cause NZ locals? Why would they want to brand their whiskey as Tennessee whiskey or Bourbon? Bourbon is widely recognized as a US whiskey, probably from Kentucky, using that name for something made in NZ is more likely to piss customers off than anything else (Tennessee whiskey has a somewhat more obvious geographic meaning).
    • AdeptusAquinas 11y ago
      When teenagers here drink cheap liquor, they might drink 'bourbon' or a 'bourbon and coke' - anything they can get for less than $20. Accordingly, there are a number of brands targeted at that market, and I would not be surprised if some of them have nothing do with the US original.
      • maxerickson 11y ago
        Sure, I wouldn't be surprised if they are using it as a brand. But I'm pretty skeptical that those teenagers care that their cheap whiskey be called Bourbon.
        • AdeptusAquinas 11y ago
          Its worse than that. I remember being surprised when I got older and found out that Bourbon is the same thing as Whiskey. The common conception was that they were distinct drinks, and that Whiskey was too expensive.
    • _delirium 11y ago
      I agree for Tennessee whiskey, which is clearly tied to production in Tennessee. But "bourbon" is increasingly seen as a just style of barrel-aged corn-mash whiskey. It's already in the process of losing its geographical specificity within the U.S., with producers in places like California and Illinois [1]. Once you have California whiskey producers making bourbon, it's not that big a stretch to imagine that one of the Japanese whiskey companies might want to come out with a bourbon. I think it would be more principled to either let anyone produce it (subject to style requirements), or to geographically restrict it to only the vicinity of Kentucky. But the U.S.'s position seems to be to want to make it a specifically American brand, but otherwise not regionally restricted. Which I understand the trade motivations for, but honestly I don't see bourbon from Tokyo as any less authentic than bourbon from San Francisco, assuming it's made correctly. [1] http://www.nonkentuckybourbon.com/non-kentucky-bourbon-list http://www.nonkentuckybourbon.com/non-kentucky-bourbon-list
• atwebb 11y ago
  I believe NZ allows legal home-distilling, maybe it's related to that? Similar to home brewers making Belgian beers by using the correct yeast and methods, people could be mini-batching TN/KY bourbon & whiskey using the style and methods.
  • adrianmacneil 11y ago
    We allow distilling, but only for personal use (you can't legally sell it), so I doubt this is related.
• ekidd 11y ago
  There's a way of thinking about things like "Tennessee Whiskey" and "champagne" that makes good business sense: They're basically shared regional brands. In Europe, many traditional kinds of cheese, alcohol and meat are covered by a system known in various countries as AOC (France, Appellation d'origine contrôlée) or DOC (Italy, Denominazione di origine controllata). Conceptually speaking, the idea goes something like: 1. Large-scale producers can always just create a trademark and market it. Customers will be able to recognize the product and evaluate it based on its reputation. 2. Small-scale producers, however, lack the reach to advertise and be recognized on their own. But what if they're making a traditional, high-end product for which their region is famous? Well, we could set up a shared "brand", where anybody from the right region can agree to follow traditional recipes and have their quality judged. And eventually, customers will realize that Parmigiano-Reggiano means "a certain kind of really good traditional Parmesan cheese from Italy." Under this system, the right way to think of things like "champagne" and "Tennessee Whiskey" is to treat them as a particular kind of brand. Any company can sell products under this brand, provided (a) they come from the right region, and (b) they meet a certain set of quality standards. The system of AOC/DOC seems to work well for both "foodie" customers (who want to be able to recognize a high-quality traditional product), and small- to mid-size producers (who get to pool their branding efforts). The only cost of this system is that names like "Tennessee Whiskey" essentially become international trademarks under the control of a regional organization.
  • patrickaljord 11y ago
    The only problem with that is that there might be producers outside these regions who produce better quality products, these producers will be penalized for not being able to use the actual product name and may give up on it, leaving the market worse off, with lower quality products. The other problem is that producers who benefit from the regional brand name have very little reason to improve or even maintain the quality of their product as they have a monopoly on it.
    • nickpsecurity 11y ago
      That's probably true given it already happens with brand names in general.
• nickpsecurity 11y ago
  My home state doesn't play around about their Whiskey. The best stuff isn't for export, though: homebrewed as moonshine, mixed with custom recipes, and distributed to family and friends. Jack n Coke is still a favorite drink.
• marcoperaza 11y ago
  France has a deal with the US and other countries that protects the name "champagne". In the US, you can't call your sparkling white wine "champagne" unless A) it's from Champagne, France, or B) you were selling it under the same label before 2006.
• snowwrestler 11y ago
  > I didn't see a similar letter with France regarding cognac or champagne. France is not a signatory to the TPP, so you wouldn't.
• rosege 11y ago
  Where do I start the rum thread? specifically spiced rum...yum!
• jmaygarden 11y ago
  NAFTA contains language that strictly defines bourbon as well.