Mannochmore 12yo
James Eadie Small Batch | 46% ABV
Score: 7/10
Very Good Indeed.
TL;DR
A borderline 8/10 and worthy of entry into any race
Only A Race If We Make It So
It’ll come as no surprise to those of you who visit Dramface that we like Indy bottlers. That’s the royal ‘we’ – all of us that buy, drink, share and prattle on about this drink, for nil reward, other than the simple pleasure of sharing that passion. All of the Dramface clan.
It’s not that we don’t love the official stuff – we really do. A lot. It’s just that these indies speak to us on a level and in a way that much of the officialdom can’t stoop to. The clarity of voice, vision of choice and (I’ve run out of rhyming words here… ‘rejoice’) and shining through of personalities. It’s the ability to ride with the waves and show the level of passion, often without the ego (read: ‘marketing department bravado’) that makes it all seem, well, contrived.
One of those indies that I really like is Woodrow’s of Edinburgh.
Relative newcomers to the scene, but dedicated, honest, personable and out there to be accounted for. They are also, as recent bottlings demonstrate, up for a little ‘fist-waving’ or soap-box rhetoric, if you will. Not too dissimilar from what this writer gets up to on these hallowed pages.
A recent bottling caught Dramface Tower’s attention when it appeared to be a small swipe at another independent bottler for a series of bottlings (many of which have been reviewed on here – a couple by me). Titled The Highland Motherlover, Race to The Bottom Edition aged 9 years and bottled at 101º proof – the label, with its gravestone and epitaph RIP left little wonder at who it was aimed at.
I had ignored it, really, until those at Woodrow’s published a blog post explanation landing on the 7th of January. Please read the full post at Woodrow’s blog, but I’ll share some excerpts here:
“We wanted to draw attention to some recent practices from certain more established independent bottler (who shall remain nameless—for now, let’s just call them X).
By the last quarter of 2024, we noticed something troubling, and yet, strangely interesting, in the whisky world: a sudden surge of whiskies hitting the shelves at shockingly good prices. These “amazing deals” were popping up everywhere, to which, we, amongst other smaller independent bottlers cried: How on earth are they making this work?
I know, I know. Some of you are probably thinking, “Well, X is a more established bottler, and they probably bought their stock years ago when prices were lower. That’s how they can afford to offer such low prices.”
But here’s the thing—we did some quick maths in a pub to see what was really going on. (All hail the Back of the Napkin Maths)
The Maths Behind the "Excellent Price"
Let’s take an example from X’s latest release: a 13-year-old Speyside Single Malt at 57.1% ABV, priced at ~£46.00 a bottle:
Price after VAT: Remove the 20% VAT, and we’re down to £38.33.
Retailer’s Margin: Subtract the retailer’s 25% cut, and now we’re at £28.75.
Alcohol Duty: The new alcohol duty of £31.64 per litre of alcohol (from August 2023) means duty is a heafty £12.65 per 700ml, bringing us to £16.10.
Packaging & Bottling Costs: Add in the costs for glass bottles, corks, labels, and bottling (about £5 per bottle), and we’re left with a paltry £11.10.
So, £11.10 is what’s left to cover the whisky itself, X’s overhead, and—well—profit. This raised a big question amongst smaller independent bottlers, including ourselves: How is this even possible?
The "Race to the Bottom" Explained
Of course, X has every right to do what they do and release what they release. We live in a democratic, capitalist society, after all. In fact, this is a fairly common business practice, known as the "Race to the Bottom."
The "Race to the Bottom" refers to the market situations where competitors prioritise market share growth over profitability and keep lowering prices (sometimes to the point of a net loss) to gain enough control over a market and eliminating competitors.”
Not wanting to take sides here, but there is a bit to unpack. We need to start with the first point made.
‘X’ did indeed buy these casks when they were lower. A lot lower. And I mean a heck of a lot lower. These casks were bought at prices that would make the buying team (the owner) at Woodrow’s do such a hard double-take as to make their eyes pop out à la Roger Rabbit.
Back before the world started trading casks like they were mined Bitcoin, casks of whisky were not expensive – and they were plentiful – and some lucky beggars were buying at trade prices.
All unheard of now, pretty much, but back in the day, and for a long time, that was how it was. Prices were judged on a RLA by year basis (Re-gauged Litres of Alcohol: how much liquid alcohol you have in a barrel at any given time ; required for value calculation and accurate labelling). For the sake of ease, say £1 per year per re-gauged litre of alcohol. So a ten year old hogshead with 100 litres in it was a simple sum: £1 x 10 x 100 = £1,000. You read that right folks – and I’m not even going back that far for those sums to be correct (many of you wouldn’t have been legally drinking though).
I’m not 100% certain, of course, that we are exactly on point with these price calculations but, trust me, we’re not a million miles away.
So that’s point one - and it is the most important one to remember - for ‘X’, the whisky did not cost much to buy.
Point two; those back of the napkin sums. Can’t argue with the VAT or the Duty, but I’ll take it from here. Because I have friends in very high places, I can let you know that the wholesale price per bottle for the 100º series in question is £30, so removing Duty is leaving £17.35.
The packaging and bottling is going to be closer to half of what is estimated in the calculation. Around £2.50 (a very fast bottling line, and far superior buying power for raw materials), which means we’re down to £14.85. I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest the whisky cost no more than £6 or £7 a bottle, meaning the profit margin ain’t half bad – not bad at all.
Especially when you consider these are not single casks but small batches of well over 1,000 bottles per bottling (could be several thousand perhaps). Suddenly each run - that sells out damn quick - bringing in maybe £6 a bottle is turning a tidy profit. Notice I didn’t use the word ‘little’ there.
So that’s what’s wrong with the Woodrow rant (there’s much more to it than that: UK customers, global distribution, minimum order meaning more expensive bottles get listed and so on) but, in a nutshell, the idea that this series is run at anywhere near cost let alone at a loss, is flawed. Deeply.
I think ‘X’ are, in effect, asking the reverse question of ‘why can Gordon & MacPhail bottle ludicrously expensive old whiskies?’
However, and this directed at you dear reader as much as it is at Woodrow’s; I am not having a go at Woody’s. Far from it, I’m just pointing out facts. Sharing some knowledge, if you will.
Here’s the rub. I know the Woodrow’s team. I really like them. I like what they do, what they stand for. I like their presence in the industry, at festivals, tastings and gatherings. I like, no, I love the fact that they love whisky. That means a lot to me. It means an awful lot more than being able to buy a Speyside (M) for less than £50.
They have entered the independent bottling game at a tough time, with scant supply, high prices, an over-crowded market and under-whelmed consumers. And yet, they are going about their business with aplomb, no little courage and a whole lot of conviction.
Oh that I could say the same about ‘X’.
In a side-industry of people, faces, passion and convictions first, ‘X’ are last. They are not to be seen. Faceless, soulless, expressionless (apart from the releases, obviously) and without representation of any kind. They have reduced independent bottling to the lowest denominator – a product, plain and simple.
When you buy a bottle from ‘X’ what are you buying into? Who or what are you supporting? Do we buy whisky just because it can be cheap booze? Or do we want it packaged with attention, personality and commitment?
Woodrow’s in my opinion just have to take this 100º Proof series on the chin, like 90% of all of the other bottlers. Times change and I remember whilst ‘X’ was filling their boots with stock from one of the giant companies - gits - whilst others were tapping their empty bowls at the windows begging for scraps. It is what it is, and not in a Joe Pesci kind of way.
Let it slide off of your backs and get back to doing what you do best. Keep the passion alive. If you build it, people will come. They most definitely will come.
Review
Mannochmore 12yo, James Eadie Small Batch, First-fill bourbon hogshead #6697 and a re-charred butt #2344, 1,035 bottles, bottled 2024, 46% ABV
£50 and available everywhere (£45 paid)
I don’t have a Woodrow’s to hand and have already reviewed two of the X 100º Proof series, so let’s open a bottle I bought at one of the many festivals, can’t remember which, last year, from James Eadie.
Score: 7/10
Very Good Indeed.
TL;DR
A borderline 8/10 and worthy of entry into any race
Nose
My first thoughts are of tangerine peel, but I’m very much reminded of that bitter orange note that is so prevalent in Amaro’s in Italy (Kinnie for those of you who have been to Malta).
The re-charred oak has given this an oaky-bitterness but in no way is this unpleasant or unattractive. Perhaps oaky-spiciness is a better way of putting it. With some time, (this one doesn’t need a drop of water) a soft vanilla cakiness (that’s not a word, I know but…) comes through with hints of apricot jam, barley sugar, coconut (just the barest of hints) – and then back to some tart citrus.
This isn’t a single cask, nor cask strength, and in my opinion is not missing a mark due to these facts. There is no nose prickle, no off-notes, nothing that in any way detracts from the spirit character (the fruity notes) mingling with the oak input.
Palate
More barley sugar. The barley flavour is quite strong, and then comes the fruitiness. Again, apricot jam comes to mind. It is sweet but not overly spicy, without being dominant, and the oaky bitterness, i.e. spiciness, comes in around the tongue and adds a delightful touch.
The Dregs
I love this kind of whisky. It really speaks my language. It doesn’t require 1,000 words to describe it, nor does it require £100 to buy it – in fact, £100 will buy two.
I feel no loss of emphasis with it being bottled at 46%. This was purchased about two-thirds of the way through a festival (hence the slight discount on the purchase price) and was the only bottle I bought that day. For it to have remained with me after the [insert a guess of how many other whiskies I tried that day] demonstrated that it punched the right buttons within me. I also really like the James Eadie gang, their ethos, and how they interact with the great and good of the whisky-buying public (me and you lot). Lots of boxes ticked in my book – borderline 8/10.
This is a perfect example of what I mean above about ‘other bottlers’; those who are not juggernauts like Gordon & MacPhail or Signatory Vintage. Those who do their utmost to present the best whiskies they can source at the best presentation and prices they can muster. They are only ever as good as their most recent outturn and James Eadie are amongst some of the best. As are Woodrow’s, Watt Whisky, Little Brown Dog, The Thompson Brothers, Dràm Mòr… need I continue?
For the majority of us, of course we are going to keep buying the odd ‘X’. We drink the Supermarket own label wine don’t we?
But, when you can, check out what Woody’s and these other great bottlers are up to. Get chatting with them at tastings and festivals and realise that their availability, knowledge, passion and integrity come with a few £s on the price tag.
Think of it as supporting the impassioned smaller concerns, protecting whisky’s diversity and a tip for great service.
Score: 7/10
Tried this? Share your thoughts in the comments below. FF
-
Dramface is free.
Its fierce independence and community-focused content is funded by that same community. We don’t do ads, sponsorships or paid-for content. If you like what we do you can support us by becoming a Dramface member for the price of a magazine.
However, if you’ve found a particular article valuable, you also have the option to make a direct donation to the writer, for those that choose to include a link here - you’d make their day. Thank you.
For more on Dramface and our funding read our about page here.
