Single Malts

[Chipchopper]

Is aged whiskey's significantly improved by great age ?
For example, I ordered a 12 year single malt from a supermarket, which was substituted with a 5 year, aged one, of a different distillery.
Should I feel cheated ?

[1ozzy]

Yep

[CoolBritannia]

Defo, yes.

[emmie]

yes you should feel cheated. take it back

[Chipchopper]

Can't take it back now, I've given it to a friend already.

[1ozzy]

But taste it first ;-/

[1ozzy]

Oops,

[lady-janine]

Yes. Certainly. Big difference in taste, smell and price.

[1ozzy]

And quality.
You've been dudded old mate.

[webbo3]

Yes, very, its not even close.

[davebro]

I once toured the distillery on Jura & our guide said that older is not always better as it depends to some extent on the quality of the (sherry) barrels they could get at the time for storing the whisky.

He said (then) that the 8-year-old was better than the 12-year-old.

[davebro]

BTW "whiskey" is Irish - scotch is whisky. Just saying...

[sunny-dave]

Price of a whisky depends on so much more than the age statement. It can also take into account the reputation of the distillery, the number of bottles of each variant made and any prizes won.

The only way of knowing if you've been cheated is to look at

1. The usual/recommended price of each whisky
2. The prices on the day you purchased

Assuming you paid the actual price for the 5 year old, I'd feel cross if I had ordered a £40 bottle reduced to £25, but got sent a £25 bottle which was unreduced, but if both were either at full price or reduced by a similar margin then it wouldn't be so bad.

[Ellipsis]

> Should I feel cheated?

That's not a substitution that should have been made. It's not a reasonable one. You should have refused it. But, given that you didn't, were you cheated? It's a tricky one. Probably the supermarket ought to have rules about which items can and can't be substituted, and for what. Swapping an £8 bottle of rioja for an £8 bottle of a different rioja is probably OK. But a 12-year-old single malt ... there's a good chance that was being bought as a present for someone, perhaps because it's their favourite, so swapping to a 5-year-old from another distillery is not something the supermarket ought to be doing.

[Redhelen72]

Not at all!
I would much rather have the Wee Beastie from Ardbeg which is a 5 than a 12 speyside.
Its down to the individual tastes, where it is stored - what casks and how many its stored in.

[Ellipsis]

The point is that whisky is very much a matter of taste. It's not like swapping one tin of tomatoes for another. If you've ordered a 12 year old single malt, the chances are you want exactly that.

[Sqad]

Ive no idea whether or not you should feel cheated, as you really are not in the Rolls Royce's of whiskeys.

Try the replacement and if it is to your liking, then you haven't been cheated, but if it is unacceptable to your palate, then yes, you have been "cheated."

It's that simple.

[drmorgans]

I'd be concerned about the "character" of the malt; Speyside tend to be fruity, while Islay are peaty, with Lowland and Highland ranged between them. If I bought my brother-in-law a top quality Speyside he wouldn't like it, preferring smoky or peaty flavours, so an Islay or Highland would suit.

[Vagus]

What you probably should have done, Chip, is ticked the ‘no substitute’ box.
Failing that, if the substituted one is cheaper than the one you ordered then they should refund you the difference. If it’s a more expensive substitute then no problem as you should still be charged the price your cheaper, ordered, one was.
So no, I don’t think I’d feel cheated in these circumstances.

[douglas9401]

The usurious taxes and duty remain the same though. :-)

[Meaghan27]

My Dad loves the Wee Beastie from Ardbeg. I used to buy him Jura for his birthday and Xmas every year, then he tasted the beastie up in Scotland and asked for that. I don't like whiskey much but like the wee beastie as its so smoky and sharp.