It was the early ’90s. I was strolling around Soho in Manhattan. As my wife will (regrettably) attest to, I have a difficult time walking past a liquor store without at least having a peak inside.
On this given day, I was alone, so when I strolled past Soho Wines and Spirits, I bopped right in. The shop wasn’t very big (it is NYC after all), and it was mostly wines. But on the left wall were a few dozen bottles of whisky.
Nothing was out of the ordinary, except for a distillery bottle of Ladyburn, identical to the bottle on the left. I never saw a owner-bottled Ladyburn before, and I knew that it was rare. So, I bought it. For $28.
I took it home and that’s where it sat–for several years on display in my house bar. That is, until I received an email from a prominent UK whisky retailer who was inquiring about several different rare bottles of whiskies that some of his clients were interested in purchasing.
Now, I’m not big on collecting just for the sake of collecting. If I buy a whisky, I intend to drink it. But the few reviews I heard of Ladyburn at the time were not very good ones, and that includes Michael Jackson.
I figured I am better of selling it for a handsome profit and spending the money on whisky that I will actually drink and enjoy, so that’s what I did. I sold this bottle for a great price (I don’t remember how much it was, because I also sold a couple other bottles at the same time as a package deal, but it was under $1,000.) And that was the end of it. That is, until I noticed a bottle was up for auction at the recent Bonhams auction this past June 22nd in New York City.
What did it sell for? How about $3,570! Obviously, someone made a great profit on this whisky. Or was it some people?
I know there were very few of these bottles floating around. I don’t know what happened to my bottle after I sold it. I wonder if this is the same bottle I bought almost 20 years ago for $28. And I can’t help wondering if it was flipped a few times.
It’s a small world these days, isn’t it?
The dilemma:
To trade a fabulous, and unreplacable, bottle for multiple bottles of high quality, but available, whisk(e)y
OR
To keep, and bask in the glow of, the “Magic Bottle” in your stash.
I know some owners of 70′s Ardbeg and Port Ellen who may be in this position in a few years time.
That said, a very nice dilemma to be in!
It really was an easy decision. Now, if it were an Ardbeg or Port Ellen, I wouldn’t be selling. I have a couple of Cadenhead’s Cask Strength 11 and 12 year old Port Ellens that isn’t going anywhere except down my (and my friends’) gullets some day.
Ditto an old Allied Distillers Ardbeg 10 year old which I am about to pull the trigger on and open.
Pre-80′s Ardbeg? Enjoy that one in good company John.
Slaínte!
I got the chance recently to get a bottle of Ardbeg 1975 very cheap as the back label fell off and those zany collectors had no use for such a mangled bottle. I opened it moments after it arrived in the mail.
Whisky is only valuable if it becomes exclusive and rare. If the bulk of said whisky is not consumed, then there will never be just a few remaining bottles to truly accrue wealth.
So, I have a purpose in life… I have to do my part to help those collectors make money. ; )
Great story – I have that 1973 Ladyburn that no one likes which I bought from Joe C. for like $150 – I am likely never going to drink it but not sure I would sell it either. Most of the bottles that I have bought I have opened and am drinking but its tempting to sell one I know I am not likely to drink in order to buy some high quality ones I will!
I have a great story to tell about the 1973 Ladyburn too, but that one is too long for here, BJ. Next time I see you I’ll tell you about it.
I’ve tasted several different bottlings of the 1973. Most were overly oaked and out of balance. But there was one that tasted okay. Hopefully, you got one of the better casks.
John, is that fair to tease us with that?
Your wish is my command.
See my new post.
Thank you, if only everything else was that easy
Great story, John, and the possibility that this could be your bottle adds to the intrigue! As a collector of whiskey and other stuff, and having seen things I’ve sold previously go for way more later on, my motto has always been “You can’t have it all!”
Isn’t it really about the experience, regardless of the outcome, and the stories that go along with it?
Yes, good point Sam. The experiences and the stories indeed!
Great story!
As a 30yr old guy, I get the feeling that starting to collect whisky NOW is akin to me collecting baseball cards and comic books as a kid in 80′s. We’d all heard how valuable the cards/comics from yesteryear were so every kid like me kept them all mint and under plastic. Well, they’re worth nothing now. Maybe this is an erroneous comparison but I get the feeling it’s not, as it seems like more and more people collect whisky now. Like Brian Bradley up in comment #2, I think I’ll just drink what I can get my hands on!
Yes…by the time the general public gets a whiff of this kind of thing, it’s too late to get in (and is in fact the perfect time to get out). The high price of collectibles is contingent on there being more demand than supply. The sheer number of people collecting whisky these days assures that eye-popping price spikes like this will not happen again. If there had been as many collectors around in the early ’90′s, then there would be lots of these bottles around today.
I’m afraid I don’t quite get collecting whiskies just for the sake of scarcity. To me, if I’m going to collect something, it needs to have some aesthetic merit, and while many whisky bottles are pretty, the true art is inside. I personally intend to collect as many OPEN bottles as possible and leave the swapping of rare labels to others.
Patrick,
Just buy stuff you like. If there is something that you really like, buy a few extra bottles. If you are lucky, some of them will be worth a lot years done the road. Independent bottlings and vintages are by definition limited editions. And you never know when something from a major distillery, i.e Macallan 18, will stop being generally available. Then you’ll have the big decision to make some time in the future.
Slainte.
Louis
surely the thing to do is to drink the whisky, replace it with some appropriately coloured solution and pay a professional to re-seal the bottle so you can continue to display it.
Sounds like what they were doing with MacAllan to auction a few years ago…
Paying 3570$
, I would go quiet about it, I wouldnt pay over 50$ for it.
Selling bad whisky for a lot of money seems like a good idea
(well its probably not bad, but I suspect it to be worse from what you get from an average OB these days)
Macdeffe
I wish I could have done that with my bottle of Loch Dhu. Whoof, that was quite a painful taste.
I have a problem with that right now with a few “one bottle left” things, mainly one of those final Hirsch bourbons. I *want* to drink it, but knowing the price and the trend makes me pause.
I will crack it at some point, though; I may have too many bottles, but they’re for drinking and sharing, not collecting.
I used my bottle of Loch Dhu at a whisky tasting I hosted. I wanted to show everyone what waste of Mannochmore whisky it was. Then, after they discontinued it, it’s value rose sharply and started showing up at auctions.
Amazing that some people will pay a lot of money for a whisky, regardless of quality, just becaues it is rare.
For the Loch Dhu, I opened the bottle to taste it with a friend. Do I regret it? No, since we enjoyed tasting the stuff.
Concerning your second comment, I normally only buy stuff that I intend to drink. But if I have tasted a bottle that I own and don’t like, I don’t mind selling it to buy good stuff.
There is definitely a clear divide between collectors and drinkers. The collectors buy because it’s rare, the drinkers buy because it’s good. I suppose the only time the interplay becomes a problem is when a really good, but rare, whisky comes up for sale. I personally choose to drink whisky, rather than attempt to use it to pay for my retirement.
On a side note, I wonder how much different whisky prices would be if there were no collectors, and everyone was just interested in drinking the stuff…
though i will never have enough money to experience this dilemma i can understand it to some degree. while an expensive bottle of whisky is nowhere as expensive as collectible art, you can hang a painting on a wall forever, and you can appreciate it everyday without diminishing it. but i meant my comment above only half jokingly: if the whisky is not an investment you wish to flip in the future but something you want to display in your collection, why not drink the whisky and fill the bottle back up with caramel solution?
me, i’m collecting cans of spam in the hope that they may someday be fashionable. and should the apocalypse come first, we won’t go hungry.
[...] Lowland distillery (that were sold here in the U.S., anyway): the 12 year old which I wrote about here on Friday, and this [...]
(as a side-note: i see that someone paid in excess of $900 pre-tax for lot 533–12 bottles of the lagavulin 16–at the bonham’s auction. current price at astor’s in nyc for 12 bottles of the laga 16? <$600 pre-tax)
Back in the 1980′s, I stopped in at Frugal McDougles in Nashville, TN and they had several cases of Ladyburn 12, as pictured. The price was less than $20.00 a bottle, and I bought 3. Hindsight, I should have bought it all!! I still have one unopened bottle, and half of another. I’m a big fan of William Grant & Sons, and have the unopened one in my Grant’s display in my Scotch room. I had no idea this whisky would command this kind of premium…….
Ah Scotty, like many of us over the years, you underestimated the overwhelming power of a collector’s compulsion.
As my Mother always said, God rest her soul, they have “More money than brains!”