| # | Name | Comments |
|---|
| 951 | John Milroy | In my many years selling whiskies in UK and abroad I have always lectured that mixing malts is called vatted.
Mixing malts with grain whiskies is called blended.
Why confuse so many people who have already been converted? |
| 952 | Anonymous | Thanks! |
| 953 | Anonymous | |
| 954 | Steve Hinternhoff | |
| 955 | toni whittington | |
| 956 | anthony ridings | Why is it that legislation aiming for
"clarification" always seems to miss the mark? |
| 957 | Anonymous | I don't enjoy whisky myself. But I do have a Marketing degree. And this is just a cost-cutting customer-insulting rip-off. No! no! no! |
| 958 | Chris Luke | |
| 959 | Joe Fernandez | I totally agree. |
| 960 | Martine Nouet | as a journalist I will never use "blended malt" in my writings |
| 961 | Rudy Gardin | Introduce legislation to defend definition, but not definition that create confusion.
Thanks |
| 962 | Anonymous | |
| 963 | Te-Fu Chiu | |
| 964 | Arne Hansen | |
| 965 | Dave Thomason | |
| 966 | MGSCOLLINGS | this is a bad move for both malt whisky and scotch whisky.
Champagne does not say blended wine or cognac blended eaux de vieux.
Blended to most consumers means inferior which it is not |
| 967 | chris strain | |
| 968 | Torgrim Tandstad | |
| 969 | bowwine | |
| 970 | Peter George | NO, NO and NO again. Leave it alone. |
| 971 | Keith Grainger | What a crazy proposal. Add this to the array of absurd wood finshes designed by marketeers and accountants who know nothing about, and care less for, the integrity of malts and consumer consusion will prevail. |
| 972 | Carl | |
| 973 | Anonymous | |
| 974 | Larry Brown | |
| 975 | Luis Palafox | |
| 976 | J Nathan Bazzel | Malt is Malt and Blend is Blend. I like them both and I am not an idiot which SWA is trying to make feel like. |
| 977 | Aaron Barker | |
| 978 | Eric Crowther | What's wrong with our old friend "Vatted Malt"? |
| 979 | Anonymous | The greatest problem with this is the fact that re-branding does not create clarity. In every example re-branding even older confusing information has created more confusion than it has solved. |
| 980 | Aaron Burke | |
| 981 | Ian MacKay | A ridiculous idea, designed to confuse whisky buyers for the benefit of a few SWA members at the expense of the industry as a whole. |
| 982 | Gary P | |
| 983 | Adam Auden | We already have the terms for defining this, why change them now? Single/Vatted/Blended. Why, other than for the purposes of confusing the consumer, should these terms be prohibited? |
| 984 | Ted Bergquist | |
| 985 | Anonymous | |
| 986 | Magnus Herou | |
| 987 | Jens Draböl | |
| 988 | Micke Forsberg | |
| 989 | Magnus Orrenas | |
| 990 | C.C.CHANG | |
| 991 | Bob Gulien | Bad, Bad and Bad |
| 992 | Hans Strenge | |
| 993 | Brian Stenberg | |
| 994 | Anonymous | |
| 995 | Michael Rotthoff | |
| 996 | Anonymous | |
| 997 | sandy reid | |
| 998 | Erik Bloomberg | “SAY NO TO ‘BLENDED MALT SCOTCH WHISKY!’” |
| 999 | Sue Stenberg | |
| 1000 | Will Grzanich | |