NO! to Blended Malt Scotch Whisky!

Signatures 1288 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ... 26 › »

1. 151
   Name: James Pithie on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
2. 152
   Name: Phil McIntyre on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
3. 153
   Name: Gemma Scott on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
4. 154
   Name: Mats Olsson on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
5. 155
   Name: Mikael Sandberg on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 156
   Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
7. 157
   Name: Keith Glass on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 158
   Name: Susan Webster on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 159
   Name: Steve Oliver on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments: As a part-time whisky retailer, to change the name from vatted malt to a blend of malts is a retrograde step. Vatted Malt very adequately describes the product - a vatting of malts. Blending is synonomous with a mixing of Grain and Malt.

   Flag
10. 160
    Name: S on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
11. 161
    Name: George Glass on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Why disrupt and disadvantage our major industry for little/no advantage to consumers. Typically anti Scottish measure from the centre. Another pinprick towards breaking up the UK.

    Flag
12. 162
    Name: Gerry Granger on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Don't change just for the sake of it. This proposal will cause more confusion. It will lower malt whisky to the level of blended whisky in the eyes of those who don't know better. We have a premium brand do throw it away.

    Flag
13. 163
    Name: Martin Diekmann on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: It`s all about clarification - stop confusing people!

    Flag
14. 164
    Name: Mark Woolven on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: As a consumer of whisky, Scotch and other, I would find the use of the word "blend" in the context of two entirely different drinks to be unnecessarily confusing.

    Flag
15. 165
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Don't transform what is simple and obvious into something misleading and complicated.

    Flag
16. 166
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
17. 167
    Name: WuLin Enterprises Co on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: I strongly support the "spirit" and specific veto noted in the above petition. In Asian markets this will be totally confusing and jeopardize the known quality of Scottish Single Malts. Gordon Woolley

    Flag
18. 168
    Name: Ake Johansson on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
19. 169
    Name: Iain Crawford on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
20. 170
    Name: Renie Jas on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: A clearly No to blended Malt Scotch Whisky.

    Flag
21. 171
    Name: Alice Glass on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: A very bad idea, helping no one but mounting additional cost on an important part of our industry and heritage.

    Flag
22. 172
    Name: Kurt Heldwein on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 173
    Name: Katy Jones on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
24. 174
    Name: Gregg Glass on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 175
    Name: Paul Gunn on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: I agree with the view that the word, "blended", has become associated with whiskies of minimal value and of absolute minimal quality as demanded by the large own-branded supermarket distributors. It is vital to retain a distinct designation for malt whiskies, such as exist already, and such as are nowadays becoming increasingly understood and used more confidently by the ever-growing community of malt whisky consumers worldwide. To replace the terms "vatted malt" and "pure malt" with the now-debased word, "blended" would, in my opinion, greatly diminish the excellent quality image of scotch whisky in general.

    Flag
26. 176
    Name: Richard Barr on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 177
    Name: Gijs on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 178
    Name: John Savage-Onstwedder on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: I agree that the term 'Blended Malt Scotch Whisky' is confusing. Whoever introduced this proposal, obviously wants to hijack the word MALT in order to mislead the general public in thinking that the quality of the product is on a par with malt whisky which it obviously is not. It is perfectly clear what they are intending to achieve with this proposal and utterly disgraceful.

    Flag
29. 179
    Name: Gijs on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
30. 180
    Name: Bob LeDrew on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 181
    Name: Volker St on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Dear DEFRA, creating a new term using the word

    Flag
32. 182
    Name: Robert Wilson on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 183
    Name: Volker St on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Dear DEFRA, creating a new term using the word

    Flag
34. 184
    Name: Lothar M on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: NO TO

    Flag
35. 185
    Name: Craig Daniels on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 186
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Please leave well along in the interest of Scotch Whisky!

    Flag
37. 187
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Term Blended Malt undermines and devalues the status and aspirations of the the Scotch Whisky Industry. Such a term confuses the consumer and would be detrimental to building confidence.

    Flag
38. 188
    Name: BjornErik Julseth on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: I do not in any way support any new law that would change the language of the category, and specifically to prohibit the terms

    Flag
39. 189
    Name: Aidan McParland on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: I fundamentally disagree with the proposal for "Blended Malt Scotch Whisky" as it will cause confusion and ultimately devalue the industry, particularly small independent producers. To enshrine this new system in law would be to fail the consumer and the industry.

    Flag
40. 190
    Name: Volker Vogel on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: What stupide idea! Let the fingers from our Scotch!

    Flag
41. 191
    Name: Bob Wenting on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
42. 192
    Name: S Carr on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: In the spirit of simplification, it would be helpful to adopt a single term to describe a product consisting only of malt whisky, albeit from more than one distillery. Should DEFRA not be invited, therefore, to prohibit one of "pure" or "vatted" and settle on the other

    Flag
43. 193
    Name: Jean-Michel LEVY on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
44. 194
    Name: Dr Mats D Hermansson on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
45. 195
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 196
    Name: Paul Dejong on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
47. 197
    Name: Dugdale Bradley on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Please retain the present simple and well understood system. The new porposal is very confusing and will undermine some of the market for Scotland's best products.

    Flag
48. 198
    Name: Gloria Ramon on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Perfectly fine the way they are at present. Blended Malt would just be confused with Blended whiskies.

    Flag
49. 199
    Name: Andreas Julseth on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 200
    Name: Niel Hendriksz on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: I agree that "Blended Malt" is both more confusing and damaging to the industry. I would much rather prefer "Vatted malt"

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ... 26 › »