NO! to Blended Malt Scotch Whisky!

Signatures 1288 total

Page: « ‹ 1, ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, ... 26 › »

1. 301
   Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments: This decision would increase the confusion instead of ameliorating it.

   Flag
2. 302
   Name: Lesley Townsend on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
3. 303
   Name: Thomas Witzel on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments: I say NO to blended malt scotch whisky!

   Flag
4. 304
   Name: Andrew Chapman on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
5. 305
   Name: Andrew Cameron on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments: It has taken years to establish Single Malt Whisky around the Globe, this is a back dooe entry by "Fat Cats" who see only profit. They are the modern day equivalent of 19th century "medicine drummers" selling rot gut from the back of a wagon

   Flag
6. 306
   Name: Ali Lyons on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
7. 307
   Name: Stuart Robertson on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments: This representation of malt whisky has been known as either vatted malt or pure malt for many years now. My preference and I believe the preference of all whisky consumers would be for the term vatted malt to be used where malt whisky from more than 2 different distilleries is mixed together in a single bottle.

   Flag
8. 308
   Name: Thomas Rothammel on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments: I say NO to 'blended malt whisky' !!!

   Flag
9. 309
   Name: Astrid Kathrine Ohl on Mar 26, 2008

   Comments: A clear NO to "Blended Malt Scotch Whisky"!!!

   Flag
10. 310
    Name: Paul M on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
11. 311
    Name: John McLeod on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
12. 312
    Name: Claude Nijs on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: the therm 'blended malt' is misleading.

    Flag
13. 313
    Name: Claude Nijs on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: the therm 'blended malt' is misleading.

    Flag
14. 314
    Name: Kenny Hawkins on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: NO way

    Flag
15. 315
    Name: Bruce Crichton on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Vatted Malt is a much better term than 'Blended Malt'

    Flag
16. 316
    Name: Eva Bolander on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
17. 317
    Name: Dirk Holz on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Bound by tradition! Therefore - NO to "Blended Malt Scotch Whisky!"

    Flag
18. 318
    Name: Gordon Haughton on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Blended Whisky is Grain and Malt

    Flag
19. 319
    Name: G on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
20. 320
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
21. 321
    Name: Emanuel Ringbom on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
22. 322
    Name: S.B. Jens on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 323
    Name: James Rodewald on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
24. 324
    Name: Ola Eriksson on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 325
    Name: Arjen Hommersom on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
26. 326
    Name: Urs Jan on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 327
    Name: Peter Kirkwood on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 328
    Name: Axel G on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
29. 329
    Name: Mike Ralston on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
30. 330
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 331
    Name: Andrew Drynan on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: totally unnecessary

    Flag
32. 332
    Name: David L Harris on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: As an independent bottler we do not want our exclusive products devalued in this way. Why oh why does the UK Government have this incessant ambition to destroy our traditions and heritage. Their mission statement must include 'the removal of anything ressembling speciality or refinement - the mass market will rule'!

    Flag
33. 333
    Name: Samuel Karlsson on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 334
    Name: T E Bergin on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
35. 335
    Name: Kevin Erskine on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 336
    Name: Ryan Fucella on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
37. 337
    Name: Louis Perlman on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
38. 338
    Name: Bo Arnell on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Say no to Blended Malt. And to Pure malt.

    Flag
39. 339
    Name: Bob Drousth on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Let's not confuse the public needless descriptions.

    Flag
40. 340
    Name: Ulf Sch on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 341
    Name: Jon Allen on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: The last thing we need, as we should be encouraging everyone to 'drink less; drink better' is any unnecessary confusion around the labelling of alcohol.

    Flag
42. 342
    Name: H. Joseph Ehrmann on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: I spend a lot of time, energy and money on educating my customers about whisky and this would reverse so much of my efforts. Please don't waste eveyone's time and money.

    Flag
43. 343
    Name: Susan Purnell on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: As a retailer in California, I know this would cause a great deal of confusion and is not needed. Whisky is already expensive enough without the additional cost of all these companies having to change their labels. It is in particular a major expense for the smaller independent distilleries and merchant bottlers. So, I say NO, NO, NO to "Blended Malt Scotch Whisky"

    Flag
44. 344
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
45. 345
    Name: Edward W Tomeo on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 346
    Name: Richard Martino on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
47. 347
    Name: Marshall Smith on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments: Why do they feel the need to make a change Is it a slow day fro government regulators.

    Flag
48. 348
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
49. 349
    Name: David Kassel on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 350
    Name: Helena Kassel on Mar 26, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, ... 26 › »