Words matter, as do the conclusions based on them. Now while the Frozen reaches the correct conclusion - that the blend is younger - is no news; further his pathway to that conclusion - as well as the conclusion itself - is less than satisfying. Let's start here:"Recently, the entire Flor de Caña line-up has received a make-over with splashy new bottle designs. Part of this redesign was the elimination of a definitive age statement upon the new labels. Correspondence with the company indicates that the Company wanted to modernize the bottle presentation; but they maintain that no changes to the flavour profile of their rums has occurred.
Further persistence on my part has revealed however that the age profile of their rums has indeed changed...
The new bottling ...Flor de Caña Centenario 18 is now blended to an average age of 18 years. It is a subtle, but meaningful difference which strongly implies that the brand is across the board is younger than it was before."
Here begins his analysis, but one wonders why an analysis was even needed? FdC replaced "18 Years" with just "18". Frankly, that's all we need to know. No marketer in his/her right mind would ever miss an opportunity to state 18 "years" if it were legally possible. Of course the rum has been cheapened with the addition of younger components."Correspondence with the company indicates that the Company wanted to modernize the bottle presentation; but they maintain that no changes to the flavour profile of their rums has occurred."
This trend was long ago brought to light by JaRiMi, but it's clear already that FdC has no intention of making an honest age statement anymore, but instead retains the duplicity of just saying "18", hoping no one will notice anytime soon. Too late.
Next:
Now things get well, curious. It's fair to believe that the old FdC 18 Year - if we can trust them at all - might have consisted of rums set aside for 18 years. Not 20 or 25 years, or they'd surely say so. But the Frozen One is claiming that he has somehow intuited or discovered that the new FdC "18" is now an "average of 18 years old""The new bottling however, the Flor de Caña Centenario 18 is now blended to an average age of 18 years. It is a subtle, but meaningful difference which strongly implies that the brand is across the board is younger than it was before."
That makes no sense, to wit...
If for example FdC has added some 15 year to the blend, it would have to be matched with an equal amount of 21 year old product to maintain the 18 year average. If 12 year product was used, it would have to be balanced with an equal amount of 24 year old. Let's stop right here!
Does anyone here believe that is what has happened? I don't. It is perfectly obvious that the trends are toward NAS - clearly younger blends - but that the marketeers want us to believe are actually better or just as good. Even MGXO is not the same blend it was, as the really good, really old stuff is saved for the super premium release like 1703. Yet according to Wolfie (and unlike MGXO), FdC states the profile has not changed at all!
In FdC's case this would mean they would have to divert rums over 20 years old - taking it away from possible super-premium releases like their 25 year, so that they can sell an "18" which carries no age statement? And all this just to maintain an "average" of 18 years, yet to keep that fact secret from the world except for the Frozen One? Really? If actually true, this is exactly the opposite of what MGXO and other distillers are doing.
I doubt it.
What I must and will believe is that the product is younger. Until FdC goes public with their claimed "18 year average", the FO's claim remains cold weather moose droppings. The obvious thing to have done wouldhave been to compare an old "18 year" to the new "18" to see if FdC's claim that there was "no change in profile" is true, a claim that Wolfie then examined:
Accordingly the Frozen One actually gave the new version a "92" compared to his old review of the old "18 year" at "85", based on the alleged real old stuff's "overt oakiness" (and reflecting his usual sweet tooth preference for "sweetness"). Have FdC's aging butts been kissed? You decide."Although I have criticized the way the Flor de Cana rums have been labeled, I do not criticize the decision to make this particular brand just a little younger than it was before. This is because when I previously reviewed the Flor de Caña Centenario 18 Year Old Rum, I found the spirit had an overt oakiness that was somewhat distracting. The new iteration of the brand appears to have found a much better balancing point between the oak spice and the light butterscotch sweetness.".
*******
Speaking of averages, it is notable that the FO's score of "85" for the actual "18 year" was for him, a bit of an insult, as per the Reviewer's Reviews his own "average" score was then calculated at about "87". Thus a score of "92" for the new "18" is quite the sop...
http://therumhowlerblog.com/rum-reviews ... enario-18/
