The One Eyed leads the Blind Dept: Luis Ayala

This is the main discussion section. Grab yer cups! All hands on deck!
Post Reply
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

The One Eyed leads the Blind Dept: Luis Ayala

Post by Capn Jimbo »

Let's start here: I like Luis Ayala...


...way more than I like Wolfie, the Preacher, or the Lone Flamer. He was one of the pioneers, he works hard, and although he's not perfect, he's done his very best to promote rum for years now. But let's face it... when bottle comes to cork he is a commercial operator and he has to go with the flow.

As we all know well sugar has finally been completely outed, based on ALKO, the Swedes, Drejer, and a bunch of good guys who follow his hydrometer protocol to test rums. As I run around the net I am finding ever more rum drinkers who are not only aware of the Master Sugar List, but actually promote it. This is not good for promoters and commercial advisors like Ayala who is a consultant and trainer.

His world is changing under him and the question is: will he bite the bullet and promote the truth - or will he try to fuzz it up to buy at least a couple more years of dubious alteration and practices. In this month's newsletter, Luis parses the alterations clause to his advantage, in addition to featuring a "testing expert" who goes into numbing detail of various sophisticated testing methods - but - which somehow fails to cover the common and traditional use of the hydrometer by thousands of brewers, vintners and distillers.

An accident? I think not. Check this out in my email of today to Luis:
"Dear Luis...

Hope you are doing well and as always, I enjoy reading your monthly e-newsletter. I do have a couple of comments however.

First, and as I'm sure you are well aware - ALKO and the Swedes have published a large number of tests. With the assistance of Richard Seale, Johnny Drejer established a hydrometer testing protocol - with charts - for the surprisingly accurate testing of spirits, in this case rum. He established the accuracy via two means - first by comparing his results with ALKO/Swedish findings, and second by testing pure alcohol/water mixtures to which a known amount of sugar was added. His methods were adopted by the Fat Pirate, Cyril, Mamjuana, and myself.

Altogether, about 740 tests were performed and have been listed alphabetically in the Master Sugar List. Roughly half of the rums tested showed no sugar, while the other half contained sugar in up to 12 teaspoons per liter. Example: the old Z23, Diplomatico Exclusiva, Zaya, et al. Many of the El Dorados and all the Plantations are seriously sugared.

Independent tastings by our Che then took two pure and unaltered rums - one white, one aged - and then added precise amounts of sugar from 1 - 5 - 10 - 20 etc. all the way up to 50g/liter. Che - who has an excellent palate than described the effects of this adulteration. He found that even 1g was discernable, with notable effects starting at just 5g. At 10 and above the based rum starts being smothered to the point that its original and pleasant profile was blanketed and muted to the point that over 20g all rums began to become indistinguishable from one another.

Sugaring is a serious concern and the presence of adulterating sugar has become widely known. More and more buyers are offended and refuse to buy cheaper base rums that have been premiumized by tricking them out with added sugar and other unlabeled flavorings, glycerol and the like. Example: Ron Matusalem who was shown to add prune and vanilla extract to what they persisted in selling as "rum" (and not "flavored rum").

This is outrageous. That the TTB either doesn't care, or fails to enforce the regulations is unimportant. The lack of honesty, or proof of real age is. Rum is a bastard spirit that has yet to match the much purer and honest single malt, Scotch and Irish and other whiskies, and/or bourbon.

The tests are performed with the only caveat that Seales own extensive testing reveals that well aged rums may introduce very small amounts of hydrometer revealed solids other than sugar, which Richard cautions may be from 1-2g/liter. No matter. No one is concerned about these trace amounts of non-sugar solids, as many aged rum were tested at 0 grams. Nonetheless, any reading of from 1-3g of solids is considered sugar free or reasonably so.

What concerns all of us are not these trace amounts, but the huge number of rums that reliably test out at 10, 20, 30 or even 40 grams of sugar.

Your newsletter recently published a series of isoteric, sophisticated and expensive tests, but failed to address the common use of hydrometers to test for sugar, as used by thousands of brewers, vintners and distillers. Used with care and being sure to calibrate an accurate electronic thermometer, and expanded scale hydrometers will result in test accurate to less than 1g, quite close enough.

My question: am I mistaken or did your "expert" ignore hydrometer testing on purpose, or was this just a mistaken omission on his/your part?

Second, I'd like to question your coverage of the SID's, in particular your parsing of the section on alternation, where you stated "The manual also defines that rum may include up to 2.5% of “Harmless Coloring, Flavoring and/or Blending Materials" with no label disclosure being required". You then conclude that "... as long as the ingredient we are trying to use has been determined to be“harmless”, that we can use up to 2.5% by volume and we do noT have to declare it on the label".

For the life of me Luis, I cannot understand why you chose to extract just part of the opening sentence, rather than the complete section, which is really quite short:

"There may be added to any class or type of distilled spirits, without changing the class or type thereof, (i) such harmless coloring, flavoring, or blending materials as are an essential component part of the particular class or type of distilled spirits to which added, and (ii) harmless coloring, flavoring, or blending materials such as caramel, straight malt or straight rye malt whiskies, fruit juices, sugar, infusion of oak chips when approved by the Administrator, or wine, which are not an essential component part of the particular distilled spirits to which added, but which are customarily employed therein in accordance with established trade usage, if such coloring, flavoring, or blending materials do not total more than 21⁄2 percent by volume of the finished product."

Luis, the facts are these. First that yes, up to 2.5% of "harmless coloring, flavoring or blending materials" may be added to a spirit - but only - if they are an "essential component part" or that are customarily employed "in accordance with established trade usage". If you are not aware of the law, "essential component" and "established trade usage" are well defined and have clear meaning. In layman's terms that means that these components are so essential that the class - in this case rum - requires them.

The legal definition of "trade usage" is this:

Trade Usage

"Any system, custom, or practice of doing business used so commonly in a vocation, field, or place that an expectation arises that it will be observed in a particular transaction. Established trade usage means that parties need not specify the practice in writing; in fact the opposite is true. If the customer does NOT expect the established usage, he must specify its exclusion in writing."

Example: I order 10,000 gallons of rum. If indeed harmless coloring, flavoring and blending materials are "essential", under "established trade usage", I would expect that the "rum" you deliver MUST have these components. If you deliver the product without them, then it is not "rum", and I can sue you.

Of the components you cited, only "harmless coloring" qualifies - not as "essential", but rather as "established trade usage". We expect distillers to use E150a. No other flavoring, glycerol or wine is in such broad and essential use insofar as rum is concerned and therefore do NOT qualify under the alteration clause. I should add that "established trade usage" and "essential" are legally much more strict, than the terms "customary" or "traditional". This is also made clear in usual legal interpretation.

Established trade usage means a product is expected to have these essential component(s), in every instance.

Luis, in my opinion your claim is unsubstantiated short of the fact that the distillers - at least insofar as rum - are getting away with murder. When half the rum produced is not altered (short of coloring) the addition of flavorings, wine or blending materials in no way qualify as either "essential" or in "established trade usage". The fact that the TTB is ridiculously lax is no excuse. By not making clear that these practices are questionable and opaque, if not downright illegal you are doing rum no service.

If we do not hold up the distillers and their phony premiumized tricked up products that are foisted on an uninformed public, we are then part of the problem and not of the solution. I was, am and will remain part of the solution.

You?


Best regards, as always,
CJ"
Post Reply