Whisky Advocate

Review: The Glenlivet Founder’s Reserve

January 4th, 2011

 

As promised, this is the first of a series of weekday reviews throughout the month of January.

The Glenlivet “Founder’s Reserve,” 55.6%, $375

A special bottling to celebrate a major distillery expansion in 2010. So nice to see this whisky bottled at cask strength and not chill-filtered. Silky smooth, velvety texture. Creamy sweet foundation of vanilla fudge and caramel coated almond. Plenty of fruit too (golden raisin, honeyed peach, ripe nectarine, hint of banana bread). Richly textured, good weight (but not cloying), and the flavors combine seamlessly. A celebratory whisky indeed.

Advanced Malt Advocate rating: 92

26 Responses to “Review: The Glenlivet Founder’s Reserve”

  1. Gal Granov says:

    for 375$?!

    how old is this?

  2. Ely says:

    has anyone found the bottle at a store in NYC area or possible even NJ? only one store online has it but is selling for $399.

    i think it’s absurd that i can easily get a glenlivet XXV for around $200, the 21 archive for $90 and the 18 year old for $50 yet somehow this is priced at $375… its crazy but i’m a collector (aka sucker)…

  3. MrTH says:

    How many bottles?

  4. two-bit cowboy says:

    1824

  5. Marc says:

    According to a blog post on drinkhacker.com, it is a minimum of 21 years. I have not been able to verify that.

  6. JWC says:

    pretty oak box – solid oak probably. clean, simple lines. =)

  7. Rick Duff says:

    Advanced Duff Rating: 0
    Boo on the price.. really disappointed in Glenlivet on this one.

  8. bgulien says:

    I thought you were abstaining from alcohol for 20 days?
    I was about to join, but seeing this review I chucked it.

  9. Vince says:

    I’m sure this is a great whisky but you have to be kidding with the price–$375? You can get their 21 year old for around $100-$120 so I guess we are suppose to believe that this is three times better than that? This is exactly what is wrong with the industry

  10. MrTH says:

    If you think a whisky that costs three times as much has to be three times better, you don’t understand economics.

    I’m not going to pile on on this one. It’s essentially a commemorative bottling. $375 is more than I’ll ever pay for a bottle, but it isn’t that outlandish. And I don’t feel that I’m entitled to have every bottle priced so that I can afford it. Got a nice bottle of Nadurra here for $50.

    • Henry H. says:

      MrTH, how do you like your Nadurra? Any tasting notes for us? I’m not the biggest Glenlivet fan, yet I’ve had a drop of the Nadurra and was intrigued. Thinking of springing for a bottle.

      • Red_Arremer says:

        Mr. TH *loves* Nadurra, Henry. He often brings it up to make points about the value/price of whisky.

        • Henry H. says:

          Thanks, Red. I must not be hanging on every word here. I’ve only had the stuff a couple of times, and it wasn’t necessarily all that distinctive for me. It also seemed a bit overripe, if that makes any sense. One of these days, it’ll jump out at me again at a bar, and I’ll have another wee dram to see if I was tasting properly.

  11. Andre Girard says:

    Were still able to get a 21yo Glenlivet for 125$ and a Nadurra for 80$…. I think a NAS Cask Strength Glenlivet for about 400$ is too expensive…

  12. The pricing is obviously aimed at collectors. For a release of 1824 bottles the price is way over the top for someone who is actually interested in drinking it.

  13. John Hansell says:

    This was sent to me by Neil Macdonald, Brand Director:

    It is a 21yo whisky by the way. Although originally I had a much grander idea of taking a cask from each of the last 5 decades and vatting these together; unfortunately I would not have been able to communicate this according to Scotch regulations so we opted for the simpler age statement solution.

    • Jon W. says:

      I am curious what part of the regulation would forbid this (or communicating it). How is it different than the Ardbeg Rollercoaster vatting casks from the past 10 years? It’s clearly indicated on the label.

      • Red_Arremer says:

        Probably the part of the regulations were it’s stated that only the age of the youngest whisky can be given as an age statement… and that an age statement is the only age related number that can be prominently displayed on the packaging…

  14. Ely says:

    John, do YOU personally think there is “bang for our buck” in terms of someone who will be drinking the scotch as opposed to someone collecting? Thank you!

    • John Hansell says:

      This is a very nice whisky. Can you find a better whisky for less $$? Of course. That can almost always be said. Bottom line: If you like Glenlivet and have the money to spend on it, then maybe you might want to buy a bottle. The juice inside the bottle is good.

© Copyright 2014. Whisky Advocate. All rights reserved.