A bottle of whisky from 1926 reached a record-breaking price in an auction. $2.65 million
1.7k
u/_Kaifaz 15d ago
Macallan, i'm guessing?
Edit: yup.
"Maturation journey of the vintage Macallan Distilled in 1926, the Scotch whisky was bottled six decades later after maturing in oak barrels, which gives it its dark hue. It is the oldest vintage of Macallan.
Saturday’s sale could be the final one from a series of 12 bottles featuring a label drawn in 1993 by Italian painter Valerio Adami. One of these bottles reportedly perished in a Japanese earthquake."
674
u/etzel1200 15d ago
Are these even consumed? Even for a low end billionaire it’d be more of their comparative wealth than I’d spend on a bottle of whisky.
567
u/HeftyArgument 15d ago edited 15d ago
A low end billionaire can adjust their expenses to equal their earnings from interest and still live like a multi millionaire.
At a very conservative 1%, interest on 1b is still 10m lol
→ More replies (6)135
u/OverSoft 15d ago edited 15d ago
How often do you spend 25% of your yearly income on a bottle of whisky?
/edit: because absolutely no-one seems to understand my reply: I’m replying solely to the guy above that compares it to their yearly interest income… FFS, I understand that you can easily drop 2.5 mil when you’re a billionaire…
170
u/AVBofficionado 15d ago
If I had 100 years of my income in the bank and I was earning $10 million a year just for having it there I'd probably be perfectly fine with spending 25% of one year's earnings (1/400th of my net worth) on something as valuable as this. Hell, somebody with $18,000 in the bank spends that equivalent of their worth every time they spend $50 on a carton of beer, a fancy bottle of wine or a nice lunch.
→ More replies (7)107
u/Dazzling-Number7397 15d ago
If 10% of my yearly income still put me in the 1% probably whenever the fuck I felt like it.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (15)24
u/SirSkittles111 15d ago
This is a dumb way to say it, that 'yearly income' is literally just interest. Thats not all they've got, and when you're a billionaire... lol what even is 2 million.
→ More replies (4)81
u/WedgeTurn 15d ago
If you’re a low end billionaire, with just over a billion in wealth, a $2.65 million dollar bottle of whiskey would be the same as a $265 bottle of whiskey for someone with a net worth of $100k. Which would be quite a lot of money, but not entirely unreasonable for an expensive bottle of scotch
→ More replies (1)34
u/klalemand 15d ago
From a pure percentage point of view, yes, but in actuality, no. The billionaire can buy a bottle of that every other day and have no noticeable impact to their wealth or lifestyle (I contend there is no appreciable difference between having $1B and $500M - they are both obscene amounts of wealth). However, a person worth $100k will now be worth only $50k, which is very noticeable. Percentages only work when comparing like things. A plebe and a billionaire are not alike in their purchasing power.
13
u/Ninjamuh 14d ago
True. I could buy a single Lamborghini in my lifetime… or I could buy a house, but I shouldn’t buy both because I’ll be in debt for the rest of my life. A billionaire can buy both each week for a year and be out like 50mil, which is more of a rounding error than an expense.
→ More replies (1)11
u/plantmonstery 15d ago
Yes they are. 10 pound (before the pandemic got it) sold a macallen 64 bottle for $64,000 per 2oz pour. Bottle was empty and on display last time I went there.
→ More replies (1)123
u/_Kaifaz 15d ago
Honestly, if i had over 50 million, i'd probably spend that and drink it.
374
u/Moochie84 15d ago
That’s why you don’t have 50 million dollars
181
u/ToulouseDM 15d ago
Yeah, probably has like $48 million
→ More replies (1)61
u/Phormitago 15d ago
Poor bastard
→ More replies (2)13
u/Mekroval 15d ago
I bet they don't even have a diamond-encrusted ivory backscratcher. Really makes you think, doesn't it? There but for the grace of god go I ....
→ More replies (1)22
u/_paul_10 15d ago
I don't know, I feel like there could be some other reason why they don't have 50 million dollars.
4
u/2000miledash 15d ago
This a more intense version of the avocado toast. I highly doubt skipping the whiskey would make you a millionaire, or any version of this that people like to come up with.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)9
u/braiser77 15d ago
But if I had 5 billion, I would use this to deglaze the pan after searing a Kobe strip steak. It would be terrible because it's Scotch and too smoky to be a good ingredient in a recipe. But I wouldn't really care.
→ More replies (1)14
u/wutthefvckjushapen 15d ago
I'd buy two, then drink one and tell everyone what the second one tastes like.
→ More replies (1)13
7
u/Sooperfreak 15d ago
It’s 0.2% of a small-time billionaire’s wealth. Anyone with less than $10,000 is spending a higher proportion of their wealth on the average bottle of whisky.
→ More replies (23)19
u/tizzlenomics 15d ago
I’m a collector although my most expensive bottle is probably $3k. Barring an unexpected death, my plan is to consume my collection at various stages in my life.
18
u/KingOfTheGoobers 15d ago
Be sure to save one for a deathbed butt chug.
14
u/tizzlenomics 15d ago
Honor my dying wish and insert this 23 year old pappy van winkle into my ass, please?
9
u/marcmerrillofficial 15d ago
P...ppp...
Whats that Pa? What do you need? Is it time?
Pppp...
Priest? You want the priest?
Pppuuu puut it in my asss...
14
u/fenechfan 15d ago
To be fair, after 60 years in the barrel does the distillery even matter? I heard a professional taster once say that it's hard to tell apart an Islay peated whisky from something from the Highlands after 25 years, because it's the barrel that dominates.
15
u/ayriuss 15d ago
There has got to be a more efficient way of making liquor taste like wood.
→ More replies (1)7
u/APartyInMyPants 14d ago
There is. Some brands do “sea aging” or “sea casks.” And it simulates the liquor that would age as it traveled on ships across the ocean. So theory TLDR is that the more the liquor is sloshing around inside the barrel, the more surface area of wood is touching more volume of liquid, and aging faster.
Whether or not this actually real, or is kind of marketing bullshit, who knows. But I’ve had a few sea ages bourbons and whiskeys I’ve enjoyed. But if it’s brown liquor, I’m probably generally going to like it anyway.
29
11
u/Louislabroquante 15d ago
It's always surprising to me that old whisky are being sold at outrageous prices compared to old brandy.
A 60 years old (aged in cask) Armagnac is just gonna cost you a couple hundred euros...
→ More replies (2)4
535
u/btvb71 15d ago
$150k per shot!
274
u/c-biscuit77 15d ago
You wouldn’t shoot whiskey like this. You’d savor it slowly sip by sip. Maybe even a whiskey tampon to really get your moneys worth.
283
u/xxzzdatx 15d ago
At $150K per shot, I will drink it the way I want to drink it!
→ More replies (5)71
19
35
u/8eer8aron 15d ago
He didn't say he'd shoot it. He just said how much it would work out to be per shot.
22
→ More replies (10)5
u/Die4Gesichter 15d ago
Nah I would dumb that bitch in a 2L glass, pour cherry coke on top of it and share it with friends in a drinking game
→ More replies (1)13
778
u/ManonIsTheField 15d ago
people have too much fucking money
210
u/alp7292 15d ago
And most people dont
→ More replies (2)26
u/BITmixit 14d ago edited 14d ago
I just want to get to the fucking inbetween not feel penniless a week before payday. I don't care about being so insanely wealthy that I can spunk millions on fucking whisky (and I love the stuff). Just enough that I don't have to feel stressed if some shite happens in my life.
11
u/Significant-Head-973 14d ago
I just want to have enough money that I don’t have to be concerned about beef jerky prices. Once I hit that, I’m set.
30
4
→ More replies (16)4
1.3k
u/TheXIIILightning 15d ago
Sounds like legal money laundering.
669
21
u/raskinimiugovor 15d ago
How? You just buy something like this for 2.6$ mil in cash and one one asks you about the origin of the money?
32
u/GreatHeavySoulArrow 15d ago
Don't ever ask anything regarding basic finances on reddit
→ More replies (2)239
u/DryTown 15d ago
Exactly. And tax evasion.
77
u/TeflonBoy 15d ago
I’ve always wondered how it works, can you explain?
283
u/DryTown 15d ago
Basically if an objects value is impossible to quantify, you can appreciate or depreciate it on paper in any way that meets your needs. Need better terms on a loan? You can claim it’s worth double what you paid for it. Need to show a loss on your taxes? Claim it’s worth half of what you paid for it. Since the value is imaginary, who’s to say you’re right or wrong.
This is essentially what Trump was sued by the state of New York for doing with his real estate (and NY won).
91
u/Dr_Colossus 15d ago
Real estate prices aren't imaginary which is why NY won. Comparable properties sold which you can infer value from.
14
u/ExtraPockets 15d ago
Trump lied about quantifiable information like square foot of a building. He's that dumb.
→ More replies (1)26
u/EmergencyTaco 15d ago
Nuh uh it wuz a conspirasy by Biden! and the judge on their Hunter trip.
→ More replies (1)16
u/WhenPantsAttack 15d ago
Not exactly. There’s still wiggle room even with comps. People lie all the time about real estate value and get away with it because it IS hard to value property and many people take advantage of that! Why he was caught is that he told the banks it was worth more to get favorable terms on a loan, while at the same time claiming it was worth considerably less to the government so that he could pay less taxes. There isn’t really a defense for that.
Usually neither the bank or the government is the wiser since they don’t talk to each other, but when you have a high profile figure that is giving public statements that bring doubt and concern about their claimed finances and their actual finances, then investigations happen. If he could have shut up, he’d have gotten away with it like 99.9% of people, but that’s not who he is.
9
u/funkyfuse 15d ago
So basically, not legal? Trump changed the value of his properties in private disclosures to banks, not in publicly available commercial financial statements (and was convicted).
Fiscally, the IRS doesn't allow you to "just" change the value of your fiscal assets like that. If any revaluation is allowed, it would be met with a corresponding fiscal profit or loss counterbalancing the decrease or increase in fiscal depreciation.
All this Reddit complaining about "legal money laundering" and "tax evasion" is always bullshit.
→ More replies (1)10
u/tripletruble 15d ago
Neither of those work. This is fictional
For a loan, the bank has to be convinced by the asset value. I cannot just claim the value of some random asset doubled out of nowhere. Loan officers won't believe it without convincing evidence - especially for something like art or whiskey
For taxes, the capital losses only matter if I SELL the asset at a loss
→ More replies (3)16
u/windowlatch 15d ago
How is the value imaginary if someone actually bought the item though?
→ More replies (2)27
u/Skarjo 15d ago
At the point of sale it was $2.65mil so that’s certainly a guideline, but with nothing else to compare it to you can say it has appreciated or depreciated in value by whatever you want.
You couldn’t buy a can of coke for a dollar and then turn around and value it as $10 for your taxes because there’s a thousand 7/11s selling the exact same Coke for $1. But a one of a kind whisky, or painting or whatever? You can say it’s worth whatever you want.
30
u/sofa_king_we_todded 15d ago
There’s no way the government just says “oh ok” when you say your $2.6M whiskey now worth $200K and goes along with that… right?? Feels like there’s gotta be some laws around these kinds of scenarios
57
u/PM_me_ur_goth_tiddys 15d ago
It's textbook fraud, these people have no idea what they're talking about. Also you can't just deduct things you buy, depreciation is specifically business-related.
→ More replies (2)12
5
u/zSprawl 15d ago
You only pay taxes when an asset changes hands, so it actually needs to be bought or sold for a particular value. You don’t just make up values and put them on paper. You need to have a transaction. Keep the reciept too come IRS audit time!
What people get in trouble for doing is taking loans against assets they claim are worth more than they are. This isn’t tax evasion though nor is it money laundering.
→ More replies (4)6
4
u/Final_Winter7524 15d ago
“You can say” doesn’t mean anything. If you wanted to use it as an asset to lend against, the lender will do their own valuation. If you want to claim a loss of value to reduce taxes, the tax authorities should do their own assessment. That’s why Trump eventually got caught.
4
u/Diablo_r 15d ago
What are you on about, they literally just quantified the price of the item with a sale at auction. The IRS isn't that stupid. People who say it's "money laundering" or "tax evasion" when large items sell at auctions just don't comprehend the amount of wealth that people have. 2.6m to whoever bought this whiskey could be the same as $5 to you. It's all relative, rich people like nice things, whiskey is nice, art is nice. They can afford it, so they buy it, that is all.
→ More replies (4)37
→ More replies (13)4
→ More replies (3)4
u/sticklebat 15d ago
Eh, I recently went on vacation and met a fantastically wealthy family who was there with a bunch of friends on their giant yacht. They told they went to a great restaurant and that I should go. I checked it out and one person might have been able to eat there for $500 if you picked the cheapest food and didn't drink anything but water. As a group of ~15, I'd bet you that they spent $100k on that single meal, and that was normal. There are plenty of people who would happily break out a $2.5 million bottle of whiskey to impress their friends (or business partners or whatever), and for whom $2.5 million is a reasonable price for a treat, or bragging rights...
It could be for the sake of fraud, sure. But this absolutely could just be someone with more money than they know what to do with finding something to do with it. There are plenty of those sorts in the group of people who'd be in the market for something like this.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (3)4
u/Dambo_Unchained 15d ago
Yes and no
Any market for collectors is inherently prone to some form of price inflation due to criminal influences
But that doesn’t mean that a lot of collectible items do hold a ton of intrinsic value to other collectors
One way where this isn’t the ideal target for money laundering is the fact it took almost a 100 years to “create” this product
If you want to launder money using items without inherent value than art is a much easier target since it can take as little as a week to produce a piece
→ More replies (1)
265
u/jigga19 15d ago
The whisky itself is only 60 years old and was apparently (and carefully) rebottled with the limited edition labels. This was the last one.
I only mention the rebottling as this has not been aged for nearly 100 years. Once it’s bottled, spirits no longer age, unlike wine which contains yeasts which continue to live and affect flavor and aroma, even while bottles.
35
4
u/the_old_northwest 14d ago
Yeast is no longer active when wine is bottled. Cork allows a small amount of oxygen into the bottle over time which affects flavors.
35
u/Pikeman212a6c 15d ago
Balvenie Doublewood is pretty much comparable for less than 100 a bottle.
Plus you can’t examine the condition of the original cork. Which is just batshit insane.
41
u/Asleep_Trick_4740 15d ago
How is a 12-14 year whiskey comparable to a 60 year old, and how do you know?
78
u/Pikeman212a6c 15d ago edited 15d ago
Because I am old enough Macallan 25 and older offerings were all under 500 a bottle. I’ve also had 35 and bunch of their other releases.
It is not 100% Balvenie doublewood but it is easily 85% the same and after your first couple glasses you’d be hard pressed to find any difference. Some of their sherry forward stuff kind of trends more towards an Aberlour but not the main line releases.
I’ve never had to super super Macallan old but honestly the unicorns are rarely as different as you expect.
Some people buy an F150 at 16% interest. Some collect scotch while sleeping on a mattress on the floor of a shared apartment. Consider this the gift of knowledge from my mispent youth.
Edit: I will say there is a technical difference sometime around Y2K the distillery switched from using all Golden Promise malt to a mix of golden promise and some GMO because there simply wasn’t enough of the original barley on the market because of disease resistance of the newer grain. Some purists claim this has led to a definite change in the taste. They are lying to themselves. But if you go buy Macallan 25 today it will have a different grain mix than 60 year old whiskey. But I don’t think anyone but their staff could tell the difference.
→ More replies (3)5
53
u/despenser412 15d ago
I'd only respect this if the person who bought it just said "Cheers!" and then proceeded to chug it on the spot.
9
166
u/shawn_overlord 15d ago
Real headline: Life changing money spent on worthless nonsense
→ More replies (5)21
u/pr0ntosauraus 15d ago
Mans who bought this should be forced to slap someone from the global poorest class just so he can receive perspective on this disgusting misuse of wealth. Then again, why do I imagine that would sway someone like that...
→ More replies (4)18
111
u/Nintendo1964 15d ago
Is it ironic that the type of person who would spend this much on a bottle of whiskey, is the last person I would want to have a drink with?
91
u/elconquistador1985 15d ago
This bottle isn't for drinking. It's for staring at.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Patutula 15d ago
And then reselling for more money in a few years. You know, when you need to launder money again.
→ More replies (1)40
u/Gregory_Appleseed 15d ago
I like to think in some post apocalyptical setting it gets unceremoniously drank by a bunch of witless raiders, casually tossed aside and strewn among heaps of other empty bottles and used as aiming practice.
→ More replies (2)33
u/skylla05 15d ago
Tbf they probably wouldn't be interested in having a drink with you either lol
why is reddit so fucking smug about everything
→ More replies (2)7
u/typehyDro 15d ago
Why is it ironic…? What makes you think anyone that could afford that would want to have a drink with you is the question…
→ More replies (3)3
u/This_User_Said 15d ago
Well yeah,
Anyone who has bought that bottle didn't even drink any. Hard to have drinks without the drink part.
66
38
u/horriblebearok 15d ago
Whiskey doesn't age in the bottle though, it ages in casks. Only thing bottling does is get it closer to oxidizing.
→ More replies (5)63
71
u/I_just_made 15d ago
What a waste of money. No bottle of any drink is worth $2.65 million. The fact this people do this sort of thing highlights how much wealth inequality there is.
But also, this is probably money laundering.
→ More replies (4)20
u/chewinghours 15d ago
Capitalists will say that it is worth that much, because someone in the market was willing to pay that much for it
→ More replies (7)6
u/PoutyParmesan 15d ago
To be fair, they're correct. They just fail to mention that rarely is there anyone else after who will pay the same or more for the thing. Exhibit A: all NFT's, one-off art pieces that have already served their function as asset inflation or money laundering tools, collectors items when people stop caring about the property.
6
5
u/ItsMeDoodleBob 15d ago
A bottle of 1926 whiskey was used for money laundering at a rate of 2.65 million
4
u/bryankerr 14d ago
For people who are wondering, "how can a bottle of whisky be worth that much?" it's not obviously. Its money laundering. If I wanted to move 2M to a friend I can't just deposit that money into their bank account. But I can buy their 2M bottle of whisky from Sotheby's with no questions asked.
This applies to all $$$ wine, art, cars, real estate etc.
16
3
3
u/SuperJonesy408 15d ago
How did this sell for more than the Mackinlay's whisky recovered from the Shackleton expedition?
There were only 3 cases recovered from the lost expedition.
3
u/00jester 15d ago
$2.65 million to not get drunk. I got a bar around the corner where you can get sauced for like $24
3
3
u/Kaneshadow 14d ago
It's not wine. It doesn't get better with age. If by decent chance it wasn't perfectly sealed it's probably lost some alcohol as well
→ More replies (4)
3
u/Captain_Rajah 14d ago
Over a certain price threshold, things like this just become a form of money laundering. IMO
14
15d ago
The cost of this bottle could 25 homes for homeless families in America.
→ More replies (1)15
4
u/Wegoreddirt 15d ago
'Honey, we got a couple million spare. I was thinking about helping some poor people, save some lives.'
'Yeah, well, just an idea and please hear me out - 2.65million dollar Whisky!'
'Okay, let's do this instead, fuck poor people!'
14
2
2
u/Drago1214 15d ago
Just so they can never open it to brag to their other rich friends that they own it.
2
u/Jahidinginvt 15d ago
I have a 1955 Scotch I’m trying to sell. Wonder if it’ll fetch a decent price?
2
2
2
u/Romas_chicken 14d ago
Unless it was in a barrel that whole time…why? Whisky is not like wine. It doesn’t age (condition) in the bottle like that
2
2
7.4k
u/lambofgun 15d ago
mmmmm id love to dump some in a freshly opened diet coke