Skip to main content

Vodka Delusions

Sorry, but Grey Goose is mediocre. Ditto for Ketel One. At least according to a tasting panel at the New York Times.

The tasting panel sampled 21 unflavored vodkas, mostly on the high end. But for kicks, they decided to include lowly Smirnoff in the mix. The results?
[A]t the end of our tasting it was Smirnoff at the top of our list, ahead of many other names that are no doubt of higher status in stylish bars and lounges. Some of those names did not even make our Top 10. Grey Goose from France, one of the most popular vodkas, was felt to lack balance and seemed to have more than a touch of sweetness. Ketel One from the Netherlands, another top name, was felt to be routine and sharp, although Mr. Klemm did describe it as "a good mixer."
Here were the top ten:
  1. Smirnoff United States Grain
  2. Wyborowa Poland Single Estate Rye
  3. Belvedere Poland Rye
  4. Absolut Sweden Level Grain
  5. Hangar 1 United States Straight Wheat and Grain
  6. Vox Netherlands Wheat
  7. Olifant Netherlands Grain
  8. 42 Below New Zealand Wheat
  9. Skyy United States Grain
  10. Teton Glacier United States Potato
The placebo affect [sic] is alive and well.

Comments

Mat said…
Vodka is definitely one of those products that elicit the placebo effect. They all are basically tasteless..
Look at the quote for Teton Glacier: 'Clean and light on the palate; odorless and tasteless'

For most, vodka preference is an accessory; A decoration of self that has little to do with taste, and everything to do with image.

Let's see if I can affect consumer preference even a little..

Real Austinites drink Tito's.. It's an award winning Vodka made in the heart of the Lone Star state. Try it.

http://www.titos-vodka.com/

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the