EmbellishPod

From bourbon to rye, from store-bought to homemade, and the moment I realized my whiskey wasn’t corked - my syrup had carrot juice in it

I wanted to make a Thanksgiving cocktail. Tart cranberry, herbal notes, warm spices, citrus brightness. Clear vision, messy execution.

Turns out it takes a lot of iterations to get there. Also turns out that halfway through I’d convince myself my whiskey had gone bad when really it was just carrot juice in my syrup.

This is the Turkey Smash.

Version 1: Too Sweet, Not Enough Bite

Started with what seemed solid:

• 2 oz Wild Turkey 101 8 Year Bourbon

• 1 oz Cranberry Juice (100%, not cocktail)

• 1/2 oz Sorghum Syrup

Too sweet. The cranberry wasn’t tart enough to cut through the sorghum. The herbal notes I was chasing were completely absent. The bourbon wasn’t giving me the spice backbone I needed.

Time to pivot to rye.

I tested two rye whiskeys side by side:

What I made for me:

• 2 oz Wild Turkey Rare Breed Rye

• 1 1/2 oz Cranberry Juice

• 1/2 oz Simple Syrup

• Orange Bitters

What I made for her:

• 2 oz Wild Turkey 101 Rye

• 1 1/2 oz Cranberry Juice

• 1/2 oz Simple Syrup

• Orange Bitters

I preferred the Rare Breed. She preferred the 101. She said hers tasted like cranberry sauce, the jelly type. I thought mine was too sweet, maybe from too much simple syrup or a syrup ratio that was too sugar-heavy.

We kept testing both.

Version 3: Finding the Right Bitters

The third round kept both whiskeys in play but added a new question: which bitters would actually bring those warm spices?

I tested both ryes with Bluegrass Five Spice Orange Bitters. The Rare Breed won clearly. The higher proof and spicier character worked better with the bitters.

Then I made another with just the Rare Breed using Regan’s Orange Bitters No. 6 for comparison. The Bluegrass Five Spice Orange was the right choice. Those warm spice notes (cinnamon, clove, allspice) finally showed up.

I also cut the syrup down to 1/4 oz, which helped with sweetness.

Where we were:

• 2 oz Wild Turkey Rare Breed Rye

• 1 1/2 oz Cranberry Juice (100%, not cocktail)

• 1/4 oz Cranberry Pie Syrup

• Bluegrass Five Spice Orange Bitters

This version had enough tartness to cut through rich Thanksgiving food. Good spark of tang and citrus. But still a bit sweet, and something else was off.

There was this weird earthy flavor. I thought my whiskey might be corked. I was genuinely worried I’d been using bad bottles for multiple tests.

Then I read the label on my cranberry pie syrup: black carrot juice concentrate.

Always pay attention to your ingredients.

The black carrot juice gave the cocktail its deep color. But I could taste it. That earthy note wasn’t the whiskey. It was carrot juice.

I made two homemade syrups to compare:

1. Cranberry simple syrup (simple syrup plus cranberry juice and sugar)

2. Jellied cranberry sauce reduction (from leftover Thanksgiving cranberry sauce)

I tasted them straight, no cocktail. Both crushed the commercial syrup. Cleaner flavors, better balance, no carrot juice.

I made both versions in the actual cocktail.

The cranberry simple and the jellied cranberry sauce reduction tasted nearly identical. The only real difference was texture. When that’s the case, go the easy route.

The Turkey Smash:

• 2 oz Wild Turkey Rare Breed Rye

• 1 1/2 oz Cranberry Juice (100%, not cocktail)

• 1/4 oz Cranberry Simple Syrup

• 2 dashes Bluegrass Five Spice Orange Bitters

Add everything to a shaker with ice. Stir until well-chilled. Strain into a chilled Nick and Nora glass.

Garnish with 2-3 fresh cranberries on a cocktail pick across the rim and a rosemary sprig.

From that first too-sweet bourbon version to this, the testing paid off. Different base spirits, adjusted sweetness, bitters comparisons, ditching store-bought for homemade. The result tastes like the holiday it’s meant to celebrate.

Tart enough to cut through rich food. Spiced enough to feel festive. Complex enough to make you want another sip.

And it doesn’t taste like carrots.

Next month: Butterbeer

Sometimes you get an idea and just start running with it. The framework makes sense, the direction feels right, so you commit before you’ve actually mapped out all the details. Which is fine. Momentum matters. But at some point you probably need to stop and draw the actual map.

I posted the framework for this series without including the specifics: which cocktails, which months, and why they’re sequenced that way. That’s the kind of detail that’s useful when you’re asking people to follow along for a year. So here’s the calendar through August.

One thing to clarify upfront: just because I’m developing the cocktail in a given month doesn’t mean the article drops then. Testing takes time, iteration requires multiple rounds, and I write things up when I write things up. We could easily see the next article in December even though I’m actively working on November’s cocktail right now. I’m not running a tight editorial calendar here.

November is the Turkey Smash. It’s Thanksgiving in a glass, which is why it’s timed for November. Cranberry bourbon cocktail I’m actively testing. Initial version was too sweet, so I’m working through rye variations to see if the spice character can balance the cranberry without adding more citrus.

December closes out the year with Boozy Butterbeer. Look, Harry Potter is a Christmas movie, and we had the actual thing at Universal. Damn was it sweet. Sweets go with Christmas pretty well, but I’m trying to find a way to make it less diabeetus. This one introduces aged rum (Don Q Gran Reserva) and butter-washing technique, which is elaborate but the seasonal timing works.

January starts simple. Black Russian. Vodka and coffee liqueur, straightforward build. Good contrast after December’s production complexity.

February shifts to Vieux Carré. Rye whiskey and cognac split base, which means learning brandy alongside the Manhattan-adjacent structure. It’s also a bit of an homage to Mardi Gras, which feels appropriate for February.

March is Irish Whiskey Sour, hitting St. Patrick’s Day while working through the fundamental sour template.

April opens gin territory, which has been completely absent so far. I haven’t locked the specific cocktail yet, but it needs to address that gap while fitting the transitional weather.

May brings the Cranberry Paloma. Tequila, cranberry, grapefruit. Originally planned for earlier but spacing it out makes more sense than back-to-back cranberry content.

June is Hemingway Daiquiri. White rum, grapefruit, maraschino liqueur. Classic technique, different rum profile from December’s aged expression.

July is Blackberry Bramble. Our blackberries in the backyard should be ripening by then, which makes this the practical choice. Also gives a second gin cocktail to round out that spirit education.

August wraps the calendar with Paper Plane. Equal parts bourbon, Aperol, Amaro Nonino, lemon. First real amaro exploration.

The structure avoids clustering similar spirits or flavors back-to-back while building systematic knowledge across categories. Heavy bourbon/whiskey representation in the early months reflects what’s already on the bar cart. Not a strategic decision, just reality. But the back half deliberately expands into gin, rum variations, and tequila. Seasonal appropriateness drives most of the selection, but there’s also practical timing like waiting for the backyard blackberries or hitting holiday windows when they make sense.

Testing approach stays consistent: baseline recipe, systematic iteration on single variables, documentation of what doesn’t work and why. Some of these will shift during development. April’s gin cocktail isn’t finalized, June could move if testing reveals something needs more work. The calendar provides structure without forcing adherence when reality suggests a better direction. If November’s cranberry testing takes longer than expected or reveals something worth pursuing, that informs adjustments rather than sticking to a predetermined plan because I wrote it down.

Now we have the map. We’ll see how well it survives contact with actual testing.

Ingram Distillery is bringing bourbon back to its river roots—literally.

Join us for a fascinating conversation with Hank from Ingram Distillery in Columbus, Kentucky, who’s doing something no other bourbon producer is doing: aging 100% of their whiskey on floating barges. What started as an MBA class project ten years ago has become a fully operational distillery that opens for tours in April 2026.

In this episode, we explore:

* The historical connection between bourbon and river transportation

* Why aging bourbon on water creates unique flavor profiles

* The challenges of managing 1,000+ barrels across multiple barges

* Ingram’s new bartender-friendly release: Uncharted Bourbon

* The family’s 165-year history in river shipping

Spirits Discussed:

* OH Ingram Flagship Bourbon

* OH Ingram Rye

* Uncharted Bourbon (92 proof, $40)

Guest: Hank, Founder & President, Ingram DistilleryLocation: Columbus, Kentucky (Far Western Kentucky)Opening: April 2026 (tickets on sale December 2025)

Connect with Ingram:

* Website: ingramwhiskey.com

* Social: @ingramwhiskey

Following up on the iterative cocktail series I introduced earlier, I’m starting with an autumn-focused Old Fashioned. It’s late fall, apple cider is everywhere, and the template is familiar enough that I can recognize when something’s off. Cocktails are often seasonal in when you consume them—light and refreshing in summer, rich and warming in winter—so it makes sense to follow that pattern as I work through different builds. At least until I decide it doesn’t. For now, this seemed like the natural place to begin: testing how seasonal ingredients perform in a classic framework and documenting every step until I land on something worth drinking.

The Build:

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

• 1.5 oz Jim Beam Sunshine

• 1 bar spoon dark brown sugar

• Burnt orange bitters (Bluegrass Bitters)

• Apple slice garnish

• Muddled sugar with bourbon, built in glass

Why These Ingredients:

Jim Beam Sunshine was sitting on the bar cart, so that’s what I used. Bluegrass burnt orange bitters because I’d just interviewed them on a recent episode and they were already out. Brown sugar was part of the original concept—I wanted that deeper, molasses-forward flavor rather than simple syrup. Got apples specifically for this project because apple needed to be in here somehow. The construction was straightforward: muddle sugar with bourbon in the glass, add ice, garnish with apple. Classic Old Fashioned build, just swapping in fall ingredients.

What Happened:

This felt thin. The sugar dissolved fine, but the drink lacked weight. The burnt orange bitters added something, but not enough. Building in glass worked from a construction standpoint, just didn’t solve the fundamental problem.

The issue wasn’t just volume—though 1.5 oz didn’t help—it was also being too conservative on the bourbon’s flavor profile. Jim Beam Sunshine is approachable and wheated, which was the point, but it didn’t bring enough character to anchor the concept. I was worried about overwhelming the other ingredients when I should have been thinking about whether the spirit could actually carry them.

Key Takeaway: Too conservative on both volume and spirit selection. Needed more presence and more flavor to build on.

The Build:

• 2 oz Wilderness Trail 8 Year Wheated

• 2 oz apple cider

• 1 bar spoon muscovado dark brown sugar

• Angostura bitters

• Dried apple round garnish

• Stirred in a shaker, dumped over ice

Why These Ingredients:

Wilderness Trail 8-year was one of the bottles from a blind tasting with friends earlier—figured I’d see how it performed here. Got muscovado sugar specifically for this iteration because it’s supposed to deliver more depth of flavor than regular brown sugar. Switched from burnt orange to Angostura because the orange just didn’t play right in the version I’m trying to make. Used dehydrated apple rounds because I needed to do something with the apples from the first attempt while I was waiting on the muscovado to arrive. Added apple cider at 2 oz to bring in actual fall character rather than relying on bitters alone.

What Changed:

More robust. Doubling the bourbon gave it the backbone it needed. The muscovado didn’t fully dissolve when I dumped it over ice, but honestly I think that’s fine—you get little pockets of molasses sweetness as you drink.

What Didn’t Work:

The Wilderness Trail brought too much oak to the cocktail. It worked well in the blind tasting context, but here the oak dominated everything else.

And with 2 oz of standard grocery store apple cider, the spice notes I’m chasing—cinnamon, nutmeg, allspice—aren’t showing up. The cider delivers apple, but not the fall character I’m after.

Which is frustrating, because if the cider isn’t doing that work, you start wondering if you should just use apple juice and add your own spices. But that’s a different project entirely, and I’m not interested in building spiced cider from scratch. If grocery store cider won’t deliver, that’s just the constraint I’m working with.

Key Takeaways:

• Spirit volume is right at 2 oz

• Age/oak matters—8-year brought character but the wrong kind

• Grocery store cider isn’t delivering on spice

• Angostura is better than orange but still not quite right

• Construction method (stir and dump) is working

• Muscovado was the right call

The Build:

• 2 oz Milam & Greene’s Provision

• 2 oz apple cider

• 1 bar spoon muscovado dark brown sugar

• Bittercube Bolivar bitters

• Apple round on rim, dipped in caramel sauce

Why These Ingredients:

Milam & Greene’s Provision—instinct pick more than anything. Should bring less oak than the Wilderness Trail while still having enough character to hold up. Keeping the 2 oz spirit, 2 oz cider, and muscovado since those are working. Switching to Bolivar bitters to see if that plays better with apple. Caramel-dipped apple round on the rim instead of just dropping it in—might solve the spice problem through garnish rather than relying on the cider to do all that work.

What Happened:

The bitters were right. Bolivar played perfectly with the apple—finally something clicking into place.

But the whiskey is still wrong. Needs more spice. The Milam & Greene brought less oak than the Wilderness Trail, which was good, but it’s still not giving me what I need. The caramel garnish worked as intended—adds aromatics, looks good, gives you something to nibble—but the base of the drink isn’t there yet.

Here’s the real problem I’m wrestling with: the apple cider just isn’t that spiced. With grocery store cider, I’m getting apple flavor but none of those warm baking spices that should define fall. It could mean all the difference if you had access to a nice bespoke cider from a local orchard—something that actually tastes like cinnamon and nutmeg went into it. But I don’t, and I’m trying to make this work with what’s available.

I wonder if that’s the answer. If your cider is really good cider—properly spiced, robust—bourbon would work just fine. But if it’s weak grocery store cider, you need the spice profile of rye to get that kick. It’s not a proof problem, it’s a flavor problem. The spirit needs to compensate for what the cider isn’t bringing.

Key Takeaway: Bolivar bitters nailed it. Caramel apple garnish works. The cider limitation is real, and the spirit selection needs to account for that gap. This needs to split into two different approaches based on what ingredients you have access to.

After all this testing, I realized I was fighting the wrong battle. The issue isn’t finding the perfect recipe—it’s that your ingredient quality dictates which direction you need to go. So here are two versions: one for when you’re working with standard grocery store cider, and one for when you have access to concentrated apple flavor.

When to use this: You’re working with standard apple cider that lacks robust spice character. The rye compensates by bringing the warm spice notes the cider won’t deliver.

The Build:

• 2 oz New Riff Bottled in Bond Rye

• 2 oz apple cider (standard grocery store)

• 1 bar spoon muscovado dark brown sugar

• 2 dashes Bittercube Bolivar bitters

• Apple round garnish (caramel optional—see note below)

• Stirred in shaker, dumped over ice

Why New Riff BiB Rye: 100 proof, bottled in bond, and it brings clean spice notes without overwhelming the apple. The rye’s spice profile fills in what weak cider can’t deliver. It’s widely available, making it accessible for most home bars.

Construction: Combine rye, cider, sugar, and bitters in a cocktail shaker with ice. Stir (don’t shake) for 30-40 seconds until well-chilled. Dump entire contents into a rocks glass. Garnish with apple round on the rim.

What This Tastes Like:

This version really nails the apple nose—you get that fresh apple character right up front without it being overly sweet. The Bolivar bitters are the “fancy” ingredient here, but if you don’t have them, orange bitters work fine if you like a little citrus with your cider. Oddly enough, this was the less sweet of the two final versions despite the caramel garnish. The rye keeps everything balanced and spice-forward rather than dessert-like.

When to use this: You’ve found apple cider concentrate (like Mountain Cider) that delivers concentrated apple and spice flavor. Mainly because you want to be precious about it. So maybe we do the same with the bourbon. Here it works beautifully because you’re getting the spice from the concentrate itself.

The Build:

• 2.5 oz Elijah Craig Toasted Barrel

• 0.5 oz Mountain Cider Apple Cider Concentrate (no sugar added)

• 1 bar spoon muscovado dark brown sugar

• 2 dashes Bittercube Bolivar bitters

• Apple round garnish (caramel optional—see note below)

• Stirred in shaker, dumped over ice

Why Elijah Craig Toasted Barrel: The toasted barrel finish brings caramel, cinnamon, and warm oak notes that complement the concentrated apple spice without competing with it. It’s a bourbon that already leans into fall flavors.

Why The Volume: With only 0.5 oz of concentrate, I bumped the bourbon to 2.5 oz to make sure there’s enough liquid in the glass. The concentrate delivers intense apple and spice character, so you don’t need much—but you still want a proper pour. This keeps the spirit as the star while the concentrated apple plays a supporting role.

Construction: Combine bourbon, concentrate, sugar, and bitters in a cocktail shaker with ice. Stir for 30-40 seconds until well-chilled. Dump entire contents into a rocks glass. Garnish with apple round on the rim.

What This Tastes Like:

This is definitely the sweeter of the two, leaning into dessert pour territory. Even though the apple cider concentrate has no added sugar, the natural sweetness from the Elijah Craig Toasted really comes through. The toasted barrel finish brings those warm, caramelized notes that make this feel more indulgent. If you want something to sip slowly by the fire after dinner, this is your version.

The ingredient quality dictates the path. Weak grocery store cider needs a spice-forward spirit (rye) to compensate. Concentrated apple flavor lets bourbon shine because the concentrate is already delivering those warm spices. It’s not about one being better—it’s about matching your approach to what’s actually in your liquor cabinet and on your grocery store shelf.

At the start I briefly considered rimming the glass with caramel sauce, cinnamon sugar, or some other spice mix. But then I remembered how much I actually despise rimmed glasses. It’s clumsy to consume, falls off about half the time, and usually hits you with so much of that flavor that you lose the cocktail for a minute. Don’t get me wrong—a classic well drink margarita with a salt rim is nostalgic, but it also sort of sucks to drink.

The caramel-dipped apple on the rim looks great for photos and video, but honestly it’s harder than it’s worth. I added it for the production shots, and it was a pain in the ass. A plain apple round on the rim works just as well for actual drinking—you still get the aromatic, and you can nibble it between sips without dealing with sticky caramel fingers.

Both versions use the same construction method, same bitters, same muscovado sugar. The only variables are spirit choice and cider form. Pick the version that matches your reality—and how sweet you want your autumn evening to be.

This is an ongoing series. Each version gets documented as I test it. Consider this the final article with both recipe paths.

What constraints are you working with in your builds? Drop a comment about what’s actually available to you.

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

I’ve accumulated a collection of cocktail recipes that caught my attention for various reasons—seasonal twists on classics, interesting spirit combinations, techniques that seemed worth exploring. The problem is that recipes, even detailed ones, don’t tell you much about whether they’ll actually work for your palate or circumstances.

So instead of trying each one once and moving on, I’m taking a different approach: iterative refinement. Pick a cocktail, make it according to the recipe, document what works and what doesn’t, adjust, and repeat. The goal isn’t to declare definitive “best” versions—that would be missing the point—but to understand what variables actually matter and develop versions optimized for how I prefer to drink.

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

The Process

This isn’t rocket science, but it does require some structure:

• Start with the base recipe as written

• Make it, taste it, note specific reactions (not vague impressions)

• Identify 1-2 variables to test in the next iteration

• Document changes and results

• Repeat until I hit diminishing returns or I get bored of it

Some recipes might need minimal adjustment. Others might require significant rework or reveal they’re fundamentally not worth the effort. That’s useful information either way.

Learning Along the Way

I’m not coming at this from a bartending background or deep spirits knowledge. Part of the point here is building that understanding—why certain spirits work in certain contexts, what historical or regional factors shaped these recipes, how technique actually impacts the final product. I’ll document that learning process as it happens rather than pretending to expertise I don’t have.

If I discover something interesting about rye whiskey’s role in stirred cocktails or why certain bitters combinations work, that’ll get included. Same with historical context when it’s actually relevant to understanding a drink. But I’m not going to force it or turn this into a research project. The focus stays on the iterative refinement; the broader knowledge gets built as a natural byproduct of paying attention.

Why This Matters (Or Doesn’t)

I’m not particularly interested in cocktail culture or mixology as performance. I am interested in understanding what makes drinks work, which components are doing heavy lifting, and where traditional wisdom holds up versus where it’s just convention. If you’ve ever followed a recipe that produced something technically correct but not particularly compelling, you know what I’m talking about.

This is also about recognizing constraints. I’m not setting up a professional bar or sourcing obscure ingredients. The iterations need to work within realistic boundaries—what’s available locally, what doesn’t require specialty equipment, what can be made without excessive prep time. If a drink only works with fresh-pressed juice from a specific apple variety, that’s worth knowing before investing more time in it.

What to Expect

I’ll be working through a series of cocktails over the coming months—autumn and winter seasonal drinks, some classics, a few that intrigued me for their technique or unusual combinations. Each will get its own post documenting the iteration process: what I changed, why, and what the results were.

Some posts will be short—”this worked as written, here’s why.” Others might involve multiple rounds of testing. I’m not going to pad things out or manufacture complexity where it doesn’t exist. If a recipe doesn’t deliver after a couple solid attempts, I’ll document why and move on.

If you’re looking for photography tips, craft cocktail philosophy, or exhaustive historical context, this probably isn’t your series. If you’re interested in a methodical approach to figuring out what actually matters in a drink versus what’s just noise—and building practical knowledge about spirits and cocktail fundamentals in the process—you might find this useful.

Let’s see where this goes.

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Aside from a general interest in all things in the whiskey space in the United States, a good personal friend of mine wrote this article a few years ago. What it did for me was to raise my suspicions that something was going on. I had been a big fan of the Uncle Nearest brand building(remain a fan of the story). I even had the opportunity to be on a call with “The Peoples CEO”. I brought my daughters to the computer just so they could see a female leader in a largely male space. The kinds of things that they deserve to see.

Knowing the push back David received after writing that article put me as a cautious observer so when the entire receivership process began I knew I wanted to watch. Luckily someone far more talented with words began a live blog of that. What follows is the best summarization of his work that I can muster.

If you’re not already following this situation, go to Mickey Pinstripe’s live updates at The Bourbon and Rye Club before reading further: thebourbonandryeclub.com/uncle-nearest-lawsuit-live-updates

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

This is a condensed October summary for people already tracking the case. All investigative work and detailed analysis belongs to Mickey Pinstripe (Michael DeKeyser). Follow him: @thebourbonandryeclub on Instagram | @TheBandRClub on X

The receiver filed his first quarterly report 10/1, the Weavers fought expansion of receivership to additional entities 10/22, and by 10/31 an agreed order required those entities to provide bank statements. Here’s the timeline.

Core findings: Company has significant value and can be reorganized as a going concern. Fire-sale liquidation unnecessary. BUT—non-income producing assets (Cognac château, Martha’s Vineyard house, various properties) will be sold. Core whiskey business viable with refinanced debt or sale.

Key revelations:

• Financial records before 2024 allegedly erased by former employee

• Capitalization table inaccurate and incomplete

• Some validity to allegations against former CFO, but no evidence of misappropriation by current management “to date”

• 12 employees laid off (13% workforce reduction)

• Bank injected $2.5M additional funding to keep operations running

• Cash flow was major challenge initially, now stabilized

• Hundreds of creditors contacting receiver

• Related entities commingled assets to point they’re “best viewed as a single enterprise”

Financial issues identified:

• Non-reconciled balances

• Unusual accounting entries lacking documentation

• Improper revenue recognition practices may inflate perceived performance

• Grant Sidney and Quill & Cask transactions require further review

Timeline: Receiver hopes to conclude by Q1 2026 through debt refinancing or sale of company as going concern.

10/03: WhistlePig filed request for court updates (owed money for rye whiskey or bottling services)

10/07: Oracle/NetSuite filed similar request (owed money for software services)

10/11: Board of directors info revealed—John Eugster from First Dominion Capital identified

10/13: Receiver filed Motion of Compliance, officially served notice on 10 entities he wants included in receivership (the “Tentities”):

• Shelbyville Barrel House BBQ

• Shelbyville Grand LLC

• Grant Sidney Inc. (largest UN shareholder, owned by Fawn Weaver)

• Quill and Cask Owner LLC (owned by Keith Weaver, purchased barrels from UN)

• Nashwood Inc.

• Humble Baron Inc. (world’s longest bar, paid for by UN)

• 4 Park Street LLC

• Uncle Nearest Spurs (created for potential San Antonio Spurs investment)

• Classic Hops Brewing Co.

• Weaver Interwoven Family Foundation

Mickey’s research uncovered multiple Grant Sidney-owned trademarks unrelated to whiskey:

• Second Rose: Spirits company owned by Fawn via Grant Sidney, filed 6/27/25

• King Narmer: Beer/brewery trademark (Egyptian king who owned ancient brewery)

• Skinny Southerner: Possible lifestyle/diet book

• Various other entities at same Nashville address (Deaderick Street)

10/21: Tentities’ deadline to respond to receiver’s inclusion motion

10/22: 12 separate filings hit the court. Weavers retained new attorney Michael E. Collins from Manier & Herod. Each Tentity filed lengthy responses arguing against inclusion.

Key arguments from Tentities:

• Receiver taking no position means no basis for inclusion

• Farm Credit filed nothing to support allegations despite court order

• Entities maintain separate operations, books, bank accounts

• Humble Baron legally required to be separate from UN for liquor licensing

• Grant Sidney’s $30M loan to UN during forbearance was legitimate equity investment

• Payments between entities were proper (disputed by Farm Credit)

Notable admissions:

• Grant Sidney initially booked transactions as barrel sales, later recharacterized as loans

• Some transactions “incorrectly booked” due to “speed required”

• Humble Baron operates rent-free on UN property

• UN paid for Humble Baron’s Guinness World Record designation

• Shelbyville Grand (Keith-owned) claims UN owes rent since February 2025 but hasn’t paid

Farm Credit filed response to court’s 9/30 order—all sealed:

• Summary of cash transactions from UN’s financial advisor

• Levy Settlement Agreement

• Barrel Purchase Agreement with Q and Cask (no executed copy received)

• Summary of findings from receiver’s financial advisor

Documents remain sealed because Tentities aren’t yet under court jurisdiction.

10/24: Tentities filed Pro Hac Vice motion for California attorney Oren specializing in distressed businesses, receiverships, protecting assets

10/25: Mickey analyzed Fawn’s Inc. 5000 Conference interview where she:

• Called Martha’s Vineyard property “smear campaign tactic”

• Claimed bank tried to “taint the judge, who’s going to be White in eastern Tennessee”

• Said she wouldn’t buy vacation home “not on the water in a town that is not sunny nine months out of the year” (contradicts prior “business investment” claim)

• Revealed UN House MV LLC and 4 Front Street LLC ownership details

10/27: Weavers filed complaint that Farm Credit violated “spirit” of court order by waiting to file sealed documents until after Tentities’ responses were due

10/27 (2.0): Receiver filed response making clear he’s not doing Farm Credit’s bidding:

• Motion to Clarify was to alert court to entities and seek interpretation, not advocate for expansion

• “It would be inappropriate for the Receiver to argue for the extension of his duties”

• “The Receiver is here to follow the direction provided to him by this Court, and not to do the bidding of any other party”

• Receiver retained Arlington Capital Advisors to advise on possible transactions including sale of assets

10/28: Mickey discovered two separate Deere & Company (John Deere) loans in Keith Weaver’s name for Eady Road property equipment, paid for by Uncle Nearest

Court approved joint motion with agreed order:

• Motion to Clarify stayed pending review of bank records

• Tentities must provide 2 years of bank statements within 7 days

• Receiver has 14 days to review

• If additional info needed, can request up to 3 more years of statements

• Tentities have 10 days to provide or explain why unavailable

• After review, receiver will either request hearing or withdraw Motion to Clarify

• Receiver must file progress reports every 30 days

Significance: This is the mechanism that determines inclusion. If bank statements show comingling/impropriety, hearing likely happens and Tentities get included in receivership. If not, receiver withdraws motion.

October showed the receivership moving from assessment to action. The receiver’s report confirmed the company has value but identified serious financial control issues. The fight over the Tentities is the key battle—if those entities get included, the receiver gains access to a much broader financial picture.

The Cognac business is getting sold. The Martha’s Vineyard house is getting sold. Non-essential properties are getting liquidated. What emerges will be a smaller, cleaner Uncle Nearest—possibly under new ownership by Q1 2026.

The bank statements due under the 10/31 agreed order are the next inflection point. Those will determine whether the corporate veil gets pierced.

Again: This summary is based entirely on Mickey Pinstripe’s investigative reporting at thebourbonandryeclub.com. He’s doing the document review, financial analysis, and trademark research. Support his work directly.

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

John Hughes hosts a virtual blind tasting with friends Patrick, Don, Bill, and David Levine—testing three eight-year bourbons at 100-101 proof. What starts as a friendly competition to identify three mystery whiskeys becomes a lesson in how blind tastings force us to challenge our assumptions. Don nails the Wilderness Trail 8-year pick, while the group debates Buffalo Trace characteristics and discovers surprising preferences when brand bias is removed.

Key Topics with Timestamps:

03:04 - The tasting begins: Three mystery bourbons, all eight years, all ~100 proof

05:35 - Sample #1: Initial guesses range from Buffalo Trace to Barton

11:20 - Sample #2: Debate over whether it's MGP or something more controversial

18:45 - Sample #3 : The group tries to pin down the distinctive profile

26:15 - Rankings and favorites: Group consensus emerges on quality hierarchy

35:15 - Why blind tastings are both humbling and valuable for experienced drinkers

Subscribe to Embellish Pod on your preferred podcast platform. Find video versions on YouTube. Connect on Instagram or TikTok @embellishpod. Visit www.embellishpod.com for links, episode details, and more. Now also available on Substack for written content and podcast hosting. Want to participate in a future blind tasting? Email [email protected].

So hopefully by now you’ve watched the most recent episode where I talked a little bit about Kentucky Bourbon Festival. One of the things I mentioned in there specifically was about Craig Beam and what Craig Beam is doing at Jackson Purchase Distillery.

I’m a little biased towards Jackson Purchase, mainly because it’s on the western end of the state. They’ve been producing whiskey for quite some time, and they sneakily — somewhat sneakily — released a bottle around festival time. I’ve subsequently been able to find that bottle, and I’m super excited to talk about it.

Jackson Purchase Batch 1, Full Proof, Four Year Whiskey at 117.8 proof.

When you’ve got a name like Beam, you’ve got to make some good whiskey, obviously. And it’s at a reasonable price point, I think, for a first launch of a brand. But let’s talk about it, right?

We drank this three different times, three different days on three different sets of glassware with an intent to try to remove any bias that I might have based off of what happened throughout the course of that day.

First Pass:

• Nose: A lot of caramel and barrel spice.

• Palate: Like cranberry juice, but not the cranberry cocktail — just regular cranberry juice — and a little bit of nut.

• Finish: Some orange zest and some black pepper.

Second Pass:

• Nose: Gummy caramel and a little bit of cola.

• Palate: More sarsaparilla and tart cherry.

• Finish: Real zesty and spicy kind of again.

Third Pass:

• Nose: My immediate thought was, is this a Christmas bourbon? Maybe.

• Palate: Cranberry and sour cherry again.

• Finish: Grapefruit zest and barrel spice.

I think for a first entry into the market, for a four year old whiskey, for what these guys are doing — phenomenal pour.

Go figure out what these guys have going on. They’re doing some contract distillation for some other folks, but they’re also making their own stuff. And this is a very phenomenal pour at the price point that it is and for what they’re doing.

If you haven’t checked out Jackson Purchase yet, now’s the time.

Details:

• Proof: 117.8

• Age: 4 Years

• Type: Full Proof, Batch 1

• Worth it? Absolutely. Great price point for what you’re getting.

I recently had Angel’s Envy on the podcast, and they were nice enough to send over their 10 Year Cask Strength. Now, the 10 year thing is a little different than what you might think. It’s not necessarily what they’re calling it, but it’s 10-ish years old. Has to do with their use of secondary barrels and what they’re doing there. Go listen to the podcast with Owen if you want the full breakdown on that, because it’s actually pretty fascinating.

This particular bottle clocked in at 122.6 proof and retails for $250. So yeah, it’s a pricey bottle. Let’s talk about whether it’s worth the dollars or not.

I drank this three different days on three different sets of glassware. Why? To try to eliminate any palate bias I might have based off of what I consumed that particular day. This is how I approach anything I’m taking seriously.

First Pass:

• Nose: Plum, oak, dark sugars, and cola. A lot going on, which you sort of expect for a 10-ish year old whiskey.

• Palate: Brighter fruit, maybe stone fruit of some type, but not quite as dark as plum. Still some dark sugar kind of floating around in there, but maybe not from the fruit side of it.

• Finish: Chocolate, chocolate, and dark fruit cake. And maybe chocolate is a note for either a pirate or a flavor of charred chocolate, right? Hey, maybe we’ll keep that for later on.

Second Pass:

• Nose: Like a red caramel. That’s not a thing, but that’s what my brain told me. Sometimes it bees that way.

• Palate: Cola, jammy fruit, and some super, super sweet black tea.

• Finish: Really solid wood and jammy notes.

Third Pass:

• Nose: Caramel, gummy, wood. That’s what my brain said. It’s what you get, right?

• Palate: Wood and tea, and there was something herbal in there that I couldn’t quite place.

• Finish: Chocolate and barrel spice. And maybe there’s some char-clot in there as well. Maybe that’s what I’m getting there.

I really enjoyed this pour. I like older aged whiskeys — probably stop around 15 years — but somewhere between 10 and 15 seems to be the right place for me. This hits that sweet spot.

If you’re the kind of person that has no problem spending $250 on a bottle, this is probably an easy buy for you. If you do have a problem spending that kind of money and you see it out at a bar for 20 or 30 bucks for a pour, it’s probably worth trying. I think it’s a phenomenal whiskey.

If you live in this part of the state and you want to try it, let me know. I’ll pour you up some. But beyond that, if you see it out and you get an opportunity to try it, you really probably should give it a shot.

What these guys are doing is really, really interesting. Go listen to what Owen has to say on the podcast. It’s a really fun episode and you should go listen to that because that’s what makes this possible.

Details:

• Proof: 122.6

• Price: $250

• Age: ~10 years

• Worth it? Absolutely, if the price doesn’t scare you off.

Look, I’m going to be blunt here because someone needs to say it: if you attended the 2025 Kentucky Bourbon Festival and spent three hours standing in line to buy a bottle of bourbon, you fundamentally misunderstood what you paid for.

I’ve been attending this festival since 2021—first as a general admission attendee, then as a VIP, and for the last few years as media. I’ve seen this thing from every angle, and I’ve watched it devolve from a genuine bourbon appreciation event into something that resembles Black Friday at a fucking Best Buy. And it’s not the festival’s fault. It’s ours.

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Here’s what a $190-$600 ticket to the Kentucky Bourbon Festival gets you: access to over 200 bourbon expressions from 65 distilleries. You get to meet master distillers. You get to taste bottles that cost over a thousand dollars—Very Old St. Nick was being poured on-site, just included in your admission. You get to discover craft distilleries like Potter Jane, who was showing their new make that won’t be available for years. Craig Beam—yes, that Beam family—debuted his first bourbon from Jackson Purchase Distillery. Dark Arts had their 16-year Buffalo Trace selection available to taste.

But instead of experiencing any of that, thousands of people woke up at 5 a.m., stood in line for hours, and then sprinted across a grass field when the gates opened to stand in another line for three more hours to buy a bottle of Heaven Hill’s latest limited edition.

You paid hundreds of dollars to be a trophy hunter in a high-fence operation, and then you complained about it on social media.

Almost every piece of content generated about this year’s festival mentions the same things: long lines, bottle access issues, chaos at the gates. And yeah, those things happened. But here’s the thing—the bottle sales are supposed to be incidental. This isn’t a bottle-hunting event. It’s an access event.

The Kentucky Bourbon Festival wasn’t created as a competition to see who could acquire the most allocated bottles. Hell, the first couple of years you couldn’t even buy bottles at the event. It was about creating an immersive bourbon experience for people who wanted to learn, taste, and explore. Not just acquire and hoard.

Somewhere between 2021 and 2025, we lost the plot. Bourbon culture has an identity crisis, and it’s showing up in ugly ways at events like this.

While you were complaining with your buddies about how long the bottle line was taking, here’s what was happening:

Dan Callaway from Barstown Bourbon Company was explaining their first-ever double-barreled Hungarian Oak release. Whiskey House—one of the most technologically advanced distilleries in Kentucky—was educating people about the growing importance of contract distilling. Potter Jane was giving people a taste of new make that represents what could be one of the most interesting brands in a few years.

There were 200+ expressions to taste. If you walked into a bar and tried to drink through even ten of those, you’d spend what you spent on your ticket. And there’s still 190 more to go.

But sure, stand in line for three hours for a bottle that’s going to have the same 24 ounces as every other bottle, and that you’ll forget about when next year’s limited edition drops.

I get it—not everyone wants to geek out over craft distilleries or have deep conversations with master distillers. Some people just want their allocated bottles. Fine. But if that’s your goal, maybe the Kentucky Bourbon Festival isn’t for you. Because the actual value of this event is in the things you can’t replicate anywhere else.

Want to know what makes this festival worth it? It’s about access and community. It’s about tasting things you’ve never seen before. It’s about meeting people who share your passion for bourbon. It’s about learning something new from someone who’s spent their entire career perfecting a craft.

I stayed with a group of people I met through the internet—folks from Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, South Carolina. We cooked meals together, we had our own tastings at night, we went to offsite events together. That’s what bourbon is supposed to be about. It’s a communal spirit. It brings people together who otherwise would never be in the same room.

But you don’t get that experience standing in a bottle line for three hours, pissed off that the person in front of you got the last one.

Here’s my solution, and it’s going to be controversial: Kentucky Bourbon Festival should eliminate all on-site sales of limited edition releases. Not single barrels—those are fine. Not standard releases from craft distilleries who desperately need that direct-to-consumer revenue. But the Heaven Hill 21-years, the ultra-allocated trophy bottles that create operational chaos and attendee frustration? Get rid of them.

Force people to remember what this festival is actually for. It’s for drinking bourbon, not hoarding it.

Because here’s the dirty little secret: there are reports—unsubstantiated from my perspective, but reports nonetheless—of people darting in as VIPs, grabbing multiple limited editions, and reselling them in the parking lot to people walking into the event. That’s illegal. That’s unsafe. And that’s what happens when you turn an appreciation event into a bottle-hunting competition.

And to my fellow social media people: we have a responsibility here. A lot of us were given free access to this event. We got media passes, we got food, we got opportunities that regular attendees paid hundreds of dollars for. And what did most of the biggest accounts do with that access?

They made the same damn video everyone else made: “Long lines! Bottle chaos! Here’s my haul!”

Who cares? In six months, nobody’s going to give a shit about those bottles. But you know what would have been valuable? Deep dives on craft distilleries. Conversations with master distillers about their techniques. Educational content about what makes this event special. Comparisons of VIP versus general admission value. Literally anything other than another bottle-hunting strategy guide.

Stop making content that feeds the algorithm and start making content that serves the community. Because right now, you’re contributing to the problem.

Here’s my advice: go to the Kentucky Bourbon Festival with the right expectations. Pick one “must-do” thing per day—whether that’s standing in a bottle line or tasting a specific expression. Then spend the rest of your time exploring. Talk to distillers. Try something you’ve never heard of. Meet people. Have fun.

If you go expecting to leave with a trunk full of allocated bottles, you’re going to have a bad time. But if you go expecting unprecedented access to bourbon culture at its peak, you’re going to have an incredible experience.

The value is still there. The festival is still worth attending. You just have to show up for the right reasons.

And for the love of God, stop running across grass fields like you’re storming the beaches at Normandy. It’s bourbon. It’s supposed to be fun.

Listen to the full episode for more thoughts on the Kentucky Bourbon Festival, bourbon culture, and why we need to get our priorities straight. Find me on Instagram and TikTok @EmbellishPod, or visit www.embellishpod.com.

Thanks for reading Embellish Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.