Every day, we strive to bring you something new here at MALT, so it’s understandable that occasionally something slips through our net. I mean, we do have a comprehensive portfolio of Bruichladdich, Octomore and Port Charlotte reviews prosperously sized that is almost verging on definitive … but when Rose kindly gave me this sample of the Port Charlotte MRC:01 earlier this year, I immediately relegated it to the bottom of my whisky sample mountain. I mistakenly believed that we had already reviewed it because my co-editor, Mark, tends to tackle anything that comes from this distillery, including the branding bollocks of which they’re capable. He even boasted on the recent Port Charlotte 2018 release how many he’d reviewed—a whisky that I felt we over-scored. My bad, because we have a gap in our coverage, but one that I’m now about to plug.

It’s easy to be swayed by a brand and manipulated. We are all susceptible to the ‘brand marriage,’ as the hypotheses by Susan Fournier discussed over three decades ago. It’s a fascinating area wherein brands can go bad, soar and also tap into our life experiences, all to their own benefit. We feel comfort as being part of a group (or clan), a snug blanket that tells us that we’re not alone, and that there are others like us who feel the same sense of loyalty and devotion to a brand.

This, to me, somewhat explains the tunnel vision I unearth when talking to fans of Bruichladdich, Balvenie, Glenrothes, Macallan and so on. There’s an unshakeable belief that all is good and that such a brand is incapable of bad behaviour or slipping up—qualities that make us human. When something isn’t satisfying, we put it down to a one-off and show too much forgiveness. To me, branding is camouflage, often without much foundation. If businesses, or distilleries for that matter, put as much effort into the creation and maturation of their whiskies as branding, then the whisky world would indeed be a better place.

We all have relationships with brands, regardless of social status, gender and religion. These ‘marriages’ shouldn’t be knocked by outsiders or non-believers. They do, however, need to be understood and acknowledged. This gut instinct explains why many fall virtually in love with a brand and its ideals, portrayals and messages. In other words, we need more insight into modern-day consumerism and how we are being manipulated. Websites, writers and such are manipulated by PR companies, advertising revenues and the threat of missing out on the next free sample or paid for trip.

I say, screw all that.

I’ll give you an example of a bigger brand that doesn’t relate to a single corporation, but has a strong relationship and magnetism with those that believe in the concept. That brand, as such, is bourbon. My recent forays stateside have highlighted a strong belief in all things bourbon; that it is superior, purer, only capable of being produced in America, and that other brown spirits are inferior – yes – including Scotch, believe it or not. Hilarious, I know, but it shows the belief and dedication, or lack of outlook. Many of these individuals feel strongly and passionately about bourbon. It has not only a sense of national or regional pride, but a personal admiration that prompts gratification. You can apply the same logic to champagne, car manufacturers, various wines, whisky, or even a sense of belief that’s being propagated at the cathedral of barley in Waterford.

The danger is that the defective outlook arising from tunnel vision unleashes a zealot-like persona. You stop listening, avoid exploring and dismiss anything that doesn’t fit into your brand marriage as utter garbage, or at least hearsay. I question, or would like to, those that stubbornly adhere to beliefs that bourbon is superior—why, exactly, and how many scotches have you tried? The worst that you can do is slam the door and bolt it shut for an indefinite period.

For many years, I jokingly said bourbon is vanilla and little else. I’m not here to say Scotland’s national drink is superior or whatever. Let’s just accept it is different. All things are different and should be celebrated. As a society and planet, we’re too preoccupied with putting things into silos and then debating (often arguing) what’s better and why. There are too many arguments around whisky, and it’s been magnified by social media. I don’t care, and neither should you—if you take my advice.

Now, I may have gone slightly off track here, but there is logic to the above pathway. You see recently, I’ve had several conversations with supporters (or fans?) of what we do here. A couple have mentioned that Mark’s Bruichladdich/Octomore/Port Charlotte reviews suggest a blind spot, a sense of favouritism, and/or a brand loyalty. Imagine for a moment me having to defend him and also Islay’s most overrated distillery. You listen, reason and move on. Some might say, I have the same loyalties towards Tormore, but clearly, they haven’t seen how harsh I can be on it. The same goes for Daftmill – I’d gladly give the Berry Bros sherry cask a 3 or 4, as that is what it warrants in my book. Additionally, the whisky has been obliterated by the cask and should have been bottled years prior.

That all said and done, we all have differences and our upbringings; life experiences and interactions help shape who we are today. Right now, I’d like to think on the whole we tend to follow a straight and neutral line here. Assisted by our independence and attempts to bring you multiple thoughts on a review. My own thoughts on Bruichladdich and its array of distillates are well known. I don’t follow a brand, herd, or what the masses think. I do things my way and I respect those that adore this distillery and yet are capable of actually admitting release XYZ, or its recent form, is inconsistent.

Right now, for them and for you, we’ll plug that gap with the MRC: 01. If this is as half as good as the Port Charlotte 2006 valinch SHC:01, then we’re in for a real treat, let me tell you! Bottled at 59.2% and limited to an outturn of around 8000 bottles, this features 100% Scottish barley from the Inverness region, which has always been a fertile region for barley, growing some of the best in the world, and also playing host to many distilleries, including the legendary Ferintosh. For this Port Charlotte, the 40ppm peated whisky spent time maturing in first-fill ex-bourbon casks and second-fill French wine casks before coming together for a finish of a year in the ‘finest’ (who says it’s the finest? Debate these terms!) from the Bordeaux region. The bottle will cost you around £90.

Port Charlotte 2010 MRC:01 – review

Colour: gold leaf.

On the nose: a salty pasta water, brine, caramel and tinny aspect. Red liquorice, shoe wax polish and wet hemp. Some candied orange, wet foilage, bacon crisps and Royal icing. Time reveals a little washing up liquid dynamic and BBQ beef sausages. The addition of water reveals ginger, pineapple and apricot.

In the mouth: a spent bonfire followed by peanuts and driftwood. A little table salt and it must be said a shortlived, weak finish. A tinge of alcohol as well. A cloying aspect in the background from the wine cask gives substance but not flair. Cranberries and a cinder toffee round up a mixed bag. Adding water introduces more smoke and an earthy, bark dynamic with tannins also evident.


Firstly, this is overpriced at nearly £100 so a mark has been chopped off. A fair summary, is that this MRC is a solid whisky, but nothing more, nothing less. The bottle design is nice enough. Sadly, we want more than just a nice visual presentation. I’m left asking what is the real purpose of this Port Charlotte? Little more than a revenue stream for Bruichladdich and Remy Cointreau? Come on Bruichladdich – you can do better than this.

Score: 5/10

My thanks to @fromwhereidram for the sample and photograph.

CategoriesSingle Malt
  1. David Pop_Noir says:

    Interesting points raised here, and whilst I’m not for once going to have a mini rant about certain Islay distilleries, the mention of that BBR Daftmill did get me thinking about the bottle I got and then split with three others.
    Yes it did make it affordable, but my share (17.5cl) equating to £40 doesn’t look much once you’ve decanted everyone else’s into other bottles.
    I was eager to try it and also enjoy it, and whilst it isn’t bad it certainly ain’t fantastic.
    Definitely a 3/10 when you take the price into consideration.
    I did give buying it some thought, but probably did get caught up in the clamour to some degree.
    Being successful in the ballot was hard to turn down.

    1. Jason says:

      Hi David

      Well, you’ve had a chance to try Daftmill which would please Francis. I know many haven’t and I’ve certainly opened a few and given out samples to ensure many more have that opportunity.

      Cheers, Jason

  2. Greg B. says:

    For the last number of years – even prior to the Remy Cointreau purchase – I have found myself wondering if anyone at Bruichladdich realizes how much damage they have done to their brand with the never-ending stream of releases of overly young, poorly differentiated boutiquey releases of whisky that in many instances are simply not very good. In the early days after the purchase by the original group of owners it seemed to take a while for them to realize that their stock of aged whisky would be rapidly depleted and they needed to stretch it by blending young whisky with it to maintain sufficient cash flow until they had sufficient volumes of matured inventory. That was understandable at the time after years of not having anything produced.

    But now that reasoning should have disappeared. They have been producing whisky there for almost 20 years. Yet even now if Bruichladdich is known for anything, it is for a never-ending series of young whiskies trying to mimic properly aged whiskies, having a variety of finishes and selling propositions, sold at overly high price points. One suspects, as you note, that this is a result of having to meet budget expectations of the new owners where revenue streams are required today, rather than several years into the future after full maturation. As a longtime fan of Bruichladdich, I pick and choose my purchases of their offerings very, very carefully these days, and buy their products much more infrequently than used to be the case. Does anyone there even remember what Bruichladdich used to taste like? I do, and it is something I seldom can find in their recent offerings. I miss it greatly.

    1. Jason says:

      Hi Greg

      A fair and honest summary of Bruichladdich. It almost feels as if these distilleries/brands are above criticism.

      On pricing, I find it incredible the Octomore’s escape criticism when Springbank were asking £90 for their last local barley release – which then prompted some negative feedback. Where are these people when the Bruichladdich’s are announced. People have to be consistent.

      I remember old Bruichladdich and it was always worthwhile.

      Cheers, Jason.

  3. Kevin says:

    While I completely agree that this release is overpriced, I think if the aim is for consistency, the same should have been said about the 9th Edition 100% Islay NAS Kilchoman (bottled at a lower proof) reviewed the other day. At least Bruichladdich have no reservations about telling you the age of their liquid.

    1. Jason says:

      Hi Kevin

      You should read the Kilchoman review as it does tell you the years that have gone into the whisky.

      On pricing the Kilchoman is 100% Islay and roughly 25% cheaper. Whereas this PC, I presume, uses barley from across Scotland. It does come in a fancy bottle and tin.

      As I’ve written both that’s consistency, because compared to the Kilchoman, it underlines the fact more that this PC is overpriced. However, this PC review was written prior to the Kilchoman, but even so. I don’t think your pricing stance stands up to scrutiny, although you’re perfectly entitled to it.

      Cheers, Jason.

      1. Kevin says:


        Thanks for the response. I am by no means a Bruichladdich evangelist and I do think the MRC is priced way too high. However, your review of the Kilchoman indicates that it contains barely from the 2007 and 2009 crop, but it is by no means clear what percentage – obviously, it could be anywhere from 1% – 100%. I think there is value in transparency and I am happy to support a brand that agrees. Agree to disagree I guess.

    2. Austin hembd says:

      I’m late to the game with this one but such is being a scotch enthusiast in the United States(unless it’s wee beastie…)

      This is delicious nectar from a distillery that tells you exactly what’s in the bottle and never chill filters or colors any of their expressions.

      This particular bottle is a little pricey but also I love it. Springbank shouldn’t have been criticized for their prices on the local barley , as you mentioned, I agree, but distain shouldn’t go towards Bruichladdich for that imo. I see them as part of the same team.

      Diageo charging 90 euro for an 8 year old talisker that tastes like what their standard bottling should? That’s where I think where we should start the conversation!

      1. Jason says:

        Hi Austin

        I think sadly Diageo realised they could charge more for the Talisker 8 now, at the distillery the 18 is £140 and the 7 year old handfill is £150. Just nonsense.

        I’d somewhat disagree as I see Springbank pretty much out there on its own. Because it is family owned and community-run. Bruichladdich has the backing of a large corporate giant and was pushing heavily into China with their boutique branding before COVID-19 brought it to a halt. Springbank, you’re lucky to get a printed leaflet sometimes.

        But that’s the diversity of whisky, and I have to say the PC16, which was very limited earlier this year on ballot, is really what this MRC release should have been. Much better blending on show, but that review is still to be written!

        Cheers, Jason.

  4. John says:

    All this special releases with different cask finishes taking advantage of a market rife with FOMO is a huge reason why I noped out of whisky a couple of years ago.

    Thank you for pointing out that brand loyalty should not be untouchable

    1. CraigB says:

      Jason, I completely agree with you in regards to Bruichladdich. I also feel the same towards their neghbour in Ardbeg. It’s unfortunate that fanboys/girls of both brands cannot see past the marketing hype of their now parent companies and continue to blindly fill their coffers! I loved Octomore (past tense) and I find myself paying a hefty price getting my hands on those old special ones rather than spending my hard earned on underwhelming recent releases. For me, it all changed with the name “Dialogos.” I cringe when I see that name placed on a bottle. I have not really enjoyed a bottle of Octo since the awesome 8.2. The 9 series was forgettable and the 10 series was a joke when it came to the sudden inflated price for even younger whisky. It’s even worse when one looks at the limited Committee releases from Ardbeg. People flock to websites to get their hands on some very well advertised but ultimately underwhelming whisky. As long as the fans continue to blindly open their wallets and never call distillers out on subpar liquid, they will continue to get away with it. It’s a very sad time for whisky drinkers these days. One has to filter through all the garbage to find a gem in their range. Considering how expensive whisky has become, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

      1. Jason says:

        Hi CraigB

        Thanks and I’m of the same view when it comes to Ardbeg and you can also point some blame at Bowmore and Laphroaig. I’ve never really understood why the Octomore range doesn’t come in for more criticism when it comes to pricing – every man and his dog seemed to be lining up to criticise Springbank and their local barley pricing…

        Everyone is heralding the 5yo Beastie that’s appeared, despite Ardbeg saying for years that there isn’t enough stock etc. Wonder if its appearance has anything to do with the decline in sales for blends? I’m not hunting hard for a bottle put it that way.

        Cheers, Jason.

  5. Danny Fox says:

    Thank you for this review, it confirmed my sneaking suspicions. This level of branding and marketing always sets alarms off with me. Now I still don’t know what to get instead of Uigeadail this year.

    Do I really need to change?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *