Twelve years ago, all hell broke loose when Maker’s Mark decided to lower the ABV of its popular bourbon from 45% to 42%. A 3% drop might seem trivial, but for devoted fans, it was unacceptable, with backlash causing the distillery to quickly reverse its decision.
So, if the ABV had been decreased, what implications would it have had? And why did Maker’s Mark immediately backtrack on its decision? Let’s take a look at the Maker’s Mark ABV controversy.
Signup now to make sure you don't miss out on the latest whiskey news and deals.
By Signing up, you accept and agree to our Terms of Services and you acknowledge our Privacy Statement. The Whiskey Wash is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Maker’s Mark ABV Reduction
In February 2013, Maker’s Mark, owned by Suntory Global Spirits (then Beam Inc.), announced it would lower its bourbon’s ABV from 45% to 42%. The decision, which was not taken lightly, was made in order to meet soaring demand for Maker’s Mark Whisky,
Demand was surging—global sales had increased by 15% in 2012, and supply struggled to keep up. By slightly reducing the ABV, the brand could stretch its stocks while still delivering what it believed was the same whisky experience.
Chief Operating Officer Rob Samuels reassured fans that rigorous testing had ensured the whisky’s flavor remained unchanged. Importantly, the price would also stay the same.
The Backlash
Despite these assurances, fans reacted with outrage, and many took to social media to express their frustrations.
Sara Havens of the Louisville Eccentric Observer summarised the backlash in an interview with WKU Public Radio: “It’s gotten … a lot of outrage. People asking if they’re going to lower the price now, [or] just that it’s kind of not fair.”
There were two main concerns: could Maker’s Mark maintain its signature profile with a lower ABV, and was it fair to charge the same price for a product with less alcohol?
Maker’s Mark chairman Bill Samuels Jr. defended the decision: “While we are investing today to expand capacity, by producing 42% ABV Maker’s Mark, we’ll better meet demand without compromising taste.”
He explained that both structured consumer research and tastings at the distillery confirmed the whisky’s flavor remained unchanged.
The Swift Reversal
And then, as quickly as it began, it was over. Within days, Maker’s Mark responded to the backlash by reversing its decision. The brand issued a statement from Rob and Bill Samuels Jr.:
“We’re humbled by your overwhelming response and passion for Maker’s Mark. While we thought we were doing what’s right, this is your brand – and you told us in large numbers to change our decision. You spoke. We listened. And we’re sincerely sorry we let you down.”
Was It an Overreaction?
Would the reduction have made a real difference? I spoke to Phil Dwyer, Manager of The Whisky Shop Manchester, about his experience with the lower-ABV Maker’s Mark.
Phil Dwyer, Manager of The Whisky Shop Manchester, recalled tasting the lower-ABV Maker’s Mark at an event: “Everyone in the room noticed blackcurrant, blackberry, red fruit aromas. I don’t think it was texturally different, but the change was noticeable. That said, if you poured me a dram at a bar, I’m not sure I could tell the difference. Context is key, I think.”
While some may have detected subtle changes, the flavor wasn’t worse—just different.
On pricing, some argued that lowering the ABV without reducing the price was unfair. However, an alternative view is that Maker’s Mark could very well have increased the price in order to fund the proposed production expansion. They chose not to.
At the end of the day, this controversy wasn’t about whisky quality but about brand loyalty and trust. Maker’s Mark underestimated how much customers valued consistency, but to their credit, they listened and acted swiftly. In an industry where reputation is everything, that may have been the smartest move of all.