I am mainly a subjective “value” reviewer. I must take into account price when reviewing any whiskey. I believe most of us this do this anyway and to deny it wouldn’t be reflective of the majority. As in most things, when something is relatively expensive, hopes are high for the product. So I have no one to blame but myself for the expectations of this whiskey. Whiskey doesn’t follow you get what you pay for....it follows, “you pay for the ability to get it” - meaning the price is based on availability and not quality . The price, the clout, the story and the packaging over promise on this pour. Perhaps the experience will be better served with more time. Response to the comment below: peanut brittle cooked in diluted nail polish, is the most “unique” prominent note, with weak red fruits opening up more and more as the bottle diminishes, or if water is added. The score is still reflective of the experience/price ratio. 5.0 - go out and buy all of the stock you can find. 4.0 - must buy at least one bottle before you die. 3.0 - solid, must try at a bar, or mooch from a friend. 2.0 - didn't like it, you may. 1.0 - you may have the palate of my dog, and he licks his own ass.