I guess I'm lucky in the sense that I've never had the older version of Escudo so I don't know what I'm missing. Nonetheless, I enjoy the current version a great deal.
Jim's Revised Escudo Review.
- Thread starter JimInks
- Start date
The blurb on a certain website says, "Escudo Navy Deluxe is the gold standard of Virginia/Perique blends and has been for more than 140 years." Which sounds, to those not in the know, as though it hasn’t changed. Not that it actually says that it hasn’t changed. It just sounds that way.
I believe people make a lot of money creating these types of slogans.
It is also worth mentioning that binging back a lost blend has its own set of responsibilities and / or bastardizations. Are the ingredients even available today? How can you duplicate the taste, smell, feel, cut, etc., without them? Do you market it any differently than above?
Thanks Jim, I've smoked a tin a few years ago and thought it was ok but nothing too special to my uneducated and undeveloped taster.
How would you say the current version of deluxe navy rolls compares to the current version of escudo? Based on your review, it seems the current version is at least a good Virginia blend.
How would you say the current version of deluxe navy rolls compares to the current version of escudo? Based on your review, it seems the current version is at least a good Virginia blend.
I'm curious, too, as the two blends are more "joined at the hip" these days.
I have not tried the current version of DNR though I would love to. But, I'm not buying tobaccos these days.
I guess that the new Ford is just like the ‘56 that dad had. That The Honeymooners is still on primetime. That you favorite wine from college days is still the same. Part of what makes life engaging is that things change. I can tell you this: Pennsylvania isn’t what it used to be, but I’m glad that they haven’t changed the name.
It's understandable why a tobacco company would want to acquire a marquee brand like Escudo. Presumably, it would be in their interest to try to stick to the formula that the brand was known for. But if the new manufacturer decides to change the components or even the quality of the product it isn't so much unethical as it is risky. They can't really hide those changes for long. Word of mouth, which spreads rapidly in the user community aided by the internet, will detect those changes and either support or reject them. @JimInks's excellent chronology and critique of Escudo is a case in point.
Cars and wine and places, are expected to change each year. No one buys a new car expecting to connect historically or aesthetically with a forefather, unless it is a vintage car. Tobacco, especially certain blends, come with an expectation of this. Just look at Condor’s posts about the new Condor.
Some wine is a little more like McClelland’s Christmas Cheer.
Just look at public reaction to colorizing old movies. Some people still prefer to watch movies and old shows in their original format.
Damn.
I hope nobody colorizes Mixture 79.
CMYK Mixture 79
HEX Mixture 79
HSL Mixture 79
RGB Mixture 79
Small Batch releases coming to a tobacconist near you in living colour soon!
I have been thinking about this and I think this hits it on the head, if a company can not continue to make the product in it's original form it needs to be discontinued and a new name established for the new product. Release it as a new name and have the description state that it is an homage to the original.
Maybe the new Condor is made based on today's health and wellness standards. What if an ingredient from the old version is now on the FDA banned list? Do you shut down the blend, ala McClelland, or do you bring out the new version without changing one thing on the label to keep sales going? The new bastardized version gets a new fanbase and loses an old one.
The new fanbase doesn't even know what the old fanbase is bitching about. This new stuff is great, what a blend! Meanwhile, the old timers are sitting back wondering how you can smoke this garbage. The blender is incredible, this new stuff is top shelf, they nailed the original! Really, it doesn't even have the original ingredients and 99% of you never tried the original. It is a discussion that ends up being one opinion against another, no real merit to the original version of the tobacco.
Condor is not sold in the US. It was when it switched to a Polish manufacturer that it changed, and if I remember correctly, it has switched again.
This was the case when MacBaren's released the newest version of Three Nuns. Young people bought it thinking they were connecting historically, which further pissed off the old timers.
Unfortunately, we don't get to chose what the corporations do.
This is one of the things I respect Ernie Q at Watch City Cigars for, if he can't get the ingredients for a blend it is discontinued. No compromises, no changes, no reformulations.
I am not sure. Like I said earlier, Astleys 109 didn't have a historical significance, and they've changed, not really bothering me, except... I just don't like it as much as I used to.Just a hypothetical, you can insert any "new" blend or any blend brought back from the dead.
"Condor is not sold in the US. It was when it switched to a Polish manufacturer that it changed, and if I remember correctly, it has switched again."
War Horse came back. I know that it pissed off one guy (mrlowrcase) on here who got himself banned over his rants and attacks that just wouldn't stop. But, for me, I had never heard of War Horse Bar, and it didn't bother me. Escudo is legendary, as so is Balkan Sobranie, Three Nuns, and even Erinmore, and it bothers me about that one as well.
Is there a set of standards of what makes a blend unchangeable? Not sure. That's above my forum paygrade.
However, if Greg Pease were to change one of his blends without some sort of public address about it, I think his fans revolt.
I like the idea of a label change. "REVISITED" or how about just a damn announcement.