Who Makes the Real Dunhill Now?

[Ivanhoe]

EDIT: Fixed Capitalization in Title (See Rule 9)

The single good pipe shop I have found in Tokyo has a big selection of tobaccos, but they all seem to be from EU. This is probably a result of a recent trade agreement, but I would really like to see more American blends there, especially some Cornell and Diehl burley blends. The last time I was there I saw Dunhill tobaccos -- many of the standard ones -- from two different vendors. Some were from Peterson's and some were from a blender in Germany. They both used the old familiar Dunhill tin designs, with small differences, so I think they are both authorized versions of the tobaccos and not just copycats. There was a fair difference in price between the two vendors, as well. Have I missed something? If you have more information about this situation, please reply.

 

[coming to_falling too]

I believe Peterson makes Dunhill now. What was the German Dunhill that you saw called?

 

[stevecourtright]

I believe that Peterson's "Dunhill" tobaccos are (still) made by STG - Peterson now has the rights to use the tobacco blend names.

 

[coming to_falling too]

I believe that Peterson's "Dunhill" tobaccos are (still) made by STG - Peterson now has the rights to use the tobacco blend names.

Yes, you said it better than I.

 

[rushx9]

Peterson is the official new brand name for the Dunhill blends made by STG. Charatan and McConnell's both make a line of clones blends. The McConnell blends, made in Germany by K&K, claim to use the old recipes from when Robert McConnell's in Scotland produced the blends for Dunhill in London. They have had to change the blend names and tin art because of similarity to the Dunhill/Peterson held trademarks. Before it was announced that Peterson would get the marks it was speculated here and elsewhere that McConnell's seemed the most likely brand to take over (I had hoped the resurrection of the Murray's brand was a sign that it would get the honor). I believe it was here somewhere that I saw a line purported to be made by K&K with the dunhill blend names but very different tin art. I have also seen pics of Dunhill "bootlegs" with older style tin art and with the Dunhill brand name.

 

[rushx9]

Here are the older McConnell's tins. The newer ones have yellow labels and more obscure names.

 

[BROBS]

Here are the older McConnell's tins. The newer ones have yellow labels and more obscure names.
View attachment 29891

Ah ha! I never saw the old labels.

 

[forciori]

They were produced since 2005 by the Scandinavian Tobacco Group (STG), which was acquired in 2009 by British American Tobacco (BAT).

All Dunhill tobacco-related interests (cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco) were sold a long time ago (in 1981) to Rothmans (who many years later merged with BAT.

In 2019 STG acquires the rights (after Dunhill announced that it would no longer sell or market cigars and pipe tobaccos in 2018) to reintroduces the old Dunhill blends under the Peterson brand umbrella, STG-Lane Ltd (the Lane, Ltd. was sold to the Scandinavian Tobacco Group in 1987).

There were several companies (with shared capital) that have been converging over the years, and consequently the acquisition of some shared rights.

 

[mso489]

Looks like a marketing food fight to me.

 

[mso489]

Please indulge me in a few lines of shameless self-congratulations and gloating, remembering that when Dunhill announced it was ending sales of its blends and there was a rush on the products, I said no, no, and also no. The blends were a money maker and that money wouldn't be left on the table. That's not how business works. At the time, it was like going to a funeral and standing over the deceased proclaiming that they'd go dancing tonight. But I was right. By-and-by, as we see. I don't get to make many long-shot proclamations that turn out correct, so I am taking this opportunity to crow, a little.

 

[maulragoth]

Peterson is the official new brand name for the Dunhill blends made by STG. Charatan and McConnell's both make a line of clones blends. The McConnell blends, made in Germany by K&K, claim to use the old recipes from when Robert McConnell's in Scotland produced the blends for Dunhill in London. They have had to change the blend names and tin art because of similarity to the Dunhill/Peterson held trademarks. Before it was announced that Peterson would get the marks it was speculated here and elsewhere that McConnell's seemed the most likely brand to take over (I had hoped the resurrection of the Murray's brand was a sign that it would get the honor). I believe it was here somewhere that I saw a line purported to be made by K&K with the dunhill blend names but very different tin art. I have also seen pics of Dunhill "bootlegs" with older style tin art and with the Dunhill brand name.

And there you go! Much appreciated rushx9

 

[Casual]

I believe that Peterson's "Dunhill" tobaccos are (still) made by STG - Peterson now has the rights to use the tobacco blend names.

To clarify, since 2018 I believe there are now two “Peterson” brands. “Peterson” the pipe business is owned and run by Laudisi, the guys who run SP.com, C&D, etc. “Peterson” branded tobaccos are owned and run by STG, the big tobacco company. They are unrelated except in name.

STG acquired the rights to use the names and formulas of the tobaccos they formerly made for Dunhill and put them out instead under their Peterson tobacco brand. This has nothing to do with the pipe company.

Reference:https://cigar-coop.com/2018/07/news-kapp-peterson-sold-with-peterson-pipe-tobacco-going-to-stg.html

 

[stevecourtright]

To clarify, since 2018 I believe there are now two “Peterson” brands. “Peterson” the pipe business is owned and run by Laudisi, the guys who run SP.com, C&D, etc. “Peterson” branded tobaccos are owned and run by STG, the big tobacco company. They are unrelated except in name.

STG acquired the rights to use the names and formulas of the tobaccos they formerly made for Dunhill and put them out instead under their Peterson tobacco brand. This has nothing to do with the pipe company.

Reference:https://cigar-coop.com/2018/07/news-kapp-peterson-sold-with-peterson-pipe-tobacco-going-to-stg.html

As a technical legal writer, I do appreciate a pertinent citation. And thank you for the clarification.

 

[Ivanhoe]

Today the rain finally eased and I walked to my local pipe shop again to re-check the Dunhill doppelgangers. I have attached photos of the tins for the two different clones of Royal Yacht that were there. I chose Royal Yacht only as an example; there were at least a half-dozen other Dunhill blends available in these two labels. The Peterson's version is clearly marked "Peterson's" on the tin, but does not say "Dunhill" anywhere. The other tin is labeled "Dunhill" and says "Made under license in the EU" but does not include the name of the maker. Though both are 50 gram tins and both were imported from the EU, the "Dunhill" labelled version costs more than 20% less than the Peterson version. (At current rates of exchange, these two tins cost about $22.40 and $17.25 USD, respectively.) So, for me this is still not clear. The Peterson version, which has the consensus of the group as the "official" version, does not mention Dunhill by name, but the other EU version from an unknown maker says they have a Dunhill License.

 

[Gecko]

Today the rain finally eased and I walked to my local pipe shop again to re-check the Dunhill doppelgangers. I have attached photos of the tins for the two different clones of Royal Yacht that were there. I chose Royal Yacht only as an example; there were at least a half-dozen other Dunhill blends available in these two labels. The Peterson's version is clearly marked "Peterson's" on the tin, but does not say "Dunhill" anywhere. The other tin is labeled "Dunhill" and says "Made under license in the EU" but does not include the name of the maker. Though both are 50 gram tins and both were imported from the EU, the "Dunhill" labelled version costs more than 20% less than the Peterson version. (At current rates of exchange, these two tins cost about $22.40 and $17.25 USD, respectively.) So, for me this is still not clear. The Peterson version, which has the consensus of the group as the "official" version, does not mention Dunhill by name, but the other EU version from an unknown maker says they have a Dunhill License.
View attachment 30413View attachment 30414

Thanks for posting the photos!

My guess after comparing tin art in your photos with official STG-Dunhill-era tin art is that the Dunhill tin is new old stock with regional sticker and from before the name change to Peterson and the real deal.

So the contents of both the tins should be the same stuff made by the same people (STG) but a few years apart in manufacturing date.

Mind you, I could be wrong, but it makes sense and seems resonable. Perhaps someone else can enlighten us further.

 

[cigrmaster]

Does anyone know who was making Dunhill Flake and Deluxe Navy Rolls in 2011 and 2012? I know I have asked before but my mind spent too many years in the 70's and is pretty much toast.

 

[logs]

I was jazzed when McConnell released their line of Dunhill blends and then I tried a few of them and my enthusiasm rapidly dulled. The viriginias were mediocre, flavors were different, the ribbon cut was sloppy and overall they seemed half-assed. Stick with Peterson.

 

[sablebrush52]

Does anyone know who was making Dunhill Flake and Deluxe Navy Rolls in 2011 and 2012? I know I have asked before but my mind spent too many years in the 70's and is pretty much toast.

STG was making it. BTW, Dunhill never made Deluxe Navy Rolls. That blend was introduced into the line up by Murray's. McConnell only made a couple of the blends when Dunhill licensed them off. Most and eventually all of them were made by Murray's until the blends went to Orlik and STG under a licensing agreement with BAT.
BAT doesn't own STG. BAT bought STG's cigarette and snus operations.
The line of Dunhill clones that K&K offered under the Robert McConnell marque were considered to be good blends, but not the same as what STG had been producing under their licensing agreement with BAT. At best, only a few of the blends might have used the McConnell's recipes, since McConnell didn't make all of the blends. The rest were likely retinnings of K&K blends. K&K bought McConnell in the early 1990's.
Under the FDA Deeming regulations, the Dunhill blends would not have been grandfathered in because STG pulled the Dunhill blends from the US market from 2008 to 2010.
After BAT decided to get out of the pipe tobacco business, STG was able to negotiate a deal with BAT to continue making the blends by not using the Dunhill name. They could use the label artwork. So they returned to making these blends under the Peterson name, since they owned the rights to that name for making tobaccos. The Peterson tobaccos are not associated with the Peterson pipe making business.
For those of us who were smoking Dunhill blends when Dunhill made them, the real Dunhill blends haven't been made since the early 1980's.

 

[rushx9]

The Peterson version, which has the consensus of the group as the "official" version, does not mention Dunhill by name, but the other EU version from an unknown maker says they have a Dunhill License.
View attachment 30413View attachment 30414

The current legit versions of the blends only say Peterson. They don't say "licensed by dunhill" because dunhill wanted to remove their name from pipe tobacco and focus on overpriced metrosexual fashions.
The tins that say dunhill look like they could be fakes, but who knows? They could both be fakes. If it were up to me, I'd buy one of each and open them both for comparison. You'll be able to tell if one is legit and the other is just Prince Albert in a can?.

 

[daveinlax]

because dunhill wanted to remove their name from pipe tobacco and focus on overpriced metrosexual fashions.

You're confusing Alfred Dunhill Ltd owned by Richemont with the Dunhill Tobacco brand owned by BAT

The tins that say dunhill look like they could be fakes, but who knows? They could both be fakes. If it were up to me, I'd buy one of each and open them both for comparison.

It could just be old stock. I picked up some Dunhill Night Cap with the smaller better fitting label from a shop this past winter. ?