Hello @matteob Its a loss of history and tradition that I fell rather miffed about. They were so proud of their own traditional methods, and used it to their own advantage many a time in the days when they were allowed to advertise.
As I pointed out earlier, their enthusiasm for protecting the brand with legal action was something else.
It’s a bit like telling the Irish that their famous tipple Guinness is made from barley from all over Europe, and not a bit home grown. Not sure how much home grown is used, but I think that quite a few would be a bit uppity about it if it was true.
Similar thing with the once UK firm of Cadbury’s. Famous for their chocolate in the UK. A short time after it became an American company, their milk chocolate whent awry. Lord only knows how and why they would tinker with a product that has been well received by the public for years.
As to snuff, we are used to batch to batch differences in the product and can usually spot a difference with our favourite, regularly used snuffs, but we put that down to the variability of the raw ingredients.
It’s still a good snuff, but are they legally and morally entitled to put “Original Kendal Brown” on the lid if its not wholly processed in this country, in the good old fshioned ways.
I don’t even think the British can call a sparkling wine “Champagne style” anymore. To me it’s just another glass of fizzy wine with a ludicrous price attached to it, and only really consumed for the spectacle and tradition. Fizzy wine in a posh bottle would do the job just as well.
Bottom line is, tradition, nostalgia and history mean a lot to me, and I do get a little miffed when unexpected change happens.
Enough of my rant.