What goes into the £1,000 ‘once-in-a-lifetime' cocktail?
On Wednesday, the Merchant Hotel launched its new cocktail menu, including a collection crafted with rare whiskeys by Midleton, Macallan and Michter's, which start at £785 and go up to £1,000.
It's priciest tipple has been hailed as a 'masterpiece of Irish whiskey'.
The most expensive, the Midleton Foret de Troncais (£1,000), is described as 'a masterpiece of Irish whiskey, aged in rare French Troncais oak casks and delivering elegant notes of honey, toasted almonds and delicate spice' and is served with Antica Formula and Dubonnet.
The Belfast city centre hotel earned the Guinness Book of Records title for the world's most expensive cocktail in 2007 with its £750 Mai Tai.
According to Guinness World Records, this was overtaken in 2013 by Club 23 in Melbourne, Australia when 'the Winston', a cognac cocktail, sold for £8,583.
The menu, consisting of 21 drinks which start from £14.99, was created by a team led by the Merchant Bar's general manager, Aaron Dugan and cocktail bar manager Emily Doherty.
Mr Dugan said: 'We are proud to bring our unique collaboration with three icons of whiskey to life with The Rare & Refined Collection.
'These exceptional drinks have been crafted to create once-in-a-lifetime experiences to be savoured. The lucky few that get to try these drinks will get to relish something truly special.
'And, for those that find the price tag too rich, we have also created an exceptional collection of 21 cocktails, inspired by timeless classics, but with a unique Merchant twist. Named according to their flavour profile, the menu has been designed to help customers match their preferred flavour profiles to their choices. There truly is something to suit every taste.'
The cocktail bar at The Merchant has been described as one of the most decorated in the UK and Ireland and will be the first and only bar in Northern Ireland to be awarded the coveted 2 Pin status by the Pinnacle Guide, later this month.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
Why couldn't Britain have dealt with the EU like Trump?
The more you look at the trade deal negotiated between the US and the EU, the more you want to ask: why couldn't Britain have dealt with the EU like that? Why has every UK Prime Minister since Theresa May acted so feebly in the face of the EU's tactics and ended up getting such a poor deal out of the EU? Trump has get pretty much everything he wanted. Goods imported into the US from the EU will in future be subject to tariffs of 15 per cent – half the rate that Trump had threatened but far higher than existed prior to 'Liberation Day' on 2 April. What has Ursula von der Leyen got in return? Nothing at all, other than the punitive tariffs being dropped. She has agreed to lowering tariffs on imports from the EU, in some cases to zero. She has also agreed to the EU buying more products from the US, including liquified natural gas (LNG), making a mockery of the EU's net-zero policy. Like Britain, the EU has wound down its fossil fuel industry on the pretext that it is yesterday's energy and we won't need it for much longer as we transition to clean renewables – but then it commits itself to buying increased quantities of LNG from the US. Say what you like about Trump, but it is easy to argue that he has proven a far stronger defender of his country's interests than Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer. Britain is nearly as important a destination for EU exports as the US: in 2024, 21 per cent of its exports went to the US and 14 per cent to Britain. Yet no Prime Minister has properly used this leverage to give Britain any advantage. May got nowhere in the end but would have committed Britain to becoming a rule-taker from the EU. Johnson agreed to place an internal UK border down the Irish Sea. Sunak did a little better in trying to resolve this, but then Starmer has put us back closer to where May wanted to take us: agreeing to EU rules on plant and animal products while having no say in the making of those rules. Why did UK Brexit negotiators never threaten punitive tariffs on German cars and French wine? Instead – and in spite of Theresa May's mantra of 'no deal is better than a bad deal' – we acted as if no deal was never an option. Simultaneously, we treated Trump – whose first presidential term lasted throughout the Brexit negotiations – as a kind of oaf who was destroying America's reputation. Had our leaders emulated him rather than scorned him we would be in a lot better position now. It all starts to look a bit different, however, if you look at Trump's trade negotiations from the point of view of consumers rather than producers and ask instead: has Trump really scored such a victory? If you are an American motorist who fancies a new car, your choice has just narrowed, and many of the options available have just increased in price. It is not just consumers, either, who may feel this is not quite the victory for the US it might look like on the surface. Most manufacturers rely on international supply chains. While tariffs may help snuff out some of their competition, they will in future face higher prices of raw materials and components. This does not appear to feature all that much in Trump's mercantilist mind. To him – and not just him, because many world leaders seem to think the same – exporting stuff is a strength and importing stuff a weakness. When you think of things that way, the US has been cheated by the lopsided tariffs which have long existed between the US and the rest of the world. Yet the fact remains that the US has done extremely well out of its low import tariffs. Its economy has grown far faster than those of its more protectionist rivals. So yes, it is easy to admire Trump's negotiating tactics. The whirlwind of the past few months, with threats followed by negotiations and flattery, has been a wonder to watch. It is sad that UK leaders have lacked the courage to act in such a brazen fashion towards the EU. Yet that doesn't mean that the US will end up being the big winner from higher import tariffs. On the contrary, overall the US economy is likely to grow less strongly as a result.
Glasgow Times
2 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Irish premier welcomes trade deal between EU and US
The deal was reached during a meeting between Donald Trump and the president of the European Commission on Sunday. The US president met European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen to hammer out the final details on the trading relationship between Europe and the US. Reacting to the deal, Taoiseach Micheal Martin said the agreement was very welcome. I welcome the outcome of trade talks today between the European Commission and the US. — Micheál Martin (@MichealMartinTD) July 27, 2025 'It brings clarity and predictability to the trading relationship between the EU and the US – the biggest in the world,' the Fianna Fail leader said. 'That is good for businesses, investors and consumers. It will help protect many jobs in Ireland. 'The negotiations to get us to this point have been long and complex, and I would like to thank both teams for their patient work. 'We will now study the detail of what has been agreed, including its implications for businesses exporting from Ireland to the US, and for different sectors operating here. 'The agreement is a framework and there will be more detail to be fleshed out in the weeks and months ahead.' Mr Martin said the higher tariffs will have an impact on trade between the EU and the US, which will make it more expensive and more challenging. 'However, it also creates a new era of stability that can hopefully contribute to a growing and deepening relationship between the EU and the US, which is important not just for the EU and the US, but for the global economy,' he added. 'Given the very real risk that existed for escalation and for the imposition of punitively high tariffs, this news will be welcomed by many.' The deal was also welcomed by deputy Irish premier and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Simon Harris, who said it brings clarity to businesses. 'While we have yet to see the detail, I welcome that an agreement has been announced by Commission President von der Leyen and US President Trump,' Mr Harris said in a statement. 'A deal provides a measure of much-needed certainty for Irish, European and American businesses who together represent the most integrated trading relationship in the world. Ireland makes a key contribution to this with the Ireland-US economic relationship valued at more than one trillion euros. 'The US had made clear, and this has been replicated in other recent agreements, which the US has reached with other countries, that a baseline tariff was always going to be part of the outcome. 'I have always stressed that tariffs are damaging and will have a negative impact on companies exporting to the US. 'While Ireland regrets that the baseline tariff of 15% is included in the agreement, it is important that we now have more certainty on the foundations for the EU-US trade relationship, which is essential for jobs, growth and investment. 'President von der Leyen described this as 15% tariffs across the board, all-inclusive.' He said further detail is needed around pharma, aviation and other sectors. Mr Harris said he will examine the details of the agreement over the coming days to establish the effect on Irish businesses and the economy. Earlier, EU commissioner Michael McGrath said the meeting was a 'significant and decisive moment'. Mr McGrath, EU Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection, said it would involve substantive negotiations between both sides. US President Donald Trump enjoyed a round of golf before his meeting with Ursula von der Leyen (Jane Barlow/PA) 'It's a significant moment, we hope a decisive moment, and it builds on an enormous amount of work that has been done over quite a period of time,' Mr McGrath said ahead of the meeting. 'President Trump invited President von der Leyen to Scotland for a meeting. 'This follows on the back of intensive negotiations over a number of months. He added: 'It is not a case of turning up and signing on the dotted line. There will be a real discussion that will happen, and it will take on a dynamic of its own, and let's see what happens over the course of the afternoon. 'But from the EU's point of view, we are determined to do all that we can to get a deal for European businesses, because we recognise the cost of uncertainty. 'It manifests in trade and in investment decisions and ultimately in employment and of course tariffs can cost consumers at the end of the day. 'We want a good deal. We have negotiated hard, and we're at a point now where hopefully the two leaders can today bring it to a concluding phase.'
The National
4 hours ago
- The National
Sign of a bright energy future – but for whom?
I saw John Swinney visiting Eyemouth last week and singing the praises of the Neart na Gaoithe wind farm in the Firth of Forth. For sure, the First Minister was right, it is a wonder of engineering and a sign of a bright energy future. But for whom? Almost all the benefits are passing Scotland by, just as they did in the first great energy bounty, when oil was discovered in the North Sea. Oil's still there and still being drilled for, though not as much as it should be, and it's only weeks since the Grangemouth oil refinery closed. Of course, there's a nice shiny new office block on Eyemouth pier for NnG, as it is referred to. The jobs there are few but welcome all the same. But where's the real work going – and, more importantly, who owns and profits? READ MORE: Man arrested for 'carrying a placard calling Donald Trump an offensive word' NnG might lie between Lothians and Fife but ownership lies abroad and a clue's in the name. Neart na Gaoithe is Gaelic but the Irish version, the reason being that the wind farm is owned not just by EDF, the state energy company of France but also ESB, the Republic of Ireland's state electricity company. The Irish consul general told me it is the single biggest investment ESB has ever made outwith the island of Ireland. All this means that profits from the wonder Swinney saw are going to Paris and Dublin and not to Edinburgh. But it's far worse than that: not one turbine for it is being manufactured in Scotland, despite Methil being visible from it, never mind other ports and yards in Scotland being available which are crying out for work. Even if the excuse is a lack of capacity here in turbine manufacturing – which itself is lamentable and indicative of a shameful lack of an industrial strategy – what about other works such as subsea cabling, the laying of pipeline and the assembly of the units, along with the ship contracts? As with ownership, they've gone abroad, with firms from Italy, Belgium and far beyond winning out and Scotland languishing without. Even the jobs that are coming to Scotland are limited. Beyond the smaller vessels at Eyemouth, there was hope for work for maritime crews providing for the major construction and cabling work from Montrose. So thought a former constituent of mine who left the deep-sea tankers for a job closer to home. Within a few days he and the rest of the UK crew had been laid off and replaced by South Asian labour. When you're working beyond territorial waters – and that's where NnG lies – UK employment law doesn't apply. What a rip-off. And the NnG tragedy won't be alone as it's not the only Scottish offshore wind farm owned by foreign state companies; China, Norway, Sweden and the UAE also have sites. There's a double whammy here, and not just in the work and contracts being frittered away. When the ScotWind auction took place – under the auspices and control of the Scottish not UK Government – offshore sites were sold off for a song. The £800 million raised was trumpeted as a triumph by the then first minister Nicola Sturgeon. Yet within a matter of weeks that was shown to be a paltry sum. Less than 25% of what had been auctioned off in Scotland was sold in the US by New York State for a site off Long Island and for somewhere in the region of $4.3 billion. And believe me, the European energy market, of which Scotland is a critical part, is larger than the US's. But we were told all's well as we'd be getting the supply jobs. Well, where are they? A few jobs at Eyemouth and a few ribs going out of that port aren't what we were led to believe we'd get, and are probably less that Ireland will have from just NnG alone. What a waste and what a letdown. The Scottish tragedy is being repeated but when it was oil and gas we had no Parliament. Now we have Holyrood and, shamefully, it is being complicit as well as supine. Yes, energy is largely reserved but the ScotWind sell-off was wholly down to [[Holyrood]]. This is our great opportunity, as the First Minister said, but it has to actually happen, not just be empty rhetoric. While Swinney was at Eyemouth harbour, I was at the funeral of an independence stalwart and was reminded by the eulogy of his role in the anti-poll tax campaign. Back then, he and his compadre, who sat next to me in the chapel, painted 'Pay No Poll Tax' on the bridges along the M8. No easy task but much appreciated by many. Things should be better and easier for us now, but as well as failures there's been a dampening of the spirit. Radicalism, let alone political actions, have been decried, as shown over the genocide in Palestine. We need some competency in our Government, but we also require some fire back in our movement.
