Sex sells, and so does panic, apparently. 
 
 Sales of Maker’s Mark bourbon, known for its distinctive red wax seal, soared 44 percent in the first quarter, its best ever, after the distillery announced in mid-February that it plans to water down its own product and lower the proof due to shortage of raw materials. That led to a revolt among loyal customers, but whereas people usually boycott a product when they are not happy, Maker’s announcement turned out to boost sales. Customers started hoarding what they were led to believe were to be the last 90-proof Maker’s bourbon bottles. 
 
 The firestorm that the announcement caused led Maker’s to sober up. As thousands took to social-media to complain about the change to Maker's, the company reversed the decision a week after the news broke. 
 
 "You spoke. We listened. And we're sincerely sorry we let you down," the distiller wrote on its page Feb. 17. Nearly 28,000 people clicked a “like”, praising the decision. 
 
 Companies of course tend to crow about product reformulations, but that is often the case when they improve the formulation, not diminish it. However, when it comes to marketing, scare tactics seem to work. The public relations fiasco turned out to be a boon for Maker’s Mark, offsetting some decline in parent Jim Beam’s other spirits. 
 
 Beam isn't the first company to face a backlash when tinkering with a beloved product. In 1985, devotees of Coke were enraged when Co. introduced a reformulated beverage called New Coke. Less than three months after what some called "the biggest marketing fiasco ever", Coke went back to its original formula, rechristened “Coca-Cola Classic”, marketed side by side with New Coke. 
 
 In a bit of spin, Coca-Cola eventually claimed that both formulas actually increased their share of the cola market, and some conspiracy theorists even insinuated that this was actually a brilliant, secret strategy intended to regain loyalty of Coca Cola drinks that have been switching to Pepsi. 
 
 Is it possible that Maker’s blunder was premeditated? 
 
 That would have been pretty dumb. For starters, it would have been too risky, bordering on a death wish. No one could have predicted that their customers would rush out and hoard on the bourbon. And in the age of social media it was entirely predictable that customers would revolt vociferously. 
 
 So therefore, the company might have been brazen enough or foolish enough to actually consider cheapening their product as a viable business strategy, but I don’t believe that the announcement about watering down the bourbon was premeditated, just dumb. 
 
 In some ways Maker’s learned what many companies have to grapple with today: they really don’t own their brands anymore, the customer does. They just rent them. 
 
 Avi Dan is the founder of Avidan Strategies, a marketing consulting firm that specializes in business and marketing advice, agency search, compensation, and advertising strategy. He spent 30 years in senior management and board positions with leading global agencies. ||||| Dow Jones Reprints: This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers, use the Order Reprints tool at the bottom of any article or visit www.djreprints.com
– Remember how America's bourbon drinkers collectively freaked out in February over the news Maker's Mark was going to water down its alcohol? Big corporate misstep? Hardly, reports Forbes. The company did an about-face within a week in an attempt to prevent a mass exodus of fans, and it appears those fans went on a bourbon-hoarding bender during those scary few days. Maker's Mark sales exploded 44% in Q1, making it the bourbon's strongest quarter ever. Fans better hope the hoarding has stopped, however: "We won't expect to see those 44% growth rates sustained throughout the year, and in fact we can't support them," says its CEO, per the Wall Street Journal.