Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A paid-for Facebook ad and its subsequent landing page, and a website for Whiskey & Wealth Club, seen in July 2025:
a. The Facebook ad’s caption stated, “Whiskey & Wealth Club partners with the world’s leading distilleries to offer premium cask whiskey with exclusive industry pricing. Clients also gain access to distillery tours, market insights, and exit strategy support”. The ad included a photo of a whiskey cask with the wording “Private investor … Whiskey & Wealth Club”. The ad included a hyperlink to the landing page, as below.
b. The landing page featured claims concerning potential returns from investments in Irish cask whiskey. Under the heading “Why you should invest in Irish cask whiskey” text stated, “Solid returns: Investors can expect an average of 8-18% return per annum […] High return option: 55% per annum projected return (on certain exit strategies)”.
c. The website www.whiskeywealthclub.com, featured a page titled “Irish Whiskey”. Under the heading “The Benefits of Irish Cask Whiskey Ownership with Whiskey & Wealth Club” text stated, “Solid Potential for Returns”. An asterisk beneath, which appeared as the page was scrolled down and disappeared when scrolled past, stated, “Returns subject to fluctuation and not guaranteed”.
Issue
The ASA received two complaints:
- one complainant challenged whether the investment return claims made in ad (b) were misleading and could be substantiated;
- one complainant challenged ads (a) and (b), and one complainant challenged ad (c), on whether they were misleading, because they did not make clear material information about the risks of the investments; and
- one complainant challenged ad (a), and one complainant challenged ad (c), on whether they breached the Code, because they did not make clear the value of investments was variable.
Response
1. Whiskey & Wealth Club Ltd t/a Whiskey & Wealth Club believed the claim that “Investors can expect an average of 8-18% return per annum” was not misleading, because it represented outcomes achieved by their customers. They provided the ASA with a spreadsheet which included a sample of sales and exit data, which they said illustrated the range of returns achieved by customers who invested with them, specific details of a customer’s investment history with them and three cask buy-back agreements with three different investors.
Whiskey & Wealth Club explained the claim “High return option: 55% per annum projected return (on certain exit strategies)”, had been a maximum projected return, not an average expectation. They said it was an old figure which they had removed from their website.
2. & 3. Whiskey & Wealth Club said that the claim “Solid potential for returns”, in ad (c), was qualified by asterisked text further down the page which stated, “returns are subject to fluctuation and not guaranteed”. They said the disclaimer was intended to clarify that all figures mentioned were indicative and based on historical performance, rather than guaranteed outcomes. They said they recognised that the positioning and visibility of the disclaimer may not have been sufficiently clear, however, as it only appeared further down the web page, and disappeared when users scrolled past. They said they had updated their website to ensure that the disclaimer remained permanently visible throughout the user journey. They also said that they had updated their website’s homepage, their social media ads, and all landing pages to ensure that clear, prominent risk disclaimers were displayed, in line with CAP guidance.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. It also stated that before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers were likely to regard as objective, and that were capable of objective substantiation.
Ad (b) stated, “Solid returns: Investors can expect an average of 8-18% return per annum” and “High return option: 55% per annum projected return (on certain exit strategies)”. The ASA considered that consumers were likely to understand the first investment return claim to mean that they could expect to achieve an average return of between 8 and 18 per cent each year, and that certain exit strategies could achieve a return of up to 55 per cent each year on casks bought through Whiskey & Wealth Club.
We considered the references to earning up to between 8 and 18 per cent per annum and earning up to 55 per cent per annum were different statistics, the first being the average range of returns, meaning that there was potential for some investments to have returns greater than 18 per cent, while the second would be understood as referring to a maximum return of 55 per cent, dependent on exit strategies.
We acknowledged the anonymised data Whiskey & Wealth Club had provided of their clients and their willingness to provide similar data for all their clients if necessary. Further to that, that they had also provided a detailed case study of a client who had sold casks back to Whiskey & Wealth Club and three other buy-back agreements. However, we understood that when casks were sold back to Whiskey & Wealth Club, customers could be charged between two and five per cent as a service fee, although we noted that often a proportion of the fee could be waived. Nevertheless, that fee would affect the returns achieved, and that had not been considered in the data we had been provided with or the advertised return per annum. We further understood that returns for whisky cask investments were affected by the time an individual held the asset. That meant someone who held casks for under a year would on average be unlikely to receive the advertised return, while, in contrast, someone who held it for five or more could. However, the ad did not make that clear.
We acknowledged that the claim “High return option: 55% per annum projected return” had since been removed from the landing page. However, because the investment returns claims seen in ad (b) did not take into account the service fee that could be charged when casks were sold back to Whiskey & Wealth Club, and the ad also did not make clear that returns were affected by the period of time the asset was held for, we concluded they were misleading and had not been substantiated.
On that point, ad (b) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).
2. Upheld
The CAP Code required that material information should not be omitted and should be presented clearly.
We understood that the physical whiskey investment market was not regulated within the UK, nor was it subject to the protections afforded by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme or the Financial Ombudsman Service. We considered that was material information that consumers required in order to make informed decisions about Whiskey & Wealth Club’s services.
Regarding ad (a), the paid-for Facebook post stated, “Clients also gain access to…market insights, and exit strategy support” and the image of the barrel had the text “Private investor” on it. Ad (b) stated, “Why you should invest in Irish cask whiskey”, text stated, “Solid returns: Investors can expect an average of 8-18% return per annum […] High return option: 55% per annum projected return (on certain exit strategies)”. Ad (c) stated, “The Benefits of Irish Cask Whiskey Ownership with Whiskey & Wealth Club” and text stated, “Solid Potential for Returns”. They therefore were ads for an investment product. However, ad (a), which was a paid-for Facebook ad and was limited by space, contained no information stating that such investments were unregulated. It linked to ad (b), a landing page on the Whiskey & Wealth Club website, which also included no such information. Ad (c), another page on the Whiskey & Wealth Club website, also did not include that information.
Because the ads did not make clear that whiskey investment was unregulated, we concluded they were misleading.
On that point, the ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising).
3. Upheld
Section 14 of the CAP Code, which reflected rules prescribed by the FCA on promotional material for regulated investments, required that financial marketing communications not regulated by the FCA should make clear that the value of investments was variable and, unless guaranteed, could go down as well as up.
Given the greater potential for significant financial harm resulting from financial marketing communications, those rules were additional to and more prescriptive than the rules on misleading advertising. That meant that relevant risk warnings prescribed by section 14 of the CAP Code needed to be in the initial ad and not later in the consumer journey, for instance on a landing page. We also noted that FCA guidance for regulated investments in social media stated that firms should ensure that, where possible, information that was required to be prominent be displayed without needing to click through, or any other optional action, to view it.
We noted that ad (a), the Facebook ad, contained no risk warning to make clear that the value of such investments could go down as well as up.
We acknowledged that the claim “Solid Potential for Returns”, seen in ad (c), contained an asterisk which linked to text underneath the section listing the benefits of the service, which stated, “Returns subject to fluctuation and not guaranteed”. However, we noted that the text appeared and disappeared as the page was scrolled though, meaning that it was not permanently visible to people visiting the web page. It was, therefore, possible to view the claim “Solid Potential for Returns” without the warning being visible. In addition, the warning did not appear directly below the claim but further down the page.
While we understood ad (c) had since been amended so that the qualifying text remained permanently visible throughout the user journey, because ad (a) did not include any risk warning to make clear that investments could go down as well as up, and ad (c), at the time the ad was seen, did not include a prominent warning, we concluded that they breached the Code.
On that point, the ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 14.4 (Financial products).
Action
The ads must not appear again in the form complained about. We told Whiskey & Wealth Club Ltd to ensure that their future ads did not quote average or maximum return figures unless they held adequate evidence to substantiate those claims and they made clear returns were affected by the period of time the investment was held. We also told them to ensure that future ads made clear that the value of investments in cask whiskey was variable, and could go down as well as up. We also told them to make clear that cask whiskey investments were unregulated.
