DioniLife rolls out alcohol-free spirits range
DioniLife entered the industry last year, with its acquisition of non-alcoholic brewer Mash Gang.
When the business initially announced the purchase, it indicated it had 'multiple' brands and products that were in the 'advanced stages' of development.
The new spirits brands in the group's portfolio are called La Borosa, a Mexican agave non-alcoholic spirit, and Pavari17, an aperitif.
According to the company, the drinks offer the 'flavour, depth, texture and complexity consumers and bartenders expect – minus the ethanol'.
DioniLife will sell the two brands in two formats - 700 ml bottles and and as canned pre-mixed RTD cocktails with an abv of 0.5%. The pre-mixed cocktails include a Margarita, Paloma and Spritz variant.
The products will sold in bars and retailers in the UK, and will also be launching in Colorado. More US states are to be added "soon after", DioniLife said.
CEO of DioniLife, Damian McKinney said: 'With La Borosa and Pavari17, we're not offering an 'alternative' – we're offering spirits that stand on their own.
'People shouldn't have to compromise on taste or the shared ritual of a great drink just because they're skipping the alcohol. La Borosa and Pavari17 give bartenders great new non-alcoholic liquids to play with,' he said.
'They taste like spirits; they mix like spirits. And now consumers can recreate the bar experience at home with great-tasting non-alcoholic spirits and convenient ready-to-serve cocktails. We live in exciting times in which individuals have unbelievable options."
Wilson said: 'Our aim was to create drinks that taste as good – or better – than their alcoholic counterparts. That meant starting from scratch, not imitating. These are real drinks for real social occasions, crafted with care and precision.'
"DioniLife rolls out alcohol-free spirits range" was originally created and published by Just Drinks, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Are we willing to drop cash Isas and take more risks with our money?
Savers are missing out on financial rewards because the benefits of investing in stocks and shares are being drowned out by risk warnings, the chancellor says. This week Rachel Reeves said savers would be sent details of investment opportunities if they have money in low-interest accounts. And she won't completely rule out cutting the annual tax-free allowance of cash Individual Savings Accounts (Isas) to push people into stocks and shares Isas instead. But what are her chances of making the UK a nation of investors, rather than risk-averse savers? Experts say women are investing less than men, and have warned the chancellor that some of her ideas could backfire and put off potential new investors. 'Pink websites won't work' Cash savings accounts are steady and safe. The amount of interest varies between account providers, but it is clear how much the returns will be. They are popular when putting money aside for emergencies, or for holidays, a wedding or a car. By contrast, the value of investments in stocks and shares can go up and down, but with risk can come reward. Long-term investments can be lucrative, not only for individuals, but for the economy as a whole. Laura Suter, director of personal finance at investment platform AJ Bell, says Reeves and the finance sector should start by making investing more attractive to women. Having written reports on the Isa gender gap, she argues that, for too long, advertising about investing has been designed by men. Lisa Caplan, director at investment company Charles Stanley, agrees. "It's not about making your website pink. It's about using less jargon, competitive language, and masculine imagery," she says. "When clients who are women feel seen and understood, they will be more willing to trust their money to an adviser or even an investment platform. I think this is beginning to change." Jema Arnold is an investor, and works for UK shareholders' association ShareSoc. She wants investing to be part of general, honest conversation among friends, not private and hidden. "I go to a book club. I want investing to be like that," she says. She is joined in a London cafe by Laura Colucci, who is in her 40s, and Wendy Lanham, who is 71. All three are divorcees, who were forced to think about their relationships with money when their marriages ended. Mrs Arnold was with an investment banker for 17 years. "In many ways I was a traditional housewife," she says. Her now ex-wife had managed that side of the finances. "I'd switched off that part of my brain when raising a daughter. That was a mistake. I felt foolish. I had to switch it back on again fairly quickly." Mrs Colucci was the same. "There were investments in my name," she says. "It was a huge learning curve in one year, when I had to take control." Mrs Lanham put her money into savings accounts. Only later did she consider moving some into investments. But that was a path that all three initially found difficult to join. "People froze up and looked awkward when I talked about investing," says Mrs Arnold. Male domination Mrs Lanham says she joined a group which met to talk about investing. The membership was entirely male. "I bought myself a book called Investing for Idiots, went to a conference, and treated it like adult education," she says. "I did not know anything, but hung in there, and the organisation changed." Now, the trio are members of SIGnet – a network of investor groups that meet in different parts of the UK, or online. It is not-for-profit and covers different areas of interest. It has lots of female members. But they say the chancellor will have little hope of getting more people to invest without initially improving their understanding, especially if they are trying it for the first time. "There's no point telling people to go and run a marathon when they've never run before," says Mrs Colucci. Reeves told financial services and business bosses in her Mansion House speech this week that the "negative" narrative around savers investing money in stocks and shares needed to change. "For too long, we have presented investment in too negative a light, quick to warn people of the risks without giving proper weight to the benefits," she said. She announced new adverts, reminiscent of the "Tell Sid" campaign of the 1980s, which encouraged people to invest in the newly privatised British Gas. Targeted messages will also be sent by banks to people who have money in low-interest accounts. Mrs Suter, from AJ Bell, says this needs to go beyond a "token effort". "If it can get widespread coverage and enthusiasm, then it could make a difference," she says. Isa debate Carol Knight, chief executive of the Investing and Saving Alliance, says Reeves' ambition will be judged a success if more women, more people from ethnic minorities, and more people outside of London become investors. But Anna Bowes, savings expert at the Private Office, says the chancellor risks her plan backfiring by encouraging people to invest now when markets are jittery due to global uncertainty. That could lead to short-term losses. "This needs to be done very carefully or it could put off a generation of investors." And she stresses that forcing people to consider a stocks and shares Isa by reducing the amount that could be put tax-free into a cash Isa would be a huge mistake. Reeves has stepped back from immediately cutting the tax-free limit on cash Isas, following a backlash from banks and building societies. But she is still keen to shift some of the £300bn in these accounts to being invested in the UK and its companies, despite "differing views on the right approach". Any changes would have an impact on millions of people. Isas are incredibly popular - about 42% of UK adults have at least one. Stocks and shares Isas are less popular but more money is held in them overall - around £431bn, compared to £294bn in cash Isas. People with Isas are more likely to be older, with estimates suggesting about half of pensioners have one. And while more women have Isas overall, more men have the investment option, with women more likely to stick to the safety of cash. Many investment companies that sell stocks and shares Isas back a change, while banks and building societies who dominate the cash Isa market are against it. That debate is likely to pick up again as the chancellor's autumn Budget gets closer. What is an Isa and how might the rules change? Savers to be targeted with offers to invest in shares under new plans One in 10 have no savings, financial regulator says
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Government prepares for release of landmark review into ailing water sector
The Government is bracing for the release of a landmark review into the water industry, which could reportedly lead to the abolition of embattled water regulator Ofwat. The Independent Water Commission, led by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, will outline recommendations to turn around the floundering sector in its final report on Monday. The review was commissioned by the UK and Welsh governments as part of their response to systemic industry failures, which include rising bills, record sewage spills and debt-ridden company finances, although ministers have ruled out nationalising companies. The Government will respond to the recommendations in Parliament later on Monday. The review reportedly includes proposals to establish a new system of regulation, which is currently split between Ofwat, the Environment Agency and the Drinking Water Inspectorate. Ministers will announce a consultation that could lead to axing Ofwat, which oversees how much water companies in England and Wales can charge for services, according to the Guardian. Ofwat has faced intense criticism for overseeing water companies during the years that they paid shareholders and accrued large debts while ageing infrastructure crumbled and sewage spills skyrocketed. In an interview with the Sunday Times, Environment Secretary Steve Reed suggested he was in favour of a new model where regional boards managed water in their areas, including representatives from water companies, local authorities and other organisations. He said: 'I think the catchment-based model has a lot to commend it. Because if you can manage what's going into the water better, you can clean up the water faster.' Asked on Friday if there were plans to scrap Ofwat as the regulator, Downing Street said the Government will wait for a final report. A No 10 spokesman said: 'We are waiting for Sir Jon Cunliffe's final report next week, you can expect us to set out our response after that on what more we will do to turn the sector around.' A Government spokesperson said: 'We are not going to comment on speculation.' Ofwat declined to comment. Mr Reed is also expected to announce a new Government pledge to halve sewage pollution from water companies by the end of the decade, during broadcast interviews on Sunday. He said: 'Families have watched their local rivers, coastlines and lakes suffer from record levels of pollution. 'My pledge to you: the Government will halve sewage pollution from water companies by the end of the decade.' But in his Sunday Times interview, he acknowledged that bills were unlikely to fall from their current level, saying instead that an investment of £104 billion in the sector would 'avoid the need for any big bill hikes in the future'. It comes after the Environment Agency on Friday said the number of serious pollution incidents caused by water companies across England rose by 60% in 2024 compared with the previous year. The figures showed companies recorded a total of 2,801 pollution incidents, up from 2,174 in 2023. Of these, 75 were categorised as posing 'serious or persistent' harm to wildlife and human health – up from 47 last year. The Environment Agency said it is clear some companies are failing to meet the targets it has set on pollution, attributing failures to persistent underinvestment in new infrastructure, poor asset maintenance and reduced resilience because of the impacts of climate change. Earlier on Friday, the Public Accounts Committee also released a report which called the level of pollution 'woeful' and recommended an overhaul of the regulation system. The cross-party group of MPs said the Government must act with urgency to strengthen oversight of the sector to rebuild trust and ensure its poor performance improves. The Independent Water Commission published its interim report in June, which found the sector to be beset with 'deep-rooted, systemic' failures. While the paper outlined the commission's direction of travel, it stopped short of providing detailed recommendations on policy, regulatory reform and corporate governance, which are now expected in the final report. The interim review pointed to the need for better regulation of water companies but it did not recommend the wholesale scrapping of Ofwat, which some have urged. Nationalisation, which some campaigners have also called for, was excluded from its terms of reference when commissioned by the Government. Meanwhile, the Conservatives accused Labour of copying the previous government's policies and doing nothing to halt rises in water bills. Shadow environment secretary Victoria Atkins said the Government should be 'transparent' about where the money to fix Britain's sewers was coming from, warning that consumers may have to stump up some of the cash. She added: 'Labour's water plans must also include credible proposals to improve the water system's resilience to droughts, without placing an additional burden on bill payers and taxpayers.'
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Ambitions Collide With Epstein, Fed and Health Concerns
(Bloomberg) -- For President Donald Trump, whose political career has benefited from voter anxiety over Washington elites, the health of his predecessor and the riches of Wall Street, the past week offered a reversal of fortune. The Dutch Intersection Is Coming to Save Your Life Why the Federal Reserve's Building Renovation Costs $2.5 Billion Milan Corruption Probe Casts Shadow Over Property Boom Mumbai Facelift Is Inspired by 200-Year-Old New York Blueprint How San Jose's Mayor Is Working to Build an AI Capital Trump's efforts to escape the uproar over Jeffrey Epstein failed spectacularly, after the Wall Street Journal published a story alleging he once sent a suggestive birthday letter to the disgraced financier — a claim the president denied. The White House was forced to make a rare disclosure that Trump wasn't in perfect health. And Trump whipsawed on the fate of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, signaling to lawmakers that he would attempt to fire him before relenting after concern about a market backlash. Now, as Trump gears up for a high-profile trip to the UK next week to finalize a trade deal with Prime Minister Keir Starmer, he finds himself looking slightly vulnerable. There was much Trump hoped to harness in what he called a 'week of wins' — passage of his flagship tax-cut package earlier this month, approval of spending cuts this week, a run of favorable economic data, the signing of a stablecoin bill, and implementation of his aggressive tariff agenda. Instead, there were suddenly a few punctures in the armor of a president who at times in his second term has seemed irrepressible as he bent rival institutions, countries, and political opponents to his will. Trump concluded the week posting angrily to social media and suing one of his top allies in the press, Rupert Murdoch, along with Dow Jones & Co. and News Corp. for libel. The Journal reported Thursday that Trump had prepared a letter for a book compiled for Epstein's 50th birthday. The president said the letter was 'FAKE' and called the story 'false, malicious, and defamatory.' Still, the report threw gasoline on a simmering fire, particularly among members of Trump's base, after the Justice Department claimed it had no evidence that Epstein had blackmailed political figures or kept a client list. That conclusion flew in the face of promises from some of the president's top aides that they would reveal substantial new details about a case many Trump loyalists see as a smoking gun proving the existence of a so-called Deep State. 'Weaklings' Trump supporters and FBI leaders Kash Patel and Dan Bongino are said to be at odds with Attorney General Pam Bondi, while the president has repeatedly tried — and so far failed — to quell the furor. 'Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?' he barked at a reporter earlier this month. 'People still talking about this guy, this creep? That is unbelievable.' This week, he dismissed questions from his base and said those worried about Epstein are 'weaklings' and that 'I don't want their support anymore!' But what was once a potent political tool for Trump — stoking conspiracies about Epstein, and Democrats' involvement — has now backfired, with his own supporters frustrated that his administration may be covering up details they hoped would be released. 'The emphasis on Epstein is truly the best intentions of your most loyal followers,' Charlie Kirk, a conservative media figure, said in a segment on his show addressed to the president. He said the Epstein case was a sort of linchpin in loyal Trump supporters' questions about the alleged Deep State. After the release of the Journal story, Trump moved quickly. He directed Bondi to pursue the release of some grand jury transcripts related to the case, though that stopped short of the full release of materials his allies have demanded. 'Same Scam' Separately, Trump's Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, directed the declassification of materials from the Obama administration that she argued showed evidence the former president and aides sought to politicize intelligence around Russia's role in the 2016 election. Trump has repeatedly drawn an equivalence between the Russia controversy and the Epstein case, suggesting both amounted to conspiracy-mongering by his political opponents. A special counsel ultimately did not find evidence Trump had coordinated with the Kremlin to interfere with the 2016 contest. 'It's all the same scam,' Trump told Real America's Voice in an interview that aired Wednesday. The Epstein saga is a rare example of Trump struggling to successfully shift the narrative or change subjects in the news, according to one Trump ally, speaking on condition of anonymity. The ally predicted the matter would fizzle out by next year's elections but criticized the White House's move in February to hand right-wing influencers a binder called 'The Epstein Files' that was largely a rehash of previously released information. It even overshadowed the president's escalating campaign against Powell, which has threatened to undermine longstanding conventions about Federal Reserve independence. Trump mused about dismissing Powell in a Tuesday meeting with lawmakers, with one White House official saying on condition of anonymity they expected the president to act soon to fire the central bank chief. For Trump, his war against Powell serves an important political function, giving voice to homebuyers and borrowers who see lending costs impacting their wallets. But by Wednesday, Trump said he wouldn't remove Powell unless the Fed chair was forced out for fraud, nodding to increasing efforts by the president's allies to pressure the chairman over questions about a bank renovation project. 'Winning Everywhere' Trump backed off his push to force Powell out in part because of warnings that it would trigger a messy legal fight, according to one person familiar with the matter, who requested anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The issues are distracting from what the White House wants to steer attention to: a winning streak that includes passage of a package of spending cuts and the stablecoin bill Trump signed Friday. 'We're winning everywhere,' Trump said at a signing ceremony for the stablecoin legislation. 'It's not even close — not even close — and we're going to keep it going.' Even as Trump has notched long-sought policy victories — extending his tax-cut package, gutting government agencies and securing funding for his sweeping immigration crackdown — Republicans know that each carries substantial political risk and that he'll need to focus on selling his agenda. Democrats have seized on provisions curtailing Medicaid eligibility and tax cuts benefiting the wealthy, to sharpen their economic critique of Trump. And Trump is now two weeks away from his next tariff barrage due on Aug. 1. The president has batted away economists' warnings that his tariffs will threaten growth, upend supply chains and amount to a fresh tax on consumers. --With assistance from Catherine Lucey, Nancy Cook and Jennifer A. Dlouhy. A Rebel Army Is Building a Rare-Earth Empire on China's Border How Starbucks' CEO Plans to Tame the Rush-Hour Free-for-All What the Tough Job Market for New College Grads Says About the Economy Godzilla Conquered Japan. Now Its Owner Plots a Global Takeover How Taylor Swift Turned a Glitter Freckle Maker Into a Sensation ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
