Forget the lipstick index as economic indicator; in this recession, the most successful downturn beauty product is proving to be fragrance. While much of the luxury business has struggled over the past year, a number of high-end perfume businesses have been spritzing their way to success.
— From Luxury perfume houses are expanding at the Financial Times.
Well, I don’t know how accessible a $50,000 vat of custom blended Creed is to the rabble, but when you want something to make you feel pretty, $100-$200 is sure reasonable when you compare it to a pair of Christian Louboutins.
True!
I guess people want to treat themselves, even more so in hard times. They just choose differently. A luxury perfume is a nice treat as opposed to a cheaper one which is consider day-to-day expense. So maybe they won’t make that 2 weeks vacation trip to the Caribbean, but they will get that special 130$ bottle they have been dreaming of for quite a while. Sounds fair to me
I think it is partly that, and partly growing awareness of niche brands, which do often have more unusual offerings than what you’ll find elsewhere.
** “People are not stupid,” says Frédéric Malle, of his French perfume house of the same name. “They know you’re better off spending $100 on something good than $60 on junk.” **
Hear, hear.
Just for you, R, I will not say anything cynical at all!
Can you buy a Frederic Malle scent for $100 though? I didn’t think you could these days.
Can I say something cynical then?
I don’t think paying more guarantees quality. I agree that overall niche is better quality for what you’re paying, but I also think you can get some awesome super-cheap stuff.
True, Miss K. And he’d probably be the first to agree. I’d be the second. He’s making a different point here, however.
Yeah, well, I didn’t read the article, so I guess I shouldn’t be commenting on anything.
Awww! Thanks, R.
I think most of those 3X10ml travel packs of FM still clock in at around a hundred bucks. And a lot of dreck clocks in at more than $60, so overall, without nickel-and-dime-ing the guy, I’d calculate that he’s making a good point.
“They know you’re better off spending $100 on something good than $60 on junk.”
We also no that there really isn’t much (new stuff) offered on the market under the $100 line to begin with.
Malle is quite an interesting gentleman. I don’t necessarily think price is always a good indicator of quality. You can get some smashing Guerlains for $60 or much less and some real yawners in the $200-$500 range that smell as if they *shouldn’t* cost more than $60. I’m still dabbing my sample of Lipstick Rose drop by drop because it’s just a bit too spendy right now given other perfume wants I’m working on, but I won’t deny the sheer loveliness of it and can’t wait to try more in the FM line that will likely end up on my “must own” list as well.
There certainly is something to be said for treating oneself if one has the funds and desires, but I recall reading of how Chanel No. 5 and Joy were the height of sophistication decades ago but not exclusively unattainable luxury reserved for the top 10%, either. While I don’t know if, with adjusting for inflation, their prices back then were similar to the more niche brands today, I do know lots of women were at least able to afford a signature scent or two. Despite my best attempts to do the same, sticking with even four or five bottles just isn’t something I can force myself to do now given my love for many fragrances that aren’t $30 or less which makes fb purchase decisions *really* hard.
The article reminded me very briefly of how indulging a capricious child’s tantrum-fueled demand for the toy/candy du jour in any way only serves to encourage the problem behavior, and I wanted to clap my hands over my ears and pull the “La la la la… I’m not listening.” routine while giving this a read. Let’s not encourage the modern perfume definition of “free” to increase any more than it must! If sales keep chugging right along or even surpass expectations, I shudder to think where “free” will be next year and am quite sure my credit cards are working on getting into the witness protection program as I type at the very thought.
Oh, and I am not implying that niche fragrance houses/creators are capricious children even if the end price for some of their creations seems like something I’d have to go treasure-hunting to finance.
Totally agree…price is not always an indicator of quality. The Malle fragrances are mostly wonderful though.
Regarding perfume prices a few decades ago, I share your impression that many women who wanted to could scrape together the funds for a bottle of No 5 every now and then, or would be given one. I guess there is a cost of living issue here. In my life time the price of children’s clothes has dropped quite a lot due to the greater importation of clothes made in China. So where once it was cheaper for my mother to make my clothes, it certainly would not be now. My mother would certainly have loved to spend those extra funds on perfume or some other personal luxury.
But then again other prices might have gone up, and I dunno where salaries fit with all this. But my impression is that people in fairly modest jobs like those of my parents have more spending power now than 30 or 40 years ago.
I thought I had read somewhere recently that perfume sales were down?
Oh never mind – should have read this article first – that would have been prudent. ha I must have read about department store fragrances previously.
Yep. Everything is down except expensive niche scents.
Dear Expensive Niche Scents,
You’re welcome!
Love,
Karen
LOL! Excellent.
I wonder who Frederic Malle is speaking for. Spending 100 dollars versus 60 dollars does not guarantee a great perfume purchase. I suppose that those of us who have spent 60 dollars on a perfume are stupid? Well, gaaaaaaaaaahlee!
Sigh. I think I’ve become too cynical to feel as thought I belong here. . . ;-(
That went over my head, R…what?
That might have been a bit obscure, R, sorry. Unintentional.
I meant that the knee-jerk cynicism here sometimes makes me feel, well, cynical. Malle wasn’t been contemptuous. He wasn’t calling us stupid. He wasn’t saying that you can’t find good value in a fragrance costing $60. He wasn’t saying that something costing $100 was automatically superior. He wasn’t saying that all of us should spend more than we can afford on fragrance. He qualified his comparisons clearly. He was simply responding to the NPD stats that show cheaper, mass-market fragrances took a sales drop in the first half of 2009 while sales of higher-end fragrances increased by opining that consumers today understand what value means. It’s an entirely reasonable and respectful observation.
Mea culpa though, R, for my own knee-jerk cynicism. This thread hasn’t gotten nearly as cynical as I’d feared. Hoisted with my own darn petard.
I have no quarrel with FM’s statement. But what you call “knee-jerk cynicism”, I (of course) call “a healthy dose of skepticism”. Beyond that, I usually see a variety of responses, some cynical, some not.
And some of us rapid cycle between “skeptical” and “sucker” throughout the day, such as myself.
I just hope you weren’t feeling picked on, RR. It’s hard to know how to interpret online responses sometimes. I, myself, was responding earlier to FM’s comment, not yours, just in case it did seem like I was being rude. I love everyone on here, and would hate anyone to feel like they didn’t belong.
It’s strange but true, I have bought sooooo many perfumes this year…………… perhaps I secretely thought I cannot buy them next year cause I’ll be homeless because of the crisis. Or cause I am turning to a maniac about them… or because I did not buy a lot before.. or because I found out about the niche staff just a year ago and went out of my mind , but I definetely bought more!!!
You’re not alone!
Air, I’m convinced thats the reason behind my crazed purchasing, too. Except mine haven’t included any niche scents, not through lack of desire but lack of money and access to the right shops.
We appear to have had it easy here- which is just as well as i have spent more on perfume this year than any other year!
That’s good! (That you’ve had it easy)
Not good that i have spent way too much on perfume-and each new year my resolution is to NOT buy any more! Lasts about 2 weeks!
My eye was caught by the mention of taxis and tea, at the end. I wish a certain perfumery in Melbourne would pay attention to that idea. Even a bit of ordinary courtesy would do.
Hi annemarie, I live close to Melbourne and have had a few negative experiences with perfumeries there. I’m curious to know which one exactly you’re referring to? That’s if you’re allowed to!
It’s in the Royal Arcade – hope that narrows it down enough? Sells a lot of bling-y jewellery as well. One SA was pleasant but as for the other …
I know the one too! Not a pleasant experience- why dont they let you try the testers?? I always end up in the Chocolate shop up the lane for a cheer up!!
I must seek out the chocolate shop! I got a strong feeling that that perfumery wants to protect its testers from people who come for randon spritzes, as you can do with abandon at Myers and DJs.
The treatment I got was a mixture of condescension and outright rudeness. It was full of customers tho’, especially as it was the lead-up to the Spring Racing Carnival.
Oh yeah, I know which one you’re talking about. Rude, distracted and extremely arrogant, the woman who served me was more interested in ducking and weaving around to look at people exiting the store to make sure they hadn’t stolen anything. Very bizarre behaviour. And there appeared to be more SAs than customers which made her look even more ridiculous – surely the other 5 could keep a discreet eye out to allow her to concentrate on serving a potentially paying customer.
Definetely won’t be going back there again.
Yeah, your are right … there are other ways of buyng and even sampling perfume these days, without having to worry about painted and powdered perfumery proprietors.
Mind you, I don’t think Bond treats *all* clients to tea and a ride home. But agree with your sentiment about courtesy…and do think it is partially to account for why people are spending more money on niche and less on mainstream.
I hope the new Malle store is as generous with samples as the Paris store. At Barney’s they never have anything. If they only knew – samples are the best way to hook someone on anything (though I admit to stockpiling instead of buying). I wouldn’t have half the FBs I’ve bought if I hadn’t started with samples that got their hooks in me.
I know. At NM the other day they weren’t even spraying on papers to give me – just inside the cap.
They were conserving the paper !?! Jeez.
I must be contributing to the statement they’ve made above in the Financial Times: sure I am aware there is a recession going on, and sure I am cutting back on things like moisturiser but when it comes a perfume I like, I can always find that $50, $100, $150 that it takes to buy it!
It’s easily explained in my case though: I love perfume. I’d rather buy something I like now instead of being good and waiting like I did for The Body Shop’s Aqua Lily which I can no longer buy in the shop in Adelaide!
Then you prove FM’s point