Shumate and Luby [of Pinrose] noticed that although the fragrance Sugar Bandit was neither their worst- nor best-seller, it had the highest re-purchase rate. Clearly, customers liked the scent, but something about the marketing was off.
“We realized that the name might be holding it back a little bit,” says Luby. After renaming it Secret Genius (described as “perfect for hatching plans and sneaking kisses”), sales took off, and it’s now their No. 1 best-seller.
— Read more at Here's Why Perfume Descriptions Are Never About Smell at Racked.
Interesting article.
I thought so too.
What a sad idea: perfume is so unremarkable that it’s name can be easily interchangeable. Too bad for those “geniuses” who used to love (and buy!) it with the previous name…
With the cited description of Atelier’s perfume it was funny: I was reading it thinking that it reminded me what Atelier Cologne could have written – but by the end of the story I was convinced it was a cleaver parody. Just to read next that it wasn’t.
I found it a sad idea too — but was wondering if this was while they were still selling via internet only, or after they got their products into Sephora? In other words, wonder if the name mattered more before people had access to testers.
But also wonder if there was something particularly off-putting about “Sugar Bandit”. It isn’t the word Sugar, I don’t think, since Pink Sugar was a big seller. So might be some association with food implied by the word Bandit.
“Sugar Bandits” almost sounds like a kids’ cereal. Reflecting upon the names given my own collection of fragrances it’s oh-so-boring with a preponderance of variations on the word “Homme.” I’m not sure I’ve ever been attracted by just a name.
I will admit to being suckered into trying a fragrance just because I liked the name, if the notes sound good too. Clearly for this company, the name was adversely affecting sales and they figured that out.