I think people just want value for money. So if they are reformulated they should clearly state this to the customers, regardless who is to blame.People like what they like.
I care about reformulations if a fragrance has been watered down too much. Example: Fragrance XY lasts 10 hours After reformulation: Lasts only 6 hours In that case I would only buy it if I love the fragrance, so it has to be a 10/10!
If a company can sell the same product for the same price and reduce the amount to make it increasing profit. You think they won’t do it? Considering majority of the population wouldn’t even know. That’s the goal of most big companies. Yes some might change due to regulation or supply shortages but I think that is less than profit maximisation.
We should move on? How should I move on when I spend 60€ on a fragrance if I earn only 600€ per month?? I expect good performance from a expensive product. Fragrance community nowadays accept anything that those big companies trow on the market. Shame on you!
@@danwilson12 Sir, where do you live? I am from a island in the middle of the Atlantic sea. I used to blind buy fragrances because I don't even have a proper perfumery on my place. Then, I started buying decants. Now I moved on from fragrances since most of these products aren't worth my hard earned money. If you want to keep feeding greedy people, that's your thing! I simply won't. Much better to invest in great leather shoes and good clothing than giving so much money for those rubbish bottles. I already discovered the fragrances that are worth it and already got'em. Fortunately, I didn't became a frag addict like many people here on RU-vid. Just wanted to share my thoughts on the frag community and industry.
@@neekeee If I had to start all over again I would go for these: Summer/Spring: Versace Dylan Blue and Mugler Cologne Autumn/Winter: Mugler Pure Havane and Armani Code Profumo Also, I would buy 3 30 ml decants of niche fragrances: Creed Aventus, Parfums de Marly Layton and Tom Ford Tobacco Vanille. With that set I would could be covered for every single occasion with very little waste of money. Those at least perform OK, except for Armani Code Profumo that is kinda of a beast. I have tried loads of great smelling fragrances that simply don't perform for the price tag. I have been countless times about to pull the trigger on Dior Fahrenheit but it would cost at least 60€ for a fragrance that is only performing for 3 hours... My biggest disappointment was CH Man Prive. It smells nice and performs even worse than Dior Fahrenheit.
So basically, you're saying we should accept paying the same price for a perfume that used to last for 8 hours, but has now been reformulated to last just 3 hours, even when the companies increase the price and yet lower the standards? Impeccable logic!
+Fragrance Bros. But when you, without any information about reformulation, buy a particular perfume which you know and like and in fact it appears to be significanly different from your previous bottle (not in a good way), you waste your money, right? And testers don't always match the current version of a perfume. I think it's a kind of cheating.
Great arguments but you are basing everything on behalf of the fragrance makers. As an individual user, these are my reasons to oppose your views on this matter: 1.change of ingredient to save money doesn't equal to cheaper product, why should I pay more? 2.the scent is always identical,that's not the issue but the "Performance" is as good as an Adidas fragrance! 3.They are living on their past performance glory.Imagine I run in Olympics & won 4years ago, should I be entitled the gold for the current year too without putting on the same level of performance? By end of the day, I'm not that rich.I just want the performance meet the price tag
If you reformulate a fragrance and the performance is worse than before, then it's a garage fragrance in my opinion, the idea is to make it better, if you can't do that then leave it the fuck alone!!
It is about money a lot of the time! they're selling an inferior product under the name and reputation of the first release. It sounds like you dont know how expensive and painful it feels to save up (sometimes years) for something youve been dreaming about only to find out it lasts 30 mins... you never mentioned the performance or longevity in this video, why not?? it's not always about the actual scent, i found that the longevity is the first thing to get axxed when it comes to reforms... and as for changing the colour of the juice... DON' T get me started!!! 👎🏻
Honestly, I have to disagree with a lot this video. And this is going to get long-winded because you have a lot of bad info in here... Let's talk about some of the problems I have here... *First* --- What the hell is up with you and these "regulations"? IFRA (the private conglomerate of owners) can, and has, lobbied for banning the natural forms of some of these ingredients. Why? Because one of their owners/holders has a patent on the synthetic molecule that replaces it. It isn't because of allergies. No one is banning peanuts. It's because of bad business and back-alley deals for more money. IFRA is not a government body or any type of regulated entity. It is "In every sense" a group setup in 1973 to (in their words) "represent(s) an 8 billion US$ industry, which serves luxury and consumer goods sectors." How did we ever survive before 1973 with these perfume atrocities being allowed in bottles...? *Second* --- I have friends who only buy 1 bottle of cologne every decade. They just don't wear fragrances other than "dress-up time"... Is it honestly ok for them to go to a store, pick out a scent with the exact same name, exact same bottle, and exact same description... but be sold something different than what was in that bottle a couple of years ago? (And don't say the sales(wo)men will tell him. They aren't going to miss commission...) It isn't always about the scent just being different. It's about passing off a different scent as the same. It's as if you went to the store and grabbed a gallon of "Milk", with the name "milk" on the white bottle... but found out it tasted like orange juice. Same company, same name, same bottle... new taste. *Third* --- Some reforms aren't done because of strictly money. When a perfumer leaves a company, a lot of times the company will reformulate the juice to keep it completely in-house (like Dior). And they don't change formulations based off of availability... we live in a global community these days. Most ingredients are already stock-piled by the deca-tonne and just waiting to be shipped out. This isn't the 1800's... There are perfumes that have been around for close to 100 years (Chanel No5) that have never had that problem. To the opposite actually, a lot of houses have bought land or paid locales to produce these ingredients for them... effectively *increasing* the availability.
So again, you are another person who is disagreeing with me because you misunderstand what I'm saying. First, yes, what I said was a simplification of IFRA, but the video is already long enough. I'm not going to explain every detail of their organization in order to make a point. The point I'm making is that people blame IFRA for making regulations causing reformulations. IFRA has a hand to play (my point), but they aren't the only reason. Second, do you honestly think sales associates keep up with every minute change in every fragrance they sell, being able to tell the customer the difference between this year's formulation and one ten years ago? I bet there are few perfumers or scent experts that could do that. A company can change a product any time they want, and it's not a matter of whether it is right or wrong--that's their call to make. Do I think it's bad business if they do? Of course. I think that if a company has to reformulate, they should tell customers why. But reformulations happen all the time, and not just because companies want to screw their customers. As I said, if regulations change or ingredient sourcing changes, they are faced with a mandatory reformulation. Third, you are right on almost every point, except for the fact that companies don't own farms for every single ingredient. Sure they own farms for lavender, jasmine, and rose. But not all their ingredients. They still have to rely on sourcing ingredients from other farmers and sources, making the success and formulation of many fragrances reliant on outside sources.
Great video Daver and I agree. But I think the companies owe it to the consumer to let us know when something is reformulated. It is easy for most people to get behind Dior reformulations as information on the reform is easy to find and they seem to be open about it. But most other companies you don't know until it is too late.
+BNOVA great point, and I completely agree. I'm going to make a follow-up video on comment discussions and I'll mention this. I think it's bad business when a company changes something without disclosing it to their audience. I don't even need a reason--I just want to know for sure if they're doing it.
Cant say i agree with this one. If they ruin frags consistently by reforms, we as consumers have a aright to be angry and collect old bottles. Ive never seen a single reform that was actually better than the previous version. La Nuit is a hard lesson learned about buying a fragrance u love when its new to avoid the later changes
Oh I'm not saying that people don't have a right to be angry. I'm saying that we fragrance heads have opinions on reformulations that go outside the realm of facts. When examining why a fragrance is reformulated, we shouldn't be too upset. We have a ton of choices out there, and we can move on with our lives and go to a different fragrance. There are many reformulations that are better. One comment was about the new version of Opium for women. She said that the old version was terrible, but she loves the reformulation.
Your opinion sucks. I had to sell my A*Men 2015 , 2016 bottles because performance were so bad. Also, basenote did not have time to develop properly, where the magic is. I had to buy 2011 bottle from ebay pay extra money, so I can enjoy vintage A*Men. Same with 2015 Le Male very weak, then I got 1998 Le Male, what a difference in performance! Basically now fake ones does better performance than original, and you do not have to pay $90.00.
Yeah i got a vintage Pure Havane and it is potent! i think the new Mugler ones are a complete waste of money cos Loreal took over the company and we all know what that means when a corporation comes in. For sure this old stuff is sublime, strong, long lasting and deep, just how it should be. But yeah you have to pay through the nose for it, like double or more of thats on market now. Worth it tho :)
Nowadays our tight-knit community is worried about performance because we've spent so goddamn much on fragrances, that every purchase after that becomes strategic (i.e. does it perform well?, is this WORTH the money?) The only thing is that most of these "other" fragrances you mention are out there, are nothing but dreadful. It's the same reason why classic cars are called classics.. I don't want my beastly V8, all black '68 SS Camaro (LaNuit2009) to be reissued(reformed) into a V4 hybrid (LaNuit 2015). I get that regulations regarding future fragrances aren't going away, but neither is the reformulation market.. so why don't we all just collectively bend over, and start saving to hand over our hard-earned $100 for Victor & Rolf's new limited-edition Spicebomb Eáu de Pìsse coming in 2017!!
You make some good points and I see where you are coming from, but I can't agree 100 percent. I think people do have valid reasons why they hate reformulations. Why would anyone be happy when a fragrance they loved that performed excellent is now only but a shadow of itself and performs like shit. And we don't need a litmus test to prove reformulations... They are extremely obvious.. When you had a fragrance that was rich and bold and lasted 10 plus hours and now its light and watered down and lasts 3.. thats proof enough in my book. And I don't buy the argument that these reforms have nothing to do with money. These huge conglomerate companies aren't dealing with you or robes, they are dealing with a mass market of people who aren't looking into all of this so deeply.. And people are more easily offended by strong perfumes today than in the past. Notice how they turn their EDT's into EDC's right before they launch an extreme or EDP version. Everything today is about greed and charging more and giving less. THe fragrance industry is no different. I am sure all your points have merit, but its also about profits. Saving even cents on each bottle can give them millions more dollars in profits. And if they can get away with it, why not? Every other industry has continually given us shittier ingredients and cheaper materials for higher prices.
What I'm saying is that people don't have to be so upset over reformulations. They are a way of life that is unavoidable--even if there were no regulations. So why be upset about it when there are so many thousands of other great fragrances out there? Don't let it ruin your day. Just move on to another fragrance. My point about smelling reformulations is that people just assume that their favorite scent has been reformulated without any proof. Once one person of influence says it's been reformulated, suddenly everyone smells the difference. Maybe it has, maybe it hasn't, but there's no way to know for sure. I have a review of Armani Code coming up, and in it I talk about how there is a difference in what I smell now than what I smelled a few years ago. But I don't know if that's because of reformulation. There are MANY factors that affect how I perceive a fragrance. You can't operate a sustainable business by cheating your consumers. This is my other point. The assumption we fragrance heads have is that companies are exploiting us for their own gain. But you can't prove this. It's just a conspiracy theory. But if you look at it rationally, why would a company do this? It would be bad business for them, and would bite them in the butt in the end when customers turned on them. I don't doubt that reformulation decisions are made with regard to money on some level, but if anything, the decision is about how to keep the fragrance profitable and selling well. If certain ingredients become too expensive, then they have only a few options: go bankrupt for giving the consumer the fragrance they want at their expense, raise the price, discontinue, or reformulate with ingredients that allow them to continue to sell the product. There is truly no good answer to that problem, and the fragrance company will always be the bad guy regardless of their choice. But greed? If they wanted to make more money on a fragrance, the easiest thing to do would be take the money out of packaging. That's where most of the money is. And sometimes they do that. But if their decisions are because of regulations or ingredient sourcing, then it's only about the juice and how to keep selling it. At the end of the day, this video is about food for thought. If you would rather be pissed about reformulations, then do that. I understand why people would be upset. My point is that if you are upset for the wrong reasons, you perceive the industry in the wrong way, and your experience of fragrances in general is soured. I would rather have an optimistic view here, because I want to enjoy life and enjoy this great fragrance hobby.
Both of you guys are correct.. You both make solid points.. I am sure its a combo of both reasons at times.. I don't disagree with either point of view... It is true companies are in the habit of giving less for more.. I am sure the fragrance industry is no different. But also like Daver said, it might not always be intentional.., I don't stress out of over it or go buy a vintage formulation for retarded prices.. I just say Fuk the fragrance and find something else to replace it. . People today seem more put off by stronger fragrances...And I do think most casual customers probably wouldn't even notice that much. The average customer isn't a fragrance expert, they are typically people who buy fragrances without a real deep interest in it.
Look, I get what your trying to say but it is completely unacceptable to settle for reformulations that cut performance. Slight changes in smell is fine, no biggie, but when companies water down their product (look at la nuit, there's a great video some amateur made on the difference in concentrations) it is unacceptable. One should not buy a reformulation that severely cuts performance. Reformulations that cut performance is just a way for fragrance houses to sell more of their juice, less performance = more sprays, more use to keep the aroma, bottle finishes in less time = restock +Additionally Companies save money on expensive binding molecules. Its a pattern not only in the fragrance industry but all industries, products just don't last as long today so companies can shorten the time to resell you the same product. Lastly, a company changing anything else is fair game. Just don't cut me on quality, please.
Daver appears to have made up his mind and there's not much you can say... I think in a lot of cases, he hasn't experienced the older versions, having gotten into the fragrance game later and bought mostly new merchandise. You have to dig to find new old stock, or settle to buy used, in order to experience the originals... and some people just won't do it.
It comes down to two things. Quality and longevity. Mess those up with reform and I don't care why it happened. I won't be buying it again. So the fragrance companies can try to figure out how to wow me again and entice me to spend my money in their product.
if I'm incorrect, tell me how. I've put a lot of thought into it, and I'm sure I'm not wrong here. And I'm not condescending. If you thought that, you were reading into it.
I absolutely disagree with you. I have no way of knowing if Chanel reformulated Pour Monsieur and Antaeus but I just returned a large order because they were cheap and thin and smelled nothing like earlier made bottles of the exact same scents. I will only buy vintage Chanel from now on-- I will NOT accept what they've done. Another youtube reviewer sent me a sample of his Antaeus that he said is 4 years old and it's one of the best scents ever, a new bottle of Antaeus bought from Chanel this week smelled so cheap and awful that I washed it off with soap and water a half hour later. I sent Chanel a polite email telling of my thoughts. I have a little left of my "For Men" Chanel aftershave made in New York and just opening the bottle is like opening the gates of heaven. Thank god for ebay.
I'm not arguing that reformulations don't occur. I'm saying that there isn't anything we can do about it, so let's just move on. If you don't like the way your favorite fragrance smells, you can buy vintage (and pay a premium for it), or you can move on. I'm moving on.
I get your point, people are overexaggerating reformulation stuff sometimes. And yeah, some scents still stay usable and good after reformulation occurs. But do you have an YSL La Nuit de L'Homme (really) old and also a new batch of it? When I bought my first one (2015 version) cause of the hype, I thought, "yeah its ok, but not something special". Then I got my first old batch of it in the hands... Man. Its still my over-the-top-most-favorite fragrance. Its really a complete different story. You cannot tell me that there is something to replace it. This scent is like a shadow of himself after reforming. And therefor I feel treated kinda "political incorrect" from you, implying that we should "chill out", cause what we feel is not right. I am pretty sure, LNDL got reformulated due to IFRA banned ingredients, and also maybe they tamed it down so that YSL can sell their flankers of it (Le Parfum, L'intense, Eau Électrique) better. (Or maybe did they just use the IFRA regulation as opportunity to go that way?) If I had to point out, why we should be happy about reformulations, than it would be 'cause its a good thing the IFRA forces companies to not poison us with their toxic ingredients, just to lure the last little coin out of our pockets. I hope I did not offend you with my comment, but I felt after giving you an inside of my perspective. And cheers, always stay positive and see the bright side: We got our guilty pleasure and can celebrate the heck out of it, with all that precious stuff that is available. You're so right there.. (:
For those of us who can easily move on from 1 fragrance to another then sure but for those of us who only likes the very little few fragrances & those get reformulated then "No". I hate the watered down version of Tom Ford Tobacco Vanille that no longer lasts on my skin & for the price it's selling, should I hate the reformulation? I thought so.
Reformulation quality varies by fragrance. It appears that the tendency is for them to be less appealing than the previous formulations, mainly due to cutting back on IFRA restricted ingredients or anticipated market changes. Sometimes they're good. But most of the time they're undesirable. It's just a sad fact, for those with discriminating noses.
Great video! I totally agree with what you said, but I can also see why people get upset with reformulations. People form strong emotional attachments to fragrances because of scent memories made while wearing that fragrance. I'll use Polo Sport as an example. I have tons of fond memories associated with Polo Sport. I now have like 200 other fragrances I'd rather wear, but I still like to have it around for nostalgia even if it's been reformulated. You make really great points in the video and hopefully people will understand what you're saying and not tune you out completely because they're butt hurt!
+fluffywuffy haha! I agree completely. I don't want to disparage people from necessarily feeling the way they do about reforms, but I want to offer people a more optimistic view. For me, nostalgic scents are ones that I rarely spray and revisit from time to time. Wearable scents change often.
Love the video, it's completely on point. Spray that beloved vintage Aventus today with reckless abandon because tomorrow might not come. Live the moment, love the moment, right here, right now. Hording seems like a lack of faith that anything good will come out tomorrow. Let it go!
Thanks man. This needed to be said. I'm very happy with whatever year batch of La Nuit I ended up with. I'm a low budget person who's new to the hobby, but I'm savvy enough to know that my 100ml of that fragrance will last for several years. Am I going to even like La Nuit 5 years from now? My guess is no. And if I do still like it, I'll save a bit of it for the memory-whiffs, and move on to one of the other BILLION fragrances that come out between now and then. There's beauty in fleeting enjoyment. La Nuit is a fragrance that will be associated with my late 20s. I'll leave it to another fragrance to fill that role in my early 30s.
+Evan R I think that's a great perspective. I'm always going to have certain nostalgic fragrances in my collection, even if I don't wear them a lot, and even if they're reformulated.
Fragrance Bros. I completely agree with you, Dave. My favorite fragrance in the entire world and signature scent "FIERCE" by Abercrombie & Fitch was reformulated about 5 years ago. I already ordered just one 3.4 oz vintage bottle of it for nostalgic purposes on ebay. But who knows, maybe there will be another fragrance house in the future that will re create the old "FIERCE" using different ingredients.. :D And not get the same bad rep that Abercrombie got when "FIERCE" first came out in 2002. Lol that was a hugeeee scandal!!!! It is sad because it was a beautiful manly scent that is unforgettable to me in my humble opinion. :) Abercrombie admitted they reformulated it to make a quick buck and interesting story, the person on Abercrombie's Instagram page, Sam, who is also an A&F employee, told me that they reformulated it because it was waayyyy too expensive to make. I think that's also something people have to keep in mind when a fragrance is reformulated... Making fragrances is not a cheap craft....
Ysl lhomme 2015 batch is basically water. There's a noticeable colour difference in the juice between older batches and the new ones. Ysl/ loreal have done exactly what you said: dramatically changed several of their men's fragrances, watered them down and raised the price of them. I agree the reform panic is silly but in the case of ysl in particular, concerns about reforms are more than justified
+Marty Drury Like I said, fragrance is for smelling good in the moment. If you don't like the current version, move on to another fragrance. Who cares if it's been reformulated?
Your point is very valid! However, Fragheads have about 3 to 5 go to fragrances that they really really love and it sure sucks when the reform doesn't perform for you.....smh
You are completely out of touch with the fragrance community and you conveniently left out one VERY important part of the conversation. PERFORMANCE. It is not fair to consumers who have come to expect a certain level of performance from a fragrance only to buy the fragrance again and discover that it has now become a skin scent.
performance is subjective from person to person even with the same formulation. Performance is something is also a taste issue, some people like strong fragrances, others don't, others don't care either way. I'm in that last camp. I don't care. And a reformulation doesn't necessarily mean that the performance would suffer. Case in point the latest version of Dior Fahrenheit which is pretty potent. I've been in this community for over 7 years. To say that I am out of touch is completely ignorant of my body of work and the community that I helped form.
@@FragranceBros Again you aren't answering the question on performance issue....Ppl are mad because its a skin scent....very small minority maybe like that way, like you, but not the majority of us.This is a daylight robbery!
I directly answered your question on the performance issue. Reformulations don't always make the performance to suffer. I understand if you think you are being robbed, but I made this video as food for thought. I am one person and I don't speak for everyone all the time. I can't judge a fragrance, a reformulation, or performance based on what other people perceive. And since I don't always care about having a fragrance that lasts forever, and since reformulations don't always make the performance suffer, there's not really much else to say other than "your mileage may vary." If you have a different opinion, it's cool. We can agree to disagree.
@@FragranceBros "Reformulation don't always make the performance to suffer"...it does like 99.99% of the time.No1 would be mad if it isn't that bad. Last forever? Is 6hours considered forever? If its going to be only 1hour of actual projection, then become a skin scent...how does it differ from Zara or Adidas fragrances or even shower gels? If we don't demand better quality from these "High end designer brands" things will keep getting worse looking at this current pattern.
@@FragranceBros most the time when I see reformulations mentioned, it's more to do with performance rather than smell. Though, obviously smell is a factor, performance generally outweigh it, if the smell isn't drastically different. Point taken with Fahrenheit, as I have 4 bottles(3 vintage ), and like 2 or 3 formulations. Most of those smell very similar and isn't worth the hunt for the old stuff, though, my last bottle is from 2010. That said, the original comment made a very good point. You could have agreed, because although YOU don't care, it's a community effort, is it not? The community as a whole DOES care about performance in some regard. That comment kinda got dismissed unnecessarily. I think they were asking why it wasn't addressed basically. Again, a very valid point. The only answer we got from you is because YOU don't care , but you made a whole video telling us why we shouldn't care, so when posed with a valid point as yo why we should, your response is because you don't.
Great video Daver, thanks! I got a bit disppointed when I bought recently a bottle of L'homme la nuit and afterwards I realized that it was reformulated and it didn't smell like the original one
Decent argument. However you never touched on reformulations making our colognes weaker. If they’re going to weaken and lessen the longevity and projection and increase the price. That is not cool.
This is my point. Reform only concerns me with performance. I will never hunt down vintage. If the current form sucks in performance. I will move on. Sadly this plagues every scent from every house in due time. With all the technology we have. Yesterday’s cologne coney ration doubles the performance of most of today’s extraits. And def all EDP’s. This should be the opposite.
Fragrance Bros. This is a rarity at best. Performance always never increases as a rule. The new Farenheight is not what it was when I wore it in the 80’s. At least not the 2019 plus version
Bleu de Chanel, La Nuit De L'homme, and Acqua Di Gio( who cares if it's trendy stfu) were all amazing fragrances that are horrible now due to reformulations. It sucks....i mean why fuck a good thing up ? It's such a terrible business decision to do so for the fuck of it.
Vintage D&G pour homme is far, far superior to the newer version (s) to my personal taste. They smell quite different but neither are bad and at least they were up front with the reformulation/re-release though. To me the new one is more like a lighter flanker of the vintage version, nowhere near the same performance either. Why should people be happy with weak performance?
I had the same experience with D&G pour homme...it was lighter & less luxurious smelling than the original,I had no idea it had been reformulated & now I've just discovered Amen by Thierry Mugler is not what it used to be....due to being reformulated. It's bullshit.
Wow, what an amazing video!! Daver, you nailed it!!! I think of Byredo and how diverse the houses frags are and creative. Yet they still adhere to the rules somehow.
I believe most reformulations are based on regulation compliance and profit. I'm sure there are other reasons but those two are the prevailing ones more often than not. Just my belief, though. As for performance being subjective, that's only partially true, imo. Yes, for some people a cologne or perfume won't last long on some (or vice-versa). However, when a vast majority get 4 hours of strong projection and a total of like 10-12 hours on their skin and suddenly it's cut in half...it's no longer as subjective as one might think. If a popular otc medication is popular because 95% receive great benefits from it, but myself and the other 5% don't, we're the exception to the rule as non-responders, or we're allergic, etc. It still establishes a consistent level of performance that is less subjective and more empirical. Anyways, great video. Definitely an evocative subject for us fragheads! lol I appreciate the differing opinions and civil discussion. Thanks for your time and effort, cheers!
Love it, thanks for the upload. Makes me feel better about the fragrance game! I’m relatively new and the reform-talk creates much noise around the enjoyment.
I think it depends. I prefer the reformulation of Dior Homme Sport. I prefer the reformulation of Dior Homme. I prefer the reformulation of A*Men (lighter), I don't care about the reformulation of Le Male. The only reform I don't like is La Nuit De L'Homme. I have two bottles (2011/2012) and they smell better and more powerful than the stuff being sold today.
Fragrances aren’t strictly regulated A company can reformulate whenever and however they want and do not have to notify the public Welcome to business 101
Your point 5 was spot on. I have a pre-reformulated La Nuit, which I really love and didn't have to spend a lot of money to buy it. I was kinda saving it because the reformulation is weaker (people say it, I never smelled it actually) and bla bla bla. Then I realized that I don't need to keep the same perfume forever, even if I love it. There's a whole world of perfumes out there to be discovered and I will be quite happy to find new loves. So yeah, we just gotta move on.
Great video Daver! What I'm missing from your opinion is. How do you go about your favorite fragrance (favorite of all time) when it gets reformulated for the worse part? Is that easy for you to move on and get or hope a almost/clone fragrance that there is on the market?
+Mr. Rainman Like I said at the end, I wouldn't be happy, but I can still be hopeful, because my taste is changing, the industry is evolving, and new versions of fragrances will pay homage to old ones, and will get it right again. For instance, if they reformulated GIT to water, I wouldn't cry any tears over it. I have enough right now that should last me years of pleasure, and at the end of the road, I can move on knowing that I had a great time while the moment lasted.
Great video, I was about to buy another DHI and Gucci Pour Homme II, but you've convinced me not to. That money can be spent on more fragrances than repeat ones. Just a question for you Daver, What if you find a fragrance that has been discontinued a long time ago like M7 in some back alley fragrance shop. Assuming it is original, would a fragrance stuck in a shelf with no air conditioner for this long still smell/project/last as if it did when released?
+demonwares if it's stored in a cool environment, it should be fine. But if it's in a warm/hot environment like you said, it's probably not. Light, heat, and oxygen cause a fragrance to turn bad over time.
You really gave a good description of what reformulations are all about and why we cant avoid them. Though the irritation from most consumers that adore certain fragrances is due to those compounds that is so regulated that certain key ingredients dont smell the same or have the same potency as the former because houses aren't allowed to use them with out severe cost to them. Reformulations dont bother me as much as IFRA does though.
+SamMantasLife yeah I totally agree. I am not in favor of regulations or IFRA. I'm not in favor of reformulating if you don't have to, but there are legitimate reasons why some companies have to.
I was going to stock up on Gucci Pour Homme II myself, but I realized my 90% full bottle is way past its shelf date according to checkfresh.com so buying more "expired" would be a bad move I guess. I mean, I know if kept properly, fragrances last for longer than what the box says, but it is already way past its "good" label so it can't be a good decision to stock up on "expired" products.
Hmmm. Definitely agree with you about not overspending on discontinued fragrances. However, there is some poor logic in here that I want to disagree with. >senses are subjective and you cannot know whether a fragrance has been reformulated without chemical analysis Absolutely your worst take. Luca Turin did a Ted talk about this. And besides you don't need a biophysicist to know that this is absolutely wrong. Absent sensory defects, people cow says moo looks like what the color yellow looks like and the sensory response is the same from person to person. Your nose is an extremely strong chemoreceptor so differences in smell can only be caused objectively by differences in chemical composition. >companies do not change products unnecessarily to try to improve margins and to think that happens is illogical I question your work history. I worked in an industry that depends on chemical formulations for 15 years and I know from experience that companies will absolutely change a formulation in order to make money. They spend a fortune on market testing to see what the public will accept and if they can sell the same label a product that is cheaper to produce they absolutely will. Thus a little vigilance on the subject is an important counterbalance to corporate power and an important consumer behavior. Caring in this situation is good. Irrationally wasting your own money as a result of hysteria is bad.
+Hellochyeah First, this wasn't meant to be a logical argument, it's meant to be a rational one. To further defend my points: sense of smell is subjective when they smell it according to their experience and not according to real training. What one person smells in a fragrance is different than another. I get comments from people who things in fragrances all the time. My point there isn't to say that people can't tell there is a difference in a formula. If they smell two of them back to back, I'm sure that an experienced nose can tell the difference. My point there is that people decry reformulation solely because they THINK it smells different. And when an influential person says this, it influences and informs a person's opinion of that fragrance. I see a lot of mob mentality in the fragrance community when it comes to smelling things in fragrances. I don't have any work history in the creation of perfume. Having talked to people that do, they agree with me. My experience and business has told me that when you drastically change something that sells well, you take unnecessary risks. Again, my point isn't that it doesn't happen at all, but that it's highly unlikely that this is the motivating factor behind all reformulations. I'm sure it does happen, but as I said, it's extremely bad business. My point isn't meant to mean that we should say that reformulations are right or wrong. That's up to each person to decide on their own. My point is that it inevitably happens, and when it does, we have choices that we can make. If a reformulation of your scent offends you, my advice given in the video is to move on and buy something else.
Rational-based on or in accordance with reason or logic. Words have exact meanings Dave. I really can't give you anything where you say sense of smell is subjective. You are too smart for that. Like way waaayyyy too smart. If 2 things smell different side by side they have different chemical compositions period. You don't need any experience or training for this. Other than that, I really think you are doing a great service saving people a lot of money in this instance specifically and generally on this channel.
+Hellochyeah Again, my point isn't about the sense of smell specifically. It's about people who assume there is a change. I've smelled the exact same juice, one was a first impression a year ago, and then my second impression was that I smelled something very different. My point is that people assume things when they smell them, and one of the low-hanging fruits is to say that it's been reformulated. They will say this without even doing a side-by-side comparison at all. That's my point.
Trying to say this in a nice way yes, you have some good vids. but when it comes to saying you don't care about reformulations then I got to say your not educated in that area. There is no way the reforms can compare to the original's, no way. I've smelled a couple that were ok. and that's it, just ok. Its comments like yours that allow the fragrance houses to cheapen up the new and the classics and charge more for junk that last a couple hours. Move on? I take my colognes very seriously and when they change them for the worse. I find it hard to "move on" especially when you have someone saying they don't care that they destroyed them just so they can make more money. Guess you haven't figured that out yet. And one other point . if your going to make your vids you should be able to take constructed criticism instead of getting pissed off, especially when your wrong. And your as wrong as you ever were.
Hahahaha! The pot calling the kettle black! I get it. You make critical comments about my person expecting me to say nothing, and when I do, you say that I'm being defensive and not taking "Constructive criticism". Then when you get pissy in your comments, suddenly you're all justified in saying whatever the heck you want. I get it. The comments like the one you just made are not allowed on my channel. You can disagree--I welcome that. Just look at all the disagreement in my comment section. But I won't stand for comments placing blame, saying that I am ignorant or uneducated, or attacks on my person or integrity. Nor will I allow comments like that about my guests or fellow commenters. That's not constructive criticism. That's bullying. Constructive criticism is saying what is wrong and how it can be fixed. If I can't take away anything that can used constructively...that's not constructive criticism. That's just you being mean. My video was made as an encouragement for people in the community to not take reformulations as the end of the world. I'm not saying that I'm for then or that I like them. I'm saying let's live with it and move on. If you aren't willing to expand your mind, that's okay. If you are pissed at reformulations, that's okay. If you disagree with what I'm saying, that's okay. But it's not okay to be pissed at my content. That's shallow.
@psycho'si carter I ended up buying it at a discount retailer. I find it easily lasts all day and is quite powerful. If this is a weaker version, then the original must have been insanely powerful 🤯👍
bottle collections is another one that is out of control. I have my top 5 winter and my top 5 summer, spring and fall,and about 70 bottles gathering dust, I do try to wear the others but to tell the truth I'd rather be wearing one of my top 20. To me it seems that people treat Cologne's like a trophy cabinet. good vid, I agree..
+Sean hobbs I think that's a good point, and you are right that those are relatively cheap ingredients. I don't know for certain, but I would assume that there are ingredients in the original composition that are more susceptible to regulation. I mean, neither lavender nor mint are beastly strong notes. You need something else in there. We'd have to ask JPG or the perfumer.
Dude.. I love this video... I have been saying this for years. People ask me all the time if blah blah price is a good deal for vintage blah blah... I always say I never pay more than retail for anything. Well said my friend...
Love this video! You make such great points - especially about how our tastes are ever-changing anyway, and about the creativity of perfumers. I want to just add that IFRA is not a typical regulatory body (it's a self-regulatory body and can't set laws, though some countries have adopted the IFRA standards into law). Therefore following IFRA is technically voluntary for non-members (though it's considered good practice to be an IFRA member and to follow their standards). As perverse as it sounds, IFRA is actually the barrier between completely over-severe fragrance regulation at a higher level and keeping some problem materials on the perfumers' palette. I wrote about that here: www.basenotes.net/features/3158-what-is-really-going-on-with-eu-fragrance-regulations
Plus most fragrance houses are owned brands by bigger beauty companies who care not about fragrance art but about money. When you buy a luxury good you should get quality not terrible performance and longevity. The average person buys fragrances for special occasions or presents. With reforms, these companies are ripping people off
+Marty Drury Every company that sells anything is all about the money. Unless you find someone giving away fragrances for art's sake, then a fragrance company is in it for the money. Like I stated, companies aren't reformulating fragrances in order to make money at your expense. That would be bad business and alienate their consumer base. They only reformulate when they have to.
half the time I buy a vintage fragrance due to talks of reformulations I tend to end up liking the reform more. The only situation that didn't happen was with YSL M7. Vintage all the way on that. But I prefer amouage with magnetic caps (reforms) and dhi in the reform.
Dan B My jubilation is from oman but magnetic. I absolutely adore it. And I have had 0 longevity issues. It is not a projection beast but I don't think it ever really was. Its got a decent sillage but its not going to fill a room but rather leave a whisper that you were there. But the smell imho is just better. Pre magnetic cap amouage to me have a very poo alcohol smell that needs to burn off before you really experience the scent. The new stuff I don't detect even a hint of alcohol. From what I have read amouage fragrances are the same no matter if from oman or the UK. The way I understand it all of the amouage scents are compounded in france and that concentrated fragrance is shipped to both oman and the UK where it is mixed with alcohol. The idea being its cheaper to ship due to the weight savings and there is no restrictions for shipping since the substance has not had the super flammable alcohol added yet.
China's High End EDC Nice, where did you get this information from? From what i heard, it is better to buy the Oman versions not the UK ones, but i'm not sure.
Dan B A bunch of past threads on basenotes and fragrantica. I'm trying to find them now but am having some bad luck finding it again. But here is an article that talks about amouage and how they compound in france and it is sent to oman. wanderingquilter.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/amouage-tour-of-a-perfume-factory/
This is a great video, and I agree with it to a degree. This pill would have been easier to swallow if you hadn't just aired that awesome speech from style con. It's not the scent in the moment that's the big problem. If it's not as strong as it used to be or as pleasing, just find another one. It's the scent memories tied to it. Scent memories are so strong, and when they're tied to something emotional, like the birth of your first born, or a scent that reminds you of your wife, or maybe even you're deceased loved ones, and they screw up the DNA of the fragrance, if that particular scent can no longer take you back in time, or if you never get to smell that same smell again,... that's hard. Sometimes there are good reasons for the reform but probably not always. Great video as always!
+CJULES1812 Thank you! I agree with you. It's two sides to the same coin. I completely understand why people get emotionally attached to fragrances--I am all the time too. My point isn't that I am in favor of reformulations, only that they are inevitable, and we have a choice to be optimistic or pessimistic. Perhaps if there weren't any regulations in place, reformulations would occur less frequently. I definitely don't want the scents changed that remind me of my children's births, but one day it may happen. The hope that we have is in one of my points: perfumers will find ways to remake the scents we love.
+Fragrance Bros. Great points, I totally agree, and optimism is better. Get your cherished frags before they do get reformulated! It may be worth it for some people who have deep rooted memories invested in a particular scent to spring for vintage. Also I find myself wanting iconic vintage frags just to smell the perfumers original creation!.... Like Fahrenheit! I heard that juice was BEAST!... But, with that said, your video has put some things in perspective. Not to mention the fact that I have picked up one vintage in the past and I'm not quite sure which one smells better with my skin chemistry! I think I like the reform better! You live and learn, lol,... My wallet doesn't share the same sentiment!
+bhaffar new scents will come out that remind us of our beloved fragrances, or of our loved ones. Aventus reminds me of my dad, though he never wore Aventus, obviously.
+CJULES1812 This is a good point and I know what it's like to really miss a scent that has been zombified (read: reformulated badly or greedily so it's a zombie version of its former self). But... the alternative is discontinuation. Sometimes that is actually a kindness (you know, some musicians should maybe just accept reality and retire - same with perfumes - when the juice is no longer viable, it's time to exit stage left). One of the things that I thought was covered eloquently in this video was the fact that tastes evolve. And it's not just fragrance regulations that force suppliers to reformulate - a drop in sales as a particular style of fragrance falls out of fashion can lead to a reformulation or a discontinuation, too.
I care. Chanel allure homme eau extreme. edt had amazing silage and longevity. New edp 3hrs max. Chanel reformulations are absolutely bad. And to top it all off, they raised the price. Creativity did not trump regulations in this case!!!
ZCMBeliever this dude is just super naive,” why would a company...to make money?” Okay maybe im confused but do companies not exist to make money & then make money off that money by taking your money?
Daver, this is THE best informative fragrance video I've ever watched. If there are awards for the best frag videos of the year, this just won it. IMO a 'Masterpiece', 'Grand Slam'. I salute you Fragrance Bros! Job well done & thank you
I like this video and it is honest. It is a good reminder that our hard earned money deserves better. You pretty much explained everything, and I think the people who are going to dislike (argue) this video are the one who are not listening carefully. They take fragrance collection to serious and personal hahaha. Yes reformulation sucks, but like you said there are ways to get around it and move on. Oh and I love to be entertain by people when they talk about reformulation, and are willing to spend so much money on vintage SMH. Keep up the awesome videos that you are sharing.
+bhaffar definitely true. My point is that changes are inevitable. Knowing that, we can stay rigidly attached and set ourselves up for failure, or we can roll with the punches and just enjoy fragrances for the moment. If they changed my absolute favorites, it won't be the end of the world. I can find other fragrances I love.
+Fragrance Bros. Hahaha I wasn't implying you. I just know some fragranceheads who complains about reformulations and blames it for not getting compliments without assessing the real problem, their face.
good video! i feel like a great paranoia started on fragrantica because of reformulations. if a scent got reformulated and got a little weaker it's "weak as fuck" for them.
I don't exactly agree with this. I have a bottle of Jicky edp from around the 70's and I have a 2013 bottle . The 2013 version is a skeleton of the vintage one. Same with L'heure Bleu and Vol de Nuit, my favorites from Guerlain. They eliminated Nahema Parfum wich was one of their jewels. There's a wonderful post on Bois de Jasmin blog about this.
I"m not arguing that reformulations don't happen. I'm saying that reformulations aren't as nefarious as we believe, and that if we don't like the newer version, we should just move on.
Fragrance Bros. Well, it is true that some people over obsess with reformulations. Mitsouko and Shalimar are in not a bad state. But IFRA puts way too much pressure on the fragrance industry.
***** I don't think that's the case. For instance, Guerlain wil be halting all production of Mitsouko and L'Heure Bleu for months while it's being reformulated. Do you know how much Guerlain makes a month on those fragrances? The premise that a company is willing to lose millions of dollars unnecessarily is ridiculous. No, it's IFRA and their frantic regulations.
***** That maybe true for aromachemical companies like Firmenich or Givaudan, in fact, since 1973 Givaudan has been financing IFRA. The reality is different for perfume houses. When big firms like Dior, Chanel or Guerlain put out a perfume, they rely on secret formulas that take hundreds of thousand and sometimes millions of euros to be patented and when IFRA forces the perfumers to change their palettes the perfume houses are risking the potential loss of millions of euros. They also want the whole formulas published in the packages which is insane if the brands want the rights to their formulas. The house of Robert Piguet had to reformulate the whole of their catalogue of fragrances. We're talking about an incredible loss of money. Then you have the IFRA financed by these aromachemical houses specifically targeting houses that use a lot of naturals in their fragrances (like Chanel, Jean Patou or Guerlain). "If this law goes ahead I am finished, as my perfumes are all filled with these ingredients.The impact on luxury perfume brands as a whole would be like an atomic explosion and we would not have the means to rebuild ourselves." said Frederic Malle.
This video is extremely shameful! Fragrance Bros is shillin' like a villain in it, hardcore! He's basically justifying the nefarious & evil act of companies *scamming consumers* by misleading them, under the false pretense of the product's good name - *even though the reformulated trash version has now become a totally different item,* yet it's still sold *as if* nothing has changed. So consumers are therefore *unknowingly* buying watered-down garbage fake imitation versions of what they *falsely think* they are buying, even though they actually aren't getting what they literally paid for. I'm totally shocked at how utterly disgraceful Mr. Bros has proven himself to be by publishing this shill propaganda, and even more so at the hundreds of his sycophant sheeple fans who gave it a Like.
Thank you Dave for sharing. Hopefully people paid attention and are better educated and stop whining about reformulations. It gets very annoying. From some of the comments, looks like some of them didn't pay attention. SMH, lol
This video was sponsored by all those companies who rip you off by doing stealth reformulations, where you only find out a frag has been reformulated after you buy a bottle and realize it isn't right.
+BJ BJ What I'm saying is that IFRA regulations make any new fragrance comparable to a reformulation because they are under the current regulations. If you were to make the same fragrance one or two years ago, you would have few regulations, thus making any new fragrance equal to a reformulated version.
I really do not care about reformulations, but old La Nuit has a synthetic cardamon opening which I really loved and the new one smells like WD-40. The old one had a aluminum cap and sprayer, the parts in new one has all parts made out of plastic fantastic. How much did they save, like 10 cents on each bottle? The only thing that fans of this fragrance cared was changed without any reason, so... they just basically changed the fragrance type from night time sexy date scent to night time date scent to vanilin day scent... So do they really care about their fan base? PS EU made the oakmoss restriction, not IFRA and it was made due to around 2% of people being alergic to it, it isn't cancerogenic
+Rav my point about reforms in that case is that you don't know why they reformulated it specifically. But doing it for money's sake is precisely the wrong reason because of how precarious it is to change anything that is being sold. WHen you have something that is making a lot of money, the sensible thing is to keep it the same. Reformulations happen, but not because they want to save money. They were ALREADY making money in the first place. Changing it throws a wrench in their sales stability.
+Rav Good catch on the oakmoss - I forgot to mention that in my comments :) Yes, it' not carcinogenic, and absolutely right that the pressure is coming from the EU, not IFRA. Everyone who thinks they hate IFRA actually hates EU bureaucrats. But people don't have access to good-quality info on this and most people don't care (they just want someone to blame). And in some cases companies DO cheapen the formulas, but sometimes not in the way or for the reasons we think (if you have a material in there that keeps going up 200% in price every year, at some point, you have to choose 1) discon the scent, 2) reformulate, 3) increase retail price.
+Pia Long So just increase the price by these 10 cents per bottle. They probably just don't care for the old fans, they want to reach to everyone, it's loreal after all... Tom Ford (Gucci) did care, big concern doesn't.
