| yes, I hate it! | 93% | 15 | |
| no, I will buy it anyway... | 6% | 1 |
MFK, Maison Crivelli, Vilhelm Perfumerie, Xerjoff. 2 - 3 days left to shop (if you don't mind paying full retail price; I prefer discounters anyway, so...)
I think we all agree that we hate it but will buy anyway?
I often wonder how many of the price hikes are real, and how many merchants are actually taking advantage of the inflation trend to artificially blow up prices. I suspect there's a lot of the latter going on. I very rarely buy directly from the houses, unless it's a relatively newly established house that I like, in which case I feel like I want to support them.
I think we all agree that we hate it but will buy anyway?
Yes and no! Depends. Tom Ford and Chanel are the worst offenders. They raise prices every year, it's their marketing strategy. I stopped buying Tom Ford (regular price & discounters). The prices are outrageous. 
Black Orchid Parfum is one of my winter staples. I will not repurchase.
Will not repurchase 
Grand Soir. Another winter staple of mine.
Will continue to buy Xerjoff at the discounters though... unless they will become $500 like Tom Ford and Chanel Exclusifs.
I often wonder how many of the price hikes are real, and how many merchants are actually taking advantage of the inflation trend to artificially blow up prices. I suspect there's a lot of the latter going on. I very rarely buy directly from the houses, unless it's a relatively newly established house that I like, in which case I feel like I want to support them.
Absolutely! Corporations are making more money than they have in seven decades. Their profits hit record high. It's pure greed. Inflation/post-COV!D recession is just an excuse to raise prices.
Corporate greed.
I think we all agree that we hate it but will buy anyway?
It's very likely...
Fragrances are getting worse but more expensive every year
Exactly! I've noticed that, too. Again, Tom Ford and Chanel are the worst offenders. A lot of people complain about Chanel watering down their formulas. Tom Ford (Estee Lauder corp.) perfumers reformulated iconic fragrances such as Oud Minerale, Vanille Fatale, Santal Blush, Cafe Rose, etc. They don't even smell the same. New formulas are weak. I really like 
Myrrhe Mystère. It's lovely... but it's a simple mild 'solinote' scent... so not worth the price.
Recent Dior scandal sparked outrage and concern among consumers and industry insiders alike. It costs Dior $57 to make a $2780 handbag. They use migrant workers and pay them just $2 an hour.
What about fragrances? It probably costs them $5 - $10 to make popular designer fragrances.
What about fragrances? It probably costs them $5 - $10 to make popular designer fragrances.
Supposedly, Roja Dove (born Roger Bird) said that the bottle is more expensive than the liquid in it.
Actually, I find the designer house fragrances are quite cheap compared to their other products. I recently purchased Bel Ami Vetiver on the Hermes website for $167. It had been unavailable at any discounters and even the Hermes website for many months. So, when it finally reappeared, I snapped it up there instead of waiting for it to get to discounters. IMO, anything over $100 is expensive for smelly water, but was willing to pay because I like it so much. Their clothing line - not so much. The cheapest men's shirt is ~$700 with some around the $2000 mark and some approaching $4000. A single, complete Hermes men's outfit (shirt, pants, belt, socks, shoes) could easily run $4000 assembled from their cheapest items.
Of course, even if prices are raised, one would expect the same or better quality. A reformulation that is weaker for a higher price is very dishonest in my book. Houses doing so are shooting themselves in the foot. With the Arabian houses and other dupe houses (Alexandria Fragrances, DUA, etc.) making very similar perfumes with much, much better performance, the big name houses will be and are losing customers.
But don't get me wrong, I do not like rising prices either. Yet, some of the current prices being charged are ridiculous. I mean, over $400 for 50 ml? I don't care how good it smells.
Wanted to add some clarification to my previous post. I'm talking full bottle purchases there. When it comes to samples, yes, I might buy a sample of a perfume that is beyond my budget in a full bottle, for the sole purpose of experiencing it a few times. For me, that means max of 2ml sample. Depending on the perfume, I can get 1 to 3 wears out of it. However, there are so many different perfumes on my list that I'd like to try, the expensive perfumes end up at the bottom of my sample purchase list. When a 2ml sample goes for $20 to $30 dollars or more, I'm going with the cheaper ones first.
Note: I live in a rural area and do not have the option of getting free sprays in a perfume shop or large department store.
I try to remeber that perfume is, and has historically been, a luxury item. As the price of everyday necessities (groceries, housing, utilities, fuel, etc.) increase, it's only obvious that non-essential luxuries will, too. It's all relative.
That we’re dealing with luxury items is a very valid point. Compared to necessities, there is little correlation to the cost of raw materials or even R&D and distribution costs. The price of luxury item correlates much more to what the consumer is willing to pay - which I suppose depends on prestige, trends and other irrational factors. If we were all rational consumers we would not buy a product with such a perverse price to value ratio and opt for cheapies and dupes. And certainly not more than one. So in the end I think consumer behavior is to blame just as much. Without demand, there would be no price increase.
Of course, even if prices are raised, one would expect the same or better quality. A reformulation that is weaker for a higher price is very dishonest in my book. Houses doing so are shooting themselves in the foot. With the Arabian houses and other dupe houses (Alexandria Fragrances, DUA, etc.) making very similar perfumes with much, much better performance, the big name houses will be and are losing customers.
Bel Ami line is fantastic...
Hermès items are overpriced, but they are still of the highest quality. There's a new interesting lawsuit which accuses Hermès of running a legalized extortion scheme, forcing customers to buy overpriced items before "allowing" them to buy Birkin bags. Consumers are waking up! We have so many choices now. Of course, people will notice that Chanel No. 5 doesn't smell like Chanel No. 5 anymore. The hardware on Chanel bags is not gold-plated anymore. The items are not handmade like they used to be and fall apart because of the poor quality. Money or no money, people don't like to be manipulated and taken for fools. Naturally, consumers will turn to competitors, inexpensive replicas, vintage items or new and trendy nonconformist indie brands. For us fragheads, there are so many new and exciting samples to smell... new releases every year. It's easy to ignore obvious cash grabs and overpriced garbage!
I try to remeber that perfume is, and has historically been, a luxury item. As the price of everyday necessities (groceries, housing, utilities, fuel, etc.) increase, it's only obvious that non-essential luxuries will, too. It's all relative.
Yes... luxury goods — and in some cases, Veblen goods. One of the main differences between Veblen goods and luxury goods is the role of status in driving demand. Veblen goods are goods for which demand increases as the price increases because consumers associate higher prices with higher status or prestige.
That we’re dealing with luxury items is a very valid point. Compared to necessities, there is little correlation to the cost of raw materials or even R&D and distribution costs. The price of luxury item correlates much more to what the consumer is willing to pay - which I suppose depends on prestige, trends and other irrational factors. If we were all rational consumers we would not buy a product with such a perverse price to value ratio and opt for cheapies and dupes. And certainly not more than one. So in the end I think consumer behavior is to blame just as much. Without demand, there would be no price increase.
Yes.
The Veblen goods phenomenon describes how certain goods are purchased specifically because of their high price. Veblen goods appear to violate the law of demand because the higher the price of a good, the more people want it. A higher price is perceived as an indication of higher quality. Unfortunately, sometimes a higher price does not equate to better quality. The materials and workmanship are often similar to those of cheaper items, but luxury items have an intangible social status. It's like the Emperor's new clothes, where the Emperor is sold a high-status item based on nothing more than an idea.
INTERESTING FACTS ABOUT VEBLEN GOODS.
By being aware of how high prices can drive demand for these goods, consumers can make more informed choices and avoid falling into the trap of equating price with quality or prestige. Recognizing the Veblen goods phenomenon can also encourage consumers to critically evaluate their motivations for purchasing luxury items and seek value beyond just the price tag.
Luxury Goods:
Definition: Products not essential but highly desired and associated with affluent individuals.
Demand Drivers: Quality, exclusivity, brand prestige, and superior craftsmanship.
Price-Demand Relationship: Generally, as the price increases, demand may decrease, but these goods are less sensitive to price changes compared to normal goods due to their affluent customer base.
Veblen Goods:
Definition: A subset of luxury goods where demand increases as the price increases.
Demand Drivers: Exclusivity, status, and prestige associated with high prices.
Price-Demand Relationship: Contrary to the law of demand, higher prices lead to higher demand because consumers perceive higher-priced items as more desirable and status-enhancing.
In essence, while all Veblen goods are luxury goods, not all luxury goods are Veblen goods. The key differentiator is the positive relationship between price and demand in the case of Veblen goods, driven by their role as status symbols.
