Who knew that Basenotes was so powerful? I didn't, but this blogger thinks he does:
The author starts by talking about a statement put out by MPG about "expired stock" and then talks about fakes, clearly two entirely different things. I won't relitigate the recent claims about "dreck" other than to say that there is little risk and tremendous reward to "vintage hunting," in my fairly extensive experience (so please swap me your old MPG bottles!), but fakes are an issue that clearly will arise on scent forums. However, unlike the author, I have seen responses to concerns about possible fakes that suggest the knowledge base here largely negates the effect of a thread about a bottle the original poster thought was fake but was not. Moreover, these very profitable companies could do more to make their products difficult to fake, in terms of using technology that is difficult to reproduce. Not long ago, someone wanted to swap me a recent Chanel, for example, and I asked that person for the batch code that should be on the bottle. I never heard back, and I suspect it was a fake.
This blogger seems to harbor resentment against against this site (I think he was banned, which doesn't surprise me), but even if that were not the case, when one makes such a claim, there needs to be a presentation of strong evidence. How does one measure "damage," let along incalculable damage, done to the poor, little, defenseless major perfume companies of the world? This is the same person who has at times dismissed Basenotes as a small number of deluded fools or something along those lines (if anyone finds the quote or quotes, please post them here), but the "bottom line" is that in the US you have freedom of speech. If that leads to a tiny loss of profits because some people begin to see things in a different way, that is far from some sort of financial disaster (I have speculated that this blogger may be a bit of a "catastrophizer" in the past), but it's not relevant to a free discussion of personal preferences when it comes to scents. You can't have partial freedom of speech, as many have pointed out before me; if a government tells you that you can only say things that corporations will like, then you no longer live in a "free society." The First Amendment has priority over a perceived loss of profits because someone states his or her opinion on a web site. If this blogger doesn't agree with that, then I really hope he never obtains political power !