Creed's claim of royalty and use of naturals (Turin content)  

Please look up the "Turin and Creed" thread for more discussion on this.

right on bbBD!

i find their scents to be all hype, with no substance.......

they're not really a niche company IMO....they're just a mainstream designer label, that sells their cheaply made stuff for more expensive prices TO SEEM like a real niche company...i've never been impressed by a Creed fragrance, and i've tried NEARLY all of the modern produced ones.......until they make something worthwhile, i'll try to knock em down to bring this whole thing down to reality.

Oh god, not this again. It doesn't matter where you place it, people will find it. And this corpse didn't need resurrected. IMHO. A search, as suggested above, will give you all the results, venom, and hilarity surrounding same.

Lots of things in the world enjoy very comfortable profit margins, I am sure Creed is no different. If you don't like the price or you feel the item is not worth the amount asked then buy something else. There are lots of other great colognes and perfumes to choose from ranging from cheap to lavishly expensive.

Case in point, I bought a Surefire flashlight last week. It was $110.00 as Surefire has MAP pricing in place to prevent anything less than MSRP from being charged by their dealers. Some feel MAP pricing is unfair, others feel $110.00 for a flashlight is absurd, however they are the name that all other flashlight companies are measured by. I could have bought a comparable light from another company, it probably would have been just as good but I chose the premier brand in lighting because I would not have been happy with anything else.

I do not buy Creed colognes because of their royalty claims or their premier status in the industry, I by them because I like the scent I am purchasing and they last, at least Himalaya and Erolfa which are the ones I wear. However without their premier status I probably would have never been interested in trying them.

Creeds on the whole are classic, simplistic, masculine scents that not everyone can pull off.
Actually, it takes a special guy to pull them off.

LOL. a special guy like you?

I would like to see an investigative journalist take a serious look at Creed's marketed history and claims of partonage. I am quite skeptical of these claims like many, but at this point there is no documented disproof.

I see Creed to be like Rolex: a luxury brand that markets well and that charges the maximum that the market will bear. Like Rolex, the quality of the product is merely adequate IMO, on par with other mass market fragrances (no better or worse, on average). And also like Rolex there's nothing wrong with buying it if that is what you like and you don't mind paying the brand-premium.

There's no documented disproof of the Bible's version of the creation of the universe, Adam and Eve either. That still doesn't mean the Bible tells the truth. Some people just love myths more than reality. Even the myth about fake Creeds is widely believed. If I was a journalist, I wouldn't investigate time to uncover silly nonsense like that, and ask to be sent to south Ossetia, or Tibet instead, find out more about Child labor in China or work slaves in India. Louis Vuitton has managed to block tens of thousands in Europe to visit their favorite perfume suppliers on Ebay. (This is still going on, and at the core of it may be a myth also.) People who prefer to live in a dream world deserve to be relieved from their excess dollars, even via fake Rolexes and Louis Vuitton's plastic suitcases.

With the inflation of new millionaires all over the world, Creeds and Rolexes will sell like Hamburgers in years to come. The newly rich in Russia, China, the Wall Street - wherever - don't know too much about the things they are buying. Rolex is one of the best symbols of wealth, due to the marketing (which forms a considerable part of the cost :-). 95 % of the wearers have them to be 'recognized' on the spot.

Other than an average Creed, a genuine Rolex is still top quality, I believe.

Creed would have been a good subject for Agatha Christie to write a book on...

Every fragrance house has its "spiel." Most grand histories are made up marketing fluff, whether it's Creed, Carthusia, the new Rancé, or 4711. Those companies that actually have a tradition usually don't mention things like previous bankruptcies, resurrections and concomitant product reformulations (Penhaligon's or Crown would be typical examples here).

Creed was a small and renowned fashion house for the European upper crust which had its glory days from the era of Napoleon III to the early twentieth century. That is the period that the present-day perfume house refers to when citing their service to royalty and aristocracy. Actually, even the royal warrants reprinted on the private collection cartons are not explicitly for perfume, but for clothing, riding gear etc. Historically, the Creeds are significant as tailors and listed in fashion handbooks, while they are quite irrelevant to the history of perfumery, which was obviously just a side show of their bespoke operation.

The fashion house seems to have folded for good some time in the 1950s or early 1960s & Olivier Creed must have decided to use the house's prestige as a marketing instrument in building a new perfume house. As we know from the ebay auction of some vintage late 1960s or early 1970s bottles, he apparently sold his first colognes under his own name, as Olivier Creed Eau de Cologne (the content allegedly being what is now Selection Verte). Wether the bespoke perfume service directly transformed into the perfume house only Creed knows, but if he dates are correct, there is a constant, though narrow trickle of creations (Jasmal 59, Aubepine & Epicea in 65, Irisia 68).

As to the nature of Creed perfumes, there is no question that they are different from most other lines, in that many of the older ones do have a high natural oil content and form relaitvely simple compositions which live through the quality of the ingredients. This is a style which Turin doesn't particularly care for or consider relevant for perfume culture, which, together with his (somewhat selective) disdain for pompous marketing makes Creed one of his "special" friends. Surely if it came from any other house he would have given GIT 5 stars and a few other Creeds he praises 4 instead of 3. He rates roughly half of all Creeds positively though (3 or more stars), which isn't all that bad, really. He also fails to review many of the, IMHO, most interesting Creeds, most of all Vintage Tabarome, but also Orange Spice, which is historically important for inspring Kouros (and quite good, as well), Baie de Genievre, Royal Delight and many others.

The general trend for Creed since the 90s has seemingly been towards more designer oriented perfumes, greater reliance on new synthetic molecules and appealing to a younger clientele. That seems economically a wise move, even if the proportion of Creeds that I personally like will probably be decreasing (I'm not a fan of MI, SMW, VIW, OS). They do need to update their copy on tincures and rare essences. E.g., I am pretty certain after comparing Santal Imperial from 2003 and 2005 that it has radically changed from a high Mysore sandalwood content to highly synthetic.

I understand that Creed has managed to load its brand with a cultural meaning that makes it the object of intense adoration and hate, depending on who's looking at it. I happen to find the marketing rather unbearable, while thoroughly enjoying the wonderful Royal English Leather, Bois du Portugal, Orange Spice, Baie de Genievre, Selection Verte, GIT, Epicea, Cypres Musc and others. For the reason of these perfumes alone I wish Creed a long life, even if that means reading the same carefully placed PR blurb in some glossy men's mag again and again (well, one more reason to avoid glossy men's mags).

I have just under 20 Creeds. I love the scents and I'm a big fan of the house style. However, I have one thing that makes me wonder about Creed's story: What's the oldest bottle of Creed that can be found floating around in circulation. People on here can find vintage bottles of the Guerlains etc, but does anyone have a bottle of Creed that was produced before say 1980? And if so, what kind of bottles did they come in? I'm curious as to what's the oldest bottle of Creed that anyone can produce.

Thank you, the_good_life for actually giving some perspective and intelligent analysis instead of mindlessly spouting a polarized opinion.

ItIt must be this one, which was auctioned off on ebay a while ago. Late 60s/early 70s, judging from the other stuff this guy was selling from the stock of his parents or so perfume store closed a long time ago:

It's up for auction now (again?). If you read carefully the line above 'Creed' reads Olivier and it's supposed to be an eau de cologne. I dunno, it doesn't come off as very authentic imo.

Creed is a line that never did much for me, but I don't find them overpriced. Some of the lines that are out now make Creed seem like a relative bargain

As usual, there exist those who talk the talk but rarely ever walk the walk. If one feels slighted by Creed's prententious marketing, that individual is entitled to file suit against Creed and subsequently become a very rich person. Posting about it in a public venue does nothing and is purely speculative. Amazing how after all these years there is not one shred of proof that Creed has lied to the public. If it bothers you that much, do the research and get back to us when something of substance is actually uncovered. This is your lottery ticket. Until then, let the juice flow and enjoy.

Only if we can get you and certain others to do that on pro-Creed threads...

Get off it. There are intelligent and thoughtful comments on this thread, and it's not cool to discourage that. Further, there are members who have specifically stated that they make comments and observations about the house's issues separate from likes and dislikes of their products, yet you continue to try to mock and squelch such. The house advertises as it advertises and thus gets comments and thoughts on that.

The good_life, as usual, provides great and insightful reading. Nearly all Creed articles (or interviews), when discussing their history, mention their origins as a saddle or leather goods maker. So there's no misdirection in that. They also state that their fragrances contain a "high percentage of natural ingredients in the French perfume industry" (something which even Turin has acknowledged in the book, despite some sporadic inconsistent negative reviews stating otherwise). Nowhere have Creed stated that they are "all natural", a claim which makes some neophytes spasm with jitter attacks and cause them to post "AReZ CREEDz aLL NatuRELZ??" threads (as far as I know, amongst the big name niche houses, the only all natural organic fragrance is L'Artisans' Jatamansi).

BTW, how many of these now famous fragrance houses (30 years old or older) were originally initiated as Perfume houses? Except for Guerlain and L'Artisan, I can't come up with any other (there are ofcourse the smaller Molinards, etc.) It doesn't matter much in the end though. One of my favorite houses, Czech & Speake, is traditionally a bathroom fittings maker (albeit upscale ones..). And I am willing to bet that most perfume critics consider their fragrances to be historically irrelevant ...but heck do they smell fantastic or what. And thats what counts the most.

Okay, I would have never thought that. Or perhaps it was like this " ...bathrooms can stink.....so do people....wait a minute, we have an idea !! "

Exactly.

Also, Creed's "fans" are annoying.

yep!

Why is Creed so polarizing?

So much for the intelligent conversation.

Even if their pricing is just a ploy - and not based on the cost of the materials - it is certainly a successful one since there are plenty of people who are willing to pay. I wouldn't pay that kind of money for their frags - or for any other frag, for that matter - but I certainly won't begrudge them for getting people to pay that much (they're a business, after all), or begrudge those who think the price is worth it.

See what I mean, then? Where are the old bottles of Epicea and Ambre Cannelle? Stuff that supposedly came out in the 50's and 60's. Forget the dates when it was supposedly produced, can somebody produce a bottle of Orange Spice that was made before, say 1981? I hope someone can (because I like Creed), but it nags at me.

I seriously wonder. It's a manufacturer like any other, but it's a very odd minefield as well. Seems elements about it's sales life can't be discussed without it being defended from different elements. The result is very tawdry.

It can and will be discussed, however. It makes scents so it gets discussed here. I don't want members to get in the way of that, or to intimidate other members into holding back their thoughts, or make many threads into referendums on the house instead of discussions of the house's products or other elements.

i hate H.M. with all my guts...recently i happened to try Vanilla Extasy by Montale (niche?), which is an exact replica of the same..might be better thats it. but again, i hate it equally. tomorrow if Creed releases a scent with the same ingredients, i am still bound to hate it. and let me tell you, 90% of Bners would follow the above practice. i don't care if Burr thinks H.M. is one of the most beautifully crafted scent..or if LT gives it 7 stars or if monica belluci claims she gets orgasm whn she wears H.M .how does it matter? i really fail to understand such basic outcry towards advertisements and the snoberry.

with regards to Mike, i really fail to understand his obsession towards Creed..i mean with all due respect, give the brand a freaking break and try to guide people as opposed to defending it blindly. why isit so difficult to accept the fact that they do indeed use Royals and stars as a mean to show they are elite, there is a bit of snoberry involved, same is the case with Chanel and thousand of other brands which use some or the other way to show they are different and not for the masses.

I can rationalize the reason to a degree so. It may be nonsense but I tell myself "it's because the materials used aren't allowed in the US" so some crap like that. But really it's just silly to make certain fragrances exclusive and others not.

How come any book I've read have I seen these prestigious people mention Creed?

For example: Audrey Hepburn and Spring Flower.

I bought Spring Flower for my mother because of the PR's claim that it was made for Audrey Hepburn. (I did sample it first to make sure I liked it and to think if my mother would, too) My mother is an avid Audrey Hepburn fanatic. When she opened it she was speechless... in a bad way. I said it was a perfume created for Audrey Hepburn. She said she never heard of Creed but she knew that Givenchy made a perfume and her fashions for her.

Curious, I went upstairs to her library of 20 or so book on Audrey Hepburn and looked for Givenchy or Creed in the indexes. Givenchy was mentioned and I found a remarked about L'Interdit being worn exclusively by Hepburn on one of the movie sets.

No mention of Creed. No mention of Spring Flower.

No mention of Creed on the Hepburn's website for that matter.

The PR that I read (and can no longer find on Creed's official website) stated, "a perfume created for Audrey Hepburn" never does it say she wore it, liked it or even smelled it. Let a bitter taste in my mouth.

I like a few of Creed fragrances and I have nothing against how good they smell. But the way they present themselves is so cocky that it becomes irritating.

I wrote about mechanical watches for several years. Under the hood, Rolex is only of average quality.

L'interdit wasn't commissioned by Audrey Hepburn. It was made for her (and later gifted to her) by Hubert Givenchy in 1957-58, who for some reason or the other was infactuated with her. During those years, Hepburn was at the height of her popularity. Spring Flower was commissioned by Hepburn herself from the house of Creed in 1980-1981. She was around 52 at that time, and way past her peak/popularity. Hence the mention of L'interdit in some of her bios while she was on movie sets (she used to wear Ivoire de Balmain before she was gifted L'interdit by Givenchy). Smell the recent demure reformulated L'interdit and you will see that Givenchy tried to relaunch it as a Spring Flower for the masses. The only concrete way to confirm these claims is to audit Givenchy and Creed records ...

I don't want to divert from the main subject, and I certainly have no interest in adding to the image of Rolex watches. It's just that in Switzerland where people generally take a little pride in the quality of their watch making industry, Rolexes are considered as quality watches on one hand and a total bluff on the other. (Swiss usually wear other watches, also in the high end sector.) I am neither specialized nor a watch collector myself, but I have been told that a Rolex reaches good prices even on the second hand and collectors markets. In these sectors of the market quality seems to matter more than prestige, I thought. Can you tell me who the effective owners of the 'Rolex' brand are, and where watches are actually made and assembled, Carlos ?

creed topics...hmmm

Then I don't believe anything you said.

agreed. i have NEVER seen a Rolex which even remotely appealed to my tastes, however it's the NAME they're paying for...and the feeling of power when someone looks at their watch and sees the name "Rolex" on it...

Same here... Turin did all the Creed reviews and clearly has something against them as a whole. Sanchez did all the Bond reviews and has that same hatred for those. Oh well... it made them look very biased and unprofessional. I love all my 1 star Bonds and Creeds!

I must say... seeing banned under samplermike was the highlight of my day so far

Those statements do not stand up to the evidence. Creed received a four-star rating for Green Irish Tweed. All told, fifteen out of twenty-eight were rated three stars or better.

Bond, by the way, got a five-star rating and four four-star ratings. Fifteen out of thirty-two got three stars or better.

This is on par with one of the legendary French perfume houses, Caron, which got three stars or better in sixteen of thirty-seven scents.

Finally, some sensible quantitative statements instead of gut feelings.

Me either.

Nothing to get all emotional about, its Audrey freakin' Hepburn. What I wrote is my analysis pieced together by information gathered from Audrey Hepburns life timeline and the dates given by Creed and Givenchy. I don't have the resources to audit fragrance companies and neither do I care to - the quality of the juice alway more important to me, the rest are amusing/interesting facts to create juicy gossip and promotional crap.

This makes a much greater point about trusting your sources. On the one hand, a biographer, someone who is fascinated and/or obsessed with Audrey Hepburn, who wants to accurately document every minute facet of her life, who is going to be compared with other Audrey Hepburn biographers, who has no interest in fragrance, only mentions Givenchy.

On the other hand, who mentions Creed? No one but Creed and its fans.

You can see the same thing from just earlier this year where Creed presented a new fragrance to the pope. A completely unsolicited gift that the pope will probably never smell.

http://www.community.basenotes.net/s...d.php?t=209039

Rolex is owned by the Wilsdorf Foundation. The watches are manufactured in Basel, if I recall correctly. They produce about a million watches per year.

I didn't mean to imply that they are bad watches, merely overpriced relative to the quality of the watchmaking. They are solid, just not art.

Right. So Bond no 9 has 50% relative hits and 50% relative misses. So?

Confused, clueless newbie question:
Creeds seem to be about the same price per ounce ($76) as Serge Lutens ($82) and Ormonde Jayne ($64) (the last two being my personal favorite houses), and not much different from most other odd little brands, but people keep mentioning that they're crazy-expensive. Is this a relative thing, or a dollars thing?
And, just because I have a not-terribly-nice sense of humor, here is the wikipedia page (apparently written by their marketing department) I found on Creed while trying to figure things out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creed_(perfume)
For those of you who don't know, anyone can change a wikipedia page, including yourselves. Although really, uh, 'biased' edits can theoretically get you blocked from further editing for a couple days.

it's a relative thing.

when you buy a bottle of Lutens, you get a beautiful bottle, a unique scent with nothing else that really smells like it. I don't even like Lutens fragrances, BUT i can appreciate the art behind it...and the style, uniqueness.

with Creed, you get a tacky bottle, box, and logo...and a very average scent which generally does have a designer counterpart...most Creed scents are not very original...at least from my observations.

so the Creed seems expensive, while the others don't

Like Clive Christian. Talk about overpriced. I don't know how they could come up w/ a $700 Cologne.

I am surprised that only one picture of a former, but not old, bottle showed up in reply to your question, Indie_Guy. Thank you, the_good_life, for that and for your summary and trustworthy details!

More questions to the (BN) think tank:

(1) Where are the bottles evidencing the existence of Creed perfumes since Royal English Leather (m!) *1780, Fleurs de Bulgarie, 1845, Santal Imperial (m!) 1850, Royal Scottish Lavender (m!) 1856, (Scottish lavender ??), Fantasia de Fleurs 1862, Bois de Cedrat 1875, and Vintage Tabarome (m!) 1875? I cannot believe that nobody knows of one Museum in England or France where such antiquities are exhibited.

(2) A minimum quantity of important French perfumes is being carefully stored and documented in the greatest monument perfumers ever had: the French Perfume Museum in Versailles. Now, I do not know which perfumes created by Creed are included there. But knowing Creeds interest to bolster their glorious fragrant history (if it's more than ficticious) I wouldn't really expect the Creed 'dynasty' to be so shy as to not let us know which of their perfumes are contained in that Versailles collection.

(3) Where are 200 years of Creed perfume history on Ebay? How can it be that thousand articles evidencing the Farina history (even that of the dubious Muelhens history) are known, are exhibited, or change hands in auctions, and zero pieces of evidence re Creed perfumes (before Olivier) are known to the public in Europe?

(4) What is so unique about the ‘infusion' method of making perfumes? And why has the huge French industry generally abandoned it? Sold in department stores all over the world and 'hand made' and based on all naturals from exotic islands ? I feel drawn into the darkness of alchemy. And I am addressed by Creed press as a non-thinking idiot - an insult, actually. No, Creed cannot possibly want to talk to an educated elite. What they write can really appeal to people who leave the thinking to others only.

(5) There is a widespread belief, that men wore the same perfumes as women if they wore perfumes at all ( before WW1 and in preceding centuries). At minimum five of the older Creed perfumes seem to contradict that belief. And I must say I used that myself as an argument before. By stating things from the past the way Creed still do they may not just have y of embellishing their family history (a private matter), they may be guilty of attempted falsification of perfume history. That's different and deserves to be criticized. Wiki on Creed Perfume, Aug 1, 08

(6) The BN directory is a great instrument and good source of information. BN gets applause from others for having this. Maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to review their own statements contained in Creed fragrance details, and delete the most obvious Creed propaganda, verify dates of release, and clean it from statements that Creed themselves do not seem to hang on to any longer. Example: Royal English Leather. "Basenotes says - This fragrance was enjoyed by the kings of England, George III and George V". (If that is a proven fact I've said nothing, of course!)

ps:
Thank you Carlos. I have a lower production number, but even at 2000 watches per workday, we must think in terms of an industrial production rather than true watch manufacturing. (FYI, what's produced in Switzerland is actually made in Biel. Basel has no watch industry but is home of international fairs for watches and jewellery. As was probably done in the case with Creed, the Wiki article on Rolex may have been written under Rolex' press guidance. It's still worth reading. At least they contributed to innovations in that industry.

Let's assume for a moment that the Creed perfume history is not an entire (1968 LSD induced) fabrication by a wealthy hippie named Olivier Creed

(1) It would seem Creed never publicly sold or advertised perfumes, contrary to Farina, Guerlain etc. Purely a minor bespoke service complementing their offer of leather & riding goods and textiles. Of course isolated bottles would perhaps have survived, but I doubt anyone has ever cared. Cred probably would for marketing purposes, but there simply isn't enough to show off with. Creed perfumes, so they existed, were culturally irrelevant and did not enjoy particualr contemporary reputation. Otherwise they would have mentioned in passing in diaries, correspondence, newspapers etc. and they are not.

(2) Can somebody call and find out? I doubt any are there.

(3) see (1)

(4) As far as I can see, the newer Creed blurbs no longer refer to this, or am I wrong? I believe the technique is still used by natural perfumers who make their own perfume oils? Costly, time consuming, less effective than other methods, no idea whether the results are better. Anyhow, perhaps Creed does this for a select amount of products used in a few perfumes. Though I really would be interested in touring their production facilities. Is there a millionare among us whop could get himself invited? We do know they use synthetics, and probably also the available state of the art technology, these days.

IMO Samplermike being banned is unfortunate for although he was wildly fanatical and blinded by the Creed propoganda machine he always brought his unique one sided spark and zest into posts he was involved with.

I for one always looked forward to the "sh**s and giggles" that his posts brought to the forum and his zealous, fanatical unfaltering faith in all things Creed.

Erwin Cr..., er I mean Mike, will be sincerely missed

WOO HOO! heads have rolled!

he was waaaaaaaay too one dimensional. i don't mind someone loving a brand of perfume, but he made it a point to basically advertise one brand in EVERY and ANY thread----related or unrelated to Creed....that was just over the top IMO.

the pre-1990s Creeds are some of my favorites in my wardrobe... I say this as a means of proving my status as a non-hater, haha... but now this has raised some genuine interest here.

I would love to see the old bottles, just to see what they looked like... maybe even get a sense if some of my favorites had earlier, wildly different incarnations.

Is it possible that, much like the pope's recent gift, all of those celeb/ royalty affiliations were unsolicited freebies from the Creeds? Doesn't necessarily mean they were sold in stores or even worn by the recipients....

Also, I was wondering... since Luca Turin was a member of this forum once, is it possible he would know a bit more of the factual history? Seems like he would at least know of someone who would, if not.

As far as Creed purpling their own history... hell, I don't care. It isn't too much different from Ralph Lifshitz re-inventing the notion of the American WASPy preppy into the gilded personna that is Ralph Lauren. Make whatever story you wish to sell an image along with your goods. As long as the goods are something I want to buy, I will buy them. When I was in just the type of high school that RL tries to re-imagine as a brand, very few of us looked like the denizens of his fantasies. If it makes people feel better about their well-spent ducats to buy into an aura of "other," then go for it. It's your cash, do with it what you will!

With regards to Creed history though... good on ya, the_good_life et al... I love reading such theses as these!