Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › Polo Reformulation :(
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Polo Reformulation :(

post #1 of 16
5/9/10 at 4:15pm
Thread Starter 
So today I was Sephora trying out some stuff, doing damage assessment over the reformulations and I come across Polo. I spray it, seems good, look at the boxes and see a problem-- two separate lists of ingredients! One list is shorter and does not mention moss of any kind, whereas the other lists treemoss. I asked a sales associate to check which was older, and the shorter list not mentioning moss was apparently older.

Conformation? It makes sense that a shorter list would be older, but I am still nervous. If anyone has a moderately old (1-3 years?) bottle can they list the ingredients they see? Thanks!
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 16
5/9/10 at 5:51pm
I tested one at Kohl's about 4 months ago and could definitely smell oak moss in the base, maybe they just took the ingredient off. I've noticed recently they have been replacing all of the ingredients with just "fragrance oils" as well.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 16
5/9/10 at 6:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by justaguy View Post

So today I was Sephora trying out some stuff, doing damage assessment over the reformulations and I come across Polo. I spray it, seems good, look at the boxes and see a problem-- two separate lists of ingredients! One list is shorter and does not mention moss of any kind, whereas the other lists treemoss. I asked a sales associate to check which was older, and the shorter list not mentioning moss was apparently older.

Conformation? It makes sense that a shorter list would be older, but I am still nervous. If anyone has a moderately old (1-3 years?) bottle can they list the ingredients they see? Thanks!

I don't want to scare you even more, but I have a bottle that I bought in 2007 and there is no Evernia prunastri/oakmoss listed, only Evernia furfuracea/treemoss extract.

But, honestly, it's still amazing and lasts for ages.

Now (sit down, take a deep breath), let me warn you that the Polo that is currently been sold has a slightly different package than mine. I suppose they probably changed the juice a bit also.

Ok, now I'm going to start a thread on a recent Kouros reformulation (I mean it).
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 16
5/9/10 at 6:35pm
...and just to make sure - it was NOT the Modern Reserve flanker... right? The boxes and bottles are almost identical...

Reply
Reply
post #5 of 16
5/9/10 at 6:43pm
justaguy, the juice did not smell any different than you remember, right?

I always thought it slightly presumptuous of us to assume that reformulations are often conveniently accompanied with a discernable change in packaging.

Obviously, all bets are off once new accountants and new regulations start making inroads on the chemistry side but if this is the norm, then it is awfully nice of the fragrance companies to distinguish the various formulations from one another.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 16
5/9/10 at 6:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redneck Perfumisto View Post

...and just to make sure - it was NOT the Modern Reserve flanker... right? The boxes and bottles are almost identical...


Yeah you really have to check on that. I picked up the Modern Reserve a few weeks ago at a store thinking it was the original Polo. The bottle and box look just like Polo's. They smell very different, however. I'm not crazy about Modern Reserve - it's not strong enough - but I love Polo. I'll bet you were looking at Modern Reserve.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 16
5/9/10 at 6:50pm
Good point, I think Modern Reserve actually takes out the oak moss and keeps everything else.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 16
5/9/10 at 6:53pm
If you are asking to me (take another deep breath)... no, for sure I'm not talking about Modern Reserve. I assume there were several "versions" of the original Polo Green that came unnoticed in the last years, and the newer version is probably different (I mean lighter) than the one that already had no oakmoss listed as an ingredient.

To the OP: I suppose we should not search for the 3 years old bottles, but for the 10, 20 and 30 years old bottles. Splash bottles.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 16
5/9/10 at 6:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emlynevermore View Post

justaguy, the juice did not smell any different than you remember, right?

I always thought it slightly presumptuous of us to assume that reformulations are often conveniently accompanied with a discernable change in packaging.

Obviously, all bets are off once new accountants and new regulations start making inroads on the chemistry side but if this is the norm, then it is awfully nice of the fragrance companies to distinguish the various formulations from one another.

Great point.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 16
5/9/10 at 8:56pm
Not the expert on this, but I get a sense that many scents that had used oakmoss have shifted to treemoss. I just bought Trumpers Eucris and noticed treemoss listed as an ingredient. I believe oakmoss is being eliminated due to being ruled some sort of allergen in Europe.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 16
5/9/10 at 9:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by StylinLA View Post

Not the expert on this, but I get a sense that many scents that had used oakmoss have shifted to treemoss. I just bought Trumpers Eucris and noticed treemoss listed as an ingredient. I believe oakmoss is being eliminated due to being ruled some sort of allergen in Europe.

Pretty much. Companies can still use oakmoss but in minute amounts (.1% or less) and the total amount of oak and tree moss can only total .1%. As there aren't any great synthetic substitutes for tree moss most perfumers opt to use the moss allotment on it and replace the oak with a synthetic. Sadly, I can't smell the synthetics very well.

justaguy, I've run into a newer version of Polo that only contained tree moss and it doesn't smell at all like the older version although the older version I saw did list oak moss.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 16
5/9/10 at 10:04pm
Thread Starter 
So the tester smelled fine, but since there was a mix of new and old bottles stocked up I am positive the tester was an older version tester, which is why it smelled fine. I bought the version without treemoss listed and it smelled as I remember it from a year or two ago. I cannot say for the one listing treemoss. All I can say is that I smell the oakmoss and that maybe since its not very popular with the young folk old bottles lagged around for a while-- who knows.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 16
5/9/10 at 10:46pm
This makes me happy that I kept a bottle I intended to give to somebody for a gift over a decade ago.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 16
5/10/10 at 12:11am
Lifetime Polo user here. I have the latest product and there's no (perceptible) difference with the "older". Must be some packaging modifications or batches made for different markets.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 16
5/10/10 at 10:25am
I LOVE the original Polo. To think I threw away a 4.2 oz Polo some 5 years ago when I moved... Been regreting eversince.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 16
5/10/10 at 3:54pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by perfaddict View Post

Lifetime Polo user here. I have the latest product and there's no (perceptible) difference with the "older". Must be some packaging modifications or batches made for different markets.

Thank goodness! So even the one listing treemoss is still as good as ever?
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: MFD Archive
Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › Polo Reformulation :(