People are emotionally affected by the cheapest drugstore fragrance.
So you're just going to throw around generalizations now?
Price has nothing to do with that.
It does for many. Not everyone is willing to put down $125 for 30ml to relieve memories or feel beautiful.
And some people who wear expensive niche fragrances are merely doing so because it smells good/nice to them -- or it has the "right" name, or is reputed to pull the most babes out at the club. This is not a dividing point between niche and not.
We're not talking about random niche fragrances, we're talking specifically about Slumberhouse offerings.
And is this inherent in the fragrance, or is it because the fragrance is not the right one for them, their personality, their skin chemistry?
All of those factors can be intertwined with the strength of the fragrance.
I don't know why there is this sense -- not just from you, from a great segment of this community -- that a fragrance ought to be universally applicable, that if it works for one person for "evenings out" that it's a great evening scent for anyone, that "a fragrance collection" should include this, that or the other style of thing.
Because some appeal to a larger portion of the population than others. Perhaps the ratio as it stands in the case of Slumberhouse will change in the coming year, five years, or decade.
Slumberhouse isn't for everyone. 1 Million isn't for everyone (and I'd need more asthma inhalers if it was). Marketing and hype may persuade some people -- or many people -- that they need the Thneed of the Year like everyone else, but that style of Thneed will fit some like a glove, and be irretrievably awkward or unflattering on others. And I'm quite sure that in fragrance, too, we all have a bit of that experience in our past -- the Obsession in high school which in retrospect even you didn't like on yourself, the Polo that you wore because everyone else did and it was The Thing To Do.
I never wore Polo, it was Acqua di Gio, which I can't stand today. But, once more, we're talking past each other. Slumberhouse's offerings are not 'safe' scents, which many that are popular can be classified as, nor are they scents that have been mass marketed and tested. We can only lean on anecdotal data if we want to be more than immediately subjective.
I'm sure, by the way, that if, say, the parent company of Dolce & Gabbana or Givenchy, etc. bought Josh out, and whacked out a big aggressive marketing campaign (let us leave aside the practicalities of reproducing the scents in mass market amounts, for the sake of argument) that they could totally sell Rume or Norne or Sova to the "masses" just like anything else. But I don't see why you seem to think that's a desirable goal -- for any product, really -- or why that gives it any kind of credibility.
If Slumberhouse was bought out, the product would be watered down, that's without doubt. If kept the same, it would be equivalent to the Private Blend line that Tom Ford offers. But, personally, the more interesting question is if Creed or Bond no. 9 were to suddenly cost a fraction of their price, and we did the same to Slumberhouse, keeping their offerings limited to some 5-7 'best sellers', and keeping the quality the same, who do you honestly think would sell the most?