Since Montale was running its own little scam job...

Oh wow.

Well... Marketing is marketing, but I find it both ridiculous and sad when companies feel the need to manufacture blatant lies about their backgrounds and invent a glorious past. It reflects badly on the companies and their products.

A perfume should be judged by it's contents only. Then they harm themselves with false stories and exaggerated prestige.

Some are guilty of fabricating their history, some are nazi sympathizers, some have used slave labour, some favour north African rent boys.

I believe in the premise that all advertising is lies, so the fact that a fragrance is put together by a chubby "nonentity" is irrelevant. Having said that, I am not an oud fan so Montale's revelations don't bother me anyway.

Interesting to see the back-tracking, though...

The recent hubbub about Montale doesn't bother me in the least. I buy the their fragrances because I like them.

^^^ and that is the way to go, Hednic.

I don't really care if they gonna call them selves Montale, Taneli or something third. If I like fragrance I am gonna buy it if not I won't and name doesn't play role in that.

How true ^^^ Well said, that man.

the Creed haters do have excess venom, but I doubt if they would spew it anywhere else ...

I'm just curious, who is it who's keen on North African rent boys?

+1

There are a couple of Montales that I've been looking to try, and that hasn't changed. If the bottle says Tanelli, I won't care, as long as the juice is good.

Well said. I will like Black Aoud regardless of the story behind it.

The fact that people bought into the whole prestige and/or other marketing above looking for what they liked/didn't like - taste should never be swayed by a well-spun story - then so be it. The hatred usually comes from the people that bought into the hype, or disliked that people would buy into the hype.

I've smelled only one Montale so far. I cannot say I was a fan. As a person in marketing, I find it disgusting. But I know it happens... a lot. But to resort to lying to get a false sense of prestige... I have serious problems with that.

Let's just say that they better have something to make me a believer. And my nose dictates that in this case. But I never bought into their whole prestige thing - the output was just way too numerous. Oh well... no hate here other than them using a lie to make their marketing sound better.

Same goes for Creed. I wonder who's next.

Me too.

That being said, I find lying in general distasteful. But, as they say, everyone in business does it.

I think they're all off on different jobs until Creed has a new set of mainstream releases.

http://www.infoworld.com/t/identity-...booming-181610

I personally think that the use of anti-shills to generate buzz is brilliant, even if morally bankrupt, but for me the greater mystery is at what level the cui bono makes sense enough to risk it versus the tawdriness of getting outed on it.

More than that, the whole thing is just fascinating, in that - logically speaking - every statement - every action in fragrance world - has a shill component, no matter what you do. I think that morally speaking, increasingly greater disclosure is all that you can do to let others come to their own conclusions about how much shillin' is goin' on.

You have an excellent point. The silence of haters on other brands says a lot. Watch for camouflage Guerlain haters to emerge!

I generally do not fall for any prestige scam or "made for this king and that queen" thing so this whole Montale scandal and Creed BS do not bother me in the very least. Every time I see a house advertise themselves as their fragrances are made for this person and that person, I'll always be like "Bitch, please!" LOL

I'm just curious, who is it who's keen on North African rent boys?

** Dunno, I'm partial to British and French ones myself.

LOL. It's funny...the main thing in this whole thread that I am dying to know is who this person who likes rent boys is...

Pierre Montale, the Joyce Hatto of the fragrance world!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Hatto

Then again, 'her' albums didn't come with a free single and extra amplitude on request

Being a classical music aficionado I remember that debacle well -- it was much more entertaining than this thing with Montale due to the tons of critics who had spent miles of print praising Hatto's genius and versatility (which is not surprising since her recording were the recordings of several other pianists!) Talk about egg on your face.

I don't know if this is even true, but just going for the obvious: M. Lutens. He is gay, isn't he? And he lives in Morocco...

Mind you, I have been known to make things up now and then, just for effect and to illustrate a point.

Alan Partridge

I agree tiberije. Don't most companies embellish their pasts anyways? In the end its whats inside the bottle that sells us on buying it.

Cool Avatar tiberije. Only Fools and Horses fan here also!! Love it!

Cheers!

Since you're clearly dying for a response I'll give you one.

This doesn't really affect me since I never bought into the Montale thing in the first place, mainly since I am not a big lover of oud in the first place which is a major constituent in their fragrance line.

I had noted that there were growing voices of skepticism in the Basenotes community in recent months, but as Montale threads are not all over Basenotes like a rash every day, unlike a certain other house with a dubious history, again, it really passed me by.

I feel kind of sorry for those who really bought into the Montale mystique - particularly at the greatly inflated prices you would be expected to pay for their products.

But, at the end of the day, if you enjoy the products then your feeling of satisfaction is directly related to how much you would be willing to pay for the fragrance you enjoy.

I think all this is a shame to be honest, because it doesn't reflect well on the fragrance industry as a whole.

And for the record, Puddlemonkey, one of my favourite houses is Penhaligon's, yet I have castigated them recently for Juniper Sling which I think is over-priced and has mayfly-like longevity and secondly for their Anthology release of Eau Sans Pareil which is supposed to be a re-release but is in fact nothing at all like the original, which to my mind is a shady practice and a misrepresentation. I tell it like I see it, and as I have always said, you are free to agree or disagree with my views.

I like Montale a lot so dont really care about nitty gritty gossip or whatever ...

Rent boys .... hmmmm not difficult is it , Serge Lutens anyone

In fairness Puddle, reading that quote would get me wanting proof before I bought into it, sounds a dodgy as it gets...

The big difference here seems to be that many brands can be questioned, without causing an uproar, but as soon as anyone even dares to voice a critical view regarding Creed's illustrious history, all hell breaks loose...

I'm Creed neutral, I like some of their offerings but I'm not a fanboy.

I couldn't care less if the perfume house that makes what I like today, was the chosen provider for some monarch 200 years ago.

Same thing about Montale, it doesn't matter. Like the juice, buy the juice, wear the juice... enjoy! It's that simple.

All fragrance marketing and advertising is borderline ridiculous. In a general sense every company that sells perfume aims to deceive. Wear X because Matthew MacMusclehead loves it is no less dishonest than wear Y because king Tut picked up women with it.

True.

The key word there being 'critical'. I've yet to see an anti Creed post that was anything other than pure tripe wheeled out by people with no critical eye who just cite the verbose marketing as a giant excuse to jump on the bandwagon.

It wouldn't be so bad if these people weren't so lazy but they just recycle their vitriol to the point of total irrelevance. They genuinely don't seem to understand the only thing that matters is the liquid in the bottle.

The difference is that Mr MacMusclehead is my role model, and I pay close attention to everything he does.

Hmm, not true in my case, I am as critical of the juice in the bottle as I am their verbose and ridiculous claims to their heritage. I have been around fragrances a great many years so am not some ignoramus jumping on a bandwagon.

Can't everyone read past it all and see that those who get all up in arms about a companies marketing claims, are simply comming to the aid of the poor faceless masses who are standing in line to by fragrances based on company history, rather than the actual scent.

Without promotion something terrible happens... Nothing!--P.T. Barnum

The main reason I praise or bash a company is their perfumes. My favorite house is Serge Lutens, and I make fun of their ridiculous ad copy all the time, but I still like many of their line.

Now if Serge Lutens had claimed to be the author of all his fragrances ( he isn't ), and was subsequently unmasked, I'd take a dimmer view of him as a person, but I'd still enjoy the line.

With Montale, I neither liked the line, not felt very charmed by the charade, so it was a case of two faults with Montale/Tanelli/Lord Lucan line, not just one.

If they lower their prices after it has been exposed that their products never have been used by any kings all shall be forgiven.

Eh what? Creed 'disbanded'? What proof is there that Jasmin Imperatrice EDP was not commissioned by Napoleon III http://www.creedboutique.com/creed-f...e-eugenie.html

For the record, HDS, I've always regarded you as one of the people who keeps this place honest about Creed. You and Tom have been doing that for a long time. There is a profound difference between being a critic and a hater.


LOL! I do rejoice in my suckerdom, sometimes, just for the thrill of the show!

You know, it can be practically impossible to prove a negative. Until Creed produces some kind of proof for their claims, I will remain sceptic.

What proof is there that Jasmin Imperatrice EDP was commissioned by Napoleon III?

I think this is a gorgeous jasmine/sandalwood, btw.

I wouldn't care if Eugenie herself was a myth - this is a beautiful fragrance. I do hope this never leaves the Creed lineup.

Product advertisements that stretch the truth or lie outright are everywhere. It is the nature of the beast.

Very true.

I'm not that bothered by this news, nor am I terribly surprised. The only people who really get hurt in this are consumers who bought Montale products based on their aspirations of exclusivity and opulence, due to their marketing claim of being a royal perfume supplier. And anytime people buy a product because of a name brand or ethereal associations of luxury, rather than because of the quality of the product, they run the risk of being duped. People who bought Montale because they enjoy the smell shouldn't bat an eye at this, even if they find out the scents were commisioned for a janitor instead of a sheikh.

As for why Montale isn't getting as much heat for this as Creed, I think a few factors are at play:

1) Visibility. Creed has been around for a few decades, and is widely available at many malls around America (and presumably the rest of the world.) Montale has existed for, what, ten years? And it is much less popular and more difficult to find. In the event of equivalent "crimes",people are always going to go after the bigger name.

2) Internet fans. Creed, as the more popular and accessible brand, has way more fans and devotees online. Unfortunately, the internet thrives on conflict, so of course a brand that has more defenders will attract more critics, and vice versa.

3) Price. This might be a stretch, but I think people expect less from Montale given the reasonable prices they are sold for directly from the manufacturer. I would guess some Creed critics see their higher price as a function of marketing, while Montale gets a pass for having lower prices.

Anyway, that is my speculation, as I am indifferent to the claims of either company. I like, and own, scents from Creed, and will likely get some from Montale soon as well, marketing gimmicks be damned.

I expect advertising to be a bit exaggerated, but more or less factually correct...

Exactly. Nor are the critics able to prove that Creed ever lied about a thing. That's when the armchair historians come out to play and try to intimidate Creed fans.

The Montale controversy is just deserts.

I know what you mean, and it's annoying. As long as no "false claims" are made, there's no reason to open up that can of worms.

Not really. There are many knowledgable Basenoters who know there stuff who have shedded light on this tired topic. If someone questions something, does that make them automatically "armchair historians" ?

And I really don't see how Montales recent issues have anything to do with Creeds questions history. Did all the guys questioning Creeds "legacy" show shamless promotion of Montale ? I somehow don't ever remember HDS1963 going " LulZ, MOnTalZ Da BesTZ". Why is the Montale controversy "just desserts" ?

Enjoying thread of Puddle owning the Creed haters!

** RANT ALERT **

This is the "Male Fragrance" discussion board and hence where we should be discussing the juice.

All the BS about historical accuracies and brand ownership belongs in the "Industry" board. That way all the basenoters that enjoy discussions of this nature would know where to frequent.

I can't figure out why "Kings don't use Creed" or "Coco loved Nazis" threads get started on this board which should be all about the frikkin juice.

/ END OF RANT

** LOL ALERT **



Quarantine. Sometimes ya just gotta go with what works!

Yup, no hostilities here. Just folks chewin' the cud and shootin' the breeze...

LOL. Puddle is one of my favorites on here. You need a guy like that around to keep things in order!

Also since it's a male forum should we not talk about unisex frags or frags like Sycomore and Coromandel since they're technically marketed as female? (on Chanel site no less)

Anyway let's get back to talking about frags. Looking forward to buying my next bottle of Tanelli Red Vetyver.