Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › DIOR!!!!! What have you done?????
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DIOR!!!!! What have you done?????

post #1 of 69
7/7/12 at 3:52pm
Thread Starter 
So If you followed my other thread recently I decided to go with Dior's fahrenheit for my pick from Sephora. Sadly, I was severly dissapointed in fahrenheit. Why you ask? A number of reasons. Poor sillage, poor longevity, smelled really really flat. Don't get me wrong It still smells good but I think the current has been reformulated. I had fahrenheit a few years ago and loved the stuff and wore it proudly. It was rich,deep,sensual, and my gosh it lasted for hours on my skin and everytime I wore it I always got complimented on it. After looking on here and different threads I think the formula I had was the second from the original and that was the one I fell in love with. After I bought it I tested two heavy sprays to my inner elbow and thought what the heck??? Everytime I tried to smell and resemble my old bottle it was just not there. This formula did not have no richness, no depth, and it only lasted 2 hours on my skin. 2 HOURS?? What did dior do? I emailed the company and they told me it was not redormulated. What gives? Thankfully sephora let me return it and exchange it out. Am I crazy or can any fellow-basenoters comment on if it has been reformulated and have similar experience with fahrenheit? BTW I exchanged it out for Gucci guilty intense. When I give it a full wearing I will let you know what I think.
Reply
Reply

Features on Basenotes

Greatest Hits: Annick Menardo
Petals Falling From The Sky - A Report From The Cote d'Azur's Bataille De Fleurs
Basenotes Reader Awards 2013 - Finalists Announced.
post #2 of 69
7/7/12 at 3:57pm
Hey Bobster, you're a living monument to teach those a lesson who doubt the existence of reformulation and attribute insecurities about a fragrance to some "basenotes hysteria".

I'm with you: Of course Fahrenheit is no longer the same, and of course the new formulation is shit if you knew the older ones.

You did the right thing. Tell the company, give the "product" back, buy from another company. This system needs more irate consumers who won't just buy everything anybody wants to sell.

I wish you a good Sunday.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 69
7/7/12 at 4:01pm
Sadly, Dior is known to be the worst offender in shamelessly watering down its old masterpieces. And of course companies always lie about reformulations. The same happened to countless other Diors, from Diorissimo to Diorella to many others.

cacio
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 69
7/7/12 at 4:23pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Candide View Post

Hey Bobster, you're a living monument to teach those a lesson who doubt the existence of reformulation and attribute insecurities about a fragrance to some "basenotes hysteria".

I'm with you: Of course Fahrenheit is no longer the same, and of course the new formulation is shit if you knew the older ones.

You did the right thing. Tell the company, give the "product" back, buy from another company. This system needs more irate consumers who won't just buy everything anybody wants to sell.

I wish you a good Sunday.

Whew!!! I'm glad I am not crazy. I hear you when people on here are screaming to embrace the newer one for what it is and enjoy it but like you said those of us who has worn the older ones know the difference and sadly mourn the departure of a really great fragrance. Also, back in the day it cost 52.00 and gladly paid it for the masterpiece it was and now it's 57.00 and I wouldn't pay 10.00 bucks for it. That tells you how bad they have departed from the earlier versions. I am just so dissapointed. I wonder if there is anything we can do to bring the older formula's back?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 69
7/7/12 at 4:24pm
Wow either you have a dodgy bottle or the vintage must be from the Gods lol. I find the current Fahrenheit to be really good and it lasts ten hours plus and projects really well on me. I have not smelled the original so I do not miss what I have never had but to me the current one smells fantastic. So good that I actually purchased a back up bottle in a Sale with the deodrant and shower gel. I guess each to his own.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 69
7/7/12 at 4:32pm
I have the original Fahrenheit when it was released which is great and just recently tried what's available now and thought it was also good.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 69
7/7/12 at 4:34pm
Thread Starter 
I like to put memories with scents. I wore this in my early twenties. Kinda rugged,rebellious, hardcore kinda type but soft spoken all at once. When I wore fahrenheit it fit the bill of everything I described. When my bottle ran out I just moved on to other scents and what not. When I decided to buy another bottle thinking it was the same I sprayed it on trying to recall old memories and I can tell it was different. Our memories and keen sense of smell are powerful and if we listen to it it will never lie. I have no answer why you and everyone else has great sillage and longevity from this but all I know is that I don't and by the scent alone is just not the same. If you ever get your hands on a vintage let me know what you think of it paired to the current. Thank you for posting.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 69
7/7/12 at 5:44pm
There's nothing wrong with the current reformulation of Fahrenheit.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Candide View Post


Fahrenheit is no longer the same, and of course the new formulation is shit if you knew the older ones.

No it's not. It's fine... and I did know the older ones.

- - - Updated - - -

That ridiculous Luca Turin comment about the reformulation has a lot to answer for methinks.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by hednic View Post

I have the original Fahrenheit when it was released which is great and just recently tried what's available now and thought it was also good.

Agree!

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hunter View Post

the current one smells fantastic.

Absolutely.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 69
7/7/12 at 6:06pm
Buy a bottle of Dsquared Rocky Mountain Wood. It has a ton of violet leaf in it and it was made by the same perfumer who made Rose 31.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 69
7/7/12 at 6:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoombung View Post

There's nothing wrong with the current reformulation of Fahrenheit.

- - - Updated - - -





- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -




- - - Updated - - -



I agree.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 69
7/7/12 at 7:28pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by silentrich View Post

Buy a bottle of Dsquared Rocky Mountain Wood. It has a ton of violet leaf in it and it was made by the same perfumer who made Rose 31.

Wow!!! I am going to have to try it. Thank you for the tip
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 69
7/7/12 at 7:34pm
I bought a couple of samples on ebay before I purchased my bottle and to me the samples smelled richer and had better longevity than the bottle I got on Fragrancenet, even with the crappy sprayer the samples have. Ended up being disappointed with what I got.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 69
7/7/12 at 8:16pm
I never owned this one because it just did not suit me. But I kept going back and trying it about once a year to see if I changed my mind. The last time I tried it I must agree that it seemed a shadow of its former self. I would swear it has been weakened.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 69
7/7/12 at 9:05pm
I know with DH it was in issue of IFF making the juices for them and they converted to in-house production, which changed the juice. Maybe they did same with Fahrenheit?
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 69
7/7/12 at 9:19pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameron View Post

I know with DH it was in issue of IFF making the juices for them and they converted to in-house production, which changed the juice. Maybe they did same with Fahrenheit?

Now this makes perfect sense.... i wonder how we could find it out to confirm?
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 69
7/7/12 at 11:24pm
I don't doubt the reformulation since this frag has been out since the 80's. Did you buy yours from an actual Sephora store, or their website? I ask b/c I've noticed that the fragrances that Sephora sells are kept under hot lights. The boxes of the fragrances are actually warm to the touch. That could adversely affect the fragrance and maybe your Fahrenheit was particularly bad b/c of that on top of a reformulation.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 69
7/8/12 at 12:28am
http://graindemusc.blogspot.com/2011...ex-cherie.html

Article specifically mentioned Fahrenheit as one of the "repatriated" fragrances from outside (Symrise) to in-house (LVMH / Dior) production.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 69
7/8/12 at 12:33am
all i can say is i have the either the 1st or 2nd formulation, the 3rd, and the current and yes to me as they get more modern they smell "less good" but by no means bad. the current formulation isnt really on par with my other two, but it is by no means bad. the older stuff is jus stronger and more "natural" smelling IMO. i like them all. the heart of the fragrance remains the same.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 69
7/8/12 at 12:47am
Apart from a certain liability to self-assurance I don't see a point in arguing against anyone who perceives a different formulation as significantly inferior to the original. I'm really glad for the people who come to terms with a new formulation, but not everyone has the "luck" to appreciate a noticeable change like that.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 69
7/8/12 at 1:26am
I think fragrance appreciation would be better if you treat these scents like cars.

You cannot expect a 2012 Corvette to be same as a 1988 Corvette.
If someone said "OMG the latest Corvette looks and drives NOTHING like the original or even the 1988 version!" you would laugh at them saying that. If you have this mindset that these scents are like different models of cars, you will be less disappointed. I understand the feeling - I like vintage Dior Homme EDT by Polge better than current Dior Homme EDT by Demarchy. Both are very good, but I prefer original. But I ACCEPT that scents change with the times and it makes me get over it much better! And BTW the current DH is still good IMO!
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 69
7/8/12 at 1:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameron View Post

[...] I understand the feeling - I like vintage Dior Homme EDT by Polge better than current Dior Homme EDT by Demarchy. Both are very good, but I prefer original. But I ACCEPT that scents change with the times and it makes me get over it much better! And BTW the current DH is still good IMO!

I agree. Some notable basenoter - I forgot the name - recently wrote about the reformulation of Habanita which he considers superior to the older version. I would be very pleased to be contented with a reformulation one day. Until then I'll try to keep my anger about reformulation rationally low, but sometimes it just bursts out.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 69
7/8/12 at 1:53am
Try MDCI Invasion Barbare.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 69
7/8/12 at 3:45am
i Bought a Bottle of Dior - fahrenheit last january
longevity and projection are very crappy
especially projection, that stuff doesnt project at all
im sure its the latest formulation, and it is nothing to write home aBout
since im in this comunity ive always read positive reviews aBout it so i Bought it for the heck of it
and im dissapointed, my Bottle is like 88% , ive Being trying to sell it or swap with no success
i kept trying and trying, and the scent is not Bad, But definitely it just does not estimulates me
i never feel like wearing it
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 69
7/8/12 at 3:54am
Maybe go for Fahrenheit Absolute instead; it is much more pleasing than the reform of the original Fahrenheit. Never felt compelled to buy Fahrenheit with FA in my collection.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 69
7/8/12 at 4:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameron View Post

http://graindemusc.blogspot.com/2011...ex-cherie.html

Article specifically mentioned Fahrenheit as one of the "repatriated" fragrances from outside (Symrise) to in-house (LVMH / Dior) production.

This article is really eye opening. I think I'd even heard about the story but not really taken in the import of it. There's a secondary motive behind the reformulations which isn't mentioned in it though; the decline in Dior's sales and loss of market share to it's sister brand Louis Vuitton (which currently has plans to release its first perfume) which is the biggest luxury brand in the world and which produces roughly half of LVMH's profits. Given that Dior is a 42.36% share holder in LVMH (so the article is wrong in giving the impression that Dior is owned by LVMH, instead Dior is a part owner of LVMH) and that the primary shareholder in Dior (Groupe Arnault, whose Chairman Bernard Arnault is also Chairman and CEO of LVMH) is also the controlling share holder in LVMH (with 63.66% of LVMH's voting rights by right of its Dior shares and those it directly owns) it's only natural that Groupe Arnault would want to maximise Dior's perfumery profits and keep Dior competitive in that sector prior to a LV perfume release. Keep in mind also that Dior has had a series of crises in creative direction too and a PR disaster with John Galliano's fall from grace, and has only now settled on a new head Designer Raf Simons. Raf Simons is a big gamble in creative terms (he was unceremoniously sacked by Jil Sander when she came back from retirement to take over at her label after his last couple of seasons seemed to be taking the brand that bears her name in a direction she didn't approve of) and the house could find itself looking for another head designer fairly soon.

Overall Dior's market position is weak atm, and with it being the main holding company in LVMH with an interest in the future success of a LV perfume or perfumes, one can see exactly why it was on a major reformulation binge (taken in tandem with LVMH's move to "repatriate" production), especially with regard to fragrances like DH which were critical successes but not as profitable as was hoped due to their market challenging characteristics.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraghead View Post

Maybe go for Fahrenheit Absolute instead; it is much more pleasing than the reform of the original Fahrenheit. Never felt compelled to buy Fahrenheit with FA in my collection.


This is really good advice, FA is better fragrance than the reformulated Fahrenheit, and don't forget there's the Dior Privé line to explore and I think the privé line contains some of the very best perfumes on the market today, bar none.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 69
7/8/12 at 6:15am
I read somewhere that the original version of Fahrenheit had two and a half times the percentage of ISO E Super than is now legal. So of course it had to be reformulated. There are many kinds of reformulation and, given the nature of the business these days, reformulation is pretty much inevitable. Many ingredients are either being banned as allergens or, like sandalwood, are nearing extinction.

Any product containing natural materials-- fine wines, wooden furniture, the best linens, wools, and cottons--- is going to change over time. Depending on crops and sources, they are going to be different from year to year and they will age. To those who agonize over this, I would say be careful what you wish for: perfumes that don't change are also going to be much more generic and much more synthetic.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 69
7/8/12 at 9:46am
I find nothing wrong with the current version with longevity or sillage?
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 69
7/8/12 at 11:09am
I purchased a bottle a few months ago. It projected better and lasted longer than most scents on the market. However I found it to be very floral and rather soft putting the petroleum note aside.

A woman told me it smelled very unisex. It definitely isn't a "bruiser" type of cologne.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 69
7/8/12 at 11:11am
Completely agree with you. It is shameful the way Dior reformulates its fragrances. Always looking to find cheaper ways of re-producing the scent, always resulting in poorer quality. This disappoints me on a grand scale for Christian Dior is my favorite fragrance house.

- - - Updated - - -

Excellent write up. Very interesting.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 69
7/8/12 at 11:38am
OP- How long has it been since you wore the original?
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 69
7/8/12 at 1:39pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesaboogie View Post

I don't doubt the reformulation since this frag has been out since the 80's. Did you buy yours from an actual Sephora store, or their website? I ask b/c I've noticed that the fragrances that Sephora sells are kept under hot lights. The boxes of the fragrances are actually warm to the touch. That could adversely affect the fragrance and maybe your Fahrenheit was particularly bad b/c of that on top of a reformulation.

Hmmmm never thought of it that way.Indeed I bought the fahrenheit from an actual sephora store. Maybe this was the case. Thank you for the info

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraghead View Post

Maybe go for Fahrenheit Absolute instead; it is much more pleasing than the reform of the original Fahrenheit. Never felt compelled to buy Fahrenheit with FA in my collection.

Thank you I will have to search this one out.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Candide View Post

I agree. Some notable basenoter - I forgot the name - recently wrote about the reformulation of Habanita which he considers superior to the older version. I would be very pleased to be contented with a reformulation one day. Until then I'll try to keep my anger about reformulation rationally low, but sometimes it just bursts out.

I agree. I try to keep the reformulation feelings low and good anology btw looking at it like cars. The only thing I deal with is when they reformulate a product and then charge the same price for the juice. Gah!!!!! Now if fahrenheit was alot cheaper in price maybe I would justify buying a bottle but at the current formula I just could not keep it. Take the new Haslton Z-14 I know I know but bare with me. Back in the day when It was first released it was a pricey penney but overtime they reformulated it and even though the current formula is not my favorite you can pick up a big bottle for like 15 or 20 tops. With the current formula price compared to the older I can see justifying buying a bottle. Now there are good reformulations out there Giorgio beverly hills is one of them my gosh that thing projected like a beast on me and the lonevity was like 8+ hours. So good with the bad I guess.
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 69
7/8/12 at 3:31pm
Hilaire, I couldn't well have mentioned the upcoming Louis Vuitton perfume in my blog post, since the information wasn't available at the time, but I stand corrected on the specifics of the Dior/LVMH/Groupe Arnault ownership structure.

The "repatriation" of a number of LVMH fragrances (Dior Homme, Kenzo Flower, Fahrenheit and Miss Dior ex-Chérie) is a major shakeup of the perfume industry. None of the big suppliers (i.e. IFF, Firmenich, Symrise and Givaudan) were forewarned: they were put in front of the fait accompli. LVMH is still a huge client for their raw materials and many fragrances, so their hands are tied.

It'll be interesting to see whether other large luxury groups hire in-house perfumers and repatriate their formulas, and how the supppliers will react.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 69
7/8/12 at 3:38pm
Any other updates since the blog was posted in 2011 you can share carmencanada? Very much enjoyed reading your blog post on the matter.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 69
7/8/12 at 3:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by carmencanada View Post

Hilaire, I couldn't well have mentioned the upcoming Louis Vuitton perfume in my blog post, since the information wasn't available at the time, but I stand corrected on the specifics of the Dior/LVMH/Groupe Arnault ownership structure.

The "repatriation" of a number of LVMH fragrances (Dior Homme, Kenzo Flower, Fahrenheit and Miss Dior ex-Chérie) is a major shakeup of the perfume industry. None of the big suppliers (i.e. IFF, Firmenich, Symrise and Givaudan) were forewarned: they were put in front of the fait accompli. LVMH is still a huge client for their raw materials and many fragrances, so their hands are tied.

It'll be interesting to see whether other large luxury groups hire in-house perfumers and repatriate their formulas, and how the supppliers will react.

This is interesting as it reverses a long-running trend. Chanel is well-known for having an in-house perfumer and for closely controlling all aspects of their production, from materials through distribution. This has become very unusual but Chanel is having great success lately, more than LVMH with its fragrance lines. So LVMH may be trying to emulate them.

A few years ago, of the large, established houses, only Chanel had an in-house perfumer. Since then both Hermes and Guerlain have added them. So far as I know, none of the other big houses do, relying on the established method of going through the big fragrance companies.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 69
7/8/12 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BurgundyMarsh View Post

A few years ago, of the large, established houses, only Chanel had an in-house perfumer. Since then both Hermes and Guerlain have added them.

Wasn't Mr. Guerlain kind of a in-(his)-house perfumer? :-)
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 69
7/8/12 at 4:10pm
What's the weather like where you are? If you're used to something in the winter or in a rainy season it'll wear different on a really hot dry day.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 69
7/8/12 at 4:13pm
  • KMF
  • offline
  • Gender:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameron View Post

I think fragrance appreciation would be better if you treat these scents like cars.

You cannot expect a 2012 Corvette to be same as a 1988 Corvette.
If someone said "OMG the latest Corvette looks and drives NOTHING like the original or even the 1988 version!" you would laugh at them saying that. If you have this mindset that these scents are like different models of cars, you will be less disappointed. I understand the feeling - I like vintage Dior Homme EDT by Polge better than current Dior Homme EDT by Demarchy. Both are very good, but I prefer original. But I ACCEPT that scents change with the times and it makes me get over it much better! And BTW the current DH is still good IMO!

Here's the problem with that analogy. When car manufacturers redesign cars, they redesign them to improve them. Whether it be more horsepower, better handling, better mpg's, etc, they're trying to to make the product better. With reformulations, it's the opposite. Most reformulations are done either to lower production costs (use cheaper ingredients in order to increase profit margins), or because a certain item in the formula can no longer be sourced. In either case, it is no longer quite the same as the perfumer had in mind. There are certainly times when people prefer the reformulation to the original, but that is rarely anything other than a happy accident...
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 69
7/8/12 at 4:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by carmencanada View Post

Hilaire, I couldn't well have mentioned the upcoming Louis Vuitton perfume in my blog post, since the information wasn't available at the time, but I stand corrected on the specifics of the Dior/LVMH/Groupe Arnault ownership structure.

The "repatriation" of a number of LVMH fragrances (Dior Homme, Kenzo Flower, Fahrenheit and Miss Dior ex-Chérie) is a major shakeup of the perfume industry. None of the big suppliers (i.e. IFF, Firmenich, Symrise and Givaudan) were forewarned: they were put in front of the fait accompli. LVMH is still a huge client for their raw materials and many fragrances, so their hands are tied.

It'll be interesting to see whether other large luxury groups hire in-house perfumers and repatriate their formulas, and how the supppliers will react.


Oh I do apologise if it seemed I was pointing out a defect in your blog post. On the contrary it was extremely interesting and well written. I was merely elaborating with, as you point out, more recent Dior/LVMH gossip and surmise
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 69
7/8/12 at 4:15pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by L'Homme Blanc Individuel View Post

What's the weather like where you are? If you're used to something in the winter or in a rainy season it'll wear different on a really hot dry day.

Right now it is summer and it has not done real well. True I have not tried it in the winter. Thank you for the suggestion
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 69
7/8/12 at 4:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMF View Post

Here's the problem with that analogy. When car manufacturers redesign cars, they redesign them to improve them. Whether it be more horsepower, better handling, better mpg's, etc, they're trying to to make the product better. With reformulations, it's the opposite. Most reformulations are done either to lower production costs (use cheaper ingredients in order to increase profit margins), or because a certain item in the formula can no longer be sourced. In either case, it is no longer quite the same as the perfumer had in mind. There are certainly times when people prefer the reformulation to the original, but that is rarely anything other than a happy accident...



I'm somewhat sceptical about this for two reasons, reformulations take place all the time, most of them imperceptible and secondly because I more and more think that people are simply nostalgic about older formulas. I remember a number of "great" perfumes that were horrid acrid messes which are now quite wearable and enjoyable. In part that's because newer, better smelling (yes I said it), synthetics have been developed which make many of their older predecessors smell like an accident in an oil refinery. This applies especially to mid to late 20th century formulas but less so to earlier formulas.

There are for instance much better smelling Sandalwood and Musk synthetics around now than 20 years ago.

That's not to say that the main thrust of your point is wrong, I'm sure most reformulations are poorer creatures, but not all by any means and nor are all reformulations only serendipitously better than their forebears.
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 69
7/8/12 at 4:44pm
Hilaire:

I think your point is important. But typically, we mourn the reformulation of great perfumes. The reformulation for those is due either to cheapening of the formula (simplified, less naturals) or because IFRA bans a key ingredient. Reformulation of these is then bad, usually. Worse perfumes, most of which have been forgotten, might well benefit from a reformulation, but we care less about them.

cacio
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 69
7/8/12 at 5:49pm
you can mourn and moan but at some point you have to accept it's part of the game...

I can cry about not being able to buy a 1965 Shelby Mustang when I walk into a Ford dealership....or I can simply accept that they now have the 2012 models instead and choose to purchase or not purchase...it's just the way it is.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 69
7/8/12 at 6:09pm
Cars aren't a good analogy because dealerships will tell you the difference between a 2012 Mustang and a 2011 or 2010. You're right tho. If we want a certain frag we have to either accept what's available or not buy it. You've always got to be careful about nostalgia too. Things don't always smell like we remember, especially if our tastes have evolved. That's why I go back and try things again even if I didn't like them before. Tastes change.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 69
7/8/12 at 6:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Candide View Post

Wasn't Mr. Guerlain kind of a in-(his)-house perfumer? :-)

When Guerlain was owned by the Guerlain family, the in-house perfumer was always a M. Guerlain. The last of these was the great Jean-Paul Guerlain. After LVMH took over the company, Jean-Paul became some sort of "consultant" but, so far as I know, did not produce any more perfumes. There was a period of mostly bad releases by outside perfumers before they hired a new in-house perfumer. LVMH has been a great success financially but is always on the edge of losing the quality, reputations, and cache of the brands it has swallowed up.

- - - Updated - - -

It is worth keeping in mind that Dior itself is no longer Dior and has been reformulated many times since Christian Dior died in 1957.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by KMF View Post

Here's the problem with that analogy. When car manufacturers redesign cars, they redesign them to improve them. Whether it be more horsepower, better handling, better mpg's, etc, they're trying to to make the product better. With reformulations, it's the opposite. Most reformulations are done either to lower production costs (use cheaper ingredients in order to increase profit margins), or because a certain item in the formula can no longer be sourced. In either case, it is no longer quite the same as the perfumer had in mind. There are certainly times when people prefer the reformulation to the original, but that is rarely anything other than a happy accident...

I don't think it is possible to generalize about why reformulations are made, especially, unlike updates in cars and electronics, as they are almost never discussed publicly by the companies that make them. Knowing how organizational politics work, there are probably as many stories behind these reformulations as there are reformulations. Some are certainly made to save money but there have also been modern "reconstructions" of classic fragrances (e.g., by Polge at Chanel) that have been very well received. I think there have always been adjustments in formulae to deal with the availability of materials and the introduction of new ones.

The very nature of fragrance is change. As Heraclitus might say, you can never sniff the same scent twice.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 69
7/8/12 at 6:46pm
I wonder how many people in this thread actually went through the late 80's and 90's wearing Fahrenheit? Stuff was wicked strong and the more I think about it, the happier I am that they reformulated it (muted it). Let's not forget this fragrance is 24 years old.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 69
7/8/12 at 6:54pm
For the Fahrenheit lovers, bid quick LOL - http://www.ebay.com/itm/Giant-Rarity...item19d1c412da
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 69
7/8/12 at 7:13pm
I agree with those who have been poking holes in the car analogy. As helpful as it may be to assuage people's inflamed emotions re: reformulation, it is totally off the mark when speaking about fragrances. Cars are "reformulated" on purpose every year, and their main function is transportation, as much as people use them to express their style. Perfumes are marketed as standalone products like a food specialty or a movie and their main function is aesthetic.

The uproar over fragrance cheapening and poor reformulation is analagous to the "New Coke" debacle. Or imagine the reaction of Star Wars fans if they no longer had access to the original cuts when George Lucas peppered them with stupid CGI.

Automobile analogy: may be comforting, but it's fallacious.

(Regarding Fahrenheit: I agree with the OP regarding the lack of depth in the new formula. It's totally lacking the real jasmine sambac my nose picks up in vintage (90s) juice, upon which depends the rich balance of the heart accord.)
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 69
7/8/12 at 7:21pm
The real problem isn't even reformulation. It's when a changed product is presented as unchanged. I'm a wine guy. I know vintages change each year but it says what vintage it is right on the label. I don't really expect a 2012 Dior to smell exactly like a Dior from 1950, but I totally expect it to smell the same as a 2011 or even a 2000 if it has the same name same bottle and same box.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 69
7/8/12 at 7:26pm
I bought a brand new bottle (1.7 oz.) at Dillard's the other day. It's fantastic... Great longevity, great silage and smells incredible. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the formula... In fact, it's going to be my SOTD tomorrow.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 69
7/8/12 at 7:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilaire View Post

This article is really eye opening. I think I'd even heard about the story but not really taken in the import of it. There's a secondary motive behind the reformulations which isn't mentioned in it though; the decline in Dior's sales and loss of market share to it's sister brand Louis Vuitton (which currently has plans to release its first perfume) which is the biggest luxury brand in the world and which produces roughly half of LVMH's profits. Given that Dior is a 42.36% share holder in LVMH (so the article is wrong in giving the impression that Dior is owned by LVMH, instead Dior is a part owner of LVMH) and that the primary shareholder in Dior (Groupe Arnault, whose Chairman Bernard Arnault is also Chairman and CEO of LVMH) is also the controlling share holder in LVMH (with 63.66% of LVMH's voting rights by right of its Dior shares and those it directly owns) it's only natural that Groupe Arnault would want to maximise Dior's perfumery profits and keep Dior competitive in that sector prior to a LV perfume release. Keep in mind also that Dior has had a series of crises in creative direction too and a PR disaster with John Galliano's fall from grace, and has only now settled on a new head Designer Raf Simons. Raf Simons is a big gamble in creative terms (he was unceremoniously sacked by Jil Sander when she came back from retirement to take over at her label after his last couple of seasons seemed to be taking the brand that bears her name in a direction she didn't approve of) and the house could find itself looking for another head designer fairly soon.

Overall Dior's market position is weak atm, and with it being the main holding company in LVMH with an interest in the future success of a LV perfume or perfumes, one can see exactly why it was on a major reformulation binge (taken in tandem with LVMH's move to "repatriate" production), especially with regard to fragrances like DH which were critical successes but not as profitable as was hoped due to their market challenging characteristics.

- - - Updated - - -




This is really good advice, FA is better fragrance than the reformulated Fahrenheit, and don't forget there's the Dior Privé line to explore and I think the privé line contains some of the very best perfumes on the market today, bar none.

I agree with everything you said except for what you said in Dior not having a strong hold in the market today. Despite the chaos going on behind the scenes sales continued to grow even without having a head designer. Hec they are one of the best selling luxury goods items in the market compared to other companies such as Prada etc. In the fragrance department they have best sellers in J'adore among others. I think it was smart of them getting an in house perfume, especially Demachy, he's amazing. That article was really an eye opener and yes they're La collection Privee line is incredible and has good offerings. .

The modern Fahrenheit is amazing and is one of my all time fav.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 69
7/8/12 at 9:22pm
You inspired me to pull out my Fahrenheit and try it again. I have a mini I got a few weeks ago. I put it on my wrist three hours ago and it's still screamin', so if you think it disappears after 2 hours something's definitely not right. Allergies maybe? Nose fatigue? ? New Fahrenheit still smells like the real deal to me.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 69
7/8/12 at 9:38pm
Thread Starter 
Thank you guys so much for your comments and info. It has really helped me and my eyes have been opened to so many difference of opinions. I see alot of comments that are giving the current formula a great review and rightly so it is still a good fragrance and it still smells good but for what I understand as well the ones who are praising the current formula has not used a whole bottle or a full bottle wearing to know the difference. Which is ok I am by no means bashing the current formula i still have a sample of fahrenheit I will keep around to sniff every now and then but I will not own a bottle of the new formula. Also, I realize that the newer formula in its reformulated ingredients do not match my chemistry like the vintage version did hence the reason why the projection and longevity do not last on my skin. As everyone stated yes I do have a choice to buy or not to buy and I choose not to buy given it does wear the same on me as it did years ago nor have the rich depth it once had. Also here is a good way to look at reformulations. Take your spouse for instance what happens if you have been married for over 20 years and you come home for work and kiss your wife and noticed her kiss is not the same or her hugs? What happens if she is not acting the same anymore after all those years? You know her better than anyone else and one day boom she's changed. She tells you Oh I got an uprgrade anyway I am getting silly with it but you get the point. I do see now both sides of the coin. I guess there will come a day where I will have to get over my mourning and accept the old fahrenheit is gone for good and if I need to settle for a less of its former self I will have to be happy with the one on the market. Oh sweet sorrow

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by L'Homme Blanc Individuel View Post

You inspired me to pull out my Fahrenheit and try it again. I have a mini I got a few weeks ago. I put it on my wrist three hours ago and it's still screamin', so if you think it disappears after 2 hours something's definitely not right. Allergies maybe? Nose fatigue? ? New Fahrenheit still smells like the real deal to me.

See thats it too i forgot to mention my sample i got did last longer than the big bottle I got from sephora. Def not allergies i take medicine for that lol and def not fatigue My other colognes I can smell real good hours later. You don't think Dior puts the vintage in the samples to get you hooked to buy the big bottle and the big bottle is trash?
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 69
7/8/12 at 9:44pm
Bolster, keep in mind your memory of what Fahrenheit smelled like might not be right. We all do that, remembering the past being better than it was. Don't let memories get in the way of enjoying the present. Cheers!
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 69
7/8/12 at 11:49pm
Adding this about Dior reformulations: when they "repatriated" the formulas to produce the fragrances from A to Z, there may have been specific qualities of raw materials to which they no longer had access, and/or that they replaced with materials they purchase for the whole Dior/LVMH fragrance portfolio. Often, a powerful client (a brand) can ask for part of the formula created by the perfumer of a supplier house to be "open", i.e. not secret: it can then be produced anywhere. The supplier house only produces the part of the formula that is "closed", i.e. not disclosed to the client.

But another reason for the change in Dior fragrances has to do neither with cost-cutting nor IFRA or different raw materials: it is simply that François Demachy, who now heads the entire Dior/LVMH perfume division, decided to reinterpret the fragrances, either for marketing reasons or because he thought he could improve on them.

Bear in mind that even though he is credited with all the new launches, he is not the only one working on them: it is said in the industry that some are outsourced to other perfumers in supplier houses.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 69
7/9/12 at 3:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by canuck21 View Post

I agree with everything you said except for what you said in Dior not having a strong hold in the market today. Despite the chaos going on behind the scenes sales continued to grow even without having a head designer. Hec they are one of the best selling luxury goods items in the market compared to other companies such as Prada etc. In the fragrance department they have best sellers in J'adore among others. I think it was smart of them getting an in house perfume, especially Demachy, he's amazing. That article was really an eye opener and yes they're La collection Privee line is incredible and has good offerings. .

The modern Fahrenheit is amazing and is one of my all time fav.



Oh their sales have grown, and one or two of the products are market leading, but they have lost market share and they're not even in the current top 10 luxury brands in the world, that's a weak market position from the point of view of LVMH which owns 4 of the top ten, including Louis Vuitton which is the biggest selling luxury brand in the world.

I was chatting to my pal who works for LVMH this morning on Skype, and mentioned this discussion, he pointed out that in fact Parfums Christian Dior is a LVMH owned subsidiary, even though Christian Dior S.A. remains an autonomous holding company linked to LVMH through the Arnault Groupe. So Carmencanada is right to group the perfume arm of Dior under the LVMH banner.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:
Originally Posted by cacio View Post

Hilaire:

I think your point is important. But typically, we mourn the reformulation of great perfumes. The reformulation for those is due either to cheapening of the formula (simplified, less naturals) or because IFRA bans a key ingredient. Reformulation of these is then bad, usually. Worse perfumes, most of which have been forgotten, might well benefit from a reformulation, but we care less about them.

cacio

OK but what qualifies as a great perfume? There are fans of YSL's Jazz, M7 and Rive Gauche who are cursing L'Oreal out right now for having re-released those three in the La Collection line but to my nose all three were harsh, chemical smelling and not easily worn in their vintage formula (and in M7's case the market clearly agreed with me because it was not popular and ended up being discontinued) while the La Collection formulations are hugely improved and contain more naturally occurring ingredients and their new prices reflect that.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 69
7/9/12 at 3:25am
Very informative, and interesting. Thank you so much for the posting.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 69
7/9/12 at 4:17am
The house of Dior is the first that I have experienced reformulation woes with, the examples from my wardrobe being Hypnotic Poison and Miss Dior Cherie. It's upsetting to me that I paid the same price on these perfumes 5-6 years ago, and the newer versions are so watered down.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 69
7/9/12 at 6:42am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayven View Post

The house of Dior is the first that I have experienced reformulation woes with, the examples from my wardrobe being Hypnotic Poison and Miss Dior Cherie. It's upsetting to me that I paid the same price on these perfumes 5-6 years ago, and the newer versions are so watered down.

Thank you hayven for posting. It's nice to get a female perspective on this issue
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 69
7/9/12 at 6:58am
Hilaire:

there is certainly some disagreement as to what is a masterpiece, and masterpiece doesn't mean successful. But what I had in mind were things like Diorella and Diorissimo.

cacio
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 69
7/9/12 at 12:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cacio View Post

Hilaire:

there is certainly some disagreement as to what is a masterpiece, and masterpiece doesn't mean successful. But what I had in mind were things like Diorella and Diorissimo.

cacio


Well a masterpiece would be a slightly different thing to a Great Perfume too I would have thought. However if success isn't a part of the assessment then how does one frame what is or is not a masterpiece or a great?

I mean put it this way, I don't like Obsession but it was tremendously successful and seemed to speak to a wide variety and huge number of people (and still does). Comparing perfume to other artforms in this instance is useful, I may not personally like the paintings of Monet but the ability of his work to speak to millions of people and have meaning and worth to them is undoubtedly an aspect of the greatness and importance of his work. I personally don't like Monet's paintings but I accept their greatness and by the same rubric I accept Obsession's greatness even if I don't particularly like the smell of it.

Now if someone repainted all of Monet's paintings making them essentially unrecognisable as the work of Monet I could understand widespread public outrage. However if someone carefully restored damaged works of Monet's to enhance or protect the integrity of the works in questions I don't think anyone would be too upset about it, indeed most people would welcome it.

There are plenty of reformulations which obliterate the original work, great or otherwise, and which I think it's reasonable to be upset about. There are other kinds of reformulation which are more like restoration work or even rescue work which attempt to rescue a great formula in the face of lack of the original requisite ingredients or where those ingredients come under regulated control.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: MFD Archive

Features on Basenotes

Greatest Hits: Annick Menardo
Petals Falling From The Sky - A Report From The Cote d'Azur's Bataille De Fleurs
Basenotes Reader Awards 2013 - Finalists Announced.
Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › DIOR!!!!! What have you done?????