Code of Conduct
Results 1 to 28 of 28
  1. #1

    Default The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    still interesting. This is known by everyone here, and yet it is always worth to provide some proof. There is a similar experiment here on Basenotes...

    http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/id...ations/?page=2

    One of the implications of Shiv's experiment is that it's possible to make a product more "effective" by increasing its price. A good marketing campaign can have a similar effect, as it instills consumers with lofty expectations about the quality of the product.

    [different experiment descriptions]...

    According to Brochet, the lesson of his experiment is that our experience is the end result of an elaborate interpretive process, in which the brain parses our sensations based upon our expectations. If we think a wine is red, or that a certain brand is better, then we will interpret our senses to preserve that belief. Such distortions are a fundamental feature of the brain.
    cof cof Creed cof cof Bond cof cof 60% of the niche fragrances cof cof...

    Even thought objectivity is intrinsic to most Natural processes, it looks like it also goes against human nature... Ironic.
    Last edited by irish; 28th February 2008 at 05:45 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Common knowledge but...

    Thanks for the article.
    I don't disagree with your general assertion.

    While I've now found several niche houses I think are pretty good, my comments here over the years that a lot of the expensive niche stuff that many were raving about seemed like cheap, feminine, short-lasting potpouri, I still generally stand by.

    But I disagree with you on the Creed. I love my Green Irish Tweed - you can't buy cheaper stuff with the same ingedients - and my wife thought I was pulling her leg when I told her one of it's expensive ingredients was whale spew that had been floating around in the ocean for a few years.
    Renato

  3. #3

    Default Re: Common knowledge but...

    You are welcome...
    I am not trying to say that Creed fragrances are not good. They are very user-friendly IMO, even BdP.
    Erolfa is one of my top 3 fragrances... and yet it is often considered to be one of the cheapest smelling of my EDTs. People always like to smell mi collection... and I believe they give more honest opinions since I decant my scents to different atomizers and they never have a tag.

    Further, VIW... If it were not Creed it would never had generated the hype it had here... Best summer scent? :S smells like something Tommy Bahama would sell for 1/4 of the price.
    BdP is a great fragrance, but I am pretty sure a lot of the people that talk about it here have never actually smelled it, and when they finally do there are more than 500 threads telling the back of their head: it is good, it is the best fragrance ever...

    And it goes on, not only about quality. You hear X has a note Y... it could be wrong but all of a sudden everybody smells it. E.g. Ungaro III being dark dark. Where?! D&GpH is waaay darker than UIII.
    I am just saying the obvious, price and prestige greatly affect our perception. Is that bad? not entirely otherwise I would have left BN long time ago.
    Last edited by irish; 28th February 2008 at 05:33 PM.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    1,034

    Default Re: Common knowledge but...

    I said it before and I'll say it again: lots of the newer Creeds are overrated and overpriced. The older EDT Creeds are priced right and are amazing IF you wear cologne for yourself and not others.

  5. #5

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Most basenoters (and other perfume enthusiasts) are a more discerning bunch than your average joe who goes to a perfume shop and buys a niche fragrance mainly because of the name and packaging. We have higher expectations from the more famous niche houses - when Creed launched Himalaya and OV, many spotted some similarities with XS homme and Mugler Cologne and called Creed out over it. Were Lutens recent more conformist launches spared? No. Was Malle showered with praise and allotted 5 stars for French Lover and Outrageous!? No. Was Guerlains dark period before 2006 allowed to escape scrutiny? No. There are many more examples. BTW, all of these are great fragrances by designer standards but when you charge a fortune and have a storied history, we expect more. We didn't shower them with blind praise just because they were from more famous houses.

    Ofcourse occasionally fanboyism might slip in from time to time, simply because some might be too deep in love with Ellena, Erwin Creed or Pierre Montale. But most are oblivious to it.
    -

  6. #6

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    zztopp,

    I disagree with you when you say most of basenoters are more decerning... While this is a good comunity, I do not think most of us are much more prejudice free when evaluating a fragrance. If anything, the selection process may be more complex and their gut-desitions are more rationalized, but not much more valid IMHO. Still, there are a couple of noses here I can trust.

    The article and me are not implying that price and prestige are the ultimate deciding factors of perception, but they are very important ones that are often overlooked.

  7. #7

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    I can't help but wonder about this. could the blind test group have chosen the cheapest wine (in the truly blind setting) as the best because they were most familiar with it ? (maybe they are not rich people themselves?? "better" things are not always understood as being better at the first tasting to someone who is accustomed to eating shit all their lives - makes sense ?). Also, if you actually think some dumb caffeine sugar beverage is going to help you solve mind puzzles in the first place, your pretty stupid - so all that researchers study proved is that idiots act like idiots when given energy drinks and pricing info, also proves how little confidence they have in themselves. Anyways, I think the kind of people that set up these types of experiments to go against what they know is true are wasting their time. A large majority of people will buy things that they think will please others regardless of the quality level. These people KNOW the item is not worth the money in terms of its quality, but they buy it anyways and pretend to themselves that it is in fact worth what they paid. We are all guilty of this at least once in our lives. But we still know deep in our hearts that we are just buying the item to fit in, please others etc or we are evaluating it as a "good/better" item to fit in, please others, or do what seems to be the right thing. We just don't care at that point because the benefits of fitting in or pleasing others in that situation are probably better than being the outsider. The sad part is that everyone knows this to be true in their hearts but egos have kept us debating this for years...

    edit: some self actualized people actually buy things only for themselves, like myself (im not going to lie, I only got this way after a long phase of buying to please others in my youth), I generally buy for myself and if it pleases others that makes me happy too. Although I have alot of friends who buy specifically to please others, and I'd say the majority of people are in that group. When confronted with this 99.999 people will also say "me too I buy for myself!" as well which is kind of funny, seems like people want to join any group they can! anyways, thats not the point, my first paragraph was just meant to explain the behaviour we were looking at in the study, not everyone on the face of the planet, so I don't want to get a million speak for yourself replies - thanks in advance!
    Last edited by smellyliquid; 28th February 2008 at 07:01 PM.

  8. #8

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Pricing is a very important part of the perception of quality. My wife took a number of marketing classes, and pricing a product too high or too low will tend to reduce sales.

    The case study that made the biggest impression on me was Jack Daniel's Whiskey in Japan in the late 1980's. When trade barriers fell, the whiskey went form about US$50/L to US$25/L and sales fell off. They ended up raising the price back up to $50/L and the sales recovered. But I believe that this is true of a lot of things. And the high price according to the report *really does* add to the enjoyment.

    Strange. Feels true. I would like to think I am "immune" but that would feel like self-deception.

    I guess this explains Caviar!
    Last edited by Bromo33333; 28th February 2008 at 07:09 PM.
    ===
    “… [I] recall thinking that the computer would never advance much further than this. Call me naïve, but I seemed to have underestimated the universal desire to sit in a hard plastic chair and stare at a screen until your eyes cross.” ~ David Sedaris

  9. #9

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bromo33333 View Post

    I guess this explains Caviar!
    oh man if theres one thing im definatley immune to in the arena, its caviar yuck!

  10. #10

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    ...
    Last edited by irish; 6th December 2008 at 11:03 AM.

  11. #11

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    im very keen to here from scentronic & johhny_v considering they have extensive creed collection...(pluran must be hating this discussion to the core)

    however, the fact remains...if im paying $200 for a johnny walker blue label and if i do not like it, i would not purchase it again just bcoz its a popular brand...might as well look for other brands...same ways, one would never buy something expensive if it doenst give them pleasure. I would have to be richie rich to buy something that i dont like and care for....i think more than the price...people like to buy "quality" products, preferably made by companies who have been doing this for generations and also companies who hire top notch perfumers/noses who have this vision...i read about terre D hermes in the same breath as serge lutens...

    it seems, creed, shiseido, lartisan, CdG are the beatles, pink floyd, led zeppelin of yester years that no newbie could match...but, every now and then some gifted youngsters release something grounbreaking in the 21st century and are immediately absorbed by these top notch companies as their leading designers purely for the vision and the passion they possess//////

    P.S. i would never buy davidoff cool water no matter which brand releases it...i would still hate it if it'd cost $300
    Last edited by jenson; 28th February 2008 at 09:29 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

  12. #12

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Lobster anyone?
    Check out my fragrances for sale at Crystal Flacon - NEW! Updated - Click Here!
    Creed, Bond No.9, Montale, Frederic Malle, Le Labo, Amouage
    Niche Fragrances / Women's Fragrances / Men's Fragrances

  13. #13

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    I believe that similar blind tests were done with Chanel No. 5 (cited by Luca Turin), without being told that it was Chanel, and it does poorly.

    I think that there is a great deal of truth to this. I had not realized it's effect in my own life. In fact, I am going to stop letting people know that the fragrance that I want them to test is one I made myself and just tell them it is from Hermes or Guerlain and see if it makes a difference in the responses I get. Maybe some of my failures will end up successes!
    Sometimes one finds an antique vial which remembers,
    Whence gushes forth a living soul returned to life

  14. #14

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by somethinpositiv View Post
    Lobster anyone?
    lol

  15. #15

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Some thoughts...
    I think there is (unfortunately) much truth in this. The bit about the red and white wine is quite interesting because there they are dealing with "experts" who I would like to think are more resistant than lay people to this effect. I do think that increased knowledge gives one a better chance of seeing through the marketing, however as demonstrated here, it does not make one immune.

    There are some psychological studies (sorry I can't quote sources) which suggest that a significant indicator of is perception of wealth relative to the peer group. This fits in nicely with that. We are relational creatures, social animals. We live and define ourselves by our interfaces with various groups and structures. These are many and complex. The allure of demonstrating that we have wealth and/or influence cannot be underestimated.

    However, I think perfumes are particularly interesting as I think they can send out so many different signals. For example for me - vetiver sends out earthy, don't care about status, grounded signals wheras wearing roses sends out a signal of airy asthete etc. I really love all these smells and appreciate them as compositions when I smell them from paper or from the bottle, and that is what I often do.. However, wearing them is a different matter, there must be a factor of the image I want to project to others involved there or else why not just carry a bottle around to sniff....

    Another issue here may be that there still is often a real correlation between cost and quality. Not everything costly is high quality, but most high quality stuff is relatively costly. We put expensive and high quality together in our heads and only work to separate them when we are prompted to or something inconsistent jumps out.
    Last edited by hirch_duckfinder; 28th February 2008 at 10:49 PM.
    "Don’t try to be original. Be simple. Be good technically, and if there is something in you, it will come out. ” - Henri Matisse.

    "Wear R de Capucci" - Hirch Duckfinder

    reviews

  16. #16

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    BN Examples
    "The cheap smell of ...".4711"...
    "X...Smells like a million dollar"
    "This leather smells like a new Rolls Roice,.. Bentley...."

    It's also a social thing: You want to match up to others in your group of people. Their standards become your own: drinks, cars, clubs, living quarters...And often that is a function of job and income. Not only do you expect to buy better things for more money - you also want to demonstrate your spending level and thus buy "prestigious" items (and perfume to go with it! If your sunglasses don't look like Chanel or Gucci - the frame will show their signature. Millions of Chinese have a share in our good living via second market - isn't that a good thing?
    Last edited by narcus; 29th February 2008 at 06:14 AM.
    'Il mondo dei profumi è un universo senza limiti: una fraganza puo rievocare sensazioni, luoghi, persone o ancora condurre in uno spazio di nuove dimensioni emozionali' L. V.

  17. #17

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by irish View Post
    There nothing is better than the scientific method but speculation... right?

    You did not read the article... They did not choose the cheapest wine, they choose the one they thought it was the most expensive. Both were the same. And what does being rich have to do with the quality of the wine? does wealth automatically enhance your senses or something?
    Second, This article has very little to do with pretentiousness, it deals with self-deception, placebo effect, paradigms the nature of quality and luxury products. They did not want to please society... They actually felt more pleasure using more expensive goods. That is why they rated them as being better. (as Bromo33333 pointed it out)

    Your mind predisposed the study to say something, and for you, it did... Aren't expectations powerful paradigms that makes us qualify things (perfume, caffeine, wine, articles...) as good or bad?
    and you clearly didnt read a single thing I wrote either. I said if the people were more accustomed to cheap wine, then they may have voted cheap wine as best (familiarity) during the actual blind test, on the other hand - during the test where they recieved pricing info they rated the most expensive wine best for the other (most obvious) reason I talk about in my post

    Second, the reason the people all chose the most expensive wine as best, or why they described the dyed white wine as red is because they didnt want to appear out of step with the others, or with "common knowledge". ie: common knowledge dictates that red wine will have such and such a taste, and that expensive wine will taste best. Even if its not the case upon testing, no one wants to be the first voice of dissent. Therefore, they did it to please others - not themselves.

    Third, no the study is bullshit, its pseudo science (ok its real science, but what I mean is that its nothing that we havent known for years, its like running out into the street with a ball and telling people you invented the wheel) made up to fill the pages of whatever dumb newspaper it came from. These kind of experiments beat a horse thats been dead for 50 years as we already know what caused the test group to do what they did. Its basicly just sideshow entertainment to fill up newspaper columns so people "at work" can talk about it now... my biggest pet peve = "funfacts"
    --------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by hirch_duckfinder View Post
    Some thoughts...
    I think there is (unfortunately) much truth in this. The bit about the red and white wine is quite interesting because there they are dealing with "experts" who I would like to think are more resistant than lay people to this effect. I do think that increased knowledge gives one a better chance of seeing through the marketing, however as demonstrated here, it does not make one immune.
    the actual study actually just said "experienced wine testers". They could be self proclaimed for all we know. We all know that ones who truly master their craft, such as perfume noses, can often (blindly) sniff an oil and identify the region the plant grew, the distilation type used, and even in extreme cases the type of metal the distillation machine was made from! Experts don't make these kind of idiotic mistakes found in the article. These were probably just amateurs who talk alot of ish but was never ill though. Don't take everything you read at face value.

    actually oddly enough I see a phenomenon emerging from this article that I find very ironic. Everything written in the article has all of a sudden become gospel to you all

    1. The article says "experienced wine testers"
    2. expectation: articles are usually telling the truth (yea right)
    3. The test was done be scientists
    4. expectation: scientists always work honestly (yea right)
    5. The article says the "experts" were fooled by red ink

    momentary reflection: after all we know about experts... is this really possible???

    6. Of course it is! the article says so! (just like the pricing info... colour of the wine... told them all
    Last edited by smellyliquid; 29th February 2008 at 04:45 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

  18. #18

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Thank you for this follow up post as it explains some statements i did not understand in the past one. For instance, the following
    Quote Originally Posted by smellyliquid View Post
    Anyways, I think the kind of people that set up these types of experiments to go against what they know is true are wasting their time.
    About your second post... according to you, the study talks about real self-evident facts but at the same time it is bogus and full of flaws. It is so obvious it is bullshit, but at the same time it cannot be trusted. You in the other hand have known for years what the pseud-scientist fail to prove. But I am not going to discuss that article with you any further as I am not going to be able to change your perception.

    The bottom line is I am not an expert and I believe 98% of BNers are not either. I am not able to "sniff an oil and identify the region the plant grew, the distillation type used, and even in extreme cases the type of metal the distillation machine was made from" (It would be interesting if smellyliquid could provide the reference for this). It makes me wonder, how many notes are not there but the comments on BN have made us perceive them. How many treasures are there hidden because they do not have a fancier bottle a higher price tag or because a member with high post count has never mentioned them.
    Last edited by irish; 3rd March 2008 at 03:21 AM.

  19. #19

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    according to me, the study does not talk about self evident facts, the study talks about nothing (new), I talk about self evident facts. My conclusion and the studies conclusion are not the same. Of course you won't be able to change my perception, that would be way to difficult for someone who cant read properly.

    Quote Originally Posted by irish View Post
    (It would be interesting if smellyliquid could provide the reference for this, because I do not believe it is possible, but I could be proved wrong). -
    Its either a Burr article... or something connected to Turin. I can't remember now I read it around 2 years ago. I tried to find it but its pretty impossible with those key words now that theres so much perfume related blogging and etc showing up in google results. Maybe someone who has read this article as well can back me up. But it doesnt really matter what you believe is possible anyways, who are you ? a chemist ? have you ever worked with perfume? do you even have the slightest idea what you are talking about at all ? I have about 12 different rose oils and absolutes upstairs and I cant tell the difference between all of them, blindfolded. and im just a hobbyist. When 30 years of your life have been devoted to perfume, you can damn well distinguish between alot of different factors contributing to the creation of a oil/absolute, regardless of whether your puny mind cant wrap itself around that or not.
    Quote Originally Posted by irish View Post
    It makes me wonder, how many notes are not there but the comments on BN have made us perceive them. How many treasures are there hidden because they do not have a fancier bottle a higher price tag or because a member with high post count has never mentioned them. -
    wow hes deep!

  20. #20

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by smellyliquid View Post
    and you clearly didnt read a single thing I wrote either. I said if the people were more accustomed to cheap wine, then they may have voted cheap wine as best (familiarity) during the actual blind test, on the other hand - during the test where they recieved pricing info they rated the most expensive wine best for the other (most obvious) reason I talk about in my post

    Second, the reason the people all chose the most expensive wine as best, or why they described the dyed white wine as red is because they didnt want to appear out of step with the others, or with "common knowledge". ie: common knowledge dictates that red wine will have such and such a taste, and that expensive wine will taste best. Even if its not the case upon testing, no one wants to be the first voice of dissent. Therefore, they did it to please others - not themselves.

    Third, no the study is bullshit, its pseudo science (ok its real science, but what I mean is that its nothing that we havent known for years, its like running out into the street with a ball and telling people you invented the wheel) made up to fill the pages of whatever dumb newspaper it came from. These kind of experiments beat a horse thats been dead for 50 years as we already know what caused the test group to do what they did. Its basicly just sideshow entertainment to fill up newspaper columns so people "at work" can talk about it now... my biggest pet peve = "funfacts"
    --------------------------------------


    the actual study actually just said "experienced wine testers". They could be self proclaimed for all we know. We all know that ones who truly master their craft, such as perfume noses, can often (blindly) sniff an oil and identify the region the plant grew, the distilation type used, and even in extreme cases the type of metal the distillation machine was made from! Experts don't make these kind of idiotic mistakes found in the article. These were probably just amateurs who talk alot of ish but was never ill though. Don't take everything you read at face value.

    actually oddly enough I see a phenomenon emerging from this article that I find very ironic. Everything written in the article has all of a sudden become gospel to you all

    1. The article says "experienced wine testers"
    2. expectation: articles are usually telling the truth (yea right)
    3. The test was done be scientists
    4. expectation: scientists always work honestly (yea right)
    5. The article says the "experts" were fooled by red ink

    momentary reflection: after all we know about experts... is this really possible???

    6. Of course it is! the article says so! (just like the pricing info... colour of the wine... told them all
    I will happily consider your point of view when you learn to express it politely.
    Last edited by hirch_duckfinder; 1st March 2008 at 12:19 AM.
    "Don’t try to be original. Be simple. Be good technically, and if there is something in you, it will come out. ” - Henri Matisse.

    "Wear R de Capucci" - Hirch Duckfinder

    reviews

  21. #21

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Here's a more detailed account of the Brochet study:
    http://www.academie-amorim.com/us/la...01/brochet.pdf

    Unfortunately even this lacks some key information that would help clarify some of the issues at hand here, e.g. what the experience level of the tasters was (professionals, members of a wine brotherhood - not that it would be hard to find experienced tasters in Bordeaux) or whether they evaluated the wines in each other's presence or isolated. As these were not amateurs I would expect that factors capable of influencing the result were judiciously eliminated, but the detailed set up is not given here.

    The text does point out that the general results had been previously well established, and are in fact commonly known among experts, and that the purpose of this particular experiment was clarifying a subset of issues relating to wine evaluation.

    Both wines and essential oil compositions are so complex and subject to so many factors (origin, age, processing, blending) that fully blind tastings/smellings are in fact utterly pointless. Without a guideline (these are all Syrahs, these are various vintages of the same wine, these are various néroli harvests from Morocco etc.) determined by an interest (let's see wetherv there is a difference between barrique and chipped wine, let's study the differences between Tunisian and Moroccan neroli) even the greatest expert will have to resort to groping speculation. Frame of reference is cognitively both restrictive, because it suggests chosing certain options over others based on experience, prejudice etc., yet essential for making any kind of reasonable judgment at all.

    Added: In terms of consumer expectations, I believe there are two powerful, irreconcilable assumptions these days, which may strongly determine actual product evaluations - and in particular cases may or may not correspond to empirical facts: one is that high price signifies high quality (e.g. Creed must be good, because it' so expensive), the other is that high price merely signifies brand/prestige value and that the same quality can be had at discount prices (e.g.: the smoked salmon at my local discounter for 1.99 is just as good as wild sockeye that costs 6 times the amount).
    Last edited by the_good_life; 1st March 2008 at 01:29 AM.
    My Wardrobe
    II est de forts parfums pour qui toute matière/Est poreuse. On dirait qu'ils pénètrent le verre.

  22. #22

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by the_good_life View Post
    Here's a more detailed account of the Brochet study:
    http://www.academie-amorim.com/us/la...01/brochet.pdf

    Unfortunately even this lacks some key information that would help clarify some of the issues at hand here, e.g. what the experience level of the tasters was (professionals, members of a wine brotherhood - not that it would be hard to find experienced tasters in Bordeaux) or whether they evaluated the wines in each other's presence or isolated. As these were not amateurs I would expect that factors capable of influencing the result were judiciously eliminated, but the detailed set up is not given here.
    I hate debating especially when theres incomplete information, but even if the testers were tested individually they could still have felt a "social pressure" or if they lived in Bordeux especially a certain "national pressure" to vote the one they were told was most expensive as best... its such a complicated issue
    Quote Originally Posted by the_good_life View Post
    The text does point out that the general results had been previously well established, and are in fact commonly known among experts, and that the purpose of this particular experiment was clarifying a subset of issues relating to wine evaluation.
    I actually got so upset and tried this at dinner, my mom was not fooled by white wine turned red by food colouring. I poured a bit and asked her what do you think of this wine? she said it tastes weird, very different, something weird about it, she doesnt like it (my mom really doesnt like white wine btw), where did I get this anyway?? what is this stuff??? etc etc. She didn't say it tasted like a white wine, but she definatley said it tastes weird and she doesnt like it. I tried not to load my questions at all, I didn't ask anything like "what kind of wine does it taste like"? but im sure I could have gotten the correct answer out of her if I tried hard enough. My mom is not an "experienced wine tester". The wine used was Chateau de la Chartreuse Sauternes 96, I'm not a wine drinker, it was just laying around, from my rather basic experience Id say it tastes like the typical white wine. if anyone wants to repeat my little experiment on someone they know it would be interesting. try to keep it as unbiased as possible of course... Its like colouring sprite black and trying to fool me into thinking its coke, I just don't get it ??
    Quote Originally Posted by the_good_life View Post
    Both wines and essential oil compositions are so complex and subject to so many factors (origin, age, processing, blending) that fully blind tastings/smellings are in fact utterly pointless. Without a guideline (these are all Syrahs, these are various vintages of the same wine, these are various néroli harvests from Morocco etc.) determined by an interest (let's see wetherv there is a difference between barrique and chipped wine, let's study the differences between Tunisian and Moroccan neroli) even the greatest expert will have to resort to groping speculation. Frame of reference is cognitively both restrictive, because it suggests chosing certain options over others based on experience, prejudice etc., yet essential for making any kind of reasonable judgment at all.

    Added: In terms of consumer expectations, I believe there are two powerful, irreconcilable assumptions these days, which may strongly determine actual product evaluations - and in particular cases may or may not correspond to empirical facts: one is that high price signifies high quality (e.g. Creed must be good, because it' so expensive), the other is that high price merely signifies brand/prestige value and that the same quality can be had at discount prices (e.g.: the smoked salmon at my local discounter for 1.99 is just as good as wild sockeye that costs 6 times the amount).
    i suppose this type of thinking has come along with the age that we live in, where some things really are expensive because theyre worth it, and other things are just expensive because enough people with enough cash are stupid enough you never know which scenario its going to be
    Last edited by smellyliquid; 1st March 2008 at 02:03 AM.

  23. #23

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Sauternes is actually a very untypical white whine - it's a sweet dessert wine characterized by botrytis (noble rot) and could not ever be taken for a (dry) red. I'm not sure you've recreated the original experiment's conditions - poor Mom .
    My Wardrobe
    II est de forts parfums pour qui toute matière/Est poreuse. On dirait qu'ils pénètrent le verre.

  24. #24

    Default Re: Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by irish View Post
    You are welcome...
    I am not trying to say that Creed fragrances are not good. They are very user-friendly IMO, even BdP.
    Erolfa is one of my top 3 fragrances... and yet it is often considered to be one of the cheapest smelling of my EDTs. People always like to smell mi collection... and I believe they give more honest opinions since I decant my scents to different atomizers and they never have a tag.

    Further, VIW... If it were not Creed it would never had generated the hype it had here... Best summer scent? :S smells like something Tommy Bahama would sell for 1/4 of the price.
    BdP is a great fragrance, but I am pretty sure a lot of the people that talk about it here have never actually smelled it, and when they finally do there are more than 500 threads telling the back of their head: it is good, it is the best fragrance ever...

    And it goes on, not only about quality. You hear X has a note Y... it could be wrong but all of a sudden everybody smells it. E.g. Ungaro III being dark dark. Where?! D&GpH is waaay darker than UIII.
    I am just saying the obvious, price and prestige greatly affect our perception. Is that bad? not entirely otherwise I would have left BN long time ago.
    Interesting your perceptions on Ungaro111 vs D&G Ph.
    I used to think Ungaro 111 was dark, but I wore it recently in the middle of summer and wondered where the dark went. D&G Ph I tend to think of as thickish rather than dark.
    Renato

  25. #25

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by the_good_life View Post
    Sauternes is actually a very untypical white whine - it's a sweet dessert wine characterized by botrytis (noble rot) and could not ever be taken for a (dry) red. I'm not sure you've recreated the original experiment's conditions - poor Mom .
    shoot, it tasted like any other white to me. I guess a bit sweet yea... I'm not into wine at all so you'll have to pardon me it all tastes like liquid rotten bread to me I'll try again with something else on my girlfriend, my parents make their own wine oak barrels and all, so ill tint a store bought white red again and tell her its a red my parents made, she won't have any suspicions we'll see what happens. This time ill make sure its dry!

  26. #26

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by smellyliquid View Post
    shoot, it tasted like any other white to me. I guess a bit sweet yea... I'm not into wine at all so you'll have to pardon me it all tastes like liquid rotten bread to me I'll try again with something else on my girlfriend, my parents make their own wine oak barrels and all, so ill tint a store bought white red again and tell her its a red my parents made, she won't have any suspicions we'll see what happens. This time ill make sure its dry!
    "tastes like any other white"??? that's like saying "it smells like any other male fragrance".

    this raises an interesting point.....but probably the topic of a different thread.

    Given the sensation of taste is dependent on olfactory information..shouldn't someone with an interest in fragrances have a modicum of ability in differentiating different tastes.

    but as i said...probably off topic here.

    AZTEC
    Last edited by aztec; 2nd March 2008 at 02:19 PM. Reason: make more polite

  27. #27

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bromo33333 View Post

    The case study that made the biggest impression on me was Jack Daniel's Whiskey in Japan in the late 1980's. When trade barriers fell, the whiskey went form about US$50/L to US$25/L and sales fell off. They ended up raising the price back up to $50/L and the sales recovered.

    I guess this explains Caviar!
    I actually like caviar! Though I've only ever tasted "cheap" caviar..

    From something I remember reading awhile back, the reason for that Jack Daniels drop in sales wasn't because people associated cheaper with less good, but because in Japan there are many occasions when you are obligated to give gifts to all your friends. People tend to buy items with stable and standard prices that everyone knows, so that they don't feel like they're being cheap, or not reciprocating vs what someone gave them. WHiskey bottles, and a certain kind of melon and a few other standard items are staples of gift giving. Once the whiskey went to $25 it wasn't worth giving anymore so people switched to other items in the $50 range.

    Any a recent democracynow.org radio report (this is the best newshow in North America in my opinion) they were talking about water issues, and according to one study they went to fancy restaurants and made fake "water menus" where they made up a whole list of phoney waters like "Eau de Robinet" (which means tapwater) costing about $7 a bottle. Meanwhile every water was just tap water. The people who bought them were interviewed, and asked if it was worth buying this water vs tap water and they would go on and on about the flavour, etc.

    Har, har.

    But while I think there is a huge psychological effect because of high price, I still think that Montales and Creeds and other niche houses that charge very high prices, have in general way better stuff than most designer fragrances, which actually are not particularly cheap either at retail.
    CAESAR SEEKS:
    Parfums d'Empire: Fougére Bengale

    CAESAR SWAPS/SELLS:
    Sa Majesté La Rose



  28. #28

    Default Re: The perception of perfumes. Common knowledge but...

    Quote Originally Posted by aztec View Post
    "tastes like any other white"??? that's like saying "it smells like any other male fragrance".

    this raises an interesting point.....but probably the topic of a different thread.

    Given the sensation of taste is dependent on olfactory information..shouldn't someone with an interest in fragrances have a modicum of ability in differentiating different tastes.

    but as i said...probably off topic here.

    AZTEC
    probably cuz im not a big wine drinker. Like by that I mean I barely drink wine at all. When I said
    "tastes like any other white" I didnt actually mean it tastes absolutley exactly and identically like all other whites, regardless of region or price, I meant it tastes like a white wine. the way french fries taste like french fries, even though they can taste wildly different depending where you get them. They all still taste like fries. It tasted like a white wine. I will try the experiment again with a drier white wine, I'll get someone who knows a little more about wine to help me this time!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Loving perfume on the Internet since 2000