Yes my Carnal Flower has a 5 year expiry date.
Taking a cue from one of the so called Malle copycats (http://www.basenotes.net/threads/254...zine?p=1866967), Malle has decided to put expiry dates on it's perfumes.
Just this morning I received a brand new fresh bottle of Musc Ravageur. On closer inspection I found that they've stamped the bottom of the bottle with two dates.
The first being Fab 1/2010 and then EXP 1/2015.
Well atleast the self touted leader of the pack has a secret process by which their perfumes last 5 times longer than their copycat Le Labo, whose perfumes falter after just 1 year of mixing.
Yes my Carnal Flower has a 5 year expiry date.
I don't think it's new. My two bottles are about a year or so old and they have expiry dates on them of 5 years just like Mimi's.
Obsessions of the Moment- Kristiansand EDC, Green Irish Tweed, Zizan
Granted, we've known each other for some time. It don't take a whole day to recognize sunshine. ~ Common Sense
Glad to see they are 5 years.
Assuming they are in fact that long!
Does anyone know when the fab and exp dates started going onto the bottles?
I'm looking at purchasing a Malle at the mo and it has no dates underneath - trying to work a rough age.
I wish they all would do that. At least a manufactured date would be nice - so you know if its been sitting around forever or just newly created.
1. Creed - Spice & Wood
2. Creed - Aventus
3. BrŘckner - Aoud 1
4. Armani PrivÚ - Oud Royal
5. by Kilian - Incense Oud
6. Dior - Vetiver
7. Les Nez - Turtle Vetiver Back
8. Neela Vermeire - Trayee
9. Amouage - Jubilation XXV
10. Creed - Royal English Leather
So what's the scoop? On the expiration date all you smell is alcohol???
I've personally never given those expiration dates any credence.
Please send ALL of your expired Malle fragrances to me. I will dispose of them safely.
Any clue as to release date on any perfume is helpful - the pre-IFRA'ed stuff is easier to locate!
Expiry dates appear to me as "parody" and marketing-"BS", too.
1.) It is bad if their perfumes should go off after 5 years. What a decline would that be, considering all the really great vintages around.
2.) It is bad if the expiry date has no relevance and is just a mean to induce fast consumation in order to accelerating the
process of buying anew.
A date of manifacture on the other hand, as dougzcar pointed out, would rather inspire the consumer's confidence in the brand he invests (in case of Malle) a hell of a lot money.
Just to be clear, yes the expiry is BS. Fine.
I'm curious about when this behavior of using dates started though. Does anyone know?
I actually want an older bottle of Une Fleur de Cassie and I'm wondering if an absence of the fab and exp dates indicates that it's old. Say pre-2009 for example.
I think no dates is a safe bet for 'vintage' - no idea when this actually started but I don't see any harm in it. I also think the further we are away from Paris & New York the more likelihood there will be earlier versions sitting in a stockis's cupboard somewhere.
Any perfume house that puts a clear, noncoded production date on its bottles (and packaging) should be handsomely thanked.
Current Top Ten:
1. Creed Millesime Imperial
2. Serge Lutens Chergui
3. Hermes Concentre d'Orange Verte
4. Creed Virgin Island Water
5. Chanel Eau de Cologne
6. Thierry Mugler Pure Havane
7. Van Cleef & Arpels Pour Homme
8. Bulgari Blu
9. Bond No. 9 New Haarlem
10. YSL Kouros
I think as Frederic Malle have changed their packaging recently, it will a good indication now which is older and which bottles are the newer ones. I prefer the old packaging myself.
I'm trying to buy all the Malle's I want now while I can still get the old caps...that way I'll at least have caps I can use to replace them.
It's a bit corny putting an exp date on the bottle, but I think people are also na´ve to think that their scents are exactly the same after five years, esp. after storing them at room temperature. The way in which they change and whether you find the effect appealing or not is beside the point; the mere fact that they do change is a loss of integrity from the original composition.
And it's my opinion that if a perfumer wants to use an aged wood oil or some other component that improves like cognac over time, it would be aged to perfection BEFORE it goes into the perfume. it would be a spectacular waste to include one ingredient that reaches its peak after 10 years when all the other ingredients have gone whiffy with decomposition. It makes no sense.
I think people cling to the idea of their scents having eternal life because they want it to be so and not because it is.
- - - Updated - - -
Also, it's hardly a coincidence that our older bottles have fewer top notes and seem "stronger" somehow--it's because they've gone off balance and become bottom-heavy. You might enjoy this perfectly well, but those new bottles that seem lighter and fresher (perhaps frustratingly so when we're always on the lookout for reformulation) may have more integrity than the older one whose smell you're accustomed to.