Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
I found a very interesting article in yesterday's Le Monde, a leading french daily newspaper. It says that LVMH is insourcing back the manufacturing of their perfumes, starting with 4 recent Dior creations that are now entirely manufactured in-house and no longer by IFF, Givaudan and the like. Miss Dior Chérie, for instance, was created by Christine Nagel for Givaudan in 2005 to rejuvenate the classic Miss Dior with notes of strawberry ice cream and caramelized popcorn (yuck).
It was not the commercial success Dior expected so they reformulated it and cancelled their contract with Givaudan. The article insists that it was precisely the reformulation that made it possible to insource back the manufacturing at Givaudan's expense. Givaudan has lost a muti million contract and can't do much about it since with the reformulation it is not their perfume anymore.
Sorry for the quote in French but this part essentially says that the same story happened to Kenzo Flowers (formerly manufactured by Firmenich), Dior Homme (IFF) and Fahrenheit (Symrise).Dior a rapatrié la fabrication d'autres parfums, dont il a, chaque fois, modifié la formule. D'autres sous-traitants du parfum ont subi le même sort que Givaudan : la dernière version de Kenzo Flowers n'est plus réalisée par Firmenich, celle de Dior Homme n'est plus confiée à IFF et enfin, la dernière version en date de Fahrenheit - la première fut d'ailleurs cosignée par François Demachy - n'est plus réalisée par Symrise.
LVMH has been contacted by Le Monde but they were not available for comments on on the rationale for insourcing back those fragrances. I guess that the R word is still a big taboo at LVMH.
Dans ces quatre cas, les nouveaux parfums n'ont donc plus les mêmes caractéristiques olfactives que les précédentes versions. Si bien que les sous-traitants ne peuvent en rien revendiquer la paternité de ces nouveautés.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Dior has also brought Dioressence inhouse, which explains why the current formulation is basically a recreated smell-alike.
The new Eau Sauvage Extreme being so blatantly different from the old one, I suspect it can be added to the list.
Thanks for posting this. Very interesting to read.
Very interesting, Burr's book lead me to believe that contracts were not part of usual perfume business but perhaps times have changed/he's wrong.
This is very interesting and perhaps a good direction - to go inhouse ?
Thanks for the info. I hope this means the quality will go back up.
Fascinating! Any speculation by anybody as to the reason? For example, is LVMH so strapped for cash that welching on contracts is required? Or are they feeling that they lost control over the compositions, and that they have to play hardball with the big boys? Or are the big boys balking on the "heritage formulation" idea? Worst case scenario - is the industry starting to fracture in some way? Is "insourcing" just preliminary to re-outsourcing to smaller, cheaper players that would not be "made in France/Italy"? I can come up with all sorts of speculations - what I'm wondering is if anybody knows or has a good guess as to the real reason.
Very interesting. I'm reading between the lines in the recent interview with Demachy a bit more closely now:
I hope this means Dior can create, or re-create, or maintain (depending on which ones you are looking at) a more distinctive house style in the same way Guerlain & Chanel have been able to.
Pure speculation but here's a happy scenario / equation:
Demachy & Wasser talking to each other about their frustrations with IFRA + LVMH $$$ = potentially interesting stuff for us.
thanks for the info
Discover my Guest Reviewer Of The Day here
Love that linked article even more on a second reading. It was intellectually refreshing to hear somebody say exactly WHY the restrictions on oakmoss and treemoss are out-of-touch, rather than just that they're stupid.
There does need to be a reality check here. My chemically unaware wife can buy gallons of toilet bowl cleaner, which is essentially gelled, concentrated hydrochloric acid (one might rather accurately describe it as the napalm of skin-burning acids) - and yet vintage Mitsouko is some kind of danger that people can't be allowed to buy, period? Ahem..... yeah. One doesn't need scientific intuition to see that there is a happy medium out there that we could be finding.
I'm about to read Perolaise's pieces on IFRA - it will be interesting to read between the lines on those, now, too!
i hope this is good news and that the rest of the LVMH perfume portfolio would be restored to their original glory. Vintage samsara returning anyone? or perhaps, parure and derby recreated for commercial markets? this does look good.
perhaps finally monsieur arnault has realized that their perfumes are not luxurious anymore and he's taking the right step to recreating luxury in perfumes.
seeking mitsouko 50ml's cap....desperately!!
Sitting on the sidelines here - I don't really know how the industry works - but my guess is that any break from using the big guys will be a two-pronged thing.
If a Dior (for instance) was created by a perfumer at IFF / Givaudan etc. and is (a) successful, much loved and (b) being reformulated to hell - then I can understand the house whose name is on it wanting to reformulate in-house themselves. However, they don't own the formula so they will be, despite all the tools available to them, 'rendering a copy' or 'creating something inspired by' the original formula, right? Difficult. Could lead to an improvement but could just as easily miss that 'secret ingredient' and fall flat on its face.
On the other hand - starting new fragrances from scratch in-house and having a wider access to suppliers and laboratories for ingredients bodes well, IMO, for more distinctive and original work. Ellena & Malle seem to make an art of tracking down and customising ingredients from specific sources, (rather than relying totally on one major supplier with a vested interest in pushing its own 'captives') and Mathilde Laurent at Cartier seems to be on a creative roll - not sure how that works but the quality is there.
I may be completely misinterpreting the thrust of what seems to be going on here but it seems like a really interesting development to me.
For those interested there is a bit more opinion on this over at Grain de Musc (June 2011):
Whichever way you look at it this is a bit of a shake up.
Are LVMH flexing their muscles and being ungrateful to their longterm loyal suppliers, casting them aside to boost profits?
Are LVMH reclaiming artistic integrity for their brands by taking on a more wholistic approach to production in an effort to offer customers a more unique experience, un-fettered by the necessity of using the 'patented' ingredients of Givaudan, IFF, Quest et al, maybe even stepping out from under the dark shadow cast by the IFRA?
Maybe we could get Tim Sebastien at BBC onto this - another one for the Doha debates or something?
Licensing has its risk: manufacturers control processes that aren't evident for licensers, this meaning, the licensee has to dedicate huge efforts in order to supervise manufacturing processes. Plus, manufacturers will press things in their favour, be it pressing noses to use the last aroma chemical developed by them before it goes public or tweaking it and releasing smell - alike scents under different brands (*). It does mean LVMH will have to assume costs, but I bet they must be taking in mind the fact that their luxury goods are, somehow, loosing their luster. I hope it is for their best...
(*) Take the recent release of Aqua Fahrenheit, top notes are very similar to the recently released Kenzo Boisee.
How embarrassing this is for the French, really.In June 16th 2006 the final court of appeal in France ruled that “the fragrance of a perfume does not constitute the creation of a form of expression that can benefit from the protection given to works of art.”
Last edited by pluran; 10th June 2011 at 06:33 AM.