At any rate, there is no guarantee that the quality of a niche scent is in any way lower only because a niche scent costs under 100$
There are Niche bottles that are overly priced $200+ and others that are low as $100 (or lower). What would you consider a respectable price for a Niche Fragrance? I think anywhere from $100-$150 would be respectable IMO.
At any rate, there is no guarantee that the quality of a niche scent is in any way lower only because a niche scent costs under 100$
I think they should be priced high enough to prevent every Tom, Dick and Harry from wearing them, but low enough for people such as myself to enjoy (I'm a student).
I don't have an opinion on this. I think most of the people who answer are really answering the question "how much are you willing to pay for a niche fragrance?"
It's worth what someone is willing to pay for it.
The Funny Part about Niche Houses is that the compromise here is to create art and NOT to please the standardized Mass.
Most of Mainstream Frags at the moment are relatively cheap, because they equally simply do smell cheap.
Niche Houses utilize top Raw materials (there are few exceptions) on their creations, and of course quality comes with a price.
Besides, I don't believe Niche houses are aiming to reach the average consumer, as such consumer might not even be able to smell the difference between a gorgeous perfume and a detergent (Yes, Most of Mainstream Frags available at the moment smells like detergent, specially the stupid Sport Editions)
Price is irrelevant in this case, for example: Amouge Reflection costs 220 Euros versus Le Male, 70 Euros.
IMO Le Male is more expensive compared to Amouage Reflection, simply because, Reflection:
1) Its Made of Top Raw Materials;
2 ) You won't run a risk to to smell like 95% of the Male population on planet earth;
3) It does not rely on a stupid, vulgar campaign showing semi naked man to sale the scent, as the scent here, is the star, and NOT a campaign manipulating the consumer;
I believe we should not be restricting the price tag on Niche Frags, instead we should be asking ourselves:
- Can I afford it?
- Do I understand it?
- Would such Frag inspire me?
Art is priceless!
Last edited by Bonoanimoes; 10th July 2011 at 11:06 PM.
They're obviously making a huge profit on their products, but if people are willing to pay it then that's what it's worth. Either way you look at it there's really no way to justify the cost of a $300 bottle of cologne or perfume.
Last edited by Bonoanimoes; 10th July 2011 at 11:00 PM.
Less than $100
Last edited by pluran; 12th September 2011 at 02:00 AM.
I'm wondering, do niche houses have to charge more because they are niche. I mean because their audience is substantially lessened by the fact they are not in supermarkets and cheap places they must sell substantially less (correct me if I'm wrong)?
Obviously one associates niche houses with better ingredients = more expensive. Is the fact they are more expensive to create the reason they aren't sold in the same places as the designer scents are? You'd of thought if the niche fragrance is of higher quality (non-offensive) and longer lasting, it'd sell more than it would do normally, selling at just above the designer price level at supermarkets and cheaper department stores.
I mean like Nike sells more than Paul Smith? (please correct me if I'm wrong).
I honestly think prices are more often set by the, "What can we get away with?" than by the use of "best raw materials." Amouage knows what they can get away with - a lot. I believe that Guerlain and Chanel use raw materials of a similar quality to many niche houses. So, IMHO, niche is often over priced.
I don't agree with the art theory at all. It's made in a laboratory. That's like calling Tylenol or Oxycodone a masterpiece. No alcohol is being made or any aging process to create a certain vintage. It's made by a chemist. Some are great at making drugs and medicine while others are good at making and understanding the complexities of fragrances. In a $300 fragrance everything is overpriced from the chemists to the package it's put in.
85% of the money is spent of packaging.
Last edited by pluran; 12th September 2011 at 01:59 AM.
In another hand Le Male is happily smiling at the 95% of the population on planet earth on the supermarket shelves.
There are scents for everybody available, (fortunately).
Please do yourself a favour and watch:
Afterwards let us know what do you think about Jean Claude Ellena - IMO opinion he is, as talented as famous Painter or a poet, and YES Perfumery is an art, that brings back memories, that comforts your soul, if Perfumery is not an art, why are we here at Basenotes for? I am here to learn, to enhance my knowledge on scents, and to exchange ideas with different persons, even if such persons do not share the same ideology, to evolve!
Louis Pasteur, John Tyndall and ultimately Alexander Fleming paving the way for further antimicrobials is genuine laboratory based genius and in my opinion far surpasses "masterpiece" status. It goes far further than ANY fragrance can ever reach. At the end of the day fragrance is fragrance, this "masterpiece" will go down in human history.
This, I know, is strictly my opinion (as a biologist), but I see drug research, trial and release as an art form. It takes years to research a single pathological process contributing to a disease, it takes years to develop a substance to antagonise this process, it takes years and years and years to get this substance ready for human release. Proper art - in a lab..
Last edited by boosh; 11th July 2011 at 12:16 AM.
Should be free.
Anyone against buying a bottle of CREED?
I really wont consider anything more than around $225 for 50ml, and even that is extreme. Anything above that is purely over priced in my opinion.
Further, we don't even understand how smell works, much the less the almost infinite ways in which the 3000+ aromatic molecules we have access to can combine and interact with each other. When you sit down to formulate a scent, you're partaking in an artistic task. Yes, your knowledge of your materials comes in handy - just as a painter's knowledge of various techniques and brush strokes comes in handy - but the techniques and knowledge are only there to serve the creation of a piece of art.
Honestly, in which ways does fragrance qualify more as
art than sciencescience than art (sorry for the original mistake)? (btw, it is not chemists who are making scents but perfumers, most of whom do have some understanding of chemistry but are not qualified chemists and a number of which have nothing but the most cursory undersanding of chemistry).
Last edited by SculptureOfSoul; 11th July 2011 at 06:26 AM.
if you ask me they should be for free. I don't actually WANT to pay more for them, nor do I care if anyone else does.
I don't care much for the exclusivity either. Anyone can enjoy the music enjoy, and I'm fine with it.
As to the question at hand - I'll pay up to $300 if I absolutely LOVE a scent and feel it is best of class. Would I rather get the scent for less? Of course. But I understand the art and, most especially, the difficulty in creating a truly wonderful scent, and if it just so happens that it's not only wonderful but I absolutely love it - I'll forego any trivial extras for a month or two and snag it.
Pluran is right though in that most niche don't really use much better quality materials than designers. I've come across a number of niche scents that are decidedly inferior in every way. And for the most part, it's not the quality of ingredients you are paying for. I can almost guarantee you that 95% of niche scents cost less than $10 in ingredients, and 90% less than $5.
In very general terms, if it's more than approx. USD 2 per ml. I look twice at it.
I still think this is pushing it but if I look at my desert island list they top out close to this, some well inside. If an EDT/EDP runs higher than that then it would have to be special (to my taste) to warrant the additional cost - there are some, (Sous le Vent, L'Heure Fougueuse, Vetiver Tonka) and I don't like it, but so be it.
I think Parfums de Nicolai & Chanel Exclusifs @ approx. USD 1 per mil are a good benchmark for quality vs price in the niche realm. Guerlain Les Parisennes @ approx. USD 2 per ml. are at the top end. If it falls between these in terms of cost and quality then fine, but it depends on how you define quality.
Last edited by mr. reasonable; 11th July 2011 at 05:23 AM.
I buy what I like, so I must buy 100ml because if I love it, Ill prolly spray around 15 to 20 sprays per application. Therefore 100ml is a must. If it costs more than $2, like mr.reasonbale said above, Ill have to really love it.
I've noticed most excellent niche are priced around $ 140 for 100ml.
Thats my benchmark.
I firmly believe that at the very end, is the consumer that makes the price. If we still have people that will to pay ridiculous prices for a Xerjoff, Profumum or for whatever other offensive niche's release, we should expect anything....
Myself I decided that, with a very few exceptions, I won't spend more than $150 on a fragrance, no matter what it is....
Discover my Guest Reviewer Of The Day here
I would have to answer the question in a different way....while I believe that some of the prices for various niche houses (Profumum and Xerjoff for example) are ridiculous! I think many niche houses need to offer more various sizes....I have to say as a collector, that I would be more highly tempted to pull the buy lever on many fragrances IF there was a smaller (50ml) or below offered. Unfortunately because I own SO many larger bottles, at this point I am NOT interested in anything over say a 1.7 oz. bottle...I just can't use it that fast.....so I fully appreciate companies like Carthusia or Atelier Cologne who offer sizes that fit my needs....
Niche perfumery is above all a business. Price the fragrances at whatever levels the market will bear. If you think it's overpriced, don't buy it. Look at the luxury brands. In the final analysis, a $5000 leather handbag is still a handbag. Don't make the mistake of bringing in rationale or logic into this picture, folks. We are living in a world where playing professional football is financially much more rewarding than working as firemen who put their own lives in mortal danger to save another.
I think that the experience wearing a really nice cologne that just does "it" for you is priceless. When I first wore Reflection, it was an experience. The smell stayed with me all day, and it was the nicest thing I had ever put on my skin. It made me FEEL a certain way. Refined...masculine...sophisticated. It was like a drug that has certain side effects. Would I have liked to have spent half of the $220 I spend buying it? Absolutely! But for the way this fragrance continues to make me feel when I wear it, I would do it all over again.
Having said all that, I think $125 is a fair price for a niche fragrance.
It should cost whatever you are willing to pay , however I do have ceiling so if something its teh megadolla I aint buyin it
I too feel that this question is impossible to answer unless it is specified which fragrance we're talking about.
Anything over $110-$115 for 50 ml is off-putting. It just feels like too much to pay. And I agree that more perfumes should be available in 30 ml sizes.
My husband was on the verge of buying Santal de Mysore when we were in Boston on Saturday but he could not get over the mental obstacle of paying $200 for 50 ml. He bought something entirely different -- Atelier Orange Sanguine-- for $145 (for which sum he got 6.7 ounces.)
Last edited by 30 Roses; 11th July 2011 at 04:51 PM.
I mean, on some level all arts are chemical/technical processes. Different paint types? Different chemicals. A CG movie? Obviously, very very technical. As are photoshop digital illustrations. Does a drawing become non-art when it is some % digitally created/altered? If so, at what %, and how do you make that distinction? And what about music created by synthesizers? Where does that fall?
I'm not trying to antagonize, I'm genuinely curious to hear your answers.
This discussion leads nowhere unless you agree on the same definition of the term "art". I've been through similar discussions already and was quite surprised how many different conceptions about art there are.
Art can be found in all things with enough depth in your thinking and understanding of it.
art is something that has a value for some and is utterly useless for everyone.
My problem with calling fragrance true art is the fact it is made with one formula, man made chemicals, it can be repeated consistently (unless it's a Creed. Bah!), and once the formula's finalized any number of chemists (perfumers) can make it. It's a rinse and repeat process to me and for that I don't consider it true art. The art I will give it credit for is the original creation by the perfumer and the bottle itself. For that I'd say it's 80% science and 20% art.
so, how about photography then? Is it not art? Or digital media that can be copied as much as you'd like, with no aura that would make it intrinsically unique?
I agree, they wouldn't be good art pieces. That's why they are mostly printed as good as possible, and wet signed, and in limited prints to give the illusion of authenticity and exclusivity. But is it what makes art, art? Well I'm sure many students are currently debating over the issue as I'm writing this, and it's not like they will have a consensus any time soon.