Comments on: Perfumista tip: on reformulations, or why your favorite perfume doesn’t smell like it used to

By: Elisita

Elisita — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 19:02:56 +0000

I know this comment is from forever ago, but as a member of the healthcare industry, I have to mention that all things need to be taken with a grain of salt. Natural does not equal “good” or “safe” and synthetic does not equal “bad” or “cancer”. E. Coli, Salmonella, any number of viruses….these are all natural; but you don’t want them in or around you if you can help it. On the other hand, the development of synthetic insulin and thyroid hormones have saved millions of lives; as many people could not tolerate naturally derived versions from cows or pigs, which yielded lots that weren’t exactly the same from one batch to another, and they are now readily available to all who need them. It’s the same with perfumes. Everything has it’s pluses and minuses.

By: DivineFragance

DivineFragance — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:49:17 +0000

It is by far, the best explanation-beautifuly writen, by the way, I have ever read on reformulations.
Once upon a time, I asked a pro if could be possible that Chanel 5 was “changed” several times-in particular, when I was a child, many, so many years ago; this person said to me something like this: “Not only is possible, and more than likely, but the reason noone is telling you the truth, is one simple fact, Chanel house cannot afford to recognize such a myth, a full legend, is not the same it once was”.
So thank you for your comment, in particular, regarding to international standards.

By: Robin

Robin — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 11:30:13 +0000

Companies have been doing “reserve lines” and the like (variations on an existing scent are more generally called “flankers”) for eons, so no, that isn’t a direct response to the reformulation really. And bear in mind that any flanker also has to adhere to IFRA standards, and they’re usually limited edition. Sometimes they’re more expensive and they actually use the extra money on the formula, but sometimes not.

By: marshaleigh

marshaleigh — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 22:10:52 +0000

Loved this article. I asked about this on your facebook page since I had no idea companies reformulated. It makes sense after reading all the reasons but it’s heartbreaking. Someone mentioned the original Jessica McClintock – that wonderful heavy lemon – it’s so weak now. My reason for looking into this was my anger at Clinique’s Aromatic Elixir. Today I just found this from “basenotes.net” forum: “Clinique has released a limited edition version of their 1972 iconic fragrance Aromatics Elixir called Aromatics Elixir Perfumer’s Reserve. It has a stronger white floral accent of jasmine sambac and tuberose set against the mossy-woody structure of the fragrance.” Well this is interesting news. Others must be complaining too perhaps? Maybe other companies will come out with “reserve” lines? What do you think?

By: Robin

Robin — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 01:17:23 +0000

Glad you liked it! Supposedly all the reissued Diors will be at Saks in the US.

By: LadyR

LadyR — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:59:17 +0000

Dioressence has been difficult to buy in the States the last few years – I just came back from Rome and found the newly packaged Dioressence in the Duty Free shop in Fiumicino airport.
It seems to have been reformulated but smells better than the
last reformulation and more like the vintage that I first wore in the 70′s. Hopefully it will be for sale in the US again soon. I bought
three large bottles to stock up!

By: Robin

Robin — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 23:10:19 +0000

I do not know, but it would be the rare fragrance that old that had *not* changed.

By: bloomans

bloomans — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:10:19 +0000

Has the Dolce Gabbana perfume changed? The one with the red top and clear glass bottle. I think it was their first fragrance. I used to love it , doesn’t smell like it used to when sprayed from bottle . The store clerk told me it was my chemistry that has changed.

By: Robin

Robin — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 02:32:42 +0000

If it is fraud, it is a very long-standing one; perfumes have been reformulated for years, some of them many times over by now.

By: maaries

maaries — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 01:17:27 +0000

I agree that the reformulations–without disclosure prior to purchase–is immoral, unethical, and would seem to me to be illegal if it acts as a fraud upon the buyer–which certainly seems to be the case. I remember back in the 1980′s (?) when GM put Chevrolet engines in Oldsmobiles without disclosing this to Olds purchasers. Big scandal and lawsuits–defrauded customers called it the “Chevmobile.” How is reformulating a perfume–and not disclosing it or changing the name–not the same sort of fraud? If the new formulations had a name like “Diorissimo Light” or “Diorissimo Reflections,” then you would know of the change and make a choice to try or not. What they are doing currently is clearly fraud–the customer is paying the price for a known scent, and they are getting something else. This is clear “bait and switch” to me. How about some lawyers out there bringing a class action suit on this fraud? They may continue to reformulate, but they should not be able to sell one product disguised as something else.