Bond no. 9 has launched a new Harrods-exclusive fragrance, Harrods Rose:
Exclusively for Harrods, legendary NY fragrance house Bond No.9 has created an Anglo-American scent which celebrates every olfactory dimension of the rose. Presented in a softly seductive Harrods Superstar flacon, this fragrance is destined to capture you’re heart and become the centerpiece of your fragrance wardrobe.
The notes feature white narcisse, tuberose, white rose, musk, ambrette seed and cashmere wood.
Bond no. 9 Harrods Rose is available in 50 (£110) or 100 (£190) ml Eau de Parfum. (via harrods)
See also: Bond no. 9 Saks-en-rose.
41 Comments
Read more about commenting at Now Smell This.
Didn’t they just do another rose? Am I imagining things?
The bottle is pretty, but I have no interest in this at all. Just sounds sort of meh.
They did the one for Saks (link above) and there are a few in the regular Bond line too, yeah.
Last week I was in Harrod’s, London. I was wandering through the store when, WALLAH!, that unforgettable smell of Harrod’s Bond no 9 ROSE wafted in the air. I bought it for my mother. It is this year’s favorite for all of the girls in our family. Last year was versace. This year it is Harrod’s Rose. It is fabulous!
Every single sentence is a treat!
“legendary NY fragrance house Bond No.9″ -legendary?!?
” an Anglo-American scent ” …? … ROTFL!!!!
“destined to capture you’re heart and become the centerpiece of your fragrance wardrobe!”
wow, super-confident!
As Bond n°9 could knock off my Frederic Malles, and with an
Anglo-American scent, no less…
I really like “softly seductive Harrods Superstar flacon”, and did they really say “capture *you’re* heart”? I would try it because of the blend of flowers listed, but I haven’t had much luck with this house.
saw that too…. there is a sad shortage of good proofreaders these days.
No, there are still plenty of us out there. Nobody wants to employ us, that’s all. They think it’s enough to run a piece of copy through a spellchecker–and not all publications even bother to do that.
I was in the UK recently and all the newspapers, even the supposedly good ones, have grammatical mistakes in them–”reign in” and “flaunt the law”, to name two I saw on the last day I was there (in two different papers). A spellchecker can never catch things like that.
“Flaunt the law.” In a respectable newspaper? I’m shocked – SHOCKED.
Well, maybe less shocked than I am appalled.
I hear you there! Makes me just cringe as I worked in copyediting back in my (poor) post-college days.
or rather, I here you their… grooan!! ;(
Yes, pyramus, that’s a much better way of putting it. My hometown paper had a front page article about kids not knowing their homonyms anymore… and in the first paragraph, they used the wrong their/they’re/there. It was a struggle not to send a letter to the editor…especially as that was a paper that interviewed but neglected to hire me.
Suzanne – I had a brief stint in publishing right after college myself. It was my intended career, but life intended differently, I guess.
You weren’t reading the Guardian, by any chance, were you, pyramus? It prides itself in making as many typos as possible.
It should be ‘… an Anglo-American that celebrates…’ not ‘which’. hardly anyone knows how to use ‘which’ and ‘that’ these days.
Bela, you’d enjoy my 5 yr old… I caught her correcting my 14 yr old’s grammar.
When we chuckled, she vehemently denied it and insisted she’d used the same bad grammar as her sister… but we all heard the “m” on the end of her “who”.
That nobody (including us) can afford a good proofreader anymore is a tragedy.
Indeed it is. LOL! *grumble grumble*
LOL! I know, we owe you back pay.
There is indeed a shortage of good proofreaders, or, more precisely, people who care about good proofreading. My students’ papers reflect the same problems we’re discussing here. It’s sad that we think spellchecking is the answer to all of our problems!
Having done it for a living, I agree wholeheartedly with all above comments on editing & proofreading. Messrs. Strunk & White are crying in heaven right about now….
I love this! I came home from work to find that I started a rant session on one of my favorite topics! Bless you gals.
Yeah….what’s with the ethnic specification? Hmmmm…..I wonder if their next project will be an African-American fragrance? Or an Asian-American fragrance?
It does seem strange and offensive in that “you think they’d know better” sort of way. I was so unenthused about this that I didn’t even bother reading the ad copy earlier.
Since this is a Harrods exclusive I’m sure they mean Anglo as in British not as in Caucasian. At least I hope that’s what they mean!
Yeah, I got British out of “Anglo” as well.
Still hate the rest of the ad copy.
I’m quite sure that’s what they mean…I don’t see anything offensive about it.
I am sure there was no racial connotation.
And I personally didn’t get it that way.
But that was a strange (hilarious?) way of expressing the concept they were collaborating with a British chain/shop/whatever.
Looked like an excerpt from radio communication during WWII, rather than a presentation of a fragrance from a *legendary* perfume house. At least, it sounds pretty strange when translated, since is there an Anglo-american perfumery tradition?
English is definetly not my native language, but I feel they could have been way more elegant and appropriate in expressing the concept, there is no shorthand of nuances, out there, in anglo-american dictionary territory…
What she said.
‘course they do.
As a Brit with American parents, I can vouch for the fact that “Anglo” doesn’t have ANY of the same connotations in the UK that it does in the US. It’s simply the demonym for English people, and encompasses all citizens, no matter their family’s ethnic background. As an American brand, I’m surprised that they included the phrase at all, as it’s so heavily freighted with racial cargo in the US, but I suppose the fact that it’s aimed at the British market made Bond a little less wary of its use.
I think they literally meant the connection between the US and UK, not anything racial.
All I can think is: Daisy will really want to try this…
HA! Me too!
Carlos – I can read that 2 ways, and I think both apply.
She might not – I think that the only Bond she likes is Chinatown. I haven’t had much luck with the house myself and I don’t even like Chinatown that much, it’s only okay for me.
I did have to laugh at the “legendary” part of the ad copy though – it always makes me think of Barney Stinson saying everything is going to be legen- wait for it – dary.
Hmmm….I “THOUGHT” she liked the last Rose they put out.
It’s possible – whenever Bond comes up, I tend to forget about it 10 seconds later thanks to the fact that none of them really work for me and some of them have been downright awful – like, saw-my-arm-off-to-get-it-off-me horrible.
I’ve only tried 2, but that was my reaction to both.
I got some of the Saks exclusive En Rose from her. It is like most Bond fragrances on me – strong and seems to get stronger as the day goes on, and on, and on…. Even if I start out liking them I am so tired of them after eight or nine hours that I want to saw my own arm off. I like Chinatown and adore the bottle, but I find AW Silver Factory to be the most wearable of the lot. This Harrods exclusive rose sounds an awful lot like the Saks one. I get a lot of tuberose from it, too.
I found it very tuberosy, and actually quite liked it.
It does sound vaguely pretty, but frankly, Bond has long since lost my loyalty and interest. They seem to have such snide contempt for their customers that I can’t bring myself to even sniff their products anymore. Good old Laurice will have to soldier on without me: I’m sure the ladies of Harrods will adore it, and bless their cotton socks. But not me.
“…such snide contempt for their customers…”
Thank you. Now I know someone else feels the same.
I have to admit to an urge to try this if it goes out side of Harrod’s, but I’m not very hopeful, since I’ve yet to find one of the Bond’s that I like well enough to purchase. But the ad copy… priceless!
At first I thought I had missed something, being a perfumista in training. Bond is legendary? I thought they were a newish company? But the “Anglo-American scent” part did me in. I had this image of a pair of FABULOUS WWII era British ladies discussing how to best use their clothing ration stamps to purchase the perfume.
“But if we skip a new coat this winter, we can get Harrods Rose! It’s for the Anglo-American alliance!”
“Dont’ be silly dear. We’ll pool our points, and then host splits on the bottle.”
I like the bottle design
and omgosh I went to London in November to do some Christmas shopping and we went in Harrods. it’s probably the only place where Bond No9 is available, how could I forget to give them a sniff
I’m not usuallt too fond of rose perfumes, they smell nothing like when you smell a real rose.