Why floods of new releases don’t do any good (Niche & Artisanal)

Me, reading all this market data.

Whoo boy!!! Yes, cherry oud yuzu perfumes for everyone; likely made by Tom Ford at $400 for 50ml and perfumed by Alberto Morillas' personal algorithm.

Also guys, try to keep personal attacks or attacks on character to a minimum, or else we'll attract the banhammer.

cheapimitation said:

Thanks for all this information, it is really interesting. But it mostly proves the point that Asian brands are catering to Asian tastes, makes sense! Lol

I think the point that @Guasón is referring to that has frequently been proposed as self evident fact without evidence, is the idea that Western companies catering to Asian markets have resulted in lackluster releases of light fruity florals... which makes this all the more ironic:


This notion has been floating around the fragrance community long enough to be cliche by now. The underlying (and vaguely xenophobic) assumption behind this belief is that we in the west are suffering through a decline in interesting releases because western brands are catering to a less sophisticated/more bland Asian pallete.

Of course this is not true, the cultural interaction has just expanded the fragrance pallete and made things all the more interesting. And you've handily disproved this idea with your post as well.

Click to expand...

Now regarding this message, which is directed at a small fraction of points & statistics I was actually providing :

You’re saying „But it mostly proves the point that Asian brands are catering to Asian tastes, makes sense! Lol“
Please read everything that was said before & after that :
Do brands like Dior, Guerlain & Louis Vuitton sound Asian to you ? These European brands in particular were the ones I was referencing with these changes initially. I could back this up again, but would end up copying the statistics from statista, Dior & LVMH I already provided, which correlate with the recent increased use of Asian & oriental notes that can be seen on statistics that multiple sources provide. The reason again being to please the Asian & eastern market.

Varanis Ridari said:

Me, reading all this market data.

Whoo boy!!! Yes, cherry oud yuzu perfumes for everyone; likely made by Tom Ford at $400 for 50ml and perfumed by Alberto Morillas' personal algorithm.

Also guys, try to keep personal attacks or attacks on character to a minimum, or else we'll attract the banhammer.View attachment 488894

Click to expand...

I didn’t even want to go there, my initial thread topic was about something completely different, but some people just love to argue for the sake of it, drag me into it and apparently I’m one of the only few that actually provides official statistics. Im going insane on my first week here

Schoeibksr said:

I’m predicting he will still find a way to talk around these things without providing any significant data because he is just a stubborn & desperate individual who simply likes to disagree. This is becoming a waste of time. This thread was about something completely different but here he is looking at this one little thing someone mentioned as a side note & makes a big war about it.
But bring it on, in case you should really have something significant to say, I will gladly keep this going.

Click to expand...

It's completely up to you, of course, but I'd gently advise against continuing a debate on this (really, let's be honest, obvious) point of contention. Once threads spiral off, it can be hard to get them back on track and discussing the original topic. Unfortunately, it's highly unlikely we will reach a positive end by continuing to argue in good faith. It's abundantly clear what's going on - you know it, I know it, I assume most of the people reading the thread know it as well.

You've made a good contribution to the forum in a very short space of time. This thread is a really good one, it's astute and clearheaded about the state of perfumery, which is always good to see on this forum. You can never have enough of that. Don't let some of the replies get you down. Keep it up.

slpfrsly said:

It's completely up to you, of course, but I'd gently advise against continuing a debate on this (really, let's be honest, obvious) point of contention. Once threads spiral off, it can be hard to get them back on track and discussing the original topic. Unfortunately, it's highly unlikely we will reach a positive end by continuing to argue in good faith. It's abundantly clear what's going on - you know it, I know it, I assume most of the people reading the thread know it as well.

You've made a good contribution to the forum in a very short space of time. This thread is a really good one, it's astute and clearheaded about the state of perfumery, which is always good to see on this forum. You can never have enough of that. Don't let some of the replies get you down. Keep it up.

Click to expand...

Thank you
I think you’re right. Continuing this way won’t do any good. With this I dove off to sleep & wish all of you a great night… Hopefully we can discuss my initial topic again soon

Schoeibksr said:

Thank you
I think you’re right. Continuing this way won’t do any good. With this I dove off to sleep & wish all of you a great night… Hopefully we can discuss my initial topic again soon

Click to expand...

Something to realize about BN (and maybe America, in general) is that there are people here who know how to use reasoned argument reinforced by factual evidence, but these folks are few in number. Some trial and error in various threads will reveal who those people are (and aren't). Hope you stick around, regardless!

Schoeibksr said:

Now regarding this message, which is directed at a small fraction of points & statistics I was actually providing :

You’re saying „But it mostly proves the point that Asian brands are catering to Asian tastes, makes sense! Lol“
Please read everything that was said before & after that :
Do brands like Dior, Guerlain & Louis Vuitton sound Asian to you ? These European brands in particular were the ones I was referencing with these changes initially. I could back this up again, but would end up copying the statistics from statista, Dior & LVMH I already provided, which correlate with the recent increased use of Asian & oriental notes that can be seen on statistics that multiple sources provide. The reason again being to please the Asian & eastern market.

Click to expand...

Well, the rest I find a bit less convincing. There's no doubt brands will try to appeal to all markets where they do business. But I remain skeptical that stats on the rise in use of certain ingredients are proof of regional targeted marketing and not just global market trends overall. I'm sure if you interviewed a random selection of New Yorkers you'd find just as much enthusiasm for oud as in Asia, and that tastes in California compared to New York are just as different as Beijing compared to Shanghai. It's just a bit hard to disentangle what is or isn't marketed for the "west" or the "east" when it comes to scent profile without making gross generalizations. Of course there are more obvious cases like valentines vs singles day themed promotions or lunar new year vs. Christmas collections. But these are usually quite superficial details, like special packaging.

I don't really care too much about this point, I mostly chimed in to say I agree with you and appreciated how your points dispelled some commonly held myths about Chinese tastes in perfume.

A point I do care about is the assertion that European company's catering to Asian taste is detrimental to the industry. This point is alluded to toward the end of this post:
Post in thread 'Why floods of new releases don’t do any good (Niche & Artisanal)'

This has whiffs of xenophobia to me, if you let in too much influence from the "other" you lose your own identity. Historically, at least in the arts this has proven over and over to be untrue. Many of the greatest artistic leaps forward are the result of cultural exchange (regrettably sometimes of asymmetric benefit in the past) and only worked to enrich and deepen the culture, not erase it. Liszt and Hungary, Debussy and Indonesia, Picasso and Spain, Gaugin and Polynesia.

To bring it back to the thread topic, would you assert that the Asian influence on the market is to blame for the flood of lackluster new releases?

What is interesting to me is how all the market analysis materials keep saying that Asian markets have growing interest in exotic new perfumes using local materials/cultural references…which are not exotic because they are local. Yuzu and oud and samurai are exotic in the west. Cowboys and hamburgers and top hats are exotic in the east.

The constant subtle insistance that Asian interest in local references is a turn to the exotic just raises so many questions in my mind about the credibility of the authors of the analysis. It brings to mind the article someone shared in another thread where some idiot analyst was providing perfume consumer market segment preference data for literal children who are like 8 years old.

Olympe de Gouges said:

What is interesting to me is how all the market analysis materials keep saying that Asian markets have growing interest in exotic new perfumes using local materials/cultural references…which are not exotic because they are local. Yuzu and oud and samurai are exotic in the west. Cowboys and hamburgers and top hats are exotic in the east.

The constant subtle insistance that Asian interest in local references is a turn to the exotic just raises so many questions in my mind about the credibility of the authors of the analysis. It brings to mind the article someone shared in another thread where some idiot analyst was providing perfume consumer market segment preference data for literal children who are like 8 years old.

Click to expand...

You’re mixing things up in case you mean the data shared here. The big European brands start to focus on “exotic“, “asian“ & “oriental“ notes to please Asian market. It’s “exotic“ from their point of view. No one said that it’s exotic for the Asians themselves ? Also, could you please be respectful in your tone & add to the initial topic instead ?

Olympe de Gouges said:

The constant subtle insistance that Asian interest (...) is a turn to the exotic just raises so many questions in my mind about the credibility of the authors of the analysis.

Click to expand...

Ironically, PStoller made this claim just last month. You see, it's exoticism that drives consumer preferences: Westerners want orientals and Asians want Western fragrances (Stetson's new hamburger and leather fragrance sure to fly off the shelves when it finally gets to market ). And I say good on them for making this claim; it's more than anyone else who wishes to desperately deny this factual reality has come up with so far. It may be a weak assessment - and it completely jars with the statistical data that was demanded (surprise, surprise...), as well as directly opposite to the argument you are making above - but it's better than nothing! By giving us a counter argument, we can unpick it by its own terms when, inevitably, it runs in to contradictions (revealing the nature of the claims for what they are). Without a counter-argument, it's just denialism: and but not nearly enough haha!



A more informed reading of the summary - as, once again, @Schoeibksr has made clear - is that "exotic" is used as it relates to the western and/or Anglospheric reader. It is a misreading on your part: to be both exotic and local at the same time is obviously contradictory and not what is being summarised.

Dig in to the data in your own time and you will see this readily enough.

You will also find the absence of oriental exoticism in the summary for western countries, which is slightly surprising primarily because Asians living in the west are a big driver for this trend as well as those still in Asia itself. Is it specifically Klaus in Copenhagen and Sarah in Brooklyn who are demanding fragrances filled with ouds, yuzus, saffrons, and cherries? The data suggests not:



Wrangling on this point with a technical misreading isn't a valid refutation. You need to come up with a counter argument with superior evidence if you want to do that. To disregard Statista as a credible source (!!!) of (once again, let's not forget, demanded) statistical data is also extremely absurd.

Is it just me or has the forum skewed in the direction of particularly longwinded back-and-forths lately? This thread is yet another exhausting ride.

The mood:



Still, the statistics shared throughout are very insightful, in particular this Dior report, which I'm very appreciative of @hollywoodforever for sharing!



There are different ways to slice that data, of course.

Asia + Japan had a much bigger hold in 2021, but is broadly trending down from that peak (38% of the market in 2023, versus 46% in 2021). I'm curious if that will continue to be the trend or if Asia/Japan will rally.

The US has oddly shown some growth, which I would not have expected.

In fact, France + Europe + USA comprised 49% of their 2023 market, with the US being the one segment there to show a significant increase.

(Whether we should really group the US with Europe is questionable, just as is whether very distinct cultures like China and Saudi Arabia should both be folded into "Asia.")

There's nothing questionable whatsoever with using Asia and the west as coherent categories.

slpfrsly said:

There's nothing questionable whatsoever with using Asia and the west as coherent categories.

Click to expand...

I would question how much you can group two areas as culturally distinct as the Middle East and China and maintain coherence.

Someone desperately needs to read Said.

cheapimitation said:

Someone desperately needs to read Said.

Click to expand...

FWIW, I haven't.

And, for the record, I wasn't even making some broad statement, despite this thread's weird preoccupation with projecting broader ideological debate onto sales data!

I'm speaking in terms of market research considerations alone. Objectively speaking, what consumers are looking for in China and the Middle East respectively strikes me distinct enough to treat them as separate markets.

otterlake said:

FWIW, I haven't.

And, for the record, I wasn't even making some broad statement, despite this thread's weird preoccupation with projecting broader ideological debate onto sales data!

I'm speaking in terms of market research considerations alone. Objectively speaking, what consumers are looking for in China and the Middle East respectively strikes me distinct enough to treat them as separate markets.

Click to expand...

Yea, wasn’t referring to you and I agree with what you said. Not to mention how different India’s culture is, especially in regards to fragrance.

otterlake said:

I'm speaking in terms of market research considerations alone. Objectively speaking, what consumers are looking for in China and the Middle East respectively strikes me distinct enough to treat them as separate markets.

Click to expand...

This doesn't make sense. You chose to highlight and praise the data that talks of Asia at large, rather than the data that has a much more specific of analysis of Asia's constituent parts. This is like jamming a stick in the spokes of your wheel and crying foul when the bike crashes.

Even then, Asia is still a coherent category.

One of the problems with bringing data in to a discussion when demanded - particularly when the discussion has been derailed away from the main topic; in this case, by repeatedly denying the fact that Asian fragrances (notes, styles, marketing) are being made by global perfume brands because Asian customers like and want Asian fragrances - is that it provides the opportunity to make truth claims with the mask of objectivity. The problem isn't just cherry-picking statistics to make a fallacious argument, although that can be a problem. It's that data itself, being concrete, can excuse all lack of existing subject knowledge or understanding with a simple wave of the hand to "line go up". A pie chart becomes superior to all reason (ofc not really but this is the effect it has on internet forums). Even the most junky, statistically-irrelevant data can be claimed to have supremacy over the most accomplished of knowledge and expertise - merely because it is data. In truth, interpreting statistics properly is incredibly difficult. Doing it in a 'shadows on the cave walls' manner - whether to derail a thread or not - is ridiculously easy and much more common.

To leave absolutely no doubt about the irrelevance of quibbling about Asia:

Asia is a category with constituent countries, ethnicities, geographies, markets, religions and so on. Asia, like the west, can be broken down in to its more granular constituent parts. A leg is not an arm; a shin is not a knee. It is perfectly fine to discuss these categories. No-one requires coddling against that, and if they think they do, it's probably a good idea not to partake in the discussion. If not, participating in order to deny these categories should be taken for what it is: a desire to shut down the discussion by any means necessary. Anyone who has spent any time on social media in the last 10 years will be well-acquainted with such claims against the legitimacy of categorisation, pretending to be defending particularism against generalisation ("Asia is too vast, unlike China which is distinct"; "China is too vast, unlike the Han culture which is distinct"; "Han culture is too vast..." etc) when really it is an argument in defiance of categorisation entirely ("we cannot categorise, we are all one, we are all the same"). It's beyond ridiculous at this point to keep pandering to these thought-denying platitudes.

The reason we are discussing Asia first and foremost, rather than feeling burdened by the need to reduce the discussion in to more specific regions of the continent (which, ironically, those on our side would likely be much more able to discuss than those opposing us), is because Asia is not the west. Asia is not Europe, nor France. Asia is not America. France and the USA are the two most important markets/countries/economics in perfumery and have been for several decades; France in particular is the intellectual, cultural, and corporate HQ. The changes that were raised in relation to brand strategies (e.g. western brands increasing the number and frequency of releases which is the topic of this thread) is relevant to Asia as a whole: ouds and ambers and saffrons etc in the near east, yuzus and cherries and matcha etc in the far east. Etc etc etc. There is opportunity to go in to greater detail, to be more specific by region, by country, by state, and on and on. But it doesn't require that; the point is relevant at the scale of Asia and the west. If you break your leg and only your leg, it is understood that you have not broken your arm without clarifying which part of the leg is fractured. This really should not need spelling out.



Truth be told @Schoeibksr, I don't know how to get the thread back on track. It's up to you if you want to keep dealing with these off-topic points, and as you're doing a good job at obliterating them with evidence, maybe you don't need or want any help. Tbh, keep going, you're doing really well. But I will mention that there have been plenty of much more relevant topics that haven't received anywhere near this level of response, which begs the question about what motivates the off-topic posting. It would be a shame to see this thread locked as I think there is still a lot to say - and more people to hear from - on the issue of lots of releases and how it impacts perfumery at large. I will link one of my own threads that would be an appropriate place to graft this ongoing discussion on to. Let them derail that instead. Anyone and everyone is encouraged to contribute to it constructively (i.e. positively) and allow this thread to get back on topic: https://basenotes.com/community/thr...if-french-perfume-is-no-longer-french.538420/

Failing that, as the OP, just message a mod and ask for their help. They will be able to help you get the discussion back on track.

slpfrsly said:

This doesn't make sense. You chose to highlight and praise the data that talks of Asia at large, rather than the data that has a much more specific of analysis of Asia's constituent parts.

Click to expand...

I feel that this is a bad-faith misconstrual of my initial post, but will decline to explain further beyond noting my non-concurrence with your assessment. The juice ain't worth the squeeze.

I hereby bow out of the thread, having regretted participating in it.

So I am not arguing anything. I don’t care about "winning" or the rhetoric, particularly when what people are arguing about and the data used is not well defined and changes. Particularly when, to be frank, none of you sound like you are making an argument, y’all sound like you are just trying to win an argument. As a someone who does not care and feels outside the whole thing, none of y’all are presenting good arguments or making anything clear (the data, what you are arguing, why it even matters).

Just really replying to things like these:

slpfrsly said:

View attachment 488851

View attachment 488850

Click to expand...

I get it is written from some brand’s/consultant analyst’s perspective. And knowing that it still feels weird and like they are very out of touch with the psychology and culture of their target market when they write things like “The fragrance market in Central Asia is experiencing a surge in demand for traditional, exotic scents inspired by local culture and heritage."

Like I would not be surprised if they lose market share because they give Anne Flipo the brief to create an exotic scent for cute Central Asian market inspired by local culture and heritage vs having someone create a scent inspired by the local culture and heritage.

Like any time in a restaurant outside of the US where you see something specifically labeled "American" like "American Pizza". Or like when Europeans have red cup parties. They obviously are aware of the source material, but it would never sell in the US. (Particularly "American Pizza", the interpretations I have seen in places like France and India are wild.)

Anyhow, just reclarifying: I have no interest in the argument, respond, don’t, follow your bliss, I am 0% invested in going on about rhetorical technicalities.