Fragrance clones - how popular are they?

[MrSmellSmell]

There are obviously a lot of clones of the more prominent and top tier fragrances. It seems like every popular designer fragrance has clones. My day job is in marketing, and to me, it just doesn't seem like if you are a fragrance house, why you would make a (normally) inferior scent, sell it cheaper, and position your product as a clone of X scent. In marketing and branding, if you are comparing your product to another as 'basically the same thing', you are playing a losing game.

My 2 questions are:

1) How popular are clones compared to the originals? I know most people don't have actual sales numbers, but obviously, this angle has to be slightly effective, otherwise there wouldn't be so many clones.

2) If you had to guess, what percent of top designer and niche fragrances have clones?

Thanks!

edit: Also my first post here!

 

[SharpieB]

Dude, are you going to post this same question on every forum on the internet? You have good answers on at least two other forums.

 

[JohnG]

Welcome to B&B, and thanks for your first post.

No different than any other company that sells knock-offs. As long as you don't pass it off as the original, it's all legal, and profitable.

I know that some of the soaps sold at Stirling are clones of scents like Chanel Bleu, Aventus, and others.

For fragrances that cost over $100/bottle my guess is 90% have a clone.

Fragrances under that? I would guess 50%.

 

[carluchi]

Clones have their place as do the real deal.

If you are just starting out or don't have a lot of pocket change, clones work very well.

Most will not smell exactly like the real deal but they are close enough for people who are not aficionados.

I liken it to people who only drink the top shelf stuff. Top shelf stuff is good and you are getting what you paid for. But there are a lot of things out there that are good but not 'top shelf' good and people drink still drink it.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[MrSmellSmell]

Welcome to B&B, and thanks for your first post.

No different than any other company that sells knock-offs. As long as you don't pass it off as the original, it's all legal, and profitable.

I know that some of the soaps sold at Stirling are clones of scents like Chanel Bleu, Aventus, and others.

For fragrances that cost over $100/bottle my guess is 90% have a clone.

Fragrances under that? I would guess 50%.

you think the clones are based on price per bottle rather than the prestige of the scent. Interesting. I feel like I can name a few $100+ scents that aren't that popular

 

[JohnG]

you think the clones are based on price per bottle rather than the prestige of the scent. Interesting. I feel like I can name a few $100+ scents that aren't that popular

Insofar as the motive to create a clone is greater the more expensive the fragrance is.

Rolex watches are copied every day, Timex not so much.

That means more expensive fragrances are more likely to be copied (and copied well).

 

[brucered]

1. Not as popular
2. 87.625%

 

[JimmyJoeMeeker]

why you would make a (normally) inferior scent, sell it cheaper, and position your product as a clone of X scent.

Because when you can legally make an item that's 90% or more as good as an original product in high demand, and sell it for a fraction of the price, you're going to make money. That's the long and short of it right there, but I'm going to rant on anyway.

Those who've heard my shtick on this before, forgive me: Stirling's Executive Man smells 98% similar to Creed Aventus and 100% as good.

Executive Man is $26.95 for 50 ml. Aventus retails for $295 for about 30 ml, and given how different fragrances react differently on different people, not one person out of 1000 would be able to tell the difference between Aventus and Executive Man when smelling them in the wild. And for less than 10% of the cost.

For the record, I have and wear both Aventus and Executive Man, as well as too many other Aventus clones and inspired-bys. I'm just a fanatic for that DNA.

But if you're in marketing, shouldn't you understand the rationale of offering a product to a market segment that doesn't have $295 to spend (or has the good sense not to*) on one fluid oz of smell-good juice?

If your primary goal is to smell good, you don't have to spend a fortune. If your primary goal is to feel superior because you spent more money than others, well then I guess you better always buy the most expensive juice you can find and do so at full retail.


*Sadly, I don't have that good sense... well, I got a bigger bottle from a discounter, but still.

 

[Mike M]

Because people will fake anything if there's a buck in it. I have a fake Polsilver SI blade somewhere, who would think there was money in faking blades, but there is or nobody would do it. As long as you say it's "inspired by" and not a "fake of" you're good. If someone is buying a fragrance that is "inspired by" then they likely don't have the real thing to compare to so they don't know how close (or far away) it is to/from the original.

 

[puffinshart]

1. Depends on the price. Example: People will gladly pay for Aventus clone vs for real thing because of the price.
2. I would say over 90% would have clones

 

[haulage]

Sometimes it goes the other way round too, for example I purchased an aftershave which was a dupe of Black Orchid. I really liked it, so I decided to buy the orignal EdP. I guess I was okay dropping $10 for the dupe but not ~$150 sight unseen/unsmelled for the actual thing

 

[Raz0rboy]

Many niche perfumes are already clones of something else with added chemistry a go-go
if you know you know !
true perfumery died 30/40 years ago

 

[musicman1951]

People and their relationship to their money - it's a complicated story.

My wife's favorite game is saving money while shopping. I'm surprised they don't have a picture of her on the wall at CVS with the admonition to not let her in the store for fear of bankruptcy. She delights in reporting that she purchased $60 worth of goods for $27 using coupons and sales together. She would be loathe to spend a large chunk of money on most anything that wasn't a Viking Cruise.

Nothing is too good for me, so we're an interesting shopping pair.

Some people are justifiably proud of performing tasks at exceedingly reasonable prices. Why buy an expensive "thing" when a cheaper thing will do the job just as well. And if you're satisfied that it did the same job what, realistically, is the difference?

Some people can't taste the difference between an $8 bottle of wine and a $50 bottle, or hear any difference between a $200 guitar and a $10,000 guitar - so why in the world would they pay the difference?

And a great many people don't have piles of discretionary cash lying around for high end extras like Creed cologne. And I suspect there are at least an equal number of people who wouldn't pay for Creed cologne under any circumstance.

We enjoy our hobbies, and many of us are willing to pay more for hobby related things than the general public. I suspect a member with the name MrSmellSmell is more interested in cologne than most. Enjoy your journey.

 

[carluchi]

Well said Keith, especially this part:

' ... Some people can't taste the difference between an $8 bottle of wine and a $50 bottle, or hear any difference between a $200 guitar and a $10,000 guitar - so why in the world would they pay the difference? ...'

 

[DwnSouthJukin]

I love them. If you view perfume as just another product, can you really tell one store-bought taco shell from another? Yet no one seems to look at this as unethical. Why would perfume be any different?

I usually buy decants of expensive fragrances, just to try them out, then shop for the best rated clone of the ones I like.

You'd be surprised at how good some are.

If I bought all those fragrances I post in the "SOTD" thread I'd be broke. lol

 

[Brutus]

Some people can't taste the difference between an $8 bottle of wine and a $50 bottle, or hear any difference between a $200 guitar and a $10,000 guitar - so why in the world would they pay the difference?

At the risk of digressing, it’s a bit more complicated than that.

People who know wine (including vintners and wine merchants) agree that there is an easily noticed difference between a $10 bottle and $30 bottle (depending on typical wine prices in your area*), while the difference between a $70 bottle and $210 is much harder to detect.

* I am lucky, I now live in a country , where above equation is between a $5 bottle and $15 bottle (with coupons $3 and $9 ).

Regarding coupons, the idea of coupons is to get people to buy stuff they otherwise wouldn’t.
Buying $50 worth of stuff you don’t need for $30 is still wasting $30.
To key to making coupons work for the customer, rather than the shop owner , is to exercise restraint.


As far as fragrances are concerned, I primarily buy “clones”, if that is the right word in this case (”homage” might describe it better), of products that have disappeared from the market, like Floïd Blue and Floïd Vigoroso.



B.

 

[Rover3618]

Many people don’t have the money to spend on expensive designer fragrances, they might not feel that the price of some are worth it, or they might want a fragrance that has been discontinued. You have to remember that the average person most likely isn’t into fragrances, and they won’t be able to tell the difference between a clone or original. Saving a couple hundred dollars is worth it in my opinion, especially for someone like me, who buys many different fragrances.

I recently bought two bottles of Floris Santal, which isn’t necessarily a clone, but it smells almost exactly the same as Gucci Envy which was discontinued years ago. Ive seen some bottles of Envy going for $500+ and i’m not willing to spend that on a used bottle of cologne that could’ve been sitting in the sun for the last decade.

 

[Mustard Seed]

I doubt Flores is in the clone business. It may have been Gucci was trying to clone Floris Santal.