The Wall Street Journal profiles "The World's Most Expensive Perfume", Clive Christian No. 1.
Related: a road test of Clive Christian No. 1, Money to burn.
22 Comments
Leave a comment, or read more about commenting at Now Smell This. Here's our privacy policy, and a handy emoticon chart.
Leave a reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yeah, I do a lot of “aspirational” shopping.
The WSJ is really disconnected from reality. The economy is on its knees and people can barely afford gas, let alone $300 for a “sampler” of Mr. Christian's scents.
Since the US dollar has tanked, the majority of luxury goods in the US are now being snapped up by foreign tourists. They're the only ones who can afford such luxury right now. Instead of a stimulus package that would hand out anywhere from $300-$1200, the US government should hold shopping excursions for European tourists. Who wouldn't love a never-ending 40% off sale?
Is it just my British ears, or does that presenter have a very flat, dreary voice? She sounded to me like someone narrating a truly dull 1950s travelogue.
I was struck by the woman saying 'If you go to a club in New York, you'll smell CC No. 1.” Blimey, if I'd paid over $2000 for a bottle, I'd want to be the only person smelling of that scent within a five hundred mile radius!
You know, when you hear the price of this scent, you fall into one of two camps: you either are attracted to it because of the price, or you are repulsed by it because of the price.
Come on, no one smells it first, learns the price and then waffles between — I don't know– selling their house and buying it, or not.
Is this the one that smells just like Gucci Rush, or is that X?
I kind of feel that stuff like this appeals to the cash not class crowd – the ones who think that if it's that expensive, then it must be terrific! Guerlain launched this LE KissKiss lipstick where the case was gold covered in diamonds – $28,000, or something. Seriously? Who is just snapping that up other than the bling lovers with cash to burn? Whatever happened to discreet luxury? Although with that Guerlain lipstick and Victoria's Secret annual Christmas jeweled bra set (which reported no one has ever bought), I can see it as a gimmick to draw normal people into buying the regular products and there generating more revenue, but I don't think that CC can really use that excuse!
Ah, but the WSJ is probably very connected to their readership, which is probably mostly made up of those who are not on their knees just yet, right?
It isn't like I'd know, but still, I'd be very surprised if this is what the clubbing set is wearing in NYC!
Well, he only needs to attract 10 people, right? There are only 10 of those super expensive bottles. The “regular” bottle of CC No 1 isn't the world's most expensive perfume, I don't think.
LOL — X did not remind me of Gucci Rush, but can't remember No. 1 very well.
I think that lipstick was $62,000! Not that it matters, right? If you've got 28,000 for lipstick, I don't see why you couldn't come up with 62,000 😉
Discreet luxury = a bottle of Jean Patou Joy parfum.
I haven't really chimmed in on the luxury debate yet. I am very obviously not swimming in money (I'd be out shopping, not sitting here at a computer right?!) so I will probably never be able to afford these things. And of course I tell myself that if I *did* have that kind of money that's not how I'd spend it.
But I don't understand why people are angry about it. (not on this board necessarily, just in general). Everyone gets so upset that the rich are “wasting” money. What should they do with it? Give it all away? Buy gas for me? Let it sit in the bank? People in the US are very generous to charity as a whole, especially the very wealthy (yes it's a tax write-off, but still, they give). If the trust fund babies of the world want to blow their money on silly, ostentatious crap here, have at it! Having money isn't the same as having good taste, they buy tacky stuff just like the rest of us – just on a bigger scale! LOL! They are going to spend it on something, might as well get that money back into our economy.
I totally with all of you girls. Sigh…where I come from an event like this is for the 'nouveau riche'…;)
Hear, hear!
I've been lurking on this blog so long (too lazy to take the 10 seconds it takes to create an account; I guess that's why I'm not rich!), but I just had to second Rose's opinion. If nothing else, reading about people who spend $62000 on a lipstick is entertaining…
Love the blog, by the way!
Rose, I suppose I have a bit of a puritan streak — it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth that a $215,000 bottle of perfume with a diamond embedded in the neck even exists. But yes, they should buy gas for me, absolutely! And while they're at it, buy me a few bottles of perfume, no fancy bottles necessary 😉
Hi Denise, and welcome! I wonder though if anyone has bought that lipstick? Those 10 bottles of CC No 1 Imperial Majesty edition have been around for awhile — since 2005 at least, and they aren't sold out yet.
LOL! I'd like to think I'd stay my humble and classy self (see how modest I am too?!) if I had more money than sense. Most likely I would just turn into a total jerk, I suspect this is why God doesn't allow me to win the lottery. 😉
*if you come across a gas and perfume buying sugar daddy, you have my permission to give him my personal contact info.
Be pretty funny if the juice had gone bad after all that time.
Hmmm. Can't vouch for how massive wealth might or might not change me, but can promise with great certainty that if you gave me $20 million tomorrow, I still wouldn't buy CC No 1 Imperial Majesty edition 😉
That would be hilarious E.! I can't help it I think that is really funny 😉
VanillaGirl – I'm guessing she's a newspaper reporter who has been asked to become multimedia and could use a little voice coaching!! I thought the same thing! But maybe she was just overcome by fumes…
When you think about it, a majority of the money is going towards the bottle. Take away the bottle with the diamond, gold, and crystal (and scale down the size a bit), and the cost probably be around the same as other perfumes out there. I can't say anything about the scent though, although I have my doubts about that being that there is no Saks within a 200-300 mile radius, lol! (Sucks to live in the boonies! LOL!)
Oh, absolutely true, you're paying for the packaging.
the video has been removed
Thanks.