My Last CREED Controversy Post Ever

You know – sometimes you just wise up.  Yes, seriously.  Well – sort of.  Oh, all right.  I’ll admit it.  I’ll probably get sucked back into CREED drama.  But it was a thought.

Tonight, as I was about to answer the umpteenth YACHT-boy (Yet Another CREED-Hating Troll) on Basenotes, I realized that, in essence, I was just talking to a front for CREED’s marketing arm.  What’s the point in that?  Why the heck should I tell CREED marketing about CREED marketing?  It sounds so…. complicated.  It’s like Inception or something.  Ya know?  It makes my head want to explode like sidewalk cafés in France.  Or something like that.  Good grief, that was a messy scene.

So instead, I’m going to tell you.  And everybody else is going to see this as well.  I think that’s really cool.  I guess.  I don’t know.  I’m just talking.  CREED – you didn’t hear this.  It’s like – deinception or something.

The question you hear from the CREED haters (who are, you need to realize, just CREED marketeers dressed up to stoke the fires of controversy, from one side) is Why, oh why, doesn’t CREED just provide the proof of their glorious history?

Here’s my answer.  But I’m telling YOU.  I’m not addressing the guys who just fan those flames.  They already know this.  They’re like the guys with the guns in those stunning dream scenes.  If you’re one of them, then just….. go away.  Quickly.


I think what’s REALLY fascinating about CREED’s marketing is that, if there is any truth at all to their history, or even complete truth, then they are doing exactly what I would advise them to do at this point, in terms of confirmation.  NOTHING.  You simply cannot buy the kind of publicity that a skillfully managed public controversy provides.  I used to think that it would be wonderful if CREED just did the obvious and posted images of their old formula books and receipts for goods delivered.  Sorry, folks.  Ain’t gonna happen.  It’s like kicking a bunch of money into the storm drain.  They’re not stupid.  Don’t think like a scientist or historian on this one.  Think like a lawyer or a criminal.

CREED is doing exactly what I would expect them to do – even if they really did have a weak history of low-profile bespoke perfumery, confirmable but ultimately unimpressive.  Tell mundane truths in a grandiose but carefully scripted fashion.  Plant, support, and manipulate haters and fanboys.  Let the controversy boil.  They can never have the history of Guerlain.  But they can create a false controversy about whether or not they actually had a great history.  And they don’t even have to lie to do it.  Just incite and support a controversy about whether they’re lying.  It’s frigging ingenious.

To my mind, that’s not the real worry anyway.   I care what’s going to happen to a house that has provided a good half-dozen scents that I love.  My worries are (1) will CREED slide slowly into increasing use of cheaper synthetics and away from expensive absolutes, to keep their prices affordable to the average fragrance aficionado?  or (2) will they stay true to their use of expensive materials, but let prices rise to levels that make us all do double-takes?  and (3) will Erwin’s more modern style bring in younger fans faster than older ones are lost, or vice versa?

Those are the questions about CREED that ultimately matter.


So that’s it.  My last post ever on the CREED history/authenticity controversy.

I’m still an avid fan of CREED scents.  And I probably will be for a long time.

But I’m also a wise guy now.  So back off, you YACHT boys. 😉

This entry was posted in Fragrance. Bookmark the permalink.