If you ever want to feel completely hopeless about the future of the perfume industry, I highly recommend this Daily Finance article on the cost breakdown for a $100 department store scent. Out of that $100, the actual fragrance is worth exactly one dollar. Packaging and bottle costs account for $10, making them ten times more valuable than the juice itself.
So when a perfume’s packaging or bottle are as perfect as Moschino Toy’s are, I get a little nervous. To make room in the budget for that adorably macabre headless teddy bear, other costs have to be cut. Those cuts usually happen to the least valuable component of the equation, the fragrance itself, rather than marketing or profit margins. I was hoping that Toy would defy the odds, but I’m sorry to report that it’s just another depressing example.
Inside the bear is a surprisingly masculine aromatic-woody fragrance. There’s a lot of lavender, some watery citrus notes, and a thin woody base that I can only describe as “buzzy”, like TV screen static. It reminds me very strongly of CK IN2U, another perfume where the bottle was much more interesting than its contents. I think that most people who buy Toy will buy it for the packaging, and I kind of doubt they’ll rebuy. They’ll spray it once or twice and then leave it on the dresser, like a toy that was played with a few times and then forgotten.
4 thoughts on “Moschino Toy”
A sad phenomenon indeed…
What’s really funny is that there’s no perfumer information on Fragantica. I guess no one wants to take credit for it!
I must confess that I bought Marni for the creepy doll. I’ve never seen this in a store yet but it doesn’t have the same creepy charm of the doll so I’d pass on it I think. Especially now that I know the perfume is not very good.
Marni was a perfect example of the right way to do it: attention-grabbing packaging, but with good-quality perfume to back it up. The terrifying doll also made a decent cat toy!