Question:
No joke, thats an actual name of an upcoming fragrance from YSL. I saw it listed today at Basenotes:

http://www.basenotes.net/ID26127246.html

Whats wrong with the house of YSL? Please leave the old classics alone and stop associating them with silly "tattoo" editions.

Now this may very well end up smelling great (although I highly doubt it), but after Kouros cologne sport, Kouros Eau De sport, Kouros Fraicheur, Kouros Eau D'Ete, and Kouros Cologne Sport Eau D'Ete, its high time that YSL stop diluting the legendary Kouros name

Answer:
I haven't tried it but look forward to it.

Answer:
Sounds great, going by the notes. We'll see.

Answer:
I adore Kouros and it would be interesting testing the new version!

Answer:
Seems that the name Kouros is seen as a money maker by the YSL guys.
It probably explains why houses like YSL, Chanel, etc. uses consacred names to completely different things (Body Kouros, Live Jazz, Platinum Egoiste, Black XS, and so on). They just put a powerful name the already own to push the sales, no matter how it smells.
I would not be surprised if they come with a Black Kouros next time.
P.S.: I wonder why tatoo; perhaps because, when you wear it, you have the feeling that it will stay in your body forever.

Answer:
Originally Posted by pluran I haven't tried it but look forward to it. Me too pluran.
Opium Pour Homme Eau d’Orient is truly an excellent fragrance in and of itself and shows that eponymous editions/modulations can work if there is a commitment to quality.
FWIW, I think YSL does eponymous editions/modulations better than anyone else.
As a fragrance aficianado, I am not particulary interested in whether another reissue of Kouros is a good marketing strategy or not. Clearly, YSL L'Homme was a good marketing strategy, but it's not a strategy that necessarily produces compelling fragrances.
I admire YSL's commitment to and respect of its classics though. At least YSL doesn't discontinue its fragrances at the drop of a hat if they're not selling particularly well. Now, the strategy behind the availability of YSL fragrances, that's an entirely different issue; I've never been able to understand the machinations of YSL's business mentality when it comes to making their fragrances available for easy consumption. It's a mentality which has always struck me as somewhat schizophrenic.
I hope that Kouros Tattoo is an interesting fragrance just like Body Kouros was. Who knows? We might be getting something along those lines rather than along the lines of Kouros Fraîcheur (also a very worthy modulation of Kouros and a worthy fragrance in and of itself).
I had no problem with Live Jazz capitalizing on the Jazz's name. It's one of my favorite fragrances and, in IMO, up there with Kouros as a masterpiece of the perfumer's art. If Kouros Tattoo is half as good as Live Jazz, then I'll be happy. I find it odd that many people expect every release to be the next greatest fragrance. Such an attitude tends to lead to a rather facile, perfunctory dismissiveness. I like to take my time with fragrances and make up my own mind. I try everything once, and resample it many times--over many years sometimes--to be sure I understand the fragrance and become familiar with it. Even for those fragrances I initially don't find interesting, sometimes familiarity comfirms one's lack of interest, more often than not it leads to some kind of acceptance and even, in some cases, admiration. I don't have to absolutely love only the things that are great, and I don't absolutely have to love everything first time. Besides, things change. We change, hopefully. I don't trust the permanence of my own views anymore than I trust those of someone else. I have been known to change my mind both drastically and not so drastically; I am quite proud of such traits.
I generally don't take notice of negative reviews and don't generally read them. It's a tempermental thing; experience has lead me to conclude that they usually teach me nothing about the fragrance. Negative reviews based on never having tried a fragrance perplex me though. Without being too dramatic, they put me in the same uneasy frame of mind when I hear people wanting to ban films they've never seen or burn books they've never read. I try to keep an open mind, which is what I really admire about pluran's attitude to fragrances. Just read any of his posts if you don't know what I am talking about. Temperamentally, I prefer those kind of reviews and those kind of reviewers. I don't get the point of a negative reviews of something one hasn't tried.
BTW, in the interests of full disclosure, I pretty much have most of YSL's eponymous editions/modulations of their men's and women's fragrances (Opium, Rive Gauche, Kouros, Jazz, Opium Pour Homme, Rive Gauche Pour Homme, and M7) or have tried them all. I even have a bottle of the-impossible-to-find and fugacious Kouros Eau de Sport. I am happy and okay with such abundance.
scentemental


Answer:
Scentemental I agree - Live Jazz is one of my favorites and staples. But Jazz as a brand name hasnt been much diluted.

If the new Kouros is, in the eyes of YSL, going to be a fantastic scent, why not launch with a new "name" instead of leveraging the decades old brand? The problem with this approach is that people who are wary of the Kouros name (all that nonsense urinal note talk) will perhaps skip this new fragrance based on their previous perception.

If Tattoo turns out to be a good scent, I will try it no matter what the name. But it seems to me that they might be missing an opportunity to launch a new "legend".

Answer:
Brand recognition. To the average fragrance buyer, Kouros means much more than YSL. So launching this as a Kouros saves them serious PR and advertising doe.

Answer:
Originally Posted by zztopp Scentemental I agree - Live Jazz is one of my favorites and staples. But Jazz as a brand name hasnt been much diluted.

If the new Kouros is, in the eyes of YSL, going to be a fantastic scent, why not launch with a new "name" instead of leveraging the decades old brand? The problem with this approach is that people who are wary of the Kouros name (all that nonsense urinal note talk) will perhaps skip this new fragrance based on their previous perception.

If Tattoo turns out to be a good scent, I will try it no matter what the name. But it seems to me that they might be missing an opportunity to launch a new "legend".
zztopp,

I don't think Kouros as a brand name has been diluted. Last time I heard, it was still YSL's biggest seller; I am specifically talking about Kouros and not its spin offs, which despite their relative merits have never been as successful as their progenitor. Also, I think most of Kouros’s supporters out there in this big wide world have never heard of Basenotes or the fabled “pee note”. I don’t see the Kouros name as a deficit in this regard.

You make Kouros sound like it's a has been; it's not, and I tend to agree with the_good_life's assessment that it makes better business sense for YSL these days to go with an already trusted name when relaunching a fragrance than to go with a new name. This is the reality of a saturated market with new fragrances clamoring for shelf space with even newer fragrances every couple of weeks.

In order for a fragrance to make a name for itself and to sell well, a fragrance company literally has to spend many millions and millions of dollars on advertising, which, in today's market, with its quick turnover of popular fragrances and short shelf lives, they are not willing to do. It’s a lot easier to go with brand recognition and even name recognition not to mention a lot cheaper. It’s the “Curve” phenomenon or the “Black” phenomenon. We might not like it, but we are fragrance idealists, and the money is not in our pockets, nor are the purse strings.

Having said all that, I tend to agree with the sentiments behind your post as quoted above. What we all want is YSL to bite the bullet, commission a great fragrance--or a number of great fragrances--along the lines of Kouros’s greatness. We want it to be brave, to have trust in its product and an unshakable integrity in knowing that quality is a justifiable end in and of itself, but, alas, it’s not our money and Basenotes is not the corporate world. Look where YSL's strategy of producing quirky laudatory men's fragrances got them today. Of course, I would also argue that YSL has itself to blame in large part because of its almost suicidal practices in terms of making its fragrances available for general consumption. Maybe, their failure in the US market is what really did them in. I don’t know. Maybe US retailers didn’t want YSL products on their shelves; it certainly seems that way with the almost total disappearance of YSL fragrances from major retailers' shelves. In Australia, and in Europe, YSL men’s and women’s products are generally available in most major retailing establishments.

I think it’s a combination of the the failure of YSL products in the US market and that YSL products are perhaps too quirky for the generic predilections and realities of today’s market in general. The launch of YSL L’Homme confirms this to a certain extent.
Unfortunately, the fragrance industry today--fickle, feckless, behemoth that it is--is, in general, run, to quote Luca Turin, by third rate accounts. We’re lucky these days, if there is an alignment of the stars so that we get first rate accountants along with a commitment to quality, to talent, and to risk. It happens rarely; the last time it happened--in my opinion--in the designer world was with Dior Homme; in the niche world, that alignment of stars happens a little more often--Idole de Lubin is an excellent example--but there’s less to lose in such a world given the differences involved in the economies of scale.
It’s a vexed problem, for sure, and that’s why I think we should all be rooting for YSL, hoping that is finds a middle ground that will allow it to commission great fragrances along with “YSL L'Hommes” despite the dictates of the market. Of course, it could always split itself in two and have an upmarket, exclusive line of fragrances, the likes of Dior and Hermès, in order to produce quality and compelling fragrances, but if it does, we'll all be paying more for quality YSL fragrances, something, incidentally, we've never had to do.

scentemental


Answer:
Scentemental, I agree that the marketing strategies not necessairily have to do with the fragrance itself.
As a lover of both Kouros and Body Kouros, I just think it's funny how they used the former's name to sell the later one. Perhaps, if they didn't, it would sell more.
On the other hand, I don't see my post as being negative about the fragrance itself, not even my comment about the name Tatoo. I just commented the marketing strategies, not the fragrance (which would be impossible, since neither of us ever smelled it).
I also don't see any negative reviews about the fragrance in itself by other posters here, by the same reason. In my view, they are just reacting to the strategie addopted by YSL, which is ok, because, as consumers, they want something original, including the name.
And, if someday I smell it, and dislike it, I will not feel bad at all if I decide to make a negative review of it. I would dare to say that negative reviews are sometimes even more helpful than the positives. From times to times, someone have to comment the king's new clothes. The truth has to be said.
But, it's ok to you to prefer positive reviews. I also enjoy Pluran's reviews, they are among the best (as well as yours), and they're part of the fun I have on Basenotes.
Peace