Question:
I must admit the bottle is very nice and well done.
The fragrance is not what I expected! Its very green and floral almost like a Chanel No 19 in its make up but more sweeter.
Very long lasting but I would not fit this one into a winter setting but more like early spring.....

Answer:
Originally Posted by scentimus I must admit the bottle is very nice and well done.
The fragrance is not what I expected! Its very green and floral almost like a Chanel No 19 in its make up but more sweeter.
Very long lasting but I would not fit this one into a winter setting but more like early spring..... Mine should be arriving this week from Perfumebay. I did a blind buy (I guess you did too) based on the great reviews. I'm really anxious to see what all the hoopla is about. I'll post my thoughts after it arrives.
Also, figured it's a safe blind buy since it would likely be easy to sell (or swap) here BECAUSE it's so well liked.

Answer:
I really REALLY want this one as well. Maybe I could force one of you to send me a sample before I spend the $85 needed to get the EdT.

Answer:
How many fragrances does richard james have? There is one with the frosted bottle with the etching on it. Then there are two more listed on perfume bay. the frosted cracked looking one is at escentual.uk.
Which which is which?
Thank-you in advance!

Answer:
Where can you get this--- Richard James savile row?
Also is this the one launched in 2003 or is this the same as Richard James cologne released in 2006?
I have not seen even one on ebay. Any idea how much would this be worth?

gupts

Answer:
perfumebay.com has it. I am expecting my bottle today. I haven't seen it for sale on any other sites stateside.
http://www.perfumebay.com/men-s-r-ri...w-for-men.html
oops..sorry gupts, I didn't see that you were 'down under'.

Answer:
The terminology is very confusing - I'm glad it's not just me.
The 2003 release http://www.basenotes.net/ID26122845.html is superb. I was wearing it yesterday. It is dominated by rose and suede, but supported by a host of beautiful notes - masculine and suave. The bottle says 'Richard James, Saville Row'.
The 2006 release http://www.basenotes.net/ID26125223.html (not much info) is by comparison merely good. It is a well put together citrus cologne, but lacks the rounded originality of its older brother. The bottle says 'Richard James, Cologne'.

Answer:
I got home and my Richard James 2003 was waiting on me at the front door. I admired the packaging and then I sprayed once on my right arm.....
This is like nothing I have in my collection! I really love it. I am 30 minutes into it and am so pleased with it. It fits me perfectly and probably will bump something out of my top 10 soon. I love to find something that is so fresh to the senses and stands out from the copycat frag crowd. I think I will take a shower after my workout, pour a glass of white wine and become even better aquainted with my new friend....Richard James.
barry

Answer:
New here... my very first post
I adore this scent - from the first twang of fresh floral to its dark smokey base! Theres something distinctly familiar and comforting about this fragrance, which is being played off against something dark and disturbing.
Its a keeper for sure!
Have just reviewed it, but will aparently be a wee wait before it shows up online.

Answer:
Originally Posted by michaeld39 The terminology is very confusing - I'm glad it's not just me.
The 2003 release http://www.basenotes.net/ID26122845.html is superb. I was wearing it yesterday. It is dominated by rose and suede, but supported by a host of beautiful notes - masculine and suave. The bottle says 'Richard James, Saville Row'.
The 2006 release http://www.basenotes.net/ID26125223.html (not much info) is by comparison merely good. It is a well put together citrus cologne, but lacks the rounded originality of its older brother. The bottle says 'Richard James, Cologne'. The confusion over the name arises by the mistaken assumption that "Savile Row" is part of the fragrance's name. It's not. The fragrance, like many first releases is eponymous. The fragrance's name is "Richard James" just like the tailor Richard James whose shop is in the famous tailoring street, Savile Row. Savile Row should be read as a place designation in the same manner as Paris or New York.
If you go to the Richard James website home page, you'll see written "Richard James Savile Row" in the same manner as it is on the bottle with Richard James in larger writing and Savile Row immediately beneath it in smaller writing in the following manner:
Richard James
Savile Row
This is a typographical convention that separates "Savile Row" from the name "Richard James" and makes it clear, typographically speaking, that it's a place designation and not the part of the name. If it were, Savile Row would be, at the very least, on the same line as Richard James, but most certainly in the same font size.
The smaller font size of "Cologne" on the box and bottle of Richard James Cologne works the same way to make a distinction typographically and designates the follow up fragrance as a version of the original eponymous scent by keeping the eponymic cache of "Richard James" and maintaining a connection to the already known first eponymous fragrance and thus linking the "cologne" version to it as a variation/version of it, a common strategy in marketing today.
I really like Richard James. It's a quality fragrance. To me it's a reworked, updated version of Santos de Cartier. Richard James Cologne, on the other hand--as is the usual case for a follow up fragrance after an eponymous first fragrance--is extraordinarily ordinary at best.
scentemental