Help please - Polo Green

[yarn]

My perfume journey has recently taken me into the land of vintage which is a mistake both in terms of time and cost however, the thing that is currently interesting me is vintage Polo

I have had a look at older threads but I have managed to do nothing but confuse myself with the following:

Vintage Polo Green
Polo Modern Reserve
Cosmair Polo
Current Polo

Now the terms themselves do not confuse me but I am having real trouble in working out the history of the scent and what I should be looking for and where everything fits in - this is compounded by the fact that I have never tried any variation of 'green' Polo

I would really appreciate it if someone could give me a very brief history lesson on this and suggest what I should be looking for?

Cheers

 

[freewheelingvagabond]

Chronologically, vintage (non-cosmair) Polo > cosmair Polo > current Polo

Modern Reserve is a separate release, a slight variation on Polo, and apparently a 'throwback' to vintage Polo.

I have tried all except vintage Polo. I don't think the cosmair version is that different from the current version of Polo green. But I'm not a vintage enthusiast, and more tolerant of reformulations than some others. The cosmair version is just a tad smoother.

I would say your best bet is to get the current version of Polo (given high price and lack of availability of the others). Terrific composition and sublime stuff, but don't go expecting best quality of ingredients (a notch below an Egoiste or a Bel Ami, but good enough). For reference, my bottle of Polo is from around 2011.

Of course, if you are a collector, get all.

 

[Slayerized]

I don't think the cosmair version is that different from the current version of Polo green.

Trust me, it is.............

 

[drseid]

Trust me, it is.............

Yes, it is *very* different... And *much* better.

 

[petromalt]

Vintage Polo = Warner/Lauren and Cosmair, with Warner/Lauren being the older of the two. This is how I understand it.
Modern Reserve is a different scent than Polo(green)

 

[cytherian]

I've seen a number people say that the Warner version is about the same as Cosmair. A fragrance buddy of mine recently got both. He concurred. So, I'm head scratching when others say they're noticeably different. I think they may have an older Cosmair example with faded notes.

I have two bottles of the Cosmair release and compared to the most recent, it's noticeably better (the recent release is terrible... stay away).

But for me, I'd have to say that Crest comes out ahead on original Polo. Something about the composition without the tobacco really works.

 

[yarn]

Thanks everyone - I think that I have a better understanding of the time line now

Cheers

 

[ChuckW]

I need to wear my recently acquired Cosmair Polo and see how it does. I'm bad to buy vintage stuff and then not wear them. I just love knowing they're around if I long to smell them. Examples: Kouros, Polo, Monogram.

I plan to wear all of them much more often when the Spring season is here to stay.

 

[Bigsly]

The original post is quite strange, and sounds like there is a desire to "vent" some negative emotions due to disappointing experiences - why not mention what those are? The thing is, pursuing a vintage scent after feeling burned (or whatever) by previous experiences (derived from notions about vintage that are not disclosed and which originated from others) seems rather self-contradictory! The person says he know the difference between the terms but then doesn't seem to know the difference between "vintage Polo" and "vintage Polo Green" (there isn't any). My advice: get some vintage samples from someone who can sell you the bottle if you like the sample, so that you know exactly what you are getting (Crystal Flacon may be the best place for this possibility), and don't buy into any "hype." Judge for yourself. And as to the history of Polo, if the company itself isn't providing this information, why would you think that some anonymous internet person is going to be able to tell you? When you ask such a question, why not consider whether or not you are basically prompting "know-it-alls" to provide what is perhaps no more than opinion (and possibly ill-informed). I think there has been enough written about Polo formulations over the years just here on BN alone for you to get a sense about what us anonymous internet people know and don't know, but you'll still have to decide for yourself what to believe, even if it is tentative, contingent upon new information being revealed (perhaps by your own investigations). Good luck !

 

[yarn]

The original post is quite strange, and sounds like there is a desire to "vent" some negative emotions due to disappointing experiences - why not mention what those are? The thing is, pursuing a vintage scent after feeling burned (or whatever) by previous experiences (derived from notions about vintage that are not disclosed and which originated from others) seems rather self-contradictory! The person says he know the difference between the terms but then doesn't seem to know the difference between "vintage Polo" and "vintage Polo Green" (there isn't any). My advice: get some vintage samples from someone who can sell you the bottle if you like the sample, so that you know exactly what you are getting (Crystal Flacon may be the best place for this possibility), and don't buy into any "hype." Judge for yourself. And as to the history of Polo, if the company itself isn't providing this information, why would you think that some anonymous internet person is going to be able to tell you? When you ask such a question, why not consider whether or not you are basically prompting "know-it-alls" to provide what is perhaps no more than opinion (and possibly ill-informed). I think there has been enough written about Polo formulations over the years just here on BN alone for you to get a sense about what us anonymous internet people know and don't know, but you'll still have to decide for yourself what to believe, even if it is tentative, contingent upon new information being revealed (perhaps by your own investigations). Good luck !

Slow down there bigsly

I have no reason to vent anything - and there are no problems other than the relative difficulty of getting hold of vintage scents in relation to picking up a current scent straight off the shelf. Honestly, there are no issues or hidden intent (not at all sure why you would think there was??)

With regards to knowing the terms - I do know the terms, I simply have had an issue in placing them in the right order and understanding which one is which

And in answer to 'anonymous internet person' answering my question, I hardly consider people on here as anonymous internet people? And in fairness, one of the first posts in this thread pretty much answered my question - seems a far better option than approaching a company to ask them for the answer, or maybe you know something that I don't?

And I also appreciate the advice but must point out that making my own mind up is something that I have made a living doing so while sound, it maybe is 40 years too late

I must admit, I have had to re-read my original post as half the stuff you mention seems to have come out of nowhere - all I wanted was a brief timeline which I was given, I really can't understand how you have managed to pick so much up out of a very simple, innocent question?

 

[DerangedGoose]

Bigsly's left-field rant aside, this is how I understand the timeline: Warner Polo, Cosmair Polo, Polo Crest, L'Oreal Polo (absorbed in 2000; possibly current, possibly further reforms), Modern Reserve.

I own two bottles of Cosmair Polo, as well as Crest and Modern Reserve. I dont have any appreciable experience with the current formulation. They are all variations on the same theme, but my personal favorite of the group is Modern Reserve by far. It is sharper than the original polo, and loses some of the brown tones in favor of more green, resinous ones. Its also more versatile in heavy heat/humidity. Polo Crest is a middle ground somewhere between Modern Reserve and the original, with heavy emphasis on a dry, leathery structure.

Id be happy to provide samples/decants to those curious.

 

[yarn]

Bigsly's left-field rant aside, this is how I understand the timeline: Warner Polo, Cosmair Polo, Polo Crest, L'Oreal Polo (absorbed in 2000; possibly current, possibly further reforms), Modern Reserve.

I own two bottles of Cosmair Polo, as well as Crest and Modern Reserve. I dont have any appreciable experience with the current formulation. They are all variations on the same theme, but my personal favorite of the group is Modern Reserve by far. It is sharper than the original polo, and loses some of the brown tones in favor of more green, resinous ones. Its also more versatile in heavy heat/humidity. Polo Crest is a middle ground somewhere between Modern Reserve and the original, with heavy emphasis on a dry, leathery structure.

Id be happy to provide samples/decants to those curious.

Thanks anonymous internet person

(Do you work for Ralph Lauren?)

 

[petromalt]

I, myself, am an actual tube of Petromalt hairball remedy. Trust me! :2vrolijk_08:

 

[Jowan]

Lol.. Left field rant.. You got that right. Seemed like your just looking for the timeline. We were discussing this yesterday in a post. maybe this will kinda help as well??

http://www.basenotes.net/threads/410049-Is-this-Vintage-Polo-Before-Cosmair

 

[Bigsly]

Slow down there bigsly

I have no reason to vent anything - and there are no problems other than the relative difficulty of getting hold of vintage scents in relation to picking up a current scent straight off the shelf. Honestly, there are no issues or hidden intent (not at all sure why you would think there was??)

With regards to knowing the terms - I do know the terms, I simply have had an issue in placing them in the right order and understanding which one is which

And in answer to 'anonymous internet person' answering my question, I hardly consider people on here as anonymous internet people? And in fairness, one of the first posts in this thread pretty much answered my question - seems a far better option than approaching a company to ask them for the answer, or maybe you know something that I don't?

And I also appreciate the advice but must point out that making my own mind up is something that I have made a living doing so while sound, it maybe is 40 years too late

I must admit, I have had to re-read my original post as half the stuff you mention seems to have come out of nowhere - all I wanted was a brief timeline which I was given, I really can't understand how you have managed to pick so much up out of a very simple, innocent question?

First of all, in my "mental universe," largely shaped by academic standards, if you claim that someone is ranting (which is DerangedGoose's characterization) you had better possess some strong evidence for that being the case! And as to the information an anonymous internet person provided, how do you know it is accurate? How is it any better than what you could have acquired by using the search function to find previous threads which contain a whole lot of information (or misinformation) on the subject? I wasn't the one who said, in starting a new thread:

"My perfume journey has recently taken me into the land of vintage which is a mistake both in terms of time and cost..."

Why say this? It has nothing to do with wanting to learn about Polo, and it certainly suggests disappointment. I think most people would feel that way if they "wasted" time and money on something - perhaps you are unique in this context, but if so, the burden is on you to explain yourself. You did not tell us why you felt your time and money were wasted - why bring it up but then "leave it hanging" like that? It certainly suggests an "ulterior motive." Then you said that the big problem was availability, after I mentioned a place where you can get all kinds of vintage scents (Crystal Flacon) - this simply makes no sense. If you were willing to spend time "vintage hunting" and you are willing to spend money, why not go there and see what's available?

I recently corresponded with someone who seems to be on the hunt for the perfect Polo formulation, and he really likes mine, though I only have so much to swap or sell and I think he wants more - he sought out people who had vintage formulations and tried ones until he found what he was seeking. That is the way to do it - I think you will continue to waste time and money if you don't simply get some samples and determine which one works for you. And it's always possible that you get a sample from a "cooked" bottle but like it, so again, unless you can buy the bottle that the sample came from you risk getting something you don't want. If you want a timeline, all you had to do was to post:

"Could someone please give me a timeline of the different Polo formulations?"

Though again, how would you know for sure that it is accurate? If you think these points are bizarre, for some reason, we can agree to disagree, correct? But as to cost, by "vintage hunting" I was able to buy vintage at much lower prices than current designers at dept. store prices. And as to time, yes, of course it will involve time, since as I'm sure you are aware, hardly any company states the history of formulations for their scents (I can't think of any that does it for all their scents, though a smaller niche company might).

NOTE: Your denial of there being "anything wrong" other than wanting to know the history thing is obviously not true because you don't seem to realize that Polo and "Polo Green" reference the same scent.

 

[drseid]

I've seen a number people say that the Warner version is about the same as Cosmair. A fragrance buddy of mine recently got both. He concurred. So, I'm head scratching when others say they're noticeably different. I think they may have an older Cosmair example with faded notes.

I have two bottles of the Cosmair release and compared to the most recent, it's noticeably better (the recent release is terrible... stay away).

But for me, I'd have to say that Crest comes out ahead on original Polo. Something about the composition without the tobacco really works.

With respect to the Warner vs.Cosmair... I only own a few Cosmair bottles, but recently received a large decant from a Warner, and there were some easily detectable differences between the two when I wore them side by side, one on each arm. In the end, I preferred the Warner, as it had a smoother, more integrated presentation. That said, I wouldn't hesitate to buy and continue to wear the absolutely superb Cosmair, as that is really the one I am most familiar with, and grew up wearing in the 80s. Either of the two vintage versions are light years ahead of the current stuff (not to say that even the current Polo is better than most of the offerings on the market today, just significantly inferior to what the vintages offer).

As an aside, while I prefer vintage Polo over Polo Crest, I really love that one too. Polo Crest was the last really good offering from the brand, IMO, and still kept a lot of the spirit of the original.

 

[cytherian]

With respect to the Warner vs.Cosmair... I only own a few Cosmair bottles, but recently received a large decant from a Warner, and there were some easily detectable differences between the two when I wore them side by side, one on each arm. In the end, I preferred the Warner, as it had a smoother, more integrated presentation. That said, I wouldn't hesitate to buy and continue to wear the absolutely superb Cosmair, as that is really the one I am most familiar with, and grew up wearing in the 80s. Either of the two vintage versions are light years ahead of the current stuff (not to say that even the current Polo is better than most of the offerings on the market today, just significantly inferior to what the vintages offer).

As an aside, while I prefer vintage Polo over Polo Crest, I really love that one too. Polo Crest was the last really good offering from the brand, IMO, and still kept a lot of the spirit of the original.

I appreciate your follow-up. What I'm thinking is that there is the risk of aging, especially with the earliest releases... and perhaps those who cited little differences had examples of the Warner batches where there was some fading of top notes. A pristine example of Warner would more likely serve to demonstrate differences. And the degree is of course subjective, as we all have varying sensitivities to notes (I liken it to an audiophile that can distinguish audio qualities between a 320kbps MP3 file and the source CD it came from).

I've not experienced Polo Modern Reserve. Is it closer to Warner than Crest?