When a new perfumery project takes shape, the focus is almost always on the same elements:
the fragrance, the name, the packaging, the image.<\/p>\n
They are the visible parts.
The ones that excite.
The ones that are easy to fall in love with.<\/p>\n
But in most projects that do not work, the problem has never been the scent. Let's not talk about gross errors. Yet it is these invisible accounts that determine whether a perfume can become a sustainable brand or remain a creative exercise.<\/p>\n Many projects start from the wrong question: \u201cHow much would I like to sell this perfume for?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n The correct question is a different one: \u201cAt what price is this perfume credible for the market I am targeting?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n The difference is subtle, but fundamental.<\/p>\n Price is not a number that comes at the end. It is a design constraint that should guide everything:<\/p>\n type of packaging<\/p>\n<\/li>\n weight of materials<\/p>\n<\/li>\n sales channel<\/p>\n<\/li>\n logistics costs<\/p>\n<\/li>\n real marginality<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n When the price is decided after the fact, the project is already fragile.<\/p>\n One of the most common mistakes is to look only at the cost per piece<\/strong>.<\/p>\n But a perfume is never alone:<\/p>\n the cost of fragrance<\/p>\n<\/li>\n the cost of the bottle<\/p>\n<\/li>\n the cost of the box<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n There is a total system cost, which includes:<\/p>\n scraps<\/p>\n<\/li>\n returns<\/p>\n<\/li>\n rework<\/p>\n<\/li>\n order minimums<\/p>\n<\/li>\n stockholding<\/p>\n<\/li>\n downtime<\/p>\n<\/li>\n forecast errors<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n Many brands discover too late that a product that is \u201ccheap\u201d to produce is actually expensive to sustain over time<\/strong>.<\/p>\n A project does not die because it does not sell. It dies because sells without margin<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Marginality is not just for \u201cmaking money.\u201d It serves to:<\/p>\n absorb errors<\/p>\n<\/li>\n support rearrangements<\/p>\n<\/li>\n finance future development<\/p>\n<\/li>\n handle unforeseen events<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n When marginality is compressed to \u201center the market,\u201d the project becomes rigid. And a rigid project, over time, does not hold up.<\/p>\n A perfume does not have the same income statement when sold:<\/p>\n online<\/p>\n<\/li>\n in boutique<\/p>\n<\/li>\n in selective perfumery<\/p>\n<\/li>\n through social commerce<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n Each channel has:<\/p>\n miscellaneous costs<\/p>\n<\/li>\n different expectations<\/p>\n<\/li>\n different dynamics<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n Designing a product without having clarified Where it will actually be sold <\/strong>means designing blindly.<\/p>\n The canal is not a consequence. It is a structural decision.<\/p>\n Time has a cost. Always.<\/p>\n Each additional month before launch means:<\/p>\n firm capital<\/p>\n<\/li>\n fixed costs<\/p>\n<\/li>\n loss of momentum<\/p>\n<\/li>\n decision-making pressure<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n But the opposite is also true: throwing too fast generates mistakes that cost much more later.<\/p>\n Time should not be sped up or slowed down at random. It should be designed<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Many projects work on the first launch. And they crash soon after.<\/p>\n Why no one asked:<\/p>\n what happens to the rearrangement?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n does the cost really go down?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n is the production replicable?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n does the supply chain hold up?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n A perfume is not an event. It is a system. If the system has not been thought out from the beginning, initial success becomes a problem, not an advantage.<\/p>\n The truth is simple: these accounts take away magic.<\/p>\n They force people to make choices. To give up. To downsize or rethink.<\/p>\n But the magic of a project is not in ignoring the numbers. It lies in the make them first<\/strong>, when course correction is still possible.<\/p>\n Making a good perfume today is not difficult. Building a design that can last is.<\/p>\n The brands that work are not the ones that have avoided accounts. They are the ones that have dealt with them Before falling in love with the result<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Because in the contemporary market, creativity without structure is not freedom. It is uncalculated risk.<\/p>\n This article is not a call for caution. It is an invitation to awareness<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Because the real luxury today is not launching a perfume. It is to build a project that can afford to do it again tomorrow.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" E che spesso determinano il fallimento pi\u00f9 del profumo stesso Quando un nuovo progetto di profumeria prende forma, l\u2019attenzione si concentra quasi sempre sugli stessi elementi:la fragranza, il nome, il packaging, l\u2019immagine. Sono le parti visibili.Quelle che entusiasmano.Quelle di cui \u00e8 facile innamorarsi. Ma nella maggior parte dei progetti che non funzionano, il problema non […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":13815,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13809","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-articoli"],"yoast_head":"\n
It was what has not been calculated before<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
We talk about accounts that simply are not made<\/strong>, because they are inconvenient, unglamorous or put off \u201cuntil later.\u201d.<\/p>\nThe first ignored account: the price the market really accepts<\/h2>\n
\n
The second account: the total cost, not the unit cost<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
The third account: marginality that is really needed<\/h2>\n
\n
The fourth account: the channel decides more than the product<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
The fifth account: time is not neutral<\/h2>\n
\n
The most underestimated account: what happens after the first batch<\/h2>\n
\n
Why these accounts are avoided<\/h2>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n
Editorial Note - Insight Journal<\/h3>\n