HIGH street stores last night scented success in their battle with the
top fragrance houses over the right to sell expensive perfumes at
knockdown prices.
Perfume makers have repeatedly refused to supply stores such as the
Superdrug chain with their products, fearing their upmarket image would
be tainted.
A Monopolies and Mergers Commission probe, announced yesterday, could
lead to prices for perfumes such as Chanel No 5 being cut by up to 30%
in stores across Britain.
Superdrug, Littlewoods, Poundstretcher, and other stores which have
been forced to buy the perfumes on the legal but unauthorised ''grey
market'', are already offering discounts.
Twenty of Superdrug's 670 shops sell Chanel No 5 eau de toilette at
#23.50 against the normal retail price of #28.
Givenchy aftershave sells for #9.50 at Superdrug, cheaper even than at
airport duty free shops, where it costs #11.45. The normal retail price
is #14.50.
The MMC inquiry comes after strong protests from Superdrug and other
stores determined to smash what they see as a ''perfume makers'
cartel''.
Labour raised the issue in the Commons, urging the President of the
Board of Trade, Mr Michael Heseltine, to summon the perfume houses and
''bang heads together''.
Superdrug said sales of exclusive scents were booming in the run-up to
Christmas, and yesterday's decision was a ''victory for consumers who
are being asked to pay unreasonably high prices for products to maintain
an image of luxury and exclusivity''.
Harry Thomas, public relations director with Littlewoods, which offers
discounted scents in all its 120 stores, said: ''Customers like ours who
may not be able to afford to use the big department stores are entitled
to have access to these best-selling perfumes at affordable prices.''
Last night, it appeared the move to cost-cutting was spreading.
A survey in next month's edition of the Consumers' Association
magazine Which? will show a wide range of other high street retailers
are already offering discounts, but by keeping quiet they have managed
to continue being supplied directly by the manufacturers.
BAA, which through airport sales accounts for 13% of the British fine
fragrance market, said it was studying the latest developments.
''Only a very few stores are offering discounted fragrances, but if
the practice becomes more widespread we will have to look at our
prices,'' said an official.
The nine-month MMC probe will investigate the refusal of leading
perfume companies to supply Superdrug and other stores, and will also
look at the refusal of glossy magazines such as Vogue -- worried about
their relationship with the perfume makers -- to run a Superdrug
advertising campaign offering cut-price scents.
Labour consumer spokesman Nigel Griffiths said: ''The President of the
Board of Trade must call the perfume companies in and bang heads
together.
''Consumers are already paying 30% more than they have to, and they
have already been waiting eight months while the Office of Fair Trading
considered this, and now face an unacceptable delay of up to nine
months.
In Parliament, Mr Griffiths asked Commons Leader Tony Newton, during
exchanges on next week's parliamentary business, for an early debate
''on perfume companies holding consumers to ransom, forcing up prices by
one third, blackmailing magazines and newspapers into refusing
advertisements for cheaper prices''.
Mr Newton promised to refer Mr Griffiths's remarks about banging heads
together to Mr Heseltine.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article