Introduced in 1986, L'Envie Parfum Shampoo and Conditioner represented an unusual attempt to merge the worlds of fragrance and hair care. During the 1980s, perfume sales were booming and consumers increasingly associated particular scents with lifestyle, glamour, and personal identity. Rather than marketing ordinary shampoos around concepts such as shine, moisture, or salon performance, L'Envie attempted to capitalize on the era's fascination with designer fragrances by offering highly scented hair products inspired by some of the decade's most popular perfumes. The line was promoted with the slogan: "For soft, sensual hair that smells as beautiful as it looks."
The products emphasized indulgence and sensuality, claiming rich and luxurious formulas containing softening emollients designed to soothe hair and leave it feeling silky and soft to the touch. Yet despite the fragrance associations suggested by the names and advertising, the products contained none of the actual perfumes they referenced. Instead, they relied upon fragrance compositions designed to imitate the general character of successful perfumes already familiar to consumers.
Several varieties closely echoed bestselling fragrances of the period. Ember Musk was modeled after the warm character of classic musk perfumes. Cypress recreated the clean aldehydic floral style associated with White Linen. Legace echoed the sweet floral semi-oriental style of Vanderbilt, while Siam drew inspiration from the oriental richness of Opium. Capture resembled the warm ambery oriental style of Obsession, and Milano reflected the bold floral-fruity character of Giorgio.
Although the fragrance similarities were obvious, the products were neither manufactured, licensed, nor endorsed by the original perfume companies. Instead, L'Envie was produced by S.C. Johnson, the company behind the Agree hair care line. The strategy attempted to borrow some of the appeal of luxury fragrances while remaining within the more affordable consumer hair care market.
Despite its novelty, the line struggled almost immediately. By 1988 it had been discontinued after failing to achieve the expected sales performance. Fragrance consultant Barry Jacobs suggested that the concept may have misunderstood consumer psychology. Many women associated perfume with something heavy, oily, or lingering on the skin—precisely the type of sensation consumers generally expected shampoo to remove from their hair. The products also appealed only to a limited segment of buyers, excluding those who preferred unscented or lightly scented shampoos and offering no corresponding products for men. One buyer for a major national drugstore chain reportedly admitted, "We are close to dumping the line."
Compounding these marketing difficulties were serious legal problems. Almost immediately after L'Envie appeared in stores, major fragrance companies objected to what they viewed as similarities between the shampoo branding and established perfume trademarks. L'Oréal Group subsidiary Cosmair, owner of the Vanderbilt trademark at the time, filed suit against S.C. Johnson, while the owners of White Linen reportedly considered joining the legal action. Cosmair initially demanded that the approximately one million products already on store shelves be removed from sale.
In 1986, Cosmair obtained a temporary restraining order against S.C. Johnson that prohibited further distribution of certain L'Envie products. The company argued trademark infringement and unfair competition, claiming that the packaging and promotional strategies resembled those used by fragrance imitation or "knockoff" marketers. Although S.C. Johnson maintained that it operated only in the shampoo and conditioner business, opponents argued that the marketing language and packaging could potentially confuse consumers regarding the products' relationship to established perfume brands.
The dispute ultimately ended with an out-of-court settlement in 1987. S.C. Johnson agreed to place more visible disclaimer stickers on the front of product bottles and to include similar disclaimers in advertising materials. The revised packaging clarified that the products had no connection with the original perfume brands. The settlement satisfied the perfume companies involved, but by that point the combination of weak sales, legal costs, and consumer confusion had already undermined the line's prospects.
L'Envie ultimately became a short-lived experiment that reflected the excesses and ambitions of 1980s marketing. Although the products themselves disappeared quickly, they remain a fascinating example of how deeply fragrance culture had penetrated consumer products during the decade, extending even into something as ordinary as shampoo.