Vincent Belo D.
Fragile ego, can not handle any construive criticism
I honestly do not understand why they gifted me a perfume i literally bought from them few weeks ago. Instead of giving me something new to smell, very silly of them. Furthermore, I personally do not appreciate the use of AI-generated images that they use.Especially being that they have some of the most expensive perfumes in the world, over 10,000$. However, it does not impact the quality of their fragrances/oils in any way whatsoever. Keep up the quality of ingredients and blendin. They banned me when i told them of an error on their website anoung few other objective facts, very fragile ego.
Response from Ensar OudJul 8, 2026
Thank you for explicitly acknowledging that the quality of our fragrances and oils is not in question. For clarity, the perfume referenced was a complimentary gift included at no charge. It was, in fact, a highly coveted collector’s composition that is no longer available. Complimentary gifts are selected and offered at our discretion according to availability and order context, and they do not carry a guarantee that the recipient has never previously purchased or experienced the item. We understand that you would have preferred something different. We are entirely open to constructive criticism, including criticism of our visual presentation, and neither that opinion nor the identification of any error on our website had anything to do with our decision. The decision followed a pattern present from the beginning of the relationship: repeated demands for exceptional access, accommodations, explanations, and staff attention that became disproportionate and consumed considerable company resources. When reasonable boundaries were established, public reviews were invoked in an apparent attempt to influence our commercial decisions. The continued downward revision of the rating, from three, to four stars and back to three and now one, despite the reviewer expressly affirming the quality of our products, further reinforces our concern that the review is being used to exert pressure over decisions unrelated to product quality rather than to provide a stable account of the customer’s experience. Only after the decision to discontinue the relationship had already been communicated did the reviewer subject a member of our staff to personal psychological characterizations while invoking his stated professional background in mental health to lend those remarks authority. Those remarks were therefore not the basis of the original decision, but they further demonstrated why continuing the exchange was neither appropriate nor constructive. The commercial relationship was not discontinued because criticism was offered. It was discontinued because its demands and tone were no longer constructive, proportionate, or mutually respectful. We will not publish or litigate private correspondence here, but we stand by our decision and wish you all the best.