Tate 01: A Rented Brand in a Borrowed Bottle
Tate McRae's first fragrance will sell. That doesn't make it a brand.
Tate McRae has launched Tate 01, a $30–$82 fragrance made with Scent Beauty, on her own site now, on Ulta.com from 16 October and in Ulta stores from 25 October. It is a smart deal. It is also the weakest kind of celebrity beauty brand.
The safest category in beauty
Fragrance needs no shade range, no efficacy claim, no before-and-after. US prestige fragrance grew 6% in H1 2026, but only because prices rose 5% while units stayed flat (Circana). McRae picked the one category where nobody can prove her wrong. That is a hedge, not a vision.
Rented, not founded
Scent Beauty is a celebrity perfume machine: Dolly Parton, Cher, Sabrina Carpenter. It makes the juice, the bottle and the retail plan; the star brings the fans. Hailey Bieber owned Rhode and sold it to e.l.f. for up to $1 billion. A licensed perfume rarely ends that way.
Credibility spent before day one
McRae is still Neutrogena's Global Ambassador and has fronted for Rhode and Skims. In August, her sponsored post-show routine drew around 20 million views, mostly from people asking whether she actually used the wipes. Eight weeks later, she wants Gen Z to believe this scent is truly hers.
Wrong product, wrong moment
Tate 01 launched the same week as celebrity brands from Amber Valletta and Rochelle Humes, while Gwen Stefani's Gxve and Drew Barrymore's Flower Beauty have closed. A floral-woody skin scent fills no gap. Its only difference is the name on the bottle, and that is exactly what buyers have learned to discount.
The verdict
Strong on sales, weak on everything that builds a brand. Tate 01 is the 2000s celebrity perfume with better packaging.
The celebrity perfume is back. The question is whether anyone still believes the celebrity.
Read the full breakdown.
Want to dive deeper into the strategy behind Tate McRae's debut beauty play? [Read the full article here.]
