Beauty

[MalteseMomma]

---

@Stevie Nix wrote:

I don't use his products, but I find this post very interesting.  Is this how QVC offers their "special" prices?  I wonder if this occurs on other beauty products

@Stevie Nix.  

---

I always thought  Q's Philosophy products (perfumes) were watered down because when I bought them elsewear they smelled  better and lasted longer.

[suzyQ3]

Based on what I'm reading here, I don't think we need to jump to dire conclusions, especially after reading @Porcelain's informative posts.

[Porcelain]

@noodleann. I'm sorry I repeated myself. Didn't mean to come across as argumentative or like you didn't know what you were talking about. These concepts are new to me and kind of eye opening so I struggle to communicate exactly what I'm trying to say, and tend to rephrase to make more sense to myself. Thanks for being patient.

I do think you are on to something with these mixed around ingredient decks. If people say they are experiencing a difference in product, they are not making that up or imagining things.

Because these companies have so much wiggle room to get away with so much, they rely on reputation more and more. PTR is making a big mistake having two different labels floating around for identically packaged and named products. He is undercutting his own very loudclaim that they contain 1.5 percent microencapsulated retinol. People won't assume that the retinol and the encapsulating ingredient have to be listed separately on the list. So it gives the appearance that he is fudging about how much is in there. We have no way to know for sure, and less reason to take his word for it.

[dogsx3]

Cosmetic ingredient list

In the United States, it is a requirement that all cosmetics be labeled with their ingredients. The LOI (list of ingredients) is supposed to be printed on the container and needs to follow some rules when listing ingredients.

1. Ingredients above 1% need to be listed in order of concentration
2. Ingredients 1% or below can be listed in any order
3. Exception: Color ingredients are listed at the end

The names of the ingredients must be those found in the INCI (International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients) Dictionary.

[dogsx3]

---

@dogsx3 wrote:

Cosmetic ingredient list

In the United States, it is a requirement that all cosmetics be labeled with their ingredients. The LOI (list of ingredients) is supposed to be printed on the container and needs to follow some rules when listing ingredients.

1. Ingredients above 1% need to be listed in order of concentration
2. Ingredients 1% or below can be listed in any order
3. Exception: Color ingredients are listed at the end

The names of the ingredients must be those found in the INCI (International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients) Dictionary.

---

It is supposed to be 1.5% retinol in it, so i think it is watered down a bit.

[Katcat1]

I would be upset with PTR.  What is going on?  Your products should all be the same no matter who is selling it.  Shame on you.  I am glad I do not purchase your products. 

[Stormygirl]

I know PTR isnt the only one whose products seem to differ depending on where is purchased (in order or ingrediant deck differences) I think the first I noticed this was with WEN formulas comparing Guthie Renker and QVC ...although I do not know the impacting significance? Interesting though thanks. I have noticed this with other brands as well.

[noodleann]

---

@porcelain wrote:

@noodleann. I'm sorry I repeated myself. Didn't mean to come across as argumentative or like you didn't know what you were talking about. These concepts are new to me and kind of eye opening so I struggle to communicate exactly what I'm trying to say, and tend to rephrase to make more sense to myself. Thanks for being patient.

I do think you are on to something with these mixed around ingredient decks. If people say they are experiencing a difference in product, they are not making that up or imagining things.

Because these companies have so much wiggle room to get away with so much, they rely on reputation more and more. PTR is making a big mistake having two different labels floating around for identically packaged and named products. He is undercutting his own very loudclaim that they contain 1.5 percent microencapsulated retinol. People won't assume that the retinol and the encapsulating ingredient have to be listed separately on the list. So it gives the appearance that he is fudging about how much is in there. We have no way to know for sure, and less reason to take his word for it.

---

@Porcelain, you were spot-on, as they say, not at all argumentative and you made very necessary points. I know about food but I did not know about the 1% cut-off in terms of the ingredients listings in these products, and agreed with the implicit logic that the whole thing I was having a little hissy fit about might be moot. IOW, these products with the same ingredients listed in a different order below that 1% floor may actually be the same.

PC is probably good, and it'll be helpful to hear her explanation on this.

PTR, as you point out, has a lot more splainin' to do. 

And your last line about having "less reason to take his word for it" should be heard as a cautionary note to all of these product producers. It's not until something  like this comes up that you realize how much trust you as a consumer place in the name, etc., and how little you actually know about all of it--speaking for myself on that last point. I confess that I allow a lot more wishful thinking to guide my investments in beauty products than I ever would in other purchases.

I really appreciate your illuminating and instructive posts and hope you continue to make them. The add a vital, critical dimension to the discussion. 

[Valstybaby]

Whenever they say "made especially for QVC I know it's been cheapened and don't buy it. Period. 

[SahmIam]

Here's what bugs me:

I think the majority of customers (myself included) are assuming/expecting that the product aired on QVC (or HSN or Evine) when appearing in IDENTICAL packaging as what we'ver purchased/can purchase in a store or directly from the vendors site IS THE EXACT SAME PRODUCT. Am I wrong in this? I expect it to work, smell, look and be in EVERY WAY IDENTICAL. The ONLY reason I would buy it from QVC is the deal they are offering...why else would I buy it from them?

When I hear "made especially for QVC", I'm thinking the CONFIGURATION  of the kit is only available at QVC. Often, the product is shown here first and a few months later, it's available elsewhere. Have no issue with QVC being a launch pad for a new item; in fact, it's a bit genius of both- QVC gets the sales and the vendor sees if the product does well. Beyond that, it SHOULD be identical. If not, fess up. 

Of course they won't but then... doesn't this make them a liar regarding their products? Why would you want to purchase from them if they are not being honest regarding the ingredients but the container and packaging is the same? Why don't they use different packaging, therefore? 

Makes you wonder.