Beauty

[Suebdoo]

Ok if his retinol is 1.5% would it make a difference if it is 3rd or 4th?  I'm thinking somehow they would have to guarantee the percentage if tested.

[ILoveFragrance]

How disappointing. I think this is done because the Q probably has the vender give the lowest price possible and they have to water it down. Sigh

[Mysticmom]

As I said, I've already purchased and am reassured that the formula is consistent with the one I currently have and love! Also want to mention that Beautypedia gives this serum 5 stars. Happy I got this one after all

[Tinkrbl44]

First of all .... what is the "deck" being referred to?

Secondly, many manufacturers make different versions of their products for different retailers.  This is nothing new.  I'm not saying it's a good policy, but it's done rather frequently.    It could be ingredients, quantity in package or slight fabric variations, just to name a few.

 Obviously, we need to read labels, and it's good to point these things out and discuss them .....  but this isn't new.   

[Judaline]

Where's a mod when you want one. Nothing to say, QVC??? No reply? No 'this post has been removed because.................' ?

[Harpa]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

First of all .... what is the "deck" being referred to?

Secondly, many manufacturers make different versions of their products for different retailers.  This is nothing new.  I'm not saying it's a good policy, but it's done rather frequently.    It could be ingredients, quantity in package or slight fabric variations, just to name a few.

 Obviously, we need to read labels, and it's good to point these things out and discuss them .....  but this isn't new.   

---

The QVC ingredient deck was being compared to the Sephora ingredient deck.

We still have to see a bottle from Sephora, not just a listing from their website. 

So has anyone purchased the PTR retinol fusion from Sephora and can tell us what ingredients are posted on the bottle?

What happened to those who started this thread?

(I have a feeling some may have jumped to unnecessary conclusions.)

@Tinkrbl44But you are right that there are different versions made for different retailers for different markets and for different parts of the country.

[cmoose]

I am the one that started the thread. I don't have the actual bottle from Sephora, would love to hear from someone that does.

I am drawing my conclusion from info posted by both Sephora and QVC including the list of ingredients ( which anyone should be able to assume are correct) and the difference in the reviews - specifically referring the the watery consistency of the QVC product. Perhaps that is the way the product is supposed to feel- it just seemed odd that order of the ingredients, listing water higher on the deck, coincided with the the reviews of he watery consistency. 

The only reason I even looked into this is that the upcoming TSV seems like a great price for a lot of product. Some serums are very watery just by their nature- and if that's the case here great. But if it's watery because they have watered down the original version to give more product at a better price then that's an issue for me. 

I think QVC has high standards based on how often you hear a host or vendor refer to legal claims that can or cannot be made- so if this says it 1.5% retinol I'm guessing that must be true regardless of the order of ingredients- I really would just like to know why the difference from one site to another, that's all. 

[Northray]

And I've always heard that the order of the ingredients listed is important because the ingredients listed first is how much you have more of.  So that if in the Sephora PTR product retional is listed before water then you would have more retional then water and if the QVC PTR product list water before retional then you have more water than retional.   I know I'm not explaining this right but you can google it.  I have MS and today is a bad cognitive day. 

[Schmackey]

That's it......no more beauty purchases from QVC for me!

[Northray]

The FDA states it as: Descending order of predominance.