Hormones have changed my skin -- I don't just need liquid products now, I need water-based products. Please hit me with your top drugstore recommendations for water-based makeup, but especially bronzer and blush. Thank you!

What’s the best foundation between these Diors and Merit?
I tend to have dry/patchy skin.
I moisturize with the Dieux Angel Moisturizer
Any other foundation recommendations?
I’m not sure how the sticks might make the dry patches on my skin more visible.
I have tried Haus Labs but noticed that it’s kind of oxidized even though i’m a somewhat neutral golden shade?

The lighting and camera may have muted my makeup a bit 😅

Here are the products I use:

- Faycy grip primer

- Glad2Glow cushion foundation in custard

- Glad2Glow powder foundation in custard

- Timephoria concealer in 02N

- Flower Knows Strawberry Cupid Collection face palette in Cupid's Mischief

- Faycy eyeshadow palette

- Glad2Glow brightening lip serum in cherry pop

- Timephoria stellar dust lip stain in nexus

- Glad2Glow setting spray

I bought the Ruby and loved it so splashed out on the full set. Putting on dusty rose this morning I was surprised how dark it was on me. So this afternoon I swatched them all (in a weird order, sorry - did the order of the box and then swapped two around). To me some of the ‘lighter’ shades are quite a bit darker/browner than the promo photos. Anyone else found this? And I possibly not mixing the pigment enough?

Top to bottom Ruby, Toasty mauve, sheer petal, sheer sienna, sheer blush, dusty rose, berry, maroon, mahogany. Left hand photo in full sun, right hand in shade.

Positive it was Annabelle. #56 or #54, maybe #46. Either it’s been discontinued or renamed…but I can find it anywhere. It’s been my go to blush for 20+ years, and no others can match it, always there for me, my perfect Taupe!!!

Can anyone help me find it? I’m sick of looking like a clown.

Has anyone found a compatible pump for The Performer Foundation by About-Face? I’ve heard that the foundation can oxidize because the bottle is constantly exposed to air, so I’m wondering if replacing the doe foot with a pump would help reduce air exposure.

Plus, I actually prefer a pump; I hate getting foundation on my hands, and using the applicator directly on my face could make me break out.

Puck’s 9/30 report said a deal for Fenty Beauty "could be signed within the next three to four weeks," around now. "Terms were not disclosed," but the article reiterates "the brand is currently valued at around $1 billion, down from previous estimates… of $2.8 billion." Rihanna’s 50% stake is her main asset, the reason Forbes initially declared her a billionaire.

The brand was defined by Rihanna using her star power to sell foundation in full spectrum shades, not just for light skin. "Beauty for all" is its slogan. Its success pushed the industry to the point that this is becoming standard, including at LVMH’s other brands it fully owns. Like Dior, which now has 42 shades compared to the limited dark range back in 2017. This is like no longer needing Whole Foods for organic, Tesla for EVs. Or Drunk Elephant for clean makeup. 

Puck mentions the real door that Rihanna opened. Celebrities followed her makeup money and copied her shade spectrum. Measured by money, these are the lives she changed the most. Now you don’t need Fenty for an 'inclusive' star brand. Tbf Kylie and Rihanna’s success inevitably incentivized followers. Agents will be on it if their clients aren’t organically interested, just like celebrity alcohol and perfumes. 

Ofc some of these star brands have had viral failures with non inclusive shades. Like even this year, Golloria calling out Lady Gaga’s Haus for a small shade range and products that didn’t suit her—that they sent her for PR and needed 4 months to apologize. Regardless of shortcomings, dark shade range for products besides foundation is becoming an expectation of other brands, so what distinguished Fenty is now diluted.

Bloomberg covered the flood of celebrity beauty brands, from 2 in 2016 to a peak of 20 in 2021. This gets to the other side of the deal FOMO: investors funded the stars. It was part of general new makeup and DTC brand oversaturation from an excess of VC funded startups. Puck was basically right last year about Glossier’s impending decline, so that lends credibility to their scoops. (They were first on Jay Z picking himself for the halftime show too.) Once worth $1.8b, they laid off a third of employees in February. Ami Cole and Pat McGrath were two highly praised black brands; the former closed, latter went bankrupt. 

Puck’s update reinforces their earlier June article on LVMH potentially selling its 50% to Jay Z’s company:

“The valuation would not make Rihanna a billionaire on paper anymore,” a person with knowledge of the situation said

"Sales at Sephora are down around 30 percent year to date," but "the brand is on track to do around $500 million in revenue in 2027." Compare to $450m in 2024 (Reuters link below). $500m each of its first 5 years, Bloomberg. Steady, not growing.

A source told Puck there’s potential to grow via going more mass market, after being asked about it. This approach doesn’t work for Savage X Fenty, which MarcyPen should be aware of. I’m a little skeptical that’s something they actually want to do. There’s also potential loss of LVMH synergies, which owns Sephora and has scale in cosmetics through its other brands like Dior beauty, Makeup Forever. (Its business segment is called 'Perfume and Cosmetics,' implying perfume sales are bigger.) Talent pool access, bargaining power in ad buying/real estate, etc. Fenty Beauty is under by LVMH’s Kendo Brands, looks like a white label manufacturer. No mention if they will continue to make, but not doing so would seem like such a challenge, a literal 'material risk' that the product is not the same.

A year ago, Reuters’ mentioned this potentially lower valuation.

They said LVMH was looking to sell its half at a total valuation of $1-2b. Forbes referred to this in their March 2026 celebrity billionaire ranking that still placed her net worth at $1b. They were presumably waiting on news of the transaction, not expecting it to take years to find a buyer. There was never a need for priced funding rounds, so previous valuations were entirely Forbes own estimate. Doesn’t mean it’s inaccurate; their peak estimate for Fenty matches Glossier’s peak in a priced round in 2021, as well as Loreal’s post pandemic boom. Two years of double digit growth for the industry leader, the Nike of makeup, with 18.5% in 2022. 

Lack of news since last October shows lack of interest from buyers, even at a $1b valuation. 

It would sort of be a bailout by MarcyPen, arguably an above market price floor that implies they could get a better deal if fiduciary duty for returns came first. There could be different realized valuation, and the low range is not entirely unfair. FT cited a way higher 1.5-2.5b euro estimate by JP Morgan earlier this year. Ofc the key strategic reason you don’t want an insultingly low offer is offending the name and face of the brand who owns the other half.

Jay Z’s investment company is less of a random fit than it seems + majority black owned

One of the founders of MarcyPen also cofounded Fenty Beauty and Savage X. And Roc Nation, where Rihanna is signed. If MarcyPen buys the LVMH half, Fenty Beauty will be majority Black owned. Four of five MarcyPen cofounders are Black (slide 11.) If they got the female one to advertise it, could be very effective. Or Michelle Obama; the CEO was a financial advisor to the Obamas. Beauty Independent first broke MarcyPen’s interest in Fenty, before Puck; it says MarcyPen invested in a clean cosmetics brand and another that makes skincare. (The site’s mention of Rhode, Rare, and only non black brands like Lady Gaga’s as competitors is sloppy. Likewise Puck’s mention of Gaga. Again, see Golloria for, Rare and Rhode too.)

I think the real move would be to buy more black makeup brands for more efficient production, reducing redundancies, scale dealing with a Sephora that’s no longer on the same team. 

MarcyPen has $1.1b assets under management (9/2026 Form ADV.) Spending $500m of that for Fenty Beauty is no diversification. Are they part of a group of buyers? (I’m no expert, but yes imma tell you this is the kind of thing that the beauty writers miss even if they get the scoop.)  Usually such private equity firms don’t just have one fund either. Leverage? Mckinsey says PE has too much demand, too much cash it can’t spend. So leverage would disadvantage MarcyPen’s returns when peers don’t need it now bc they’re not buying something they can’t afford.

Beauty Independent mentioned MarcyPen’s plans for a $500m Korean culture/lifestyle fund, in cooperation with Hanwha a big Korean asset manager. It got lots of attention when announced. By now, it’s become a joint venture instead. Trouble finding investors? It is so late. K Pop is saturated. K beauty is still growing, but likewise everyone knows about it: 30% of US families use it.  Such growth reduces need for financing. Still, shows MarcyPen’s ability to find capital that might pay for Fenty without anchoring its fate to one investment. 

But Korea leads back to potential synergy from owning more beauty companies. Capture K beauty growth while adding economies of scale (efficiencies from being big) to Fenty, even if ownership is in different entities. K beauty makes a lot of skincare, but they do color cosmetics (makeup) too. Bloomberg’s celeb beauty link talks about how skincare revenue at Estee Lauder actually doubled makeup’s, so it is growth Fenty could benefit from. They can complement each other, with Fenty’s expertise on dark shades.

Most K beauty is either publicly listed stocks or already close to it (Tirtir, Beauty of Joseon owner Goodai). MarcyPen is headed toward 'private' equity, a category lagging stocks lately/before the pandemic by various measures. Such alternative asset managers can benefit from some public (listed stock) investments. Be flexible instead of rigid and chasing deals. Jared Kushner’s 'PE' firm invested in a listed Israeli asset manager for his best returns (the one they said invested in IDF suppliers).

The advantage of MarcyPen buying listed K beauty companies is they can’t turn down money (bc you don’t buy shares directly from them.) If you have enough money like from a Hanwha, you could buy control. For manufacturing etc.

Despite coming from such a rough childhood, there’s potential for Jay Z to build Black finance that can diversify the business world. Not just with its privileged founders or Rihanna, but with the people it hires its investments hire. That lack of diversity is why it took Fenty to make dark shades a norm.

The partner with everything

The Fenty sale is kind of surprising since this was such a public success story. LVMH seemed like it should’ve been big enough to give Fenty the backing it needed. It’s much bigger than the biggest company that sells just beauty or just fashion, with about the combined revenue of both: L’Oreal and Nike. Business of Fashion says its beauty division was kind of leaderless. I think this gets to why it fell short. LVMH under CEO Bernard Arnault is more shamelessly aggressive than Zuckerberg, dominant for decades, and seemed like the ideal partner for Fenty— Savage X Fenty too, which it invested in. But he’s also in his 70s. Jewelry, shopping centers, hotels are other areas he wants more of. Resellers are eating handbag sales. L’Oreal has a lot of brands too, not across wildly different categories.

For years it said it has 75 brands (2nd slide), but they actually don’t update this in annual reports when adding new ones, not even Tiffany. L’Oreal has a lot too but they aren’t across so many wildly different categories. Michelin restaurants, yachts, a supermarket.

It’s been divesting underperforming brands including at Kendo; first time it’s been selling more than buying in a while, bc first time it stopped growing in a while. (Divesting isn’t unheard of for them if you see their past portfolio; the best known thing they sold is Michael Kors.)

LVMH was just too big to pay attention to a brand that sells around 0.5% of its revenue, of which its share is half. Likewise Savage X which is smaller/LVMH has a smaller, less direct % of.

This is why new, much smaller owners for Fenty could actually be better. It is the focus and not one of 99 problems. But do they have a plan?

Big Cosmetics can eat costs: Trump tariffs, talc lawsuits, Iran war

Last year was very bad compared to expectations (of no illegal tariffs). Big brands can absorb the damage and make it to a much better 2026. They can eat tariff losses and wait for any refunds to come through. But such uncertainty lowers interest in acquisitions—see slowness selling Fenty—partly bc these costs clarify the advantage of big over small. Smarter to wait out the bubble of new DTC brands, learn from them, then take back that market with little effort. K beauty meanwhile is actually eating Big Cosmetics and worth buying.

Maybe this sub knows, L’Oreal and Estée Lauder are 1st and 2nd in sales. 

I couldn’t find where Fenty is made. But tariffs have hurt cosmetics brands, from Elf very exposed to China to Estée Lauder, whose heir supported Trump—throwing away a big chunk of profits as a result. 

I see in Estée Lauder’s latest earnings, $102m tariffs and $159m talc settlement costs alone are greater than its 2026 net income. There’s partial rollback on Trump tariffs, but higher costs still hurt profits and led to higher prices that slows demand. And like Johnson & Johnson, cosmetics companies face suits over asbestos in talc. L’Oreal has hundreds of pending talc suits. Iran war is another cost: lost business in the Mideast, shipping delays, plastic packaging and cosmetics ingredients made from oil. Estée Lauder cites war impact of about 6% of net income ($0.03 on $0.50 GAAP EPS for 2026.)

LVMH doesn’t have such a talc burden, but that should’ve been an advantage. Historically it’s used its scale to grow and take market while competitors struggle, like when Cognac struggled after China’s anti corruption campaign. Basically it has the capacity to invest while smaller competitors who only have one business cannot afford to. Again, like buying K beauty. It’s beauty excluding perfume is relatively small compared to Estee Lauder. L’Oreal is also far bigger than LVMH cognac and champagne competitors. 

Yet it’s failed to use what advantage it does have, like Sephora’s (and LVMH’s duty free segment’s) data on competitors.

LVMH beauty division: 3 birds with one stone 🍗

LVMH was not doing much to respond to these things bc its other product categories make these costs even more complicated. Tariffs really hurt its alcohol. China’s on cognac. Also, they poached a guy from L’Oreal, which led to a legal battle over him. He did not work out anyway. After losing him, L’Oreal is doing better than ever. Big, risky bet on one guy was a distracting waste of time in years when cosmetics could no longer coast. The 2021-22 spike was an anomaly, a lockdown reaction, but much fading much faster than concert demand. A rare time Arnault’s aggression backfired. Kill two birds with one stone, gone wrong. LVMH tried to be slick putting him in their hotel division at first—maybe it’s 3 birds. Sacrificing two whole divisions to catch this guy. Plus the level of involvement from Arnault to do this was a waste, instead of looking at the many other things that need fixing.

The poached guy did get Pat McGrath to launch LV’s makeup, with very limited selection. Famously overpriced. The simultaneously launched LV lipstick holders were even more absurdly expensive, yet I mostly saw positive comments, like they look cute. 

Pat McGrath has a lot of credibility and both black and considered a defining talent in makeup. This was actually effective, 'earned media' that gives the launch a very strong impression. Polarizing, flirting on the edge of repulsive but managing the right mix of intriguing vs insulting potential buyers. While promoting LV accessories with the same emphasis. I think it helps sells more practical bags for those who can’t justify spending $3000 for a single lipstick box. 

It went a direction nobody else will go bc Chanel, Loreal, Hermes see the backlash and sense there must be a reason nobody succeeded with such pricing before. They’re also much more conservatively run French companies.  That is actually an advantage; LV is big enough to test a new market and risk unsold inventory. But the whole thing was just a price experiment that hasn’t done much at this point. Nice of the guy to show his worth for once.

This drive to go upscale probably came from above. LVMH isn’t growing due to enormous exposure to the price sensitive mass market. If you sell over twice what Nike does, it means you’re selling to everyone. This is a problem Hermes doesn’t have, and a reason for the sharp, industry wide handbag price increases during pandemic. Pricing out aspirational customers that luxury conglomerates once depended on.

Being part of one is why Fenty did better than many of its peers like Glossier or Pat McGrath’s own brand. But anything short of luxury pricing is what LVMH wants to trim. L’Oreal’s success shows how being the biggest helps, if you’re focused on basically one category.

It’s not that LVMH is inherently big and inefficient. Like Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, it’s an exception to conventional wisdom on conglomerates. Even if the name sounds random as L’Oreal Bacardi, great companies still have slumps. It’s performing much better than competitor Kering, hurt by Gucci’s collapse. It’s been exceptionally run for very long, and its scale remains a long term advantage over Hermes. The transition upscale will take time. 

Some see Kering selling its beauty division to L’Oreal as a possible move LVMH should emulate. Yet the whole strategy of a beauty category for luxury brands like Dior and Chanel is a high profit way to reach aspirational customers. Marketing for the handbags. Kering still retains the marketing benefit after divesting the division. But run well, beauty should itself be a profit driver: L’Oreal actually has higher gross margin than LVMH.

I mean more that LVMH is too big to figure out how to fix Fenty. The amount of effort may not be worth it. Easier just to sell.

'Selling' to L Catterton?

This is a PE firm partly owned by LVMH; it invested in Savage X Fenty. It’s developing its own beauty incubator with its own small celebrity brands from Molly Sims and Naomi Watts, and has a shared investment with MarcyPen: Merit Beauty. It profits from trading companies, not from their operations. Smaller place, more mass market brands/expertise, maybe better fit that keeps the Sephora advantage.

Since MarcyPen might not have the capital alone, I can see LVMH partly shifting Fenty to a different entity while improving its own profitability/focus. Neither L Catterton nor MarcyPen has done well with Savage X. But they haven’t done a lot of other brands that are like Savage. L Catterton’s past investments/portfolio in beauty suggest it can offer more expertise for Fenty than for Savage. Plus the relatively new incubator means they want to grow in this area where Kendo—the one LVMH operates—is shrinking. And incubator = more hands on.

Too many startups/DTC brands. Savage X Fenty, Drunk Elephant, Kylie: decimation

The last official valuation of Savage X is $1b. Pitchbook considers its valuation inaccurate since it hasn’t been updated in 3 years with a priced funding round. They estimate Savage X is now worth just $390m. 

There were too many startups overall, not just DTC. A bubble from excess capital when interest was low (making bonds less appealing for investment.) Pitchbook found that almost half of US startups worth at least $1b haven’t raised in 3 years. Not bc they’re doing so well they don’t need it; startups that last raised in 2022 lost an estimated 52% of their value. 

The market was fueled by high valuations from acquisitions. Like when Shiseido bought Drunk Elephant or Coty and Kylie in 2019. Investors thought new DTC brands could be as profitable as software by cutting out the middleman and using more efficient, targeted digital ads. Social media unlocked a new way to monetize celebrity. There a sense VCs could revolutionize non tech categories. Celebrities thought they weren’t cool enough unless they became a 'founder,' and more talked up startup investments. Stars became a reason to invest, either alongside them or to fund them. There’s limited stars in the market, only so many Rihannas. This turned when there was too much competition to stand out, novelty of new choices faded, or what made it unique got copied. Now there’s also Lady Gaga, Ariana, Hailey, and Selena makeup. As Bloomberg said, 20 celebrity beauty brands in 2021. 17 in 2020. There were just 19 star brands launched in the 6 years ending with Fenty’s release, with no star comparable to Rihanna. Their data shows Kylie’s US site sales fell 80% from 2017-23.

'Exits' were once the goal. The problem with this VC exit focus is most of these brands haven’t done well after the exit. They do not grow into anything like the next Airbnb, a new alternative to makeup or shaving the way it is to hotels. A lot of founders are probably just fine cashing out; they are not the Steve Jobs of makeup. Drunk Elephant failed specifically bc clean got copied. Rare and Rhode are the new ones, in the celebrity category. Merit is one funded by MarcyPen.

In March 2022, Bloomberg said a Savage X IPO at $3b was being considered. That was just after it peaked per traffic analytics on sites like Semrush (check if you like, I don’t have time to go into it again.) Skims traffic was just starting to surge, and their bras launched September that year. I recognized the tagline from ads at the time of inclusive sizing just like Savage X claims to have. Usually investors care about not just competitive advantage, but 'moat,' how defensible it is. Something easily copied: no moat.

New brands go out of fashion. Name brands are hard to copy.

Fenty Beauty remains the leading black makeup brand. It seems positioned to gain market from Ami Cole and Pat McGrath, but Puck’s mention of a 30% drop at Sephora shows that’s not happening. Maybe Danessa Myricks, who started before Fenty Beauty can break through.

It echoes Kylie Cosmetics (slide 3), but without the made up numbers. This brings to mind a pattern I see similar to fashion that the VCs overlook bc they don’t know consumer retail that well. They might look at the winners but not the losers. There’s some name brands that generally do well decade after decade. Nike, Polo, Zara, European luxury. Most other brands that get hot the since the 90s are just meteoric. They have their moment—then fade. Coach, Michael Kors, Gap, Juicy Couture, Forever 21, Under Armour. Lululemon broke through but lost its founder and faces competition: copying.

Different product category not for this sub, but you see the pattern now. Copying is a challenge for every hot consumer brand that relies on a differentiator and has no other brand recognition. Like say if Rihanna initially collabed w Dior beauty for comprehensive shades; others can copy and it will still be luxury brand 'Dior.' Or MAC, which she worked with first, is still MAC.

L’Oreal is one of those long term name brands, doing even better than fashion lately. L’oreal’s chart is pretty stable over time, slide 4. (Using search topic shows jumps from Google's measurement changes, so I used search the more common term Loreal instead of L'Oreal.) 

K Beauty. Music to sell the makeup: why not Beyonce 5 years ago?

K Beauty is eating a lot of the interest in new brands, even taking share from legacy ones. I guess there is an efficiency from decades of mainly selling to a demanding home market that is lower income than the US. Lower labor cost, similar to France or Japan’s GDP per capita. BUT unlike those countries Korea hasn’t been a big exporter with recognizable brands like L’Oreal and Shiseido, so it doesn’t price as high as brands that catered to global demand for longer. 

I hear some Western brands chasing K beauty, like the cushion revival. But K beauty also has a type of unique ingredient differentiation, like with ginseng. Ginseng doesn’t seem to have actual proven health benefit as food when I looked it up, idk for skin. But it sounds exotic. If Western brands copied it would be seen as inauthentic: what the hell does La Mer/Rare know about ginseng? It’s also expensive and probably would add to the cost for no reason. Ofc it could be copied by other Asian brands, but a Sulwhasoo is also a name brand like a Dior.

Nothing competes with how K pop/dramas indirectly markets a look. Kpop is the only genre where 'visual' customarily recognized as a talent. I see Rihanna has a positive feedback loop going the other way, with her brands marketing her music. But it also has me think there was missed opportunity in using music to sell a music star’s makeup. Selena Gomez is not really doing this with her brand either. With all the interlocking relationships, it would’ve been good for Jay Z/Brown to figure something out with getting Beyonce to carry the music side and sell Fenty. She prob wants to be paid big, but a non cash way to do it would be to give her equity. It would be better for Rihanna to have say 40% if it were worth more than her current 50%. It kind of balances their weaknesses in music output and Beyonce’s lack of interest in brand deals in favor of making her own brands that haven’t been that great till Cecred.

The bubble was not bad, but shows Big Cosmetics needs diversity

Rihanna and ASAP Rocky were seen with Arnault and his wife at a Dior show last summer, shortly before sales rumors. Presumably, they’ll still get along and she may continue to have the potential business advantages of this relationship. 

She became the face of Dior’s J’adore perfume, very striking given it competes with perfume from her Fenty Beauty brand. At the time I wasn’t sure why LVMH would do this, even if Fenty is known more for the makeup. It risks diluting the Fenty brand but maybe the idea was to indirectly elevate it by associating her with a 'luxury' name. Now, it seems like a tacit admission of problems at Fenty. Today (10/22) she just posted on IG for J’adore while getting her makeup done. No mention of Fenty, this isn’t their ad. But it really feels like shading her own name brand. 

Despite the bubble, it’s still good that funding gave opportunity to black/female founders and those they employed. It drew attention to the need for such brands, as well as the need to support them. Plus a lesson for future brands: competent business leadership, not necessarily having the celebrity/MUA founder also be CEO, even if that works for Danessa Myricks. Stars are not CEOs at Rhode and Rare.

These new brands were a training ground, potentially for fresh leadership at the incumbents or K beauty. I saw the founder of Ami Cole is now in an EVP role at Skims. The real change would be drawing black/female talent to work at Big Cosmetics. The giants withstood the flood of competition and costs, and there will be less interest in funding new brands bc it didn’t work. VCs now want the next OpenAI, not Fabletics or Fenty. (The above link on stale valuations explains they resulted from AI vacuuming funding that could otherwise give some of these brands a little more runway.)

These are gigantic companies; L’Oreal says it has 90k employees. The company is led by a French guy. That was what stood out to me in the BoF piece on LVMH. Only French people were considered for the cosmetics role. The former L’Oreal guy, whose poached bc he was said to be a potential CEO of L'Oreal; the replacement is a French woman. Expected of French companies. But even aside from black representation, the idea that only France is capable of producing leaders at these companies really limits the talent pool. 

I’m not as familiar w this industry, but this isn’t theoretical. I see this kind of problem at Samsung, hiring only Koreans with a lot of technical not entrepreneurial background. The combination of both sets Silicon Valley apart. Or France’s Airbus also not jumping at the opportunity to take market from Boeing after its years of safety problems. 'Switching costs,' training mechanics and pilots? Just pay for it and take share; subsidizing customers is what Amazon did, then Uber and a lot of other startups. Arnault himself succeeded by having what he called an 'American' approach to business. Aggressive, relentless, creative competition in a country with 'polite' business norms. They weren’t ready for him.

This gets to a criticism of Rihanna, 'no ethical billionaires.' To succeed, you need to want growth more. Without black billionaires in makeup, you have white billionaires running it. Copying Rihanna to sell to black buyers is a cosmetic diversity compared to having black people running the business. It took Rihanna’s Fenty Beauty to make shades for dark skin industry standard, not just a MAC thing. A white run industry didn’t care. Fenty Beauty opened doors for other black owned brands like LYS, demonstrating that a wide range of shades can be profitable. (LYS is run by someone who looks like she has a perfect Linkedin background. Business degree, corporate brand manager, MUA.)

Big Cosmetics isn’t going out of its way for a diverse workforce if we don’t push for it. If it matters to you, talk about it. Look into it, ask for answers.

Ideas for Fenty. Consolidate, ethics, be first in emerging markets

Bernard Arnault redefined the luxury industry, as well as cosmetics with Sephora and Fenty Beauty. He can’t save Fenty but he is one of the great CEOs to learn from. If Rihanna dealt with the young Arnault of 40 years ago, he might want her to hostile takeover competitors. He had no hesitation to antagonize others, and a lack of concern over media critics that has no comparison even in the US. Obsessed with growth and crushing the weak. But nobody would like a brand like that, a billionaire business version of Nicki Minaj. Older Arnault knew not to do this with Fenty, but I think the brand needs this intense desire to win. I hear about Rihanna’s involvement, and I know that it is a hard time for the industry. I don’t really get the sense she’s a 'product person' intensely driven about what she’s selling, like a Steve Jobs or Kanye with Yeezy.

What it really needs is a manager, a turnaround expert. I noticed someone with a good resume who left Ariana Grande’s Rem, Andre Branch. He had a lot of senior corporate roles, including at Estee and Loreal. He’s black and went to  a top college for undergrad and MBA, although I also see he seems not able to fully get to the top in one company after a long career. Rihanna might not be able to bring Hillary Super back to Savage, but the fact she found the person who turned around Victoria’s Secret shows she has some sense. She just needs to keep the next Hillary. 

The other lesson is the way Arnault acquired different luxury brands and used operations experts to optimize them, and strategically used their combined scale. All his brands give him power over where to place stores in a shopping center. L Catterton lets him design his own shopping center from scratch, giving control over competitors. Using LVMH’s wealth to try to buy Hermes, and still making billions even if he couldn’t. *That's a model for investing in K beauty that can generate returns while you figure out if it's worth integrating operations.

This takes me to another possibility: Rihanna building her version of Big Cosmetics. There’s potential for a black or POC alternative to L’Oreal. The big companies own dozens of brands bc it is efficient. Shared mass production lowers input cost %. Size helps ad buying, lease negotiation, shelf space in Sephora. There would have to be some cost savings and strength from merging Fenty with other brands. If MarcyPen bought other brands, it gets better pricing from suppliers. Or if it owned some white label makers, it can diversify investments too. A low price contractor benefits from the hundreds of millions of new makeup customers projected by 2030, even if your brands don’t directly sell to them. 

Bc I also think there’s a lot of potential in Africa. That is the glaring emptiness on the Google trends map for Fenty Beauty (slide 5). There’s not much search activity, which matches it being the smallest makeup market in Loreal’s 2025 beauty market report. BUT they say there will be a lot of growth, more than Europe and North America combined, the current main areas of search interest for Fenty. 65m new cosmetics customers by 2030. And the biggest area of growth will be South Asia-Mideast-North Africa (slide 6.) Where many have darker skin, but there’s a range (slide 7, map from UN affiliated program.) These new customers will amount to more than all of North America. But people just joining the middle class in developing countries will need a lower price point. I’m sure L’Oreal sees the potential if they commissioned the study, but they also want to maintain their 14% profit margin. 

I think Asian white label makers, like Chinese contractors for Elf and others are a threat/opportunity. Korea’s Cosmax and Kolmar. If Kendo remains Fenty’s maker they could help in this area, but again LVMH might not have expertise on such low price makeup. I expect with China losing labor cost advantage, more things could be made in Africa such as makeup: this is happening with clothing in Africa, like the abusive Fabletics factories. Make it ethical without the abuse and it could be a great selling point. Shea Moisture’s African origins come to mind, but not selling to a Unilever. I have a dream 😂. 

I also think there’s potential for an ethical luxury line, higher price, higher standards, since there’s been a lot of criticism over the mica issue. (This is an industry wide problem, not specific to Fenty and the accusations were actually political retaliation. It’s what drew me to research Fenty/Rihanna to begin with.) Maybe such a high price that effectively subsidizes working conditions at any sister brands. People complain about this a lot but will they actually pay for it? I’ve looked at the value of mica exports from India and given the estimated amount of kids working in those mines, I think millions would help. I mean, not that much money for a company. A struggling Fenty Beauty alone shouldn’t have to pay for the other 99.5% of the industry, but it could lead the way. Get other big companies involved, and this could be the 2nd defining change it brings to makeup.

I said above L Catterton could be doing something like this with its beauty incubator. It once had stake in a producer for many major brands, Intercos. Since the incubator started the same year Intercos was sold, presumably it didn’t see efficiency in owning it. Intercos has low profit margin and sales/profit isn’t growing much since 2023: probably exposed to the makeup downturn and not benefiting from K beauty growth. You see this in the enormous growth of Korean makers Cosmax (slide 8) and Kolmar the same period:

Revenue in b Korean won

2026 Q2 / 2023 Q2 = growth

Cosmax: 794.9 / 479.3 = 66%

Kolmar: 861 / 599.7 = 43.5%

Both higher margin/growth, but there presumably are redundancies across them, as well as things they could learn from each other. All three have a network of factories from China to the US, so they also have experience opening them in new geographies (last 3 slides.) Brand is where the margin is, like Apple compared to its maker Foxconn. But Foxconn is much more dominant an OEM, unlike these various makeup makers. Again, I’m no expert in makeup or manufacturing. Just giving a possible direction to generalists. I think there’s something to reconsider about owning a producer. The new approach: consolidate, look for cheaper labor, while also benefiting your own brands. Cosmax bought a stake in a tiny Italian maker, Keminova: around 18b KRW in sales. I think it reinforces this direction: Intercos is the big one, over 80x the revenue, also in Italy.

This is all a great fantasy, a vertically (production) and horizontally (brands)  integrated black beauty conglomerate. Idk if that’s what they’re thinking. Just an investment? Beauty Independent cites a source who says MarcyPen wants to be like a TSG Consumer, a private equity firm. That would be exit focused, on fund returns. Selling the 50% Fenty to a future buyer, or an IPO? You need to make it stronger first. I’m not familiar with private equity but I’m not aware of investors packaging together companies the way I’m thinking. Usually acquirers are in that industry, wanting to buy competitors or emerging new brands: Goodai Global in K beauty. Facebook bought Instagram itself, not bc investors asked it to. Since investors deal with many industries and often don’t have the expertise in a single one. You have the rare exception of Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway with its wholly owned operating businesses like Geico.

This has never been done, and it seems like a more complex operational challenge than more shades was when Fenty Beauty launched. That had LVMH manufacturing. This idea makes sense to me as an outside layperson; it might not work. You might have heard half of US businesses fail in 5 years. Turning around Fenty, building a company of multiple black beauty brands, someone else starting a new one in this economy: the odds are a gamble. Too high risk for the average person. 

This brings me back to diversifying Big Cosmetics, or the K beauty that seems here to stay. That is not lottery like odds, but about hiring or training people who aren’t celebrities or entrepreneurs. We can ask for scholarships and internships.

Representation, equality, making products that fit what customers actually want. Actually good cosmetics, not just fan driven hysteria that seems to fuel Hailey Bieber’s Rhode (based on reactions when I posted about its growth.) You don’t get these things quickly just waiting for it to trickle down from the entrepreneurs who take the risks, from the few who then win, only to be hanging on to what market share or corporate parent it can. You should be inspired by the example of the Rihanna’s to push for more. It was frozen till she showed she was so right she kind of made herself obsolete. That’s not to erase Danessa or MAC. But it took someone with Rihanna’s pull to pull the industry forward.

She showed things can happen fast. Ask for the scholarships, internships, hiring. Training tracks for female and POC execs. Black women at K beauty if they want to sell to black customers, not just gifts to an influencer. Look at who leads Big Beauty and ask why. A Frenchman leads Estee Lauder too. Before him it was an Italian guy. They say the US has good business schools. Nothing against these countries, but clearly there’s some cultural opportunity they have that should be available to others. And clearly they did not make shades for all until Rihanna. Credit EL’s MAC for hiring/inspiring her. But discredit for the industry not treating those with dark skin as an afterthought. Fashion is similar, men head or founded or design for the companies that sell to women. 

Diversity should not just be cosmetic.

I have been spending the last couple months growing out then reshaping my brows. I’d like to learn how to use a pencil to make them more symmetrical and fill in the sparse areas. I’ve tried this in the past and it looked terrible so I just use a little bit of tinted brow gel these days. I’d like to have another go though, and would really appreciate tips on choosing a pencil shade and application.

Products in pic: Clio kill lash in mousse brown, wet and wild tinted hydrator in light, Maybelline powder in translucent, MAC lipstick in Dubbonet, elf tinted brow gel in dark brown

I am currently use Armani Luminous Silk in 5.75 and love it but sometimes I feel like my complexion looks a little flat and could use more life and dimension?

I want to keep the medium to full coverage but add a little more glow without looking oily or compromising how long it lasts and looks good in pics lol

My biggest issue with foundations is oxidation. I hate when they end up turning orange throughout the day. I've had this issue with both NARS and Dior. Has anyone found a foundation that mixes really well with Armani and gives the skin a more radiant, healthy look without changing the color? Would love recs!

Hi everyone! I'm looking for some eyeshadow palette recommendations, especially from people who have tried Tom Ford or Chanel eyeshadows!

I'm East Asian with fair, warm/yellow-toned skin. I have large, somewhat prominent eyes, full upper eyelids, and a narrow double-eyelid crease, so a lot of my eyeshadow disappears when my eyes are open.

My current collection:

• Tom Ford 04 Honeymoon
• Tom Ford 31 Sous Le Sable (older version)
• Chanel Les Beiges Warm (just purchased)
• Ensley Reign Underland
• Pat McGrath Mothership I: Subliminal
• YSL Couture Mini Clutch 700 Over Noir
• Bobbi Brown Luxe Eye Shadow Moonstone

I've noticed that lighter, softer eyeshadow looks tend to work better for me than darker, more dramatic ones. I'm particularly interested in palettes with flattering everyday shades, smooth formulas, and beautiful shimmer finishes.

I'm currently considering Tom Ford 42 Hazy Sensuality, 03 Moonlight Dip, and Chanel Les Beiges Soft or Medium.

For anyone who owns these palettes:

• How do the formulas compare in terms of blendability, pigmentation, fallout, and longevity?
• Do you think any of these would be too similar to what I already own?
• Are there other palettes you'd recommend, especially for someone with limited visible lid space?

I love collecting and experimenting with eyeshadow, and I'm happy to invest in luxury palettes if the quality and colors are worth it.

Would love to hear your experiences and recommendations. Thank you! ❤️

I use the Huda beauty loose powder and I’ve been baking my face with it however I’ve noticed that my makeup always looks somewhat cakey. At first it’s just a little cakey and isn’t that bad or anything but after a few hours, it goes BADDDD. Should I just not bake my face and instead opt for applying little amounts or is there a way to bake without getting all cakey?

Yes, I skin prep btw. I use moisturiser, a phyto mucin glow serum, an eye cream, a sunscreen and a primer. And as for my foundation, I apply very little amounts at a time and do no more than 2 pumps. Usually around 1 and a half pumps actually and i usually do a dot of concealer too.

Hi - I have dry skin and been on tret (well tolerated) for the last year. I’m 55 with almost no deep wrinkles. However most skin tints that I’ve tried (Maybelline, Sephora brand, Dior, Hung Vanngo, It cosmetics) have dried down while making my pores look much bigger than if I were not to wear skin tints. I wear skin tints to provide my skin some blue light protection over my sunscreen.

Have you had success with a brand that I can try over the next couple of months? I figured now is a good time to try and purchase with all the sales.

Hi beauties,

With the Sephora sale coming up I need a setting powder that will not make me look or feel super powdery. I’ve used the wet and wild setting powder for years and it’s now starting to make me feel like the Sahara desert even after spraying the one size powder melt. So I switched to the morphe set and bake powder which I love but is there anything better? I’m thinking of makeup by Mario, kosas, or a thin layer of the huda powder. I am of course highly open to suggestions. Photos for attention.

Got these for a Halloween look. I’ve always wanted Ben nye products since I was in hs in so happy . The makeup artist that inspired me to do dramatic looks have been Patrick star and luscious massacre . They r my inspo for this years Halloween look I also am the reason why fire red is sold out . Right after I bought it it crossed out

I have recently come across the Mary Phillips Underpainting palette and thus learned what under painting is! I am very intrigued by the technique and think it could be a quick and hopefully easy way to get some shape in my pale, pink face. I prefer skin tints or foundations that are light to medium coverage due to my skin texture, age (42) and overall skill level.

Are there other products you find to work better than the Mary Phillips brand (m. Ph) or perhaps you had a better experience buying the shades individually in a different brand? I would like something that is a little foolproof if possible.

Any suggestions for tutorials I should watch that won’t overwhelm me? Any tips you have learned along the way? Is there a better way out there?

Just unearthed while helping my mom organize a dresser drawer. She doesn’t know how old it is, but said “oh I could still use that.” If it’s not that old, fine, but if it’s ancient, I’d like evidence so I can get her to throw it out.

hi yall! i’m a uni student and ive had a really rough semester in all honesty 😭 i would like to treat myself with some retail therapy and would really appreciate if anyone had a rouge code they would be willing to give me! thanks so muchhh 🫶🏽🫶🏽

I’m looking for cool toned lip recommendations. Liners, lipsticks, glosses and everything in between. I’m very pale, so warm tones tend to pull very orange on me. I’ve tried what seems like all the popular and trending lip colors including: Morphe makeup talk Huda beauty pinky nude & pinky brown Makeup forever endless cocoa, limitless brown, anywhere caffeine and wherever walnut Charlotte Tilbury pillow talk fair, pillow talk & pillow talk medium Mac velvet Teddy & whirl

The closest I’ve found is half magic’s blushing lizard but it is still too sparkly rather tan a more shimmery finish. I am looking for a nude/pink/transparent with a blue/teal/purple reflection and reads more like a glossy lid rather than a sparkly look.

Hi! I’m 21 and I’ve been doing (almost) full faces on myself since I was 16. I’m not new to makeup, but I’ve somehow never used eyeshadow (despite using heavy liner and lash clusters, lol). I usually put bronzer on my lids instead, and it works well. I loveeeee a bronze look.

I decided it’s time to start this new adventure with forgiving products that are easy to work with and easy to blend. Preferably from amazon, sephora, or ulta. Would also love tutorial recommendations. Thank you!!!!

there’s this gorgeous color (maybelline single eyeshadow in the vanilla shade) and anytime i use it, it gets everywhere besides my lid. it gets under my eyes, on nose. but then again im not the biggest eyeshadow person so im not sure if its a common thing to happen or not. but it makes it hard to use for everyday wear. what’s the best brands, single eyeshadows, palettes you’d recommend for high end eyeshadow quality but a drugstore price? (i have no specific color in mind either, cause if its a good brand i’ll probably buy different colors) 🤍

Eyeshadow base: urban decay anti aging

Eyeshadow: Blend Bunny Gleam and Gloom palette, blend Bunny Ellis palette, Terramoons Star gazing palette

Brows: Blend Bunny Ellis palette

Waterline: Made by Mitch color case

Mascara: Melt Cosmetics so high

Lashes: AOA studio 1620 Christine

By the end of the day, my makeup is so cakey and is literally peeling off. Am I using too much setting powder maybe? How do I stop this from happening? After I put it on in the morning, it looks fine but by the end of the day it looks like this.

I was looking into the Clio eyeshadow palettes, and these interested me. They seem to have very similar color stories based on online photos.

Does anyone have in-person experience with these palettes? What are the differences between them?

I am fair, cool, and somewhat muted, and I’m looking for a palette for everyday wear.

Clio Pro Eye Palette Air
1-2: Mute Library
3-4: Lavender Staff
5-6: Maehwa Ribbon (I’ve also seen it referred to as Plum Blossom Ribbon)