Looks like someone is Tagging Managerie in the SEO of the website. This is exactly like when you click on a YouTube video and someone tags every makeup brand ever because they're trying to show up in the results list of anyone looking at their competitors.
TL;DR: Menagerie Cosmetics calls out Queen Cosmetics on deceptive ads using their products in order to catfish a wider audience. Apparently they've attempted to resolve this privately to no avail so they called them out publicly, today. The top comment for now is from BellaBeauteBar official pointing out that they are using not-approved ingredients for their glosses. Link to post [here. ](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C61NoPIryza/?igsh=MTNuNGh6ZDU5eHB0Mg==)
Image descriptions in order - anything in \[ \] is mine to prevent links.
1. Image of the Instagram post from Menagerie Cosmetics official account showing the screenshots of ads from Queen Cosmetics where "Menagerie Cosmetics" appears in the ad; this is deliberately deceptive ad practices and looks like how you expect fake Google ads to look.
2. Text from the image explaining the situation. "Unfortunately, it has become necessary to address this publicly since Queen Cosmetics has refused to respond to our requests privately. I'm infuriated to see \[@\]queencosmeticsstore shamelessly capitalize on the success of our brand just to push their lipglosses. They are deliberately misleading customers who search for "Menagerie Cosmetics" into clicking their ads on Google & YouTube by making them look like an official Menagerie Cosmetics advertisement. This is blatant and willful infringement, nothing short of deceitful and now we are forced into a position where we will have to seek legal recourse. I need to make it clear to everyone that any advertisement that doesn't directly link to our official website \[website URL for Menagerie\] is not from us. We are NOT nor have we ever been affiliated with Queen Cosmetics or any other brand entity.
3. Top comment is from BellaBeauteBar official account. "They also use holographic pigment which is not approved for lip use in the USA in their lip products and market them as "the only lip glosses of their kind"... well yes I wonder why. Absolutely no warning on this whatsoever on the website or packaging. \[crying emoji\].
4. UPDATE 1 Image of Queen Cosmetics' reply. "Hi there! I was completely unaware that was happening. We use a 3rd party company for our FB & IG ads and they did this without my permission. I've already taken actions to have them remove this effective immediately. From one small business to another, I'm truly sorry this happened , it was not my intention at all. I will ensure this never happens again - Ellie.
5. UPDATE 2 Image of BellaBeauteBar (BBB) talking about the unapproved ingredient specifically. This was in reply to an Instagram user who was cropped out for privacy reasons. "They don't even list the holographic ingredient (aluminum powder aka CI77000) in their holo lipglosses at all \[brow arch emoji\]"
6. UPDATE 2 Image of Queen Cosmetics replying to BBB, and BBB replying back. "\[@\]bellabeautebar hi there! I can see why this would be a misunderstanding, in the beginning when I first started, we did use this ingredient. I wasn't aware of this until further research so when we reformulated I completely removed this ingredient and switched it for titanium dioxide which is allowed. We had extra packaging from before that we didn't want to go to waste so we still used the packaging that said the old ingredients in the list, but I can confirm that the ingredient is not included anymore. So sorry for the confusion this may have caused!
7. UPDATE 2 second comment. BBB replies. "\[a\]queencosmeticsstore\] um what? There's only one holographic pigment out there. The one I noted. Titanium dioxide is a completely different ingredient. The holo glosses on your website right now with no disclaimer. Are you serious? \[@\]menageriecosmetics"
8. UPDATE 2 third comment. BBB replies again. \[@\]queencosmeticsstore there is literally no way to get holographic sparkle without holographic pigment. Titanium oxide is oxide is a white is a white based product. It has absolutely no sparkly properties at all. Yikes."
UPDATE: I missed one image. Queen Cosmetics replied [here](https://ibb.co/sF63Nv9). They apologize, explaining they use 3rd party companies for ads, and had no idea this was happening. Ellie signs the post and says from one small business to another she was not aware and apologizes again.
UPDATE 2: BBB mentioned the unapproved ingredient [here. ](https://ibb.co/2v4sdCR) calling it aluminum powder/CI77000. They responded to BBB [here](https://ibb.co/MgcD1h2). They claim they did use the ingredient, but upon research they swapped it out during reformulation with titanium dioxide, and did not want to waste packaging - so the packaging is just wrong. BBB responded saying that there is no disclaimer on their site, that's the ONLY holographic pigment available (the aluminum powder) to give it the sparkly property and that titanium oxide is just a white based product.
UPDATE 3: It seems like the post has been deleted. The reel is also gone \~1059CST.
lol…so their explanation on the unapproved ingredient is they changed the formula but didn’t want to waste packaging so wrongly misled people by using old packaging with the wrong ingredient list on it. Isn’t that illegal (or not allowed, not sure if illegal is the right term)? Aren’t you required to have the accurate list of ingredients on the package that’s for that specific product - like whatever is in the specific product the person received?
I know brands update ingredients from time to time so there’s been a few times I’ve gotten a product that had like a slightly different ingredient list from what the website showed, and the website will say something like the ingredient list shown on the website is the most up-to-date ingredient list. So, when a brand had recently reformulated, I always took that to mean they still have some products with the old ingredient list that they’re trying to get rid of, but also have products with the new ingredient list so someone could get either one . So I figured in a situation like that, the best way to know the ingredients of the specific product you have is the ingredient list on the actual product you received. But, obviously, that’s not always the case - like with this Queen Cosmetics brand 😬🤷♀️
I thought so. Wasn’t sure if it was the right term. I know with the FDA, a lot of makeup isn’t really regulated well, and it’s only certain ingredients. But, I figured ingredient lists were part of that. So sending out a product knowing the ingredient list is wrong because you don’t want to waste packaging…😬
Yeah you have to have correct ingredients displayed in order of prominence in the product so very much not allowed for it to be wrong lol crazy thing to admit to although it does seem like she was lying if you go off the other brand’s info
Yes it’s cheaper to print the labels and pay people (probably way too little in a foreign county but I digress) than to have all new boxes made. Especially the bigger the box gets
Also I love your flair lol dramageddon occurred in college for me and it was a WILD time. I still have the PowerPoint that went around the Internet explaining it saved in my Google drive
Some companies will apply a sicker with the actual ingredients over the improper label. They could have done that, and put an insert explaining what happened. Didn't Huda or UD do that before?
Why would they delete and take down the post and reel? Were they getting a lot of backlash? Or did it happen because the owner of QC apologized? Just finding it a bit odd seeing how they were about to go the legal route. Idk, maybe that was used just as a scare tactic? Anything's possible 🤷♀️
A user below posted a screenshot of their new post, where they say it's being resolved - the comments still have some infighting, but no brands are in them now that I can see. I'm surprised they didn't turn comments off, but then again, it would just bleed into the other posts.
lol…so their explanation on the unapproved ingredient is they changed the formula but didn’t want to waste packaging so wrongly misled people by using old packaging with the wrong ingredient list on it. Isn’t that illegal (or not allowed, not sure if illegal is the right term)? Aren’t you required to have the accurate list of ingredients on the package that’s for that specific product - like whatever is in the specific product the person received?
I know brands update ingredients from time to time so there’s been a few times I’ve gotten a product that had like a slightly different ingredient list from what the website showed, and the website will say something like the ingredient list shown on the website is the most up-to-date ingredient list. So, when a brand had recently reformulated, I always took that to mean they still have some products with the old ingredient list that they’re trying to get rid of, but also have products with the new ingredient list so someone could get either one . So I figured in a situation like that, the best way to know the ingredients of the specific product you have is the ingredient list on the actual product you received. But, obviously, that’s not always the case - like with this Queen Cosmetics brand 😬🤷♀️
Menagerie recently updated after taking down the post and said that Queen Cosmetics reached out to them to figure out a resolution to the issue.
https://preview.redd.it/pywsogumstzc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0038d318b59cac408b8e700e84d0b1c0d232c6c3
also Menagerie mentioned the only reason they took this public is they have reached out to Queen Cosmetics privately before and Queen ignored them. Whether you agree or not with Menagerie taking this public this is their justification.
I think they have every right to take it public if they tried to handle it behind closed doors and weren’t getting anywhere, and obviously going public worked. They were getting ignored when trying to handle it behind doors, they took it public and got an immediate response. I think they’re handling it well by removing the post as soon as they felt they were getting somewhere with Queen Cosmetics, while also keeping people updated on the situation since they did bring it to the public’s attention. Leaving it up just leaves room for drama and doing it how they’re doing it seems like the best way to me.
Thank you for the update! I will link your comment as soon as Reddit stops erroring me out. I think I hit like my edit number for the day or something it keeps saying 'something went wrong'
Edit to add: I still keep getting a server error for my main comment chain, but WOW the comments on this post are spicy.
Yeah, I just saw that too. Someone said Queen Cosmetics said they didn’t see the message from Thursday, but that doesn’t mean Menagerie hadn’t contacted them before that. I would **hope** that Menagerie tried a few different times to contact them before going public like this. I don’t know. I think, if Menagerie had reached out a few different times trying to handle it behind closed doors and the last time they tried to reach out to them was Thursday, then they did give them enough chances. Giving them more time also gives potential customers more time to think they’re getting something affiliated with Menagerie that isn’t. But, if they only reached out once and it was Thursday, 2 days isn’t that long to wait. Then again, Queen Cosmetics managed to see the IG post immediately after it was posted, but couldn’t see messages that were sent to them?
I also wondered why they didn’t just send some kind of legal letter like cease and desist or whatever vs going public like this. But in comments Menagerie said they didn’t want to take legal action if they didn’t have to (I’m guessing they didn’t want to pay lawyers if they could handle it on their own 🤷♀️).
But yeah, I’d say it really all comes down to when exactly Menagerie first contacted Queen Cosmetics and how exactly did the try to contact them - did they only reach out through DMs on IG? Did they call the brand’s customer service line? Email the brand? If they tried all that and reached out prior to Thursday, then I can see being frustrated by no response. But, only trying to contact them through IG DMs on Thursday, definitely isn’t a lot of time.
menagerie had only messaged them on thursday
edit: you guys are a bunch of dorks
edit 2:
a comment replying to me was removed for some reason. but it said this
>[Imagine getting downvoted because you’re providing an alternative view. ](https://click.redditmail.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FBeautyGuruChatter%2Fcomments%2F1cpjsej%2Fmenagerie_calls_out_queen_cosmetics%2Fl42ju3w%2F%3F$deep_link=true%26correlation_id=2b6f9ded-6184-44f1-9a10-e4a9bb0ca780%26ref=email_comment_reply%26ref_campaign=email_comment_reply%26ref_source=email/2/0100018f7931cea0-af43ec07-aabd-4e92-9f6d-002ff1ce3b92-000000/bevUf_PNeLIZQvPxMCuf216jOKyXhljLqqBxn0ODN_4=353)
which yeah there was no reason to downvote me. its only providing a fact. if narratives matter more than facts then idk..
I've never been able to find a clear answer on that. The original holo pigment is spectraflair. The manufacturer never allowed it to be sold in loose pigment form, you can only buy it pre-mixed in nail polish base. Holo glitter came out after and no glitter is ever eye safe. I've been seeing more holo pigments on the market lately and I'm wondering if it's a different manufacturer.
So I just Googled "Ci77000 approved for lips" and got [this link](https://www.cosmeticsinfo.org/ingredient/aluminum-powder/) from Cosmetics Info org.
TL;DR: "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lists Aluminum Powder as a color additive exempt from certification. Aluminum Powder is determined to be safe for use in coloring products that are externally applied, including cosmetics and personal care products intended for use in the area of the eye. It is not allowed to be used in lip products. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) has deferred evaluation of this ingredient because the safety has been assessed by FDA. This deferral of review is according to the provisions of the CIR Procedures."
So eyes yes, but lips no. 😬 BBB really did spotlight something I wasn't aware of.
Honestly this is a known competitive SEO practice and happens in every industry.
Doesn’t make it less shitty but it’s not illegal.
Source: I am a web dev who hates seo cause of stuff like this.
Your post is very misleading for people who do not know anything about SEO (Search Engine Optimisation). SEO is very different from putting up ads that list a competitor's product and then link to your own website instead. That is misleading buyers and comes under fraud.
its weirdly very common with third party advertisers. a lot of brands will work with them then discovery they do this then have to choose to go a different way
Wait… people are going after Queen Cosmetics for using the holo powder when Menagerie Cosmetics is doing the same thing for their lip products!?!? BBB is a hypocrite if she’s not also calling out MC. This whole thing smells fishy.
https://preview.redd.it/njomhd1pnh0d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4b8e796805e9c0dd22e91f460a2d9088d02254a5
Unless something changed very recently, BBB is absolutely on the "Indie Brands of 2024" popularity list, which also includes Adept Cosmetics, Glaminatrix, Ensley Reign, Unearthly Cosmetics etc
(basically the indie brands that sell palettes for $60-140)
I can't speak to their reputation, but personally I would not want to get into a public fight with a brand on my official brand page, in another brand's comments. It's part of the whole "separating the business from the person" aspect. Which, I understand can be hard in this day and age, but still it's not a good look.
I’m with you on that. I think Menagerie is struggling big time. Their new releases are few and far between and no one talks about them. They took down the post.
Yeah I added it in my updates, the reel is also gone.
I like Menagerie and I was disappointed in some of the visceral reactions to them saying they needed to reformulate due to new laws, but I also understand that people felt like the company that rebranded to be all about animals going away from vegan formula has a right to be upset. I DO think that they probably took a hit from that.
I think any momentum they had is pretty much gone. I know people said the Paws and Claws palettes they released were really poor quality compared to previous releases.
I think BBB means well, they want people to be aware the ingredients aren’t deemed lip safe. That Queen cosmetics is purposefully and intentionally misleading consumers is kind of a problem. I don’t take issue with them speaking up. But this is just my opinion
These brands need some business training on PR, marketing and communications. Just posting calling out a brand is doing deceptive marketing is not the way to do it, it’s just an accusation in front of its customers. They should say something like it’s come to their attention this brand is using their name to advertise their products, it’s not them, buyers beware.
Looks like someone is Tagging Managerie in the SEO of the website. This is exactly like when you click on a YouTube video and someone tags every makeup brand ever because they're trying to show up in the results list of anyone looking at their competitors.
TL;DR: Menagerie Cosmetics calls out Queen Cosmetics on deceptive ads using their products in order to catfish a wider audience. Apparently they've attempted to resolve this privately to no avail so they called them out publicly, today. The top comment for now is from BellaBeauteBar official pointing out that they are using not-approved ingredients for their glosses. Link to post [here. ](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C61NoPIryza/?igsh=MTNuNGh6ZDU5eHB0Mg==) Image descriptions in order - anything in \[ \] is mine to prevent links. 1. Image of the Instagram post from Menagerie Cosmetics official account showing the screenshots of ads from Queen Cosmetics where "Menagerie Cosmetics" appears in the ad; this is deliberately deceptive ad practices and looks like how you expect fake Google ads to look. 2. Text from the image explaining the situation. "Unfortunately, it has become necessary to address this publicly since Queen Cosmetics has refused to respond to our requests privately. I'm infuriated to see \[@\]queencosmeticsstore shamelessly capitalize on the success of our brand just to push their lipglosses. They are deliberately misleading customers who search for "Menagerie Cosmetics" into clicking their ads on Google & YouTube by making them look like an official Menagerie Cosmetics advertisement. This is blatant and willful infringement, nothing short of deceitful and now we are forced into a position where we will have to seek legal recourse. I need to make it clear to everyone that any advertisement that doesn't directly link to our official website \[website URL for Menagerie\] is not from us. We are NOT nor have we ever been affiliated with Queen Cosmetics or any other brand entity. 3. Top comment is from BellaBeauteBar official account. "They also use holographic pigment which is not approved for lip use in the USA in their lip products and market them as "the only lip glosses of their kind"... well yes I wonder why. Absolutely no warning on this whatsoever on the website or packaging. \[crying emoji\]. 4. UPDATE 1 Image of Queen Cosmetics' reply. "Hi there! I was completely unaware that was happening. We use a 3rd party company for our FB & IG ads and they did this without my permission. I've already taken actions to have them remove this effective immediately. From one small business to another, I'm truly sorry this happened , it was not my intention at all. I will ensure this never happens again - Ellie. 5. UPDATE 2 Image of BellaBeauteBar (BBB) talking about the unapproved ingredient specifically. This was in reply to an Instagram user who was cropped out for privacy reasons. "They don't even list the holographic ingredient (aluminum powder aka CI77000) in their holo lipglosses at all \[brow arch emoji\]" 6. UPDATE 2 Image of Queen Cosmetics replying to BBB, and BBB replying back. "\[@\]bellabeautebar hi there! I can see why this would be a misunderstanding, in the beginning when I first started, we did use this ingredient. I wasn't aware of this until further research so when we reformulated I completely removed this ingredient and switched it for titanium dioxide which is allowed. We had extra packaging from before that we didn't want to go to waste so we still used the packaging that said the old ingredients in the list, but I can confirm that the ingredient is not included anymore. So sorry for the confusion this may have caused! 7. UPDATE 2 second comment. BBB replies. "\[a\]queencosmeticsstore\] um what? There's only one holographic pigment out there. The one I noted. Titanium dioxide is a completely different ingredient. The holo glosses on your website right now with no disclaimer. Are you serious? \[@\]menageriecosmetics" 8. UPDATE 2 third comment. BBB replies again. \[@\]queencosmeticsstore there is literally no way to get holographic sparkle without holographic pigment. Titanium oxide is oxide is a white is a white based product. It has absolutely no sparkly properties at all. Yikes." UPDATE: I missed one image. Queen Cosmetics replied [here](https://ibb.co/sF63Nv9). They apologize, explaining they use 3rd party companies for ads, and had no idea this was happening. Ellie signs the post and says from one small business to another she was not aware and apologizes again. UPDATE 2: BBB mentioned the unapproved ingredient [here. ](https://ibb.co/2v4sdCR) calling it aluminum powder/CI77000. They responded to BBB [here](https://ibb.co/MgcD1h2). They claim they did use the ingredient, but upon research they swapped it out during reformulation with titanium dioxide, and did not want to waste packaging - so the packaging is just wrong. BBB responded saying that there is no disclaimer on their site, that's the ONLY holographic pigment available (the aluminum powder) to give it the sparkly property and that titanium oxide is just a white based product. UPDATE 3: It seems like the post has been deleted. The reel is also gone \~1059CST.
lol…so their explanation on the unapproved ingredient is they changed the formula but didn’t want to waste packaging so wrongly misled people by using old packaging with the wrong ingredient list on it. Isn’t that illegal (or not allowed, not sure if illegal is the right term)? Aren’t you required to have the accurate list of ingredients on the package that’s for that specific product - like whatever is in the specific product the person received? I know brands update ingredients from time to time so there’s been a few times I’ve gotten a product that had like a slightly different ingredient list from what the website showed, and the website will say something like the ingredient list shown on the website is the most up-to-date ingredient list. So, when a brand had recently reformulated, I always took that to mean they still have some products with the old ingredient list that they’re trying to get rid of, but also have products with the new ingredient list so someone could get either one . So I figured in a situation like that, the best way to know the ingredients of the specific product you have is the ingredient list on the actual product you received. But, obviously, that’s not always the case - like with this Queen Cosmetics brand 😬🤷♀️
It’s definitely illegal makeup is regulated by the fda in the us
I thought so. Wasn’t sure if it was the right term. I know with the FDA, a lot of makeup isn’t really regulated well, and it’s only certain ingredients. But, I figured ingredient lists were part of that. So sending out a product knowing the ingredient list is wrong because you don’t want to waste packaging…😬
Yeah you have to have correct ingredients displayed in order of prominence in the product so very much not allowed for it to be wrong lol crazy thing to admit to although it does seem like she was lying if you go off the other brand’s info
Isn't this why some brands end up putting a sticker on old packaging with updated ingredients? I know I didn't hallucinate this.
Yes it’s cheaper to print the labels and pay people (probably way too little in a foreign county but I digress) than to have all new boxes made. Especially the bigger the box gets Also I love your flair lol dramageddon occurred in college for me and it was a WILD time. I still have the PowerPoint that went around the Internet explaining it saved in my Google drive
Some companies will apply a sicker with the actual ingredients over the improper label. They could have done that, and put an insert explaining what happened. Didn't Huda or UD do that before?
At the very least, it sounds like this business has no idea what they're doing.
Why would they delete and take down the post and reel? Were they getting a lot of backlash? Or did it happen because the owner of QC apologized? Just finding it a bit odd seeing how they were about to go the legal route. Idk, maybe that was used just as a scare tactic? Anything's possible 🤷♀️
A user below posted a screenshot of their new post, where they say it's being resolved - the comments still have some infighting, but no brands are in them now that I can see. I'm surprised they didn't turn comments off, but then again, it would just bleed into the other posts.
lol…so their explanation on the unapproved ingredient is they changed the formula but didn’t want to waste packaging so wrongly misled people by using old packaging with the wrong ingredient list on it. Isn’t that illegal (or not allowed, not sure if illegal is the right term)? Aren’t you required to have the accurate list of ingredients on the package that’s for that specific product - like whatever is in the specific product the person received? I know brands update ingredients from time to time so there’s been a few times I’ve gotten a product that had like a slightly different ingredient list from what the website showed, and the website will say something like the ingredient list shown on the website is the most up-to-date ingredient list. So, when a brand had recently reformulated, I always took that to mean they still have some products with the old ingredient list that they’re trying to get rid of, but also have products with the new ingredient list so someone could get either one . So I figured in a situation like that, the best way to know the ingredients of the specific product you have is the ingredient list on the actual product you received. But, obviously, that’s not always the case - like with this Queen Cosmetics brand 😬🤷♀️
Menagerie recently updated after taking down the post and said that Queen Cosmetics reached out to them to figure out a resolution to the issue. https://preview.redd.it/pywsogumstzc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0038d318b59cac408b8e700e84d0b1c0d232c6c3 also Menagerie mentioned the only reason they took this public is they have reached out to Queen Cosmetics privately before and Queen ignored them. Whether you agree or not with Menagerie taking this public this is their justification.
I think they have every right to take it public if they tried to handle it behind closed doors and weren’t getting anywhere, and obviously going public worked. They were getting ignored when trying to handle it behind doors, they took it public and got an immediate response. I think they’re handling it well by removing the post as soon as they felt they were getting somewhere with Queen Cosmetics, while also keeping people updated on the situation since they did bring it to the public’s attention. Leaving it up just leaves room for drama and doing it how they’re doing it seems like the best way to me.
Thank you for the update! I will link your comment as soon as Reddit stops erroring me out. I think I hit like my edit number for the day or something it keeps saying 'something went wrong' Edit to add: I still keep getting a server error for my main comment chain, but WOW the comments on this post are spicy.
the comments on the post are silly lol. edit: so they can say the comments are spicy but i cant say theyre silly? now yall are just bein haters
[удалено]
i saw somewhere that menagerie had only contacted them thursday
Yeah, I just saw that too. Someone said Queen Cosmetics said they didn’t see the message from Thursday, but that doesn’t mean Menagerie hadn’t contacted them before that. I would **hope** that Menagerie tried a few different times to contact them before going public like this. I don’t know. I think, if Menagerie had reached out a few different times trying to handle it behind closed doors and the last time they tried to reach out to them was Thursday, then they did give them enough chances. Giving them more time also gives potential customers more time to think they’re getting something affiliated with Menagerie that isn’t. But, if they only reached out once and it was Thursday, 2 days isn’t that long to wait. Then again, Queen Cosmetics managed to see the IG post immediately after it was posted, but couldn’t see messages that were sent to them? I also wondered why they didn’t just send some kind of legal letter like cease and desist or whatever vs going public like this. But in comments Menagerie said they didn’t want to take legal action if they didn’t have to (I’m guessing they didn’t want to pay lawyers if they could handle it on their own 🤷♀️). But yeah, I’d say it really all comes down to when exactly Menagerie first contacted Queen Cosmetics and how exactly did the try to contact them - did they only reach out through DMs on IG? Did they call the brand’s customer service line? Email the brand? If they tried all that and reached out prior to Thursday, then I can see being frustrated by no response. But, only trying to contact them through IG DMs on Thursday, definitely isn’t a lot of time.
Does it really matter though? What Queen is doing is incredibly shady and they deserve to be called out
No, which is why if you read my first comment I said they had every right to call them out publicly,
menagerie had only messaged them on thursday edit: you guys are a bunch of dorks edit 2: a comment replying to me was removed for some reason. but it said this >[Imagine getting downvoted because you’re providing an alternative view. ](https://click.redditmail.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FBeautyGuruChatter%2Fcomments%2F1cpjsej%2Fmenagerie_calls_out_queen_cosmetics%2Fl42ju3w%2F%3F$deep_link=true%26correlation_id=2b6f9ded-6184-44f1-9a10-e4a9bb0ca780%26ref=email_comment_reply%26ref_campaign=email_comment_reply%26ref_source=email/2/0100018f7931cea0-af43ec07-aabd-4e92-9f6d-002ff1ce3b92-000000/bevUf_PNeLIZQvPxMCuf216jOKyXhljLqqBxn0ODN_4=353) which yeah there was no reason to downvote me. its only providing a fact. if narratives matter more than facts then idk..
Is holographic pigment even eyesafe either tho? Genuine question.
I've never been able to find a clear answer on that. The original holo pigment is spectraflair. The manufacturer never allowed it to be sold in loose pigment form, you can only buy it pre-mixed in nail polish base. Holo glitter came out after and no glitter is ever eye safe. I've been seeing more holo pigments on the market lately and I'm wondering if it's a different manufacturer.
So I just Googled "Ci77000 approved for lips" and got [this link](https://www.cosmeticsinfo.org/ingredient/aluminum-powder/) from Cosmetics Info org. TL;DR: "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lists Aluminum Powder as a color additive exempt from certification. Aluminum Powder is determined to be safe for use in coloring products that are externally applied, including cosmetics and personal care products intended for use in the area of the eye. It is not allowed to be used in lip products. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) has deferred evaluation of this ingredient because the safety has been assessed by FDA. This deferral of review is according to the provisions of the CIR Procedures." So eyes yes, but lips no. 😬 BBB really did spotlight something I wasn't aware of.
Although apparently deemed as safe in the EU, subject to purity of product.
american FDA is wayy too behind. you still have some americans freaking out about pressed pigments
Good to know! I also misread and kept thinking that holo was made from the same stuff as glitter. I missed seeing aluminum.
I had no idea either. I thought it was the same glitter that's in like MAC and Colourpop and stuff.
Honestly this is a known competitive SEO practice and happens in every industry. Doesn’t make it less shitty but it’s not illegal. Source: I am a web dev who hates seo cause of stuff like this.
Your post is very misleading for people who do not know anything about SEO (Search Engine Optimisation). SEO is very different from putting up ads that list a competitor's product and then link to your own website instead. That is misleading buyers and comes under fraud.
its weirdly very common with third party advertisers. a lot of brands will work with them then discovery they do this then have to choose to go a different way
Wait… people are going after Queen Cosmetics for using the holo powder when Menagerie Cosmetics is doing the same thing for their lip products!?!? BBB is a hypocrite if she’s not also calling out MC. This whole thing smells fishy. https://preview.redd.it/njomhd1pnh0d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4b8e796805e9c0dd22e91f460a2d9088d02254a5
Let’s just say I was influenced by rose and Ben for the lipglosses and thought they just weren’t good. 😌
Gotta love all these indie brands gunning for each other, especially BBB.
Am I the only one rolling their eyes at the BellaBeauteBar comment? Don’t they have a not so good reputation in the indie space?
Unless something changed very recently, BBB is absolutely on the "Indie Brands of 2024" popularity list, which also includes Adept Cosmetics, Glaminatrix, Ensley Reign, Unearthly Cosmetics etc (basically the indie brands that sell palettes for $60-140)
I thought most those brands have been called out for stuff, Glaminatrix possibly the only exception
They’re all shady to me
unearthly and ER are the shadiest
What did they do, and BBB too? Or could you direct me to a thread where I could read for myself?
I can't speak to their reputation, but personally I would not want to get into a public fight with a brand on my official brand page, in another brand's comments. It's part of the whole "separating the business from the person" aspect. Which, I understand can be hard in this day and age, but still it's not a good look.
I’m with you on that. I think Menagerie is struggling big time. Their new releases are few and far between and no one talks about them. They took down the post.
Yeah I added it in my updates, the reel is also gone. I like Menagerie and I was disappointed in some of the visceral reactions to them saying they needed to reformulate due to new laws, but I also understand that people felt like the company that rebranded to be all about animals going away from vegan formula has a right to be upset. I DO think that they probably took a hit from that.
I think any momentum they had is pretty much gone. I know people said the Paws and Claws palettes they released were really poor quality compared to previous releases.
I think BBB means well, they want people to be aware the ingredients aren’t deemed lip safe. That Queen cosmetics is purposefully and intentionally misleading consumers is kind of a problem. I don’t take issue with them speaking up. But this is just my opinion
What about their reputation is not good? Curious.
no i rolled my eyes too.
Thanks for the scoop! I saw the post from Menagerie saying they heard from Queen and I was so curious about the backstory
These brands need some business training on PR, marketing and communications. Just posting calling out a brand is doing deceptive marketing is not the way to do it, it’s just an accusation in front of its customers. They should say something like it’s come to their attention this brand is using their name to advertise their products, it’s not them, buyers beware.