Talk going around that the next direction for her business might be into make up. This may be part of the discussion(s) with Kris Jenner since make up as a concept is part of the overall Kardashian business plan. It did give Kylie $1.2 Billion when it sold 51% to Coty. Kim sold part of her SKKN (20% for $200 Million) to Coty as well. As of June neither was known to be happy about how they felt the direction each brand was being managed.
Make up can be very lucrative. Quite. Forbes has an article of just how lucrative it has been for some people. People like Hailey Bieber (Rhode to elf for up to $1 billion but the deal has other founders and is said to be stretched over years). I also saw a list (Forbes) almost 30 people who are either billionaires or mega millionaires through make up. Some inherited the business (think the various Lauders).
But is that a realistic (meaning good) idea, now?
I'm not quite so certain.
Why make up? Many wear it, sure. But it is a market segment which has a lot of competition already. Granted there are always new people coming in to use it and some are always looking to try the new. But there are many who stick with what they already like and love. They know it and aren't into change unless forced into it (hello ebay). That's the bigger market nut you really need to crack to pull ahead instead of focusing on the people who are always chasing the latest hot new trend as they are less likely to stick with you past the first purchase.
Another way to think about competition is how the really large companies may have several lines. Think about Estee, they own Estee, Clinique, MAC, Smashbox, Bobbi Brown and others. Coty has CoverGirl, Rimmel, Max Factor, Hansen, Kylie (51%) and others. Revlon has Revlon, Almay, Ultima II, Elizabeth Arden and more. L'Oreal has Maybelline, NYX, Lancome, Yves St. Lauren and others. Note the "... and others." They are covering many different market segments so they can try to pry someone away from what they are currently using.
What's the demographic? Not a clue. The thing about fruit spread or candles or mulling (what ever) is that it can be a good gift as you can give it to almost anyone. Make up? much harder as skin type may complicate things as it does vary. It is very personal. Or if she only goes into say lipstick, that ... can potentially be a problem as it comes off as incomplete (no blush, foundation, bronzer, eye shadow).
Distribution. Think about the whole thing with the fruit spread, wine and other consumables. It was the very very limited quantity available for sale. Full stop. For anything to be really successful, it needs full time production, warehousing and then shipping to control costs. But she didn't do that for spread. Candles can be a limited run like the spread but make up? Nope. People will not be nice if their shade of (what ever) is out of stock. They want it and they want it NOW! (and if they don't get it, they will likely vent on social media to warn others and then move on to a different company). This is really a you are fully in or not at all.
How will she get it out to make it available? Don't know. Make up is kind of funny in that you can't always tell if a color on their screen is true on your screen before you even get it on your face before you start looking at how different it is in this or that type of lights. This is why there are a couple of chains to sell all brands of make up in a brick and mortar location. I don't know how easy or not it is to get into a place, be it an only make up shop or counter within a department store (or even down scale would be drug store) but it would mean having to really ramp up the quantities and have a good distribution which works. Other locations means less profit to the person because those stores want their cut.
Having written that, someone like Bobbi Brown - she was known within the industry for decades for her knowledge and experience inside and out before selling to Estee. She then sat on the sidelines as per non compete contract until that was up. And she came out with her new brand. She sells on line but also has a few stores which only sell her products. She clearly knows more about make up than probably most of the people who sell it. My guess is even if she has no college marketing or financials classes, she has the knowledge of the industry to be able to make good thought out plans of what is likely/not likely to be profitable.
Control.
Meghan comes off as not exactly known for dealing well with people trying to tell her things. She is good about surrounding herself with experienced people. But then they leave.
Trends in financial markets.
If you believe that there will be a large market crash sorta kinda soon, there will be fewer people looking to buy luxury items when they are worried about buying food, being able to pay the rent, the phone bill and power bill. Make up may be viewed as essential but they may be more likely to stick to known and possible cheaper product to eek through until their money flow is more cash flow positive. She goes for the luxury not basic market so based on past pricing, it would be unlikely to be mid or low range pricing.
And the market for buying the company making the cosmetics may be cooling. It's not what it was. Coty sold their share of SKKN back and was said to have taken a loss of $71 Million. And there have been some legal things going on about the Kylie sale with claims that the numbers were overstated and potentially not accurate tax returns.
This might not be the best time to move in a potentially fickle direction like make up but what do I know? I'm not some marketing whiz kid. And who knows, it might not even be make up but something else. Time will tell us.
Comments
This blog may or may not be the blog you are looking for. If not, we wish you well and hope you find what you are looking for.
Guidelines for this blog is as follows:
-Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Posters who are disruptive will not have their posts posted.
-Anonymous or unknown posts are not allowed.
-We know that some of this is not family friendly. It can be a fine line sometimes on the topics such as sex and sexuality. Try to lean towards family friendly (thanks).
-Profanity has not traditionally been a problem, so let's keep it that way.
-We never encourage vindictive or other harmful actions.
-Please try to keep the conspiracy theories down.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject. (please drop us a message that someone is treading on your last nerve so we can be aware that this is a problem).
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-Posts which may be deemed too many flat statements/too provocative or mean spirited may not posted on the blog.
-Remember that not every one who reads the posts is happy about what is posted here. Please do not give out personal information. Be safe.
-Your privacy matters.
-Remember that certain sites require prior approval for reuse such as Harry Markle. Please respect their request on how to handle it. Links to share is a great alternative.
Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families (and laundry) to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
I must say though, if La Markle goes into beauty products, and even if reviewers give glowing reviews, I would be certain that it is her lunatic paid-sugars writing the fake reviews, and I would never knowingly spend one single penny on her products. We dumped Netflix because of her, I refuse to ever click any link which might give her coinage, and if I ever happen, in the wild, to see her fruit “spread” or brown dried up flower leavings or crap fake Champagne which by French law should not ever be branded as a Champagne, or a laughable beauty product, I will metaphorically spit in the direction of the product, turn on my heel, and walk away.
This is my vow to all Nutties.
She hasn't learnt, and never will, the 7Ps beloved of our military: Proper Planning and Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
https://www.etruckbook.com/the-7-ps-proper-planning-and-preparation-prevents-piss-poor-performance/
She tries to convince us that she is full of the one quality demanded in that context - zeal. As if.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15269077/Meghan-Markle-bookshop-reported-council-wine.html
interesting facts about her "acting" role and who's behind it.
The breathtaking sophistication of these two.
Apparently, the theme was `007'. Did she go as Daniel Craig in his turtle neck? Is it a warning to H? Licenced to kill?
'Kim Kardashian and Kris Jenner delete photos with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle from star-studded bash
Among the omitted images included Kim and Meghan, 44, posing together while smiling for the camera as Duke of Sussex Prince Harry, 41, could be seen chatting with someone in the background.
There was another image taken from behind celebrant Kris as Meghan had her hand placed on her shoulder as Harry made a silly face toward her.
Another deleted snap saw Meghan about to greet CEO of Netflix, Reed Hastings, with a hug.'
It is noted that 'other photos featuring more attendees were also deleted from the carousels.'. There was no reason given.
The private investigator whose apparent “confession” prompted Prince Harry and others to sue the publisher of the Daily Mail has claimed that his pivotal witness statement was “completely false” and the signature “a forgery”.
Gavin Burrows claimed that a witness statement dated August 2021, in which he appeared to admit targeting “a large number of private individuals” over a number of years by hacking phones and bugging cars, was “prepared by others without my knowledge”.
Five of the seven claimants, including the Duke of Sussex, Sir Elton John and Baroness Lawrence, have told the High Court they embarked on the high-profile legal action against Associated Newspapers Limited based on evidence apparently obtained by Mr Burrows.
Mr Burrows said he “felt very sorry” for Lady Lawrence because she had been “duped into pursuing a claim on the basis of false information”.
The private investigator has now drawn up a 30-page witness statement with the help of independent lawyers in which he says he “does not recognise” the “purported witness statement” issued in his name.
“I believe that my signature on that document is a forgery,” he says, describing its various claims as “completely false”, “complete rubbish” and “a complete fantasy”.
The article is not clear about the implications.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1otxjvd/omg_now_theyre_just_photobombing_other_celebs/
In one, she looks very mammalian- no species name, no packdrill.
Meghan Markle has been accused of being 'very inexperienced with cooking' after sharing a 'hack' for eating bagels with cream cheese.
The Duchess of Sussex, 44, took to Instagram on Monday to show how fans can use the $15 (£11) flower sprinkles from her lifestyle brand, As Ever, as part of a breakfast spread.
Prince Harry's wife shared a clip of herself scooping cream cheese onto a plate, before topping it with thinly-sliced strawberries and a selection of flower petals for 'surprise and delight'.
After adding four untoasted bagel slices to the plate, she then topped the mound of cream cheese with a smattering of flower sprinkles.
After stirring a pot of her $12 (£9) jam with a knife, she used it to scoop some of the cream cheese onto the bagel and topped it with the fruit spread.'
Well, there's no end to her talents. Is this what her blog is about? Does she need a video to illustrate the 'recipe'? And I suppose you need her As ever products for an authentic recipe. As pretentious as ever.
They call the Princess of Wales with an intimate pet version of her name and the family name of her father. As classy as that sussex woman, ain't it?
I noticed the title of the latest video available for her paid subscribers - something about Hairy being accused of fraud for that issue in his court case, the one where the journalist denied that he had signed the affidavit attributed to him. Is it possible that criminal accusations could be brought against Hairy?
Sadly, it seems that's true.
Matt's cartoon on the front of Saturday's Daily Telegraph summed it up neatly, whilst referencing a recent BBC reality -competition show:
Man and wife, watching TV showing a sign proclaiming ` BBC Staff Traitors'. Man explains, `One person in the BBC Newsroom is not left-wing and all the others have to find out who it is.'
Apart from the monarch (because the Law is administered in the monarch's name and he can't sue himself) no member of the RF is above the Law - the Princess Royal has been fined a few times IIRC, mainly for speeding.
At one time it was impossible to take the Government to court because it was seen as sharing the monarch's immunity as was acting on HM's behalf (`Crown Immunity') but it now can be done.
This all suggests that, if it's possible to prove that affidavit was fraudulent, H could be taken to court. That'd be ironic, given how much he like doing it to others.
God save the King!
I've heard nothing yet that anyone recognises how they have destroyed the faith the people of the UK had in them.
I recall decades ago, about the time when some infant school teachers were teaching `Baa, Baa White Sheep', pressure was put on a friend to change her black cat's name to `Midnight' and we were no longer supposed to refer to a bookie running away with the takings as `w*lshing' , hearing something outrageous on the PM programme.
An interview with a young female singer was bleeped out as she started to say `Sh*t!' This report which was followed immediately by one about a disgruntled NatWest customer winning a court case against the bank.
His triumphant words as he emerged from the court, `I wasn't going to let them j*w me!' was allowed to stand without bleeping. I felt sick, it told me all I needed to know about the BBC.
''Canny' Meghan Markle is 'professionally wooing' Amazon top boss Jeff Bezos after string of Netflix flops, insiders claim (Daily Mail)'
This would explain why she probably gate crashed/angled for an invitation to the Kardashians. Is she also eyeing up Bezos as a replacement for Harry?
https://www.reddit.com/r/DlistedRoyals/comments/1oy7w02/canny_meghan_markle_is_professionally_wooing/
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cdf8ab93055d6cebaefda7137ccfe9daf54f6bcd40ae50d178052b68085116b8.png
https://people.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-hint-australia-visit-after-meeting-celebrity-astrologer-11849632
From what I remember of the Down Under tour, what was reported in the we didn't have anything to do with this book (which is all about how wonderful we are) one of the themes was all about how many people wanted to see them (the wedding, the tour, this stop, that stop and how their numbers were so outstanding (compared to just about everyone except the Pope).
Not being an official tour (meaning set up through the Palace), would mean not the diversity (and quantity) of opportunities to show off how many people still want to see them. That had the potential to be a let down if anyone (like the media) compared it to the past.
The other thing is that (allegedly) she was supposed to be along for the most recent Canadian trip but did not go in the end. Perhaps embarrassing maybe but if that happened on this tour which just happens to be is close proximity to that time she left early on that last tour, that could also create another less than positive aura. hmmm - can they afford more
Another thing to ask about is: what about the kids? Archie appeared in South Africa and a trip to the beach for both (Caribbean?). Why not take the kids? Soon it would be summer there, a little beach and fun.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15298949/Meghan-Markle-lampooned-Spitting-Image-new-skits-taking-aim-Duchess-Sussexs-acting-career.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Qsyshz5B74
She also had her hand in the till...
Meghan Markle has seemingly failed Prince Harry who has not been the ‘brightest bulb, either’ since his move to the US.
Royal commentator Tina Brown is the expert that made this verdict, according to a report by The Daily Beast.' . . .
https://www.geo.tv/latest/634218-meghan-markle-is-facing-an-even-bigger-crisis
There is never a news story about that woman that is any way positive or "uplifting" just shabby stories about low morals.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/lifestyle/article-15307731/meghan-markle-poses-cover-harpers-bazaar-magazine.html
I read this comment over at DM and LOLed:
She has this new thing of wearing monk-like Gandhi-style oversize draping garments and staring into the distance like she's a mysterical guru. What a joke!
This is the link to the actual Harper`s Bazaar article
She looks different, as in a different face almost some of the time. A very different look.
Another tragedy is that she truly believes that dictating "her story" again and again and again to different magazines people start believing in it. They won't. They see it is just her lie about herself she needs to get through her vacuous days. That is all.
The video of the photo shoot.
Neil Sean reveals that * used to write love notes on bananas for Trevitrevtrev
She's cosplaying Diana in her Harper's Bazaar photo shoot.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1p1x1qa/in_case_youre_wondering_yes_as_always/
I wondered about some of these poses, because they're more suited to a different type of personality than hers. Now, it makes sense. She's copying Diana again.
'Writer Kaitlyn Greenidge adds that she believes that the decision to meet at the luxury hotel is a 'calculated choice' because they sat at a 'prime' table where diners can see them.
They later met again in New York at the Upper East Side home of one of Meghan's unnamed friends.
'When I enter, the house manager announces, "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex", even though we appear to be the only other two people in the house,' Ms Greenidge reveals with clear bemusement.'
And this little gem: 'I hope they see the value of being brave', she says of her children, adding: 'They saw it when the jam was just a pot on the stove, bubbling'.
I thought she was just Meghan Sussex? And brave for making jam?? She obviously has no sense of embarrassment.
https://www.laineygossip.com/meghan-markle-leans-into-the-influencer-way-stays-firmly-in-neutral-style-in-harpers-bazaar-cover-story/86080
Harpies Bizarre
Bag o’ bones dripped in white
Pelvic thrust
not so tight
Slouched on a chair
knees akimbo
With her snide-eye glance
and wide legged stance
Her bar’s set a new low
for limbo…
Merde in the Rue Megue
Her spread on the front cover
much like her jam
Is lacking in taste
bespoke notes of ham
Unflattering photos
emetic words
Our founder is floundering
on a motion of turds…
was Just Harry warming his weeds
God save the King