Monday, January 7, 2013

Glossybox Canada Reponse - An Update

Warning: This is going to be a long winded post that may come off as a bit of a rant. This is not my typical style for posts but I thought this issue merited an update. As much as I tried to make this post seem non-ranty, this was the best I could do.

Further to my review of the December Glossybox, here is the response that was posted on the Glossybox Facebook page in reference to the discontinued Avon products that were included in this month's box:



I am glad the overall tone of the message is apologetic and does not come across as defensive for the most part. However, I believe the only reason for this is because of the public relations maelstrom on Facebook - I think Glossybox was essentially backed into a corner to provide an apologetic statement. Note that subscribers who are not on Facebook (or who do not read reviews of beauty boxes) would likely be unaware of the whole old/discontinued product issue as Glossybox did not send out any e-mail updates about this.

I just want to make 3 points about this message:

1) The message does not provide any real information. The only information that Glossybox actually confirms is that it sources products from third party suppliers. We already knew that because Avon and Revlon themselves indicated that they did not partner with Glossybox - thanks to the diligence of a few subscribers who contacted the brands and posted the findings on Facebook.

2) The use of third party suppliers makes me feel that the price increase (and higher price in general) is due to Glossybox having to pay for "filler" in our boxes because the company does not have enough brand partnerships in place. The use of a third party supplier worries me a little because Glossy box does not seem to have a lot of information about the products being sent to us and can dodge accountability by pointing to the supplier. As an extension of this, I feel that we as customers can neither rely on Glossybox nor the brand itself for reliable information when products are provided by a third party.

3) The kicker for me is that this message further indicates that Glossybox is in denial about its products. First, Glossybox responded to one of my e-mails telling me that they do not believe they include drug store brands in their boxes. Oh, ok. Now this:

... We’ve communicated with our supplier in Europe, who has been a reliable GLOSSYBOX provider in the past,
and they have reassured us that the product is in date, new and unopened, but we are devastated if our GLOSSIES are upset.

What? In what world are these Avon products, some from 2005, "in date"? Sure, they may be new and unopened (hopefully) but they are certainly not, by any stretch of the imagination, "in date". Glossybox seems to have a knack for downgrading the credibility of its entire message with one little nuance.

I understand that only 2 of the smaller items in this month's Glossybox were the focus of this public relations nightmare but, to me, this whole situation speaks volumes about the company's business practices and integrity. I have cancelled my subscription. This is the first time I've "broken up" with a beauty box and if you follow my blog, you'll know this was a long time coming. I will be receiving the January box (as I was charged for it today) but that will be my last one.

A lot of people are very upset with this issue but, on the other hand, a lot of subscribers think the issue has been blown out of proportion. How do you feel about it? What did you think of Glossybox's statement? Will you be giving Glossybox another chance?

  © 2011-2016 | ellesy the petite pear | all rights reserved

Back to TOP