MAC - Overrich Discussion

[Deirdre]

Okay, well, that's a relief! However, what I said, in regards to the shortchange, still holds true. And how crappy of MAC to be lame and dismissive of your complaint - that's pretty serious, if a company is showing one weight, but selling another, they're lying! I can't imagine how frustrating it would be for professionals, too - as it cuts seriously into your profits, if you have to buy the product 3 times, whereas you had to only buy it once, before.

I may get my Blonde's Gold after all!

I'll still be checking those weights, tomorrow. My Fafi palettes are .8 grams smaller than my other collection palletes. Which means that 1.3 grams, rather than 1.5 grams per pan. I wonder if this will begin to show up in the regular line, and the new pan size will become 1.3 grams. That's quite a price hike, considering they're raising prices on less product.

 

[Colorqueen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deirdre Okay, well, that's a relief! However, what I said, in regards to the shortchange, still holds true. And how crappy of MAC to be lame and dismissive of your complaint - that's pretty serious, if a company is showing one weight, but selling another, they're lying! I can't imagine how frustrating it would be for professionals, too - as it cuts seriously into your profits, if you have to buy the product 3 times, whereas you had to only buy it once, before. I may get my Blonde's Gold after all! I'll still be checking those weights, tomorrow. My Fafi palettes are .8 grams smaller than my other collection palletes. Which means that 1.3 grams, rather than 1.5 grams per pan. I wonder if this will begin to show up in the regular line, and the new pan size will become 1.3 grams. That's quite a price hike, considering they're raising prices on less product.

Yep, I agree- it is not very good business practice, that is for sure.

I hope I am wrong about the pigments, but it is very possible I am not.

MAC pigments used to be one of the best products on the market, their quality is already up and down, but after this, gosh, I just don't know if it is worth it in many cases now.

 

[Deirdre]

I'll definitely check out the pigment sizes, Colorqueen. I am still very excited to be going, as it's a trip to the city to get to the nearest Pro Store. I live on an island, so it's a trip to the mainland - haha, I feel so rural when I go in there, too. I don't want to feel like a rube, too.

 

[Colorqueen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deirdre I'll definitely check out the pigment sizes, Colorqueen. I am still very excited to be going, as it's a trip to the city to get to the nearest Pro Store. I live on an island, so it's a trip to the mainland - haha, I feel so rural when I go in there, too. I don't want to feel like a rube, too.

HAHA You are SO lucky.

We don't even have a MAC store near me, or counter or ANYTHING MAC. I feel like a thirsty person given water on the rare occasions I get near a MAC counter.

I have to buy sight unseen most of the time, when I can!

We just go Sephora here a year or so ago- and Ulta too-= the first time we have had ANYTHING makeup oriented ever!

 

[GlamYOURUs]

Picture of Vintage Gold in Sept. Allure Magazine...

 

[erine1881]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colorqueen I wish that were true, but unfortunately, MAC is not so altruistic. They tried to tell me that when I was furious to find my CLEAR SKY BLUE only half full. It is listed on the site as 7.5g but it is NOT. It is only 2.5G- AND IT SAYS THAT ON THE LABEL/BOX!!!! That means that they reduced volume AND WEIGHT by more than half. In this case of Overrich, I have seen it said that the weight has been reduced that is why they are not as full- it says so on the box/label. In other words, to put it bluntly, it appears that MAC is now giving a little more than half of the pigment that they used to sell for the same price. It is one of my pet peeves with this company- they do not list these things correctly on their site which is misrepresentation of product. I still love a lot of what they put out, but sometimes their business practices are frustrating to the consumer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colorqueen The overrich ones were not as small weight as the mattes- they were I think .4something G, if I remember correctly. But the mattes- Clear Sky Blue being among them- have been 2.5g since they came out. I remember getting so upset at first and contacting MAC and they were acting like *I* was nuts! Finally when they went and checked, they were offering some quick excuse which did not pan out at all, and then changed the subject. I tried and tried to get them to fix it but no one was interested. I was expecting 7.5g because that is how it is listed. 2.5g is WAY SMALLER. I can not remember which others are only 2.5g, but I do know for sure that Clear Sky Blue is one of them. The thing is that these were designed for PRO use only which means quantity for client use, so they had a lot in them. To change the quantities like that is a rip off for the PRO customers because many MUartists mix their own colors and this greatly cuts down their resources but not investment. Like I said, some of MAC's practices leave a lot to be desired.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deirdre Okay, well, that's a relief! However, what I said, in regards to the shortchange, still holds true. And how crappy of MAC to be lame and dismissive of your complaint - that's pretty serious, if a company is showing one weight, but selling another, they're lying! I can't imagine how frustrating it would be for professionals, too - as it cuts seriously into your profits, if you have to buy the product 3 times, whereas you had to only buy it once, before. I may get my Blonde's Gold after all! I'll still be checking those weights, tomorrow. My Fafi palettes are .8 grams smaller than my other collection palletes. Which means that 1.3 grams, rather than 1.5 grams per pan. I wonder if this will begin to show up in the regular line, and the new pan size will become 1.3 grams. That's quite a price hike, considering they're raising prices on less product.

most, not all, of the mattes are 2.5g. all the overrich pigments, with the exception of mega-rich and mauvment (not sure about blonde's gold) are 4.3g. the remaining pigment colors are 7.5g (pretty much the majority). they aren't gonna have three differnt categories of pigments just so they can represent all the weights (its misleading, yes, but ya just gotta deal).

besides, like its listed on the website, these are filled by weight, not volume. this results in different levels of fill. so if you're gonna be upset that they aren't the same VOLUME as other pigments, then tell mac to stop making certain colors/finishes. its the ingredients used to make these colors/finishes that vary in weight, making the fill vary as well.

 

[1165Cheryl]

I have 150 full jars and like someone mentioned the matte's are 2.5 as are the Neon colors they came out with. It's too bad they changed the size on some of the overrich's. I'll have to check all the box's when they come in. I'd hate to sell samples and only get 5 1/2 tsp out of 1 jar!! I'd have to raise my prices just to cover my cost

 

[rbella]

I got Antique Green and Blonde's Gold and both were nearly filled to capacity.

BTW, have I said how much I love these two colors?

 

[Colorqueen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by erine1881 most, not all, of the mattes are 2.5g. all the overrich pigments, with the exception of mega-rich and mauvment (not sure about blonde's gold) are 4.3g. the remaining pigment colors are 7.5g (pretty much the majority). they aren't gonna have three differnt categories of pigments just so they can represent all the weights (its misleading, yes, but ya just gotta deal). besides, like its listed on the website, these are filled by weight, not volume. this results in different levels of fill. so if you're gonna be upset that they aren't the same VOLUME as other pigments, then tell mac to stop making certain colors/finishes. its the ingredients used to make these colors/finishes that vary in weight, making the fill vary as well.

But if a product is being sold, it needs to be listed online as what weight it is being filled at. IF the weights were standardized and the volumes looked different, that is one thing. But if the weights are drastically different, that is another thing entirely. They have to be described as such.

You can not buy anything online and have it all lumped in and tell people to *deal*. That would be like saying that they are *all jeans, just run different sizes depending on the style* and having them under one order number with no way to find out what size you were getting.

They need to be defined as they are with the weights listed when they are different. That is the way that selling things works. It is accuracy in advertising to let consumers know what they are purchasing.

As for the neons, they are also lumped in with the 7.5g weight now which is false advertising.

I love MAC products and would hate to see them end up losing business or money from problems resulting from this kind of practice.

 

[Colorqueen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbella I got Antique Green and Blonde's Gold and both were nearly filled to capacity. BTW, have I said how much I love these two colors?

What is Antique Green like?

 

[Face2Mac]

Mischa Barton is in the new issue of InStyle mag. with Blonde's Gold, BTW, don't we all love the Sept. fall issues (big issues) of mags, they tell you everything you need to know. They covered Gold (Blonde's Gold), Dark Blues, and Dark lips (So Scarlet).

 

[1165Cheryl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbella I got Antique Green and Blonde's Gold and both were nearly filled to capacity. BTW, have I said how much I love these two colors?

Are they in Macs normal 7.5g/.26 ? That would be great if you could let me know...thanks

 

[panther27]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbella I got Antique Green and Blonde's Gold and both were nearly filled to capacity. BTW, have I said how much I love these two colors?

Yea they are sooo beautiful

 

[panther27]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colorqueen What is Antique Green like?

It is a forest green with some teal.

 

[erine1881]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colorqueen What is Antique Green like?

i posted swatches both here and in the swatch thread. it's gorgeous!

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1165Cheryl Are they in Macs normal 7.5g/.26 ? That would be great if you could let me know...thanks

i don't know about blonde's gold, but antique greens in 4.3g/.15oz.

 

[jd-jd]

Ladies, we have only one powerful vote: not purchasing. All other action is just noise to corporations.

My jar of peanut butter had a PUNT in the bottom (like a champagne bottle --a big divot)--the peanut butter is not up to the top of the jar and the jar now has an indentation all around the middle (Skippy.) I paid for a pound and got a lot less. So a nice letter to the Skippy people saying I am not an idiot twice over, and I will be buying truthful peanut butter by weight from the healthfood store from now on.

 

[Miss QQ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deirdre Okay, well, that's a relief! However, what I said, in regards to the shortchange, still holds true. And how crappy of MAC to be lame and dismissive of your complaint - that's pretty serious, if a company is showing one weight, but selling another, they're lying! I can't imagine how frustrating it would be for professionals, too - as it cuts seriously into your profits, if you have to buy the product 3 times, whereas you had to only buy it once, before. I may get my Blonde's Gold after all! I'll still be checking those weights, tomorrow. My Fafi palettes are .8 grams smaller than my other collection palletes. Which means that 1.3 grams, rather than 1.5 grams per pan. I wonder if this will begin to show up in the regular line, and the new pan size will become 1.3 grams. That's quite a price hike, considering they're raising prices on less product.

Hey I discovered the same thing about the pan. I wrote about it in the Starflash thread. I only started collecting MAC from Naughty Nauticals so I have "new" e/s pots. My set of Neo Sci-fi e/s, Beautiful Iris, Shore Leave, each has a weight of 1.3g. Only my Starflash e/s and Illegal Cargo e/s each has a weight of 1.5g. I thought it was that they packed more powder into the Starflash e/s pans initially. Turns out otherwise I guess...

Edit: To add on, then I have to check out my Heatherette Trio 1 palette too...

 

[MissAlphaKitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss QQ Hey I discovered the same thing about the pan. I wrote about it in the Starflash thread. I only started collecting MAC from Naughty Nauticals so I have "new" e/s pots. My set of Neo Sci-fi e/s, Beautiful Iris, Shore Leave, each has a weight of 1.3g. Only my Starflash e/s and Illegal Cargo e/s each has a weight of 1.5g. I thought it was that they packed more powder into the Starflash e/s pans initially. Turns out otherwise I guess... Edit: To add on, then I have to check out my Heatherette Trio 1 palette too...

Interesting post... I just did a quick inventory and I dont think MAC is scamming us

for example... my Dazzlelight & Femme Fi is packed to the hilt and they are both 1.3g
I don't see how they can even fit 1.5g in the pan so maybe it's a matter of density/volume that varies from color to color

Limited Edition : Go! , Mink & Sable, Solar White = 1.5g
Regular Line : Motif , Paradisco, Bronze, Patina, Espresso, Carbon, Ricepaper

Limited Edition : Warming Trend, Femme Fi, Evening Aura, = 1.3g
Regular Line : Woodwinked, All that Glitters, Dazzlelight

 

[imperfectbeauty]

*sigh* i wish i had money for antique green as it's the only one i reeeeeally wanted out of all these...i'll just have to save for it and im sure it wont sell out. lol.

 

[Miss QQ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissAlphaKitty Interesting post... I just did a quick inventory and I dont think MAC is scamming us for example... my Dazzlelight & Femme Fi is packed to the hilt and they are both 1.3g... Regular Line : Woodwinked, All that Glitters, Dazzlelight

Thanks for the details. Yeah perhaps it is the density that causes the discrepency. It may depends on how fine the powder is? Anyway I just got home and checked: my Heatherette Trio 1 has a total net wt of 4.3g, which gives 1.43g per pan. This is rather dubious, don't you think? My pink pearl pigment and reflects gold glitter from Heatherette are labelled net wt of 7.5g each and are indeed packed to the brim. I just find all these labeling of net wt interesting, hope I don't sound obsessed or petty about how much I'm willing to pay per grams.