Pigment jars getting smaller; prices staying the same

[1165Cheryl]

I understand them wanting to change the jars especially with all the fakes but this is crazy. Are they going to change the glitter jars too? They have the richmetal pigments seperate on MP website, so will those be changed over to these new jars too or be kept in the old ones? They already only put 4.3 g/.15 oz in those. I only get 5 large 1/2 tsp samples out of those as it is....I do give large samples though but still. Sample sellers will either close, raise prices or keep selling and break even. I've always done it to give people a safe place to buy the real thing and get a decent amount at a good price. I dont make much profit after my supplies since I use the best so with this the little I did make will be gone. I opened 6 years ago after buying samples and getting awful service. After that I decided to do it myself and treat people the way I'd like to be treated and give them the service they deserve.

 

[Meisje]

This is a very extreme reduction in the amount of product given for the same amount of money --- I feel that it's tacky to just switch up the sizes, keep the price the same, and not make it clear that things have changed, so that people buy them and receive a little over half what they THINK they paid for.

And they should clearly change the photo on the site to reflect the new, smaller containers, to let customers know what's up. If they're in stores already, there's been ample time to update maccosmetics.ca

 

[mely]

Figures. I was just getting into pigments.

I wonder if the old jars will be showing up at CCO's now or if they'll be trashing those?

 

[VeXedPiNk]

This is ridiculous! Smaller quantity for the same price? No thanks!

If they were making them smaller and appropriately lowering the price, I'd be super happy! I only buy pigment samples because I'd never use up a whole pigment. It's pretty stingy if you ask me.

 

[Kragey]

Well, that settles it. MAC's pigments were never the bee's knees in my opinion, anyway, but now, I definitely won't pay that price for that much less product.

 

[MissResha]

i still can't believe in live in a world where there's no Michael Jackson...and smaller pigment jars.

this is such bullshit. i am beyond pissed. yea its that serious. i dont "collect" lots of things, but i collect pigments and my collection is going to look a little STUPID w/ tons of fullsize jars and some punk ass sample size jars. this is enough to make me boycott mac to the fullest and just stick to other brands. i've been getting sick of their bs for a while now.

 

[panda0410]

I'm on the fence over this..... Of course I like more product for less $$, but seriously, the pigments in their original sizes were awesome value for money. Lets face it, you could buy MAC shadow for $14.50, or one full pigment for $19 - and the full pigment will last you 3 times as long as a single shadow with more versatility. I cant say I blame MAC for cutting the pigments to make the content more comparable to pricing for product volume in their other products. Its a fiduciary necessity for companies to cut costs and increase profit margins. Its always great when we get good value for money, and as far as pigments go we really have been with the 7.5gm jars. I'd just try to take advantage of the CCOs that have full sized stock left and grab what you can while you can.

But dont talk to me about Dazzleglasses - THAT really does suck....

 

[musicalhouses]

I've said this before and I'll say it again...I like NOTHING about this new change.

The taller, thinner jars are aesthetically prettier to look at, but they topple over more easily. And I heard the new lids will be pull-off lids. So now everytime you open your jar a bunch of pigment comes flying out. Great.

And yes, 4.5g instead of 7.5g and no price change. I don't know what's to like about that.

And lastly, for those who like to press pigments, 4.5g isn't going to press a full pan. In the past you needed one 7.5g jar to yield one full pan of pressed pigment and some extra. Now if you want to press your pigments good luck to you - you'll get half a pan with a measly 4.5g of pigment, unless you want to buy two jars to press one pan and some extra.

And of course I'm aware that it's virtually impossible to use up one 7.5g jar of pigments as it is, but that's hardly the point. The point is that they were making plenty of money on 7.5g jars in the past, so it's not like they were driven by economic necessity. If they wanted to decrease the amount to 4.5g they should have at least decreased the price too, especially to take into consideration people who press pigments.

In any case, I'm so glad I'm over my days of collecting pigments. The only people who will benefit from this are MAC, and the sellers of pigment samples.

 

[shatteredshards]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nubletta Not just by 1 gram but by 3! AND keeping the price the same?!

Not just by 3 grams - by almost half.

Half of a 7.5g jar is 3.75g; 0.75g isn't a huge difference there. I've seen a lot of this stuff going on, shrinking the size slightly, but nearly cutting the size down to half is f***in rediculous.

Nice way to really screw your customer base. Good job, MAC, good job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by musicalhouses The only people who will benefit from this are MAC, and the sellers of pigment samples.

But sample sellers won't benefit from this at all - it's almost doubling their supplies cost, so they'll have to either jack their prices up, make samples smaller, or quit selling samples.

 

[Kragey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by musicalhouses I've said this before and I'll say it again...I like NOTHING about this new change. The taller, thinner jars are aesthetically prettier to look at, but they topple over more easily. And I heard the new lids will be pull-off lids. So now everytime you open your jar a bunch of pigment comes flying out. Great. And yes, 4.5g instead of 7.5g and no price change. I don't know what's to like about that. And lastly, for those who like to press pigments, 4.5g isn't going to press a full pan. In the past you needed one 7.5g jar to yield one full pan of pressed pigment and some extra. Now if you want to press your pigments good luck to you - you'll get half a pan with a measly 4.5g of pigment, unless you want to buy two jars to press one pan and some extra. And of course I'm aware that it's virtually impossible to use up one 7.5g jar of pigments as it is, but that's hardly the point. The point is that they were making plenty of money on 7.5g jars in the past, so it's not like they were driven by economic necessity. If they wanted to decrease the amount to 4.5g they should have at least decreased the price too, especially to take into consideration people who press pigments. In any case, I'm so glad I'm over my days of collecting pigments. The only people who will benefit from this are MAC, and the sellers of pigment samples.

I don't know if sample sellers will really benefit...I know there are a LOT of people like me who buy samples because they're so cheap, and you don't use a whole lot of make-up to begin with, so a sample will last you a while. If sample prices so much as double, I expect a relative decrease in sales, as people will probably just look for cheaper stuff elsewhere.

 

[panda0410]

Quote:

Originally Posted by musicalhouses And lastly, for those who like to press pigments, 4.5g isn't going to press a full pan. In the past you needed one 7.5g jar to yield one full pan of pressed pigment and some extra. Now if you want to press your pigments good luck to you - you'll get half a pan with a measly 4.5g of pigment, unless you want to buy two jars to press one pan and some extra. .

Since when? I'm an avid pigment presser and NEVER have I ever needed to use an entire jar to fill a pan

Not even for the Richmetal pigments have I ever used the entire 4.3gms to fill a pan....

Sample sellers are definitely going to suffer, for them I can see trouble with sales long term. But I still feel we all got a bloody good deal on volume for price with the old jars. Dont get me wrong, I would still love to see that same value, but this was horribly forseeable.

 

[Nicala]

If you really think about it, don't people pay $18-19 for 0.09oz of product for MUFE star powders? It IS a lot cheaper compared to other brands (like MUFE for example), but compared to the amount you received before, it's still a rip off in a way. :|

 

[xKiKix]

i knew i smelled something fishy when i brought piggies from the mac collection, they were 4.5 g rather than the usual 7.5 g.

 

[Simply Elegant]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nubletta If you really think about it, don't people pay $18-19 for 0.09oz of product for MUFE star powders? It IS a lot cheaper compared to other brands (like MUFE for example), but compared to the amount you received before, it's still a rip off in a way. :|

I do buy MUFE but I think it's better quality than MAC. Also, they're being kind of sneaky by not changing the price. It's like food companies putting 6 of a product instead of 8 in a box to make you less apt to note a difference. It just seems more deceptive. And it's a huge decrease in product, not just a little change here and there. They're not doing it at a good time and they'll lose customers for sure.

 

[bebs]

as a pigment collector I am seriously bummed and upset I buy every pigment mac makes because I love them all and use for them or not with this extreme cut I'm debating what to do my self if they keep these new jars I already know I'm not going to buy them I might very well just sell off all of my pigments at the same time I really don't want to deal with a company that is going to be changing things to this degree, I don't think I would really be caring if it was released in the same jar however there is a reason I don't buy holiday sets thats because it wont fit with what I already do have and I have a mild case of ocd and this will seriously upset me every time I look at it.

this is a big let down and I'll be debating this for the next few weeks on what to do with my current pigments

 

[Folie]

TBH, I think it's because everyone complained the pigments were too big. I don't see why. I just started getting into them and I don't think they're as big as everyone makes them out to be. I could see myself using one. I just don't see why everyone said the old ones last forever. I think they only do when you have too many.

 

[lilibat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by panda0410 I'm on the fence over this..... Of course I like more product for less $$, but seriously, the pigments in their original sizes were awesome value for money. Lets face it, you could buy MAC shadow for $14.50, or one full pigment for $19 - and the full pigment will last you 3 times as long as a single shadow with more versatility. I cant say I blame MAC for cutting the pigments to make the content more comparable to pricing for product volume in their other products. Its a fiduciary necessity for companies to cut costs and increase profit margins. Its always great when we get good value for money, and as far as pigments go we really have been with the 7.5gm jars. I'd just try to take advantage of the CCOs that have full sized stock left and grab what you can while you can.

I would have preferred they kept the old jars and raised the prices. The new jars suck for multiple reasons, bad lid, dimensions, instability, etc.. If they had just raised the prices I would have been annoyed but not angry.

 

[purrtykitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nubletta If you really think about it, don't people pay $18-19 for 0.09oz of product for MUFE star powders? It IS a lot cheaper compared to other brands (like MUFE for example), but compared to the amount you received before, it's still a rip off in a way. :|

And, as I stated in the All Ages thread Illamasqua's pigments are $24USD for 1.3g...for reference MUFE's star powders are 2.8g and pure pigments range from .7g to 5g. So, based on that, MAC's pigments still are a great deal.

TBH, I don't think MUFE's Star Powders nor Illamasqua's pigments are of superior quality to MAC's. If there's one thing MAC still does great, it's pigments. Neither MUFE nor Illamasqua have anywhere near the shades/finishes that MAC does.

For the record...I don't really care about the jar change, but I am a little miffed by the price staying the same. I'm not upset enough to boycott as I still feel I'm getting quite a bit for my money, but I will send a complaint once the new jars are officially released.

 

[erine1881]

i hate the look of the new jars. they don't match the old ones, and my OCD makes me freak at just the thought of it!

the lid comes off after one twist, and the plastic stopper is irritatingly hard to get ahold of.

it just sucks all around.

the two new colours in all ages, all races, all sexes are killer tho!

 

[Juxtapose]

Does anyone know if you order off the regular MAC site whether or not this change goes into effect now? Can you still order pigments from the perm line (e.g. vanilla or teal) and get the old sizes? The site still says 7.5g, but I just wanted to double check. Perhaps I'll do a MAC chat tomorrow...