I'm talking mainly about three products.
The first product is mascara. I never know when my mascara is finished, no matter how much I use it, it never finishes. I used a Rimmel mascara for a year and it was still going strong. Now, seeing as you're meant to chuck your mascaras away every three months and you get a lot of product in each tube, I think that "someone" should come up with a way to make the shelf life of mascara longer. Obviously that's not top of the agenda for many scientists out there who are trying to find cures for far more pressing issues but maybe some cosmetologists should look into that?
I think mascara tubes should be clear so that you can see how much you're using and how much you have left so you're not caught short. I can't see how having a clear mascara tube can be more expensive than having one which is plastic, coated in colour and then coated with text? Is it because manufacturers are scared that we won't like what mascara looks like? I think we're adult enough to realise it's just black stuff. Lipglosses and clear mascara comes in clear tubes so I don't know why mascara gets special treatment? You could still print all the needed info onto the casing of the mascara so all laws would be complied with.
My second gripe is UDPP. EVERYONE hates the packaging on this and those who don't are lying. I don't know why UD haven't taken more notice of customers who dislike the packaging. They took a slight bit of notice and changed the shape of the wand which doesn't really help matters because what do you do when you come into the bottleneck? I assume it gets stuck.
The shape of the bottle would mean (in my mind) that it can't be the easiest shape in the world to produce and that you'd need some nifty machine to carve out the exact same shape. I'm sure it would be cheaper to just put the product into a squeezy tube a la Too Faced Shadow Insurance. I know UDPP goes off quickly when exposed to air but TFSI comes with a screw on lid which UDPP could mimic.
It kinda seems to me that UD KNOW how good their product is and can rely on the fact that people keep buying it and depotting it themselves so that THEY don't have to change the design of the product themselves. Surely there are cheaper ways for them to make the packaging which would result in lowered costs of production for them and ease of use for the customer. I personally wouldn't mind paying the same price for it if they changed to cheaper packaging as it is a really good product.
My last product is the Barry M blusher that everyone has been raving about recently. Questions were asked as to why the Natural Dazzle packaging looked so nice whereas the blusher packaging made it look cheap. Barry M's people stated that they made the choice to provide an affordable product over how the packaging looked. That confused me a bit, if that truly was the reason then why did the Natural Dazzle come looking like the younger sister of NARS? Surely both would have been packaged the same?
At the end of that long rant, I ask you guys the following:
- Which products do you detest the packaging of?
- How would you improve packaging on certain products?
- How much of a role does packaging play when you're deciding to buy a product? e,g. are you put off by cheap looking products and more drawn in by expensive looking ones or is the actual performance the sole factor you judge a product by?