Archived Post
Should brands make popular limited edition products permanent? Why or why not?
I think they should do an internal review and assess whether the popularity has longevity, and whether the product fills a void in their current line-up. I think more brands should be flexible and make limited edition products permanent, but I feel like we don’t see that as often as you’d think, given the slew of limited edition releases! Brands could also re-release some limited edition formulas more often–say a summer highlighter that gets released each summer, maybe one one or two fan favorite shades, plus something new.
— Christine
It wouldn’t hurt if a brand made some LE products permanent. Get rid of some permanent to make room for the LE ones. Keeps things fresh!
Completely agree! And branching from this topic, I think if a product has proved it’s popularity, it shouldn’t be freakin’ discontinued! Not that I’m bitter or anything. 😛
I’m with you on both counts.
Yes, absolutely, they should under certain conditions. One would be that their customers have been pleading with them to please make a very popular, well loved item part of the company’s permanent lineup. Especially where this item would fill a gap in their existing line, ie; UD Naked Palettes___Electric Palette? There’s NO in-between there! Spectrum would be a very well received addition, I believe!
Or something that was out awhile ago, but again, high quality and well loved: the brand ought to bring it back again at some point. Either repromote it or make it permanent, especially when the brand releases most of the shades from a once LE collex: MAC Extra Dimension e/S’s, but where’s Lorelei or Soul Serenade? Or why with the new regular shades: New Crop instead of Jealousy Wakes? That new neon green (so awful, I forgot its name!) instead of Savant? Why MAC? Oh, and Sex And The Oyster to replace Tilt, while their at it!
Yes! If UD released a permanent palette that was like their Shadow Box combined with some of the Basics from 1 & 2, that would be amazing!
I agree with what you said, Christine. I was elated when MAC made most of the extra dimension eyeshadows permanent. And also it reminds me of the Tom Ford (re)release this year that included much of last year’s Summer collection – I was able to pick up what I missed out on last year. As a TF admirer and collector, I really appreciated the second chance and also the mixing in of the alteady released pieces with the new.
Yes please! If an LE item is high quality and sells well, why not make it permanent? I don’t understand why brands don’t do this more often.
I feel like if a limited edition is doing well, it might make sense for a brand to restock once or twice and if it continues selling well (and has good feedback and traction on social media etc) maybe consider making it permanent! I can think of a lot of LE MAC products that did incredibly well and that people still talk about from time to time, like a lot of the Mineralize Skinfinishes. Also more than just a single product being made permanent, I think it would be great for brands to permanently release certain LE formulas that were wildly popular, or at least repromote them more often. Again looking at MAC for this one, I know a lot of people love the Extra Dimension skinfinishes. Isn’t that what they did for the Extra Dimension eye shadows? I think they were LE first and then made permanent, unless the late hour is playing tricks on my memory.
As consumer I would like that they rerelease LE products. Especially when a product is a combination of great quality, great idea, and great packaging.
The energy used to produce a great LE product should be recycled and let more people to be able to get them.
But if I’m a brand executif, I may prefer to keep the “myth” of LE products, “sorry, if it’s gone it’s gone ! Be more reactif nextime and buy our LE products immediately when you see them !!!” So more people would buy LE products immediately without to have time to reconsider before to purchase. That way each time the brand release LE products, they would be sold with no left. It’s how LE works and it works so well to make profits that brands release more and more LE products !
I really hope to find some LE to be rereleased. But how to make big profits is more important for brands than our wishes.
I’m sure there is always some business rationale behind not making an item permanent, but I definitely don’t understand it. I would agree that it makes sense to at least re-lease later if the demand is there – that keeps the excitement up but would generate plenty of sales, too!
Totally agree with this!
I think brands should definitely start considering making some limited edition products permanent. It sucks to really love a product and then you have to ration it or search for a dupe once it’s almost gone. Plus I like the idea of more people getting to try good limited edition products. I hate recommending something I love and it’s all sold out
I’m with the majority here….if a product’s popularity is proven over and over because it sells out every thing it’s re-promoted, maybe that’s a SIGN (MAC, I am looking at you primarily but other companies are almost as guilty of this though you, MAC, have taken this to a whole new level). Certainly not all LE products need or deserve to be made permanent but something like Moth Brown or Smoke & Diamonds, for which people are always clamoring and for which many pay outrageous prices (and often for fakes), it would seem only wise to make those permanent. I’m so glad MAC re-released and made permanent some of the In Extra Dimension shadows because those (especially from that Alluring Aquatics collection) sold out in a heart-beat and they are truly worthy of being permanent. Hugely popular finishes (like Extra Dimension, Starflash, Mega-Metal/Peacocky and also Matte2, which seems like it is being phased out rather than expanded) also deserve a place in the permanent lineup. Hell, get rid of CARBON if you need to make some room….(lots of other companies do far better blacks!)
If the brand has done it’s job, each LE edition collection SHOULD have a product in it that SHOULD be made permanent due to its sales success. I don’t want to see a re-promote of the most popular item in 3-5 years that sells out in a week or less. And, don’t get me started on how backup neediness makes me feel — lol.
Yes of course. It just makes business sense. So would improving the reputation and trust issues that several brands now have given their LE strategies.
Absolutely! I’ve heard so many people say they won’t even try to purchase a product that’s LE due to the games some companies play.
Yes, I’ve given up. Last week I went for an LE lipgloss I’d had my eye on since being reviewed here ~3 weeks ago, only to be told at the Nordstrom counter it was in store only 15 days. Frustrating, but in the end no big deal, it was easy to go to another brand and get one close enough.
15 days? LE is right! It sounds like they only made a handful of them. LOL Glad you found an alternative. 🙂
I definitely think so. Take ColourPop alchemy shadow–so many people rave about it, reviewed it, post on Instagram asking to keep it. That kind of reception is something that I think would be enough to keep a product. Also, if a product is sorely missed from a holiday release, I think it makes sense for the brand to at least release it again the next year if not make it permanent.
I realize that LE collections really play on the fear of missing out, and take that away, people may not purchase. They certainly aren’t scrambling to buy back-ups in just a couple weeks. Over time, the permanent product gets bumped further down the list. As a consumer, this has definitely happened to me and continues to happen. From a profit standpoint, I get it. When brands do this too often, though, it puts me off. When you know demand will be high, don’t drive up the hype and under-produce product just to whip people into a frenzy.
I think it would benefit brands to keep a good formula around permanently, and to re-release items for limited times each year. If those items continue to sell well each release, then make them permanent. If not, phase them out.
I’m in total agreeance with you. Summer and Winter editions of products would be nice. Or re-releases.
Definitely re-release the winners, and even some of the older ones that people missed out on or used up.
it’s probably a business move as to whether an LE will become permanent. If the LE sells like crazy it would be more likely to be added as permanent than one that was so-so in sells. MAC does remove products from their line from time to time. It surely comes down to a dollars and cents (sense) decision. For any beauty brand to continually stock a product that isn’t selling would be a waste and the money wasted could be on new and better lines.
Yes they should !!! I would love every LE product to have a Special packaging and then they bring pack popular products in normal packaging. So LE products would still be something special but you Could still buy your favourites later.
I do like your suggestion of permanent seasonal releases. The entire idea of LE seems ridiculous to me. If a color or product does well keep it, if not, retire it with notice.
Yes, if the LE product is a total hit like Becca x Jaclyn Hill Champagne Pop
Yes I think they should – especially when the product has sold out and remains a popular choice. Or when it has received great reviews – that generates interest as well.
Absolutely! If particular LE items are runaway hits, then many, many women have purchased them. I have been on the unfortunate end of finding LE lipsticks and eye shadows that I grew to LOVE and when they were gone, that was IT! I stopped buying LE products for that very reason. I didn’t want to find something I really liked only to not be able to purchase it again once I’d used it up.
There were times when I unknowlngly purchased an LE ptoduct, only to find it was an LE when I went back for more. In those instances, I stopped buying from that cosmetic company completely. If an SA was not honest enough to tell me the product was an LE, I wasn’t going to spend another dime with them.
If it’s a product that consumers would repurchase often or that fills a gap, I think companies are missing out by not making it permanent. (Anastasia, are you listening? We need a permanent Moon Child!)
I don’t know how many times I’ve come across a product I want to buy, only to find out it was LE. These were products there is no close dupe for in terms of color, performance, and/or formulation.
If a product is going to be LE, then at least give consumers a fair chance at getting it! When you hype up a release, then make people nervous they’re going to miss out, I’m guessing you have more brought back in long run. It’s “buy first, return later!”
I totally agree. Moonchild would be a wonderful addition to Anastasia’s permanent line up.
I also hate the FOMO that comes from something being “exclusive to the website” when it’s limited edition. Right now I’m refusing to buy it mostly because I can’t swatch it on my skin. I could totally understand if Anastasia was not available in stores, but it is, and if I don’t like it, I don’t want to go through the hassle of returning it, so it could possibly end up being a waste of money.
When I hear, “exclusive to the website,” I usually immediately lose interest, and for the same reason you’ve mentioned. In fact, I can’t think of another release I’ve ordered that was only available on a brand’s website. (Not that it’s never happened.)
I think more limited edition shades should definitely become permanent. It’s the fans who have the final say and the makeup companies to follow suit. We (the fans) know what shades we like and would like to see more of them despite the season. The customer is always right. You must appeal to everyone.
When they’re crazy popular and sell out immediately? Yes.
If there is enough public outcry yes. I think Chanel and NARS have both done it a few times. I think Chanel did that with Aura a few fall collections ago. Speaking of which, it’s still on my wish list 😛