One theory often repeated by Mary Kay directors is that when times are tough, women still buy lipstick. In fact, they claim there is evidence that lipstick sales actually increase.
But a recent story published by the Economist says the data don’t always support this theory.
The term “lipstick index” was coined by an Estee Lauder executive during the 2001 recession. But the index is less than reliable. Sometimes sales go up during tough times, other times they go down.
The bottom line: reliable historical sales figures don’t exist to support the theory.
The first part is probably true. Women will still buy lipstick. My theory is they’ll go to the drugstore and buy it for $4-$7. In a bad recession, they’ll wait for a sale and get it with a coupon for $.50-$3. LOL $13 a tube for regular old lipstick that does not include SPF is not a good bargain.
Now a chocolate index….there’s a theory. ;P
Oh yeah! Chocolate index! 😉
How True!
Chocolate? Did somebody say chocolate? Yay…I could go for that! Karma for you Julie!
And you are absolutely right, people will not be buying the $13 lipstick when they can get something as good or better for way less.
Mmmm chocolate. hehe Chocolate is a girls best friend…not dimonds
follow the link, read the article people. THINK. lipstick is made by corporations who are accountable to their stockholders, therefore, THE DATA EXISTS. Apparently, The Economist was too lazy to do their homework by checking company and corporate sales figures and comparing recession quarters to non-recession quarters. And here’s what the article ACTUALLY said:
“Reliable historical figures on lipstick sales are hard to find, and most lipstick believers can only point to isolated, anecdotal examples as evidence of the larger phenomenon. Data collected by Kline & Company, a market-research group,….”
Can anyone say BIAS???
I remember my former SD saying that “lipstick and booze was the only thing that sold during a reccession.” Eww!
don’t forget cigarettes too……I heard that too along with the lipstick and booze.
Christie, Krystina, Elaine…yes people will buy these things but they will buy the cheapest they can…so when MK uses this statement to lure consultants who NEED money into signing up for MK during economic recession, they are definitely misleading them.
Sounds like sour grapes to me. How can you make such a blanket statement?
Do you have proof? The company that owns Este Lauder, why their stock is rising.
Why do you think that is? Certainly not a inexpensive brand.
Maybe because however tight things are we have a need to buy something….Lipstick is much cheaper than a new outfit and makes us feel better.
Sassy, so you think lipstick has put Est Lauder over the top? Where did you get your figures? Just sayin. And I don’t know about you but I haven’t had a new outfit in 2 years, and lipstick is the last thing on my list of needs! Obviously you’re doing well during the recession, congratulations!
Walmart is doing well, no Este Lauder there, but I am not attributing their growth to lipstick sales!
In my area, most people are spending for BASICS only, which do not include a $ 13 lipstick. I agree with the earlier post – they will get the drug store brand on sale – and I’ve seen advertisements this week for lipsticks BOGO for $ 7! That’s 2 for $ 7, nearly 1/2 the cost of 1 MK. Everyone is looking for a deal here.