Kent, Iowa, US
I have been reading anti mac forums...i have never heard of the movement until today. Why is everyone against mac?
Aug 17 06 04:18 pm Link
Detroit, Michigan, US
"reposted from another forum posted by Kevin James Bennett"
Thanks to the morally bankrupt, maniacally driven steamroller called The Estee Lauder Companies Inc. and their take no prisoners attitude of "If you can't Beat Them, Buy Them!"...
Professional Makeup Artists worldwide are having jobs ripped out from underneath them.
The Estee Lauder Companies (who acquired MAC 4-5 years ago) methodically reduced the professional formulas and quality of the "original" MAC Makeup products to drugstore levels, rendering them un-usable by professional makeup artists. This was only the beginning of the new, improved money making scams coming from the feverish brains of the Estee Lauder marketing division.
The "original" MAC, as a courtesy, extended a % discount card (the PPID card) to pro makeup artists, hair stylists and even actors because they understood how expensive our professions were to maintain. Within a year of taking over the company, MAC/Estee Lauder instituted a yearly "membership" fee that had to be paid before they would renew/replace our PPID discount cards.
PAY for a DISCOUNT? WTF!
As if this wasn't a large enough slap in the face to the community that made them famous...
The Estee Lauder Companies/MAC Division has aggressively approached designers, production companies, photographers, advertising agencies, etc. and offered them tons of gratis makeup and free use of "their" staff makeup artists in exchange for product placement or production credit. They have even gone as far as paying CASH to get their foot in the door of some agencies/companies.
The MUA's (makeup artists) that work for MAC are brainwashed into thinking that they should feel privileged to do this work and it will be "important to their career". They are also told that they MUST do these gigs to gain their "certification" to merit promotions within the MAC organization. These "certifications" carry absolutely no cache or significance outside of the MAC company (usefulness???). The MAC artists are manipulated into working these high profile jobs for their usual hourly salesperson rate (maybe $16-17) while Pro MUA's would usually book the same jobs for 10x that amount.
The saddest thing is, these poor kids might get a MAC certification, but they usually get no credit (tear sheets, etc) for the actual job...MAC does. Without credit for your work, you get NOWHERE in the real industry. So they, in effect, have been PIMPED OUT BY MAC/ESTEE LAUDER and have taken jobs away from legitimate, professional MUA's.
You, the buying public and other MUA's have to help us out and make your voice heard. Professional MUA's are the people that put MAC on the map, made you covet the products because WE used them and now we are being systematically eliminated by the Estee Lauder Marketing and Promotional juggernaut. They are compromising our means of making a living (paying bills, feeding families) to sell more lipsticks.
Please don't support a company who willingly treats the people that are responsible for their enormous SUCCESS with blatant disrespect and underhanded, deceitful business practices.
Please stop purchasing MAC Makeup Products and help Professional Makeup Artists worldwide continue to work in the industry that we love.
CLICK HERE for a list of great alternatives to MAC products.
Aug 17 06 04:23 pm Link
Beulaville, North Carolina, US
Aug 17 06 04:31 pm Link
Here's the blog that got everybody's panties in a bunch...LOL!
Aug 17 06 04:59 pm Link
Ohio, Illinois, US
Kevin-James Bennett wrote:
That guy sure is a trouble maker..LOL. Just kidding. I support you on this 100%.
Aug 17 06 07:38 pm Link
San Antonio, Texas, US
I love my Macs! I can't see how anyone, who could, would choose to be a PC weenie.
"I shoulda got a Smell!" No way.
Aug 17 06 07:44 pm Link
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
You know its funny I didn't even know that whole story, but I did notice the quality of their makeup went down hill. Their foundations used to be pretty good, I finally had to look for alternatives (approx 3-4 years ago) because it was causing some pretty wacked out skin irritations, and blotchiness.
In my day to day career, several of my clients come to me saying the same things about the product failing to meet their expectations.
Now everything makes sense.
Aug 17 06 08:09 pm Link
Los Angeles, California, US
the mac boycott is also in the stylist forum FAQ
Aug 17 06 08:11 pm Link
I'll tell it to you froma newbie freelance perspective. I worked for Lancome for years, counter and also Makeup Artist. Trained mind you...not just sales...albeit, I loved sales...it didn't bother me at all working with Lancome's price points. I was always treated ethically and with respect by Lancome.
When I went freelance I wanted very much to start my 'kit' of makeup. I had my standard huge supply of Lancome, various and sundry other companies, such as Chanel, Smashbox, etc. Then I went to a MAC counter thinking I'd be treated the same as I had treated my clients in the business. NO, it didn't turn out that way. I did by a few of their products, mainly the studio line...I should have been a tad more critical in testing there at the counter. Not only did their makeup not perform up to my "Lancome" standards in a non-pro world...they deteriorated...when I took them back I was met with disdain, unprofessional behavior and lack of concern by their entire company. I paid a lot of money expecting that MAC would honor a return policy I erroneously thought was in place. (I always took back product that didn't perform to the customer's hope) It's clear the commissions are built into the returns as well, which clearly speaks to the lack of training and acumen of MAC the company. I still have several non-foundation products of theirs, but rarely do they perform to the exacting standards that other products have. I constantly seek out new products for my kit, and although Lancome is one of my personal favs (especially their color products and skincare) I'm not close minded to other manufacturers. I was sorely disappointed in MAC, the company, the people at the counter that didnt' care when I brought back product for return, and for a marketing machine that cares more about the bottom line than about the customer...both professional and non. I won't bother purchasing from them again....for these reasons alone. Either their marketing approach has become more aggressive, or their products have become less quality controlled or both. I'm sticking with the tried and trues, and that won't be MAC.
Aug 17 06 08:36 pm Link
I am so sorry this is a bit off topic....KJ I LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE your profile!!!!!!!!!!! LMAO!
Aug 17 06 11:03 pm Link
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Speaking as a photographer, and speaking just of image quality, (not politics), my perspective is this. In the world of film, no cosmetic containing sunscreen is worth a damn. Both available daylight and studio strobes have UV light. Sunscreen protects skin from UV light by, (you guessed it), reflecting it. Although our human eyes cannot see the UV, or the reflected UV, the film does. To film, it's the same as any other light. However, if someone applies a substance that reflects UV light on part of their body (face), the film will record that area as lighter, because to the film, that part (face), reflected more light (even if some of that light was UV). So, in general, sunscreen sucks for film. With film, I never found anything that worked as well as Mac....but Clinique was close, and believe it or not, Max Factor wasn't too bad either.
In the digital world, Mac is hard to use right. Most MUA's struggle with their newer formulas. But, it's the coolest stuff in the world to airbrush....since it's half watered down already. Sunscreen isn't as big of a deal in the digital realm, since I don't think the digital sensors "see" anything much beyond what our human eyes see.
To me, a newer MUA using Mac, scares me, since I'm expecting problems before the shoot. If someone has been a MUA for a while and wants to use Mac, I won't argue. If someone asks me what to use, I tell 'em Clinique or Max Factor, it's good enuff for me, and easier to use.
I understand politics though too. I had a photo-processing lab for 16 years. I felt that labs like mine were used, mis-led, lied to, and abused by a large well-known photographic company who puts their products in yellow boxes. Despite my normal preference toward American made goods, I dissolved all relationships with the big yellow company, and began using Mitsubishi, Agfa, and Fuji products. I later learned that the Mitsubishi paper I used, came from American trees whose pulp was processed in American paprer mills, and chemically sensitized in the good 'ol USA. That yellow company...their paper was imported, more expensive and inferior.
So, use what you have to in order to live with yourself, but, keep quality as high as possible.
Aug 18 06 12:27 am Link
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
i was the one known as the "non MAC girl" among my peers and those whom i've worked with..and of course clients always notice the lack of MAC in my kit. i haven't been on MM for that long and when i first came i read few pages of the stylist chat forum to "get to know" everyone. let's just say i went completely gitty with excitement when i came across the MAC boycot posts and after reading kevin's blog i'm so glad that there are so many out there that understand what i have to explain over and over again to those who ask "why dont u have any MAC stuff in ur kit".
thank you kjb! *^______________________________^*
and yes.. i love ur profile too..!
Aug 18 06 02:09 am Link
Liverpool, Illinois, US
The girls over at Makeup Alley are starting to take notice and we all know how much they love MAC over there!
A post went up on the boards just the other day titled "Once you go MAC you never go back..." which made me gag and instantly respond with "eurgh, I am so over MAC...so so over." To my surprise every other response in that thread was along the same train of thought as my own, "MAC used to be great, but I prefer *insert other brand here* now" etc etc.
I was so pleasantly surprised!
It is working guys! Slowly but surely!
Aug 18 06 05:59 am Link
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Where I live all events are covered by MAC so if you don't work for MAC you won't get much work as a make up artist for catwalk parades and events.Everyone who is anyone is at these shows.I guess if you wanted to meet these"who of who's" you could always buy your way to the VIP party.There is another cosmetic company in Australia which has been named worst employer in the country.They are also predominantley used for major fashion events and catwalk shows.
Aug 18 06 06:54 am Link
Awwww thanks M.
Aug 18 06 07:21 am Link
That is just awful. Talk about conglomerates. What happens if you (GOD FORBID) want to try another product? I mean...what is this? Communist China? I hope this bites them in the butt.
Aug 18 06 07:31 am Link
New York, New York, US
Good thing is in my makeup bag it doesn't carry any MAC products.
Aug 18 06 07:39 am Link
Has anyone seen this survey? It popped up when I went to the Kiehl's site (after GOOGLING KIEHL'S) to register.
I find it VERY INTERESTING...Kj?
Aug 18 06 07:52 am Link
Chicago, Illinois, US
OK, I hate to admit it, but I've purchased some MAC stuff in the last year or so. Don't hate me! But upon doing so, I discovered the best way to get under their skin . SHOW them how their product is inferior. I didn't even know it would have this effect on them. So, I went into my local MAC PRO store, looking for some foundation. I was still building my kit, so I thought I'd just buy one specific shade for myself, and if I liked it I'd more. This was a while ago, don't kill me. So, I bought it and it was horrible. It was sooo red and you could just about see the titainium dioxide with your naked eye. I was like, "ew!" I took it back, and the makeup girl was annoyed but recommended something different. She said it wasn't as heavy as the stuff a lot of artist use when doing print. Ok...it was just as bad. I returned this second foundation and the same girl was pissed. She asked what was wrong with it, so I told her "its colors were poorly balanced and it felt/looked cheap on my skin. So how can I put this type of stuff on a model?" One of the other MAC people there condescendingly inquired (while doing the return) what other makeup I was using. I mentioned Cinema Secrets and she looked like she just ate something bitter. She just said, "Oh."
A few days later, I brought in a powder from a "real print makeup line" and asked the original MAC girl if she could match it. It's this great yellow, a fab highlighter. Her eyes bugged out of her head. She was like, "WHERE did you get THAT?!" I thought that wasn't a good sign...she questioned whether anyone, let alone me, could wear this color...I looked at their pink and ashy hued powders and realized that shopping there was a complete waste of time, discount or no.
Aug 18 06 11:00 pm Link
Los Angeles, California, US
ohh what powder was it? Was it the T. LeClerc Banana Powder?
Aug 18 06 11:15 pm Link
Face Arts wrote:
They belong to a Branding Research Company...someone paid them for that survey.
Aug 19 06 09:38 am Link
New York, New York, US
On a side note:
I used to love my old MAC colors and this company matched them for me with good quality. Plus they give MUA discounts:
Aug 19 06 10:17 am Link
Miami, Florida, US
I used to have a girlfriend long time ago who was trying to boicot avocados...for some reason. Well...she missed lots of good salads. T
P/S: I didn't.
Aug 19 06 10:22 am Link
Columbus, Ohio, US
I had NO idea this was going on. Once I deplete my stash, I'm NOT using MAC anymore...
Aug 19 06 10:27 am Link
Tito Trelles wrote:
And your point is?
Aug 19 06 10:48 am Link
Tito Trelles wrote:
so you sat there eating avacados and didnt bother to inquire WHY she was boycotting them? arent you a sensitive guy..... I got that feeling from your profile as well.
Clearwater, Florida, US
My last shoot was almost a complete loss because Mac was used . I used a Mac MUA and I asked her more then once if the foundation was ok for photography? She said yes we use this all the time. I trusted her and then when shooting a tan blonde model her face was so white I could not use any of the images. The model had to take off the foundation and go out and buy something else. I have to say the model looked awesome but not in the images.
So my question to the MUAs is this.. What is the best glamour makeup for photography ?
That Look Photo wrote:
You are going to get a lot of opinions on the best, everyone has their own favorites....I like RCMA and Cinema Secrets, I'm experiementing with others but those two brands are a main stay
Aug 19 06 11:16 am Link
I agree with Mary. You need print/cinema foundation for the best photographs, IMHO... the leading cosmetics companies such as Chanel, Lancome, Revlon, etc...makeup for the masses...is better used for the color portion of your makeup, i.e. eye, lip, blush. Even then you would be well off using the media makeup lines such as RCMA, Cinema Secrets and the lesser knowns. Print makeup definately has it's place over the fashion makeup brands...of which MAC only "thinks" they're a part of. If a company continues to change their formulations over and over, you have no consistency.
Aug 19 06 01:55 pm Link
I think that's why this is an EX girlfriend he's referring to.
Aug 19 06 04:25 pm Link
Aug 19 06 05:26 pm Link
Avocados are a girls best friend sometimes....like bananas....they're in the same family, you know....and you can use them in SO many ways! (wink wink nudge nudge)
Aug 19 06 10:47 pm Link
Los Angeles, California, US
Face Arts wrote:
you mean cause of the potassium and good protean?
Sep 13 06 12:37 am Link
Everybody calm down! It's not M.A.C., you should blame it's ESTE LAUDER!!! Frank Tosken (the creator of M.A.C.) is rolling over in his grave to see what happen to his baby. Este Lauder wanted to buy him out back in the early 90's but he wanted no part of what he knew they would do his company. He died in the late 90's and lost control. It is very sad to see what they promised him they would never do, they have done.
Please direct your anger at Este Lauder...that the real problem.
Remember M.A.C. for what it was and what it used to stand for...it's only fair to Frank who had nothing but the best intensions.
Sep 13 06 01:00 am Link
Trent Cotner wrote:
Are you actually suggesting that we should go ahead and support MAC, but boycott the rest of EL? That's silly. Consider that it's MAC's name that is infiltrating the freelance and union jobs, not EL. Yes, if EL hadn't bought MAC, MAC would likely not be doing what they are doing. But the global domination is occurring in MAC's name, and as such, the boycott is against MAC.
Sep 13 06 01:18 am Link
I think it's you that wasn't "paying attention". I was just giving you some history behind the problem. It just makes me sad that this has happened to, what was once a great company.
And that is my opinion...sorry you're so angry, now at "me".
Sep 13 06 01:26 am Link
Trent Cotner wrote:
The history is fine, but telling us to "honor" MAC because of what they used to be... how exactly do we do that? They are taking our jobs, and their products are being diluted with fillers. Why should we honor MAC? It isn't what it once was.
Sep 13 06 01:30 am Link
I'm not asking you to Honor M.A.C. I'm not asking you to support the company any more. Just wanted to give my veiwpoint. I understand I'm a minority on the "not" bashing frenzy, and that's OK
and, Yes, if you want to make it a pointed boycot you should boycot Este Lauder brands. That is the Conglomerate.
Fast Food is killing the world, should you boycot the "hamburger" or maybe McDonald's or how about all the fast food companies?
Sep 13 06 01:46 am Link
Trent Cotner wrote:
Earth to Trent...
Sep 13 06 09:08 am Link
Kevin-James Bennett wrote:
"losing an argument" That's how you see it huh?
Sep 13 06 01:36 pm Link