L"Occitane lost its bunny

[SparklyBarbs]

I read it online, its free and sometimes you get useful information like this,

so i will continue to do so. Also read about diet drinks putting weight on you,

so learnt something new there. Its not my fault i cant loose weight, its diet

cokes fault he he. But seriously L"Occtaine even go to the lenghts of making

sure the items they use in their lquids, shower gels etc, are not tested on animals,

and then they go and sell out to China, thinking they can maybe get them to change

their minds. Dont think so, they sold out for money, so they agree for their wares to

be tested on animals now. Disgraceful

 

[nailprincess]

As far as I'm aware LE has still got the bunny logo? I saw it on some products while having a muse about the beauty counters in John Lewis on Saturday. Even though Avon is now the parent company I don't think they export the LE products to China, yet anyway.

 

[SparklyBarbs]

Interesting thought there nailprincess, would be good to know the answer, but cant
really seeing Avon not passing on the Liz Earle products, but maybe someone else
more knowledgable could let us know the answer to that. And probably will in the
future anyway i suppose

 

[Julius]

French companies selling out and taking the easy route to profits?
Surely not.

Here is another ignorant snipe against France / French. I think you will find actually that many brands have changed ownership stakes. Tova to a large extent is owned by QVC, Liz Earle by Avon etc etc. Of course it is up to individuals to make their own choices. Some people may not want to buy a product without the bunny symbol. It's up to them. The world is becoming a smaller places and business have to think on a larger scale to secure their future. Surely there must be some positive purpose to animal testing or there would be no point in doing it! Would you rather a bunny be damaged, or a human? I wonder how many people buy Dennis Basso faux fur coats without thinking about the fact that he makes the real deal too?!

 

[nailprincess]

I've just had a thought. If someone were to purchase some LE and wanted to send it to China I wonder if they would be able to do this and what the procedure would be, seeing as the products haven't been animal tested, I wonder if they let them into the country?

 

[nailprincess]

Back to L'occitane it seems that Clarins is a shareholder in the company according to this article in 2010. I'm also assuming that as Clarins sells in China/Asia it also carries out animal testing.

http://cocoa75.wordpress.com/2011/0...-plans-for-the-family-run-cosmetics-business/

 

[Julius]

Oh please stop all this I am having nightmares about bunnies with burnt-out eyes with inflamed sockets!

 

[Capirossi]

Julius I disliked your post for obvious reasons, even though I hate the damn button and have never had cause to use it before, but I feel you are mocking those of us who do care and it got my back up.

Thanks LIAM, but I refuse to read that vile paper full of non-news, z list zelebs and journalists who haven't got a basic grasp of the English language, let alone grammar!

Thanks Minim for that link, am about to have a look.

 

[Weathergirl]

Hmm. Tough one. Apparently they pay the chinese to lab test the products rather than arrange the tests themselves, so in the rest of the world the product is sold as cruelty free but not in China. The stringent criteria for the bunny logo are not met, but no doubt they can split hairs and say WE don't animal test our products. But agents for l'Occitaine do so on their behalf in China, just so they can sell there. Bliddy disgusting, I will use my stash and ponder. I own other brands that don't have the bunny logo, so if I boycott I will have to examine my whole beauty routine as there is no point just singling out l'occitane.

China, no human rights so why would we expect them to have animal rights? I wish business had a moral code but realistically it doesn't. As for the DM, I read the online version but it makes my blood boil most of the time, it is predictable, provocative and often innaccurate. With Liz Earle has she actually been taken over or does it remain a distinct company that has teamed up with Avon to crack the US market? I don't see her products in Avon's brochure yet. Have any of you seen Avon's name in tiny writing on LE packaging? I don't use any LE at the moment so can't check.

 

[Sazza]

Can I say I have never ever seen the bunny logo on any L'Occitane product. I went and looked at some shower creams and body lotion bought well before last December and recycle logo and says No Animal Testing.

I don't think LUSH have the bunny logo either and they are very anti animal testing.

Urban Decay decided go into China and gave a long boring and whinny statement about helping to make the Chinese see the error of their ways, on animal testing oh and women's rights. There was such an outcry from customers worldwide they changed their minds.

I agree Donna, never seen the bunny logo on L'Occitane product and I have loads!!

 

[FifeGal]

Sorry Julius, but I'm not the ignorant one here. You seem to have missed the entire point.

Firstly, the great majority of companies on the list that have 'sold out' are French. I can, therefore, say that these are French companies that are selling out. Historical events going back several decades was what made me unsurprised at this behaviour. I won't name them, the point here is about animal testing.

Secondly you made a point that this is just economics and they have to do this to stay in business. I dispute this too - you're thinking about the economics of 20+ years ago. 10 years ago businesses realised that to stay in business they had to provide better customer service, tell people what their business stood for and stand by that. Did you know that for these big companies, 80% of their value is in their brand? Their brand is what people think about, when they think about that company. The numbers on the balance sheet and the assets they own only make up 20% of the value of a company like Coca Cola.

The economics of 'now' are different again. Because not only do we as customers care about what companies stand for, we're also able to tell the world through social media and quickly mobilise into groups that feel passionately in the same way. Social media means that in a short space of time people can feel very differently about a company and that hits their brand - hard.

These (mainly) French companies are thinking very short term, that they can sacrifice something that forms part of their brand in order to go for a bigger prize - a large untapped market. Only, they've underestimated the cost of doing this (remember that 80%) in comparison to the size of the prize. If they were smart they would have all sat and waited out the change in legislation that would have to happen as there is pressure from inside China from the newly rich to have local access to these brands. They could have then claimed to have played some part in this change and benefited from hugely positive PR around their ethical stance.

On another note, does anyone find it ironic that at the same time as these brands are wanting IN and willing to undergo animal testing to do it, fake equivalents make it out every day which I'm positive have absolutely no animal testing (given that we're all warned about the lead content in eyeshadows etc)?

 

[Snarly]

Hey Capirossi, I like Akamuti's products from down the road, Llandeilo, actually. Their ReplenishingRoseCream has worked wonders in the last 2 weeks, and not 1 zit or blemish. I ordered from Weleda yesterday, toothpastes without flouride and babywash for me! no -bens. And no more of Qs nail offerings, as I have bought 3Free (formaldehyde, toulene? and-the-name-escapes-me) and vegan nail polishes this week, too. Big changes afoot in my den! Thanks to Minim and snippets from others I have learned here. Heck, I stocked up on carrot/beetroot juice today, also. ... in for a penny, in for a pound ... x Snarly

 

[reflexgirl]

Hey Capirossi, I like Akamuti's products from down the road, Llandeilo, actually. Their ReplenishingRoseCream has worked wonders in the last 2 weeks, and not 1 zit or blemish. I ordered from Weleda yesterday, toothpastes without flouride and babywash for me! no -bens. And no more of Qs nail offerings, as I have bought 3Free (formaldehyde, toulene? and-the-name-escapes-me) and vegan nail polishes this week, too. Big changes afoot in my den! Thanks to Minim and snippets from others I have learned here. Heck, I stocked up on carrot/beetroot juice today, also. ... in for a penny, in for a pound ... x Snarly

Hey Snarly, I seem to recall that some weeks ago you stated you were boycotting any product that came out of china - just wondered how it was going? From this last post it seems you are sourcing some great products that suit you!

 

[nailprincess]

Weathergirl, from what I've gathered Avon have taken over LE but they remain a stand alone company. Not sure what this means? Also no mention of Avon on the C&P etc but I still get the newsletter from time to time and also the email, and if I remember correctly the registered office is Nottingham, which I think is Avon's UK HQ/registered office.

 

[boffy]

I have to be honest, I have never given this much thought in the past but now it has been brought to my attention (thanks Sparkly) I have decided to make an effort to look for products not tested on animals. Am I right in assuming the bunny is a sign they don't? Can anyone advise on some well known and accessible brands that don't test?

I will use what's left of my L almond oil and won't be buying anymore.

And while we're on the subject of companies selling out, what is the matter with China only buying products tested on animals?! That's insane and incredibly backwards if you ask me. Grr :banghead:

From mobile, please excuse any silly errors!!

for the life of me i dont see why they have to test on animals they dont use handwash or foot cream its a backward step and unnecesary

 

[Julius]

Thank you for your reply. We will just have to agree to disagree, though. A lot of what you wrote looks impressive, but does not really bear out as anything more than a précis of a marketing textbook. I appreciate that consumers are more ethical and vocal about their opinions, but I am sceptical about the "brand values" of many companies. Whilst I am sure that some are more sincere than others it seems to me that many (including the one I work for) claim to believe in this and that, when in fact they don't care so much at all. They are in business to make money! Take money and profit out of the equation and their values and interests will fall like a house of cards! They are merely pandering to what they perceive to be the interests of their customers in a bid to bolster their reputation / status and ultimately further their own materialistic ends.

As far as animal rights is concerned I think this is a real hot potato and one QVC would do well to consider. We all know that they do not sell Dennis Basso REAL fur products on ethical grounds (although I believe that these fur coats are probably out of the price bracket for the average QVC consumer, and that this may have something to do with it). Were they really concerned about ethics and animal welfare they would not sell Dennis Basso products at all, fake or real, and thereby not indirectly line the pockets of a man that profiteers from the suffering of many animals. I mean, how many mink would it take to produce a coat?They are only small creatures. Think about it.

I would not wish to make fun of animal welfare issues. Far from it. I think cruelty to animals is wrong and often a sign of something more sinister. But there must surely be some kind of argument for animal testing? Isn't there? It would be a waste of time to do it if it provided no benefit of any kind.

I am just saying that once you scratch beneath the veneer of ethics you will often find that big companies and their consumers are not that ethical at all! QVC and their association with Basso is one example of a case in point.

Sorry Julius, but I'm not the ignorant one here. You seem to have missed the entire point.

Firstly, the great majority of companies on the list that have 'sold out' are French. I can, therefore, say that these are French companies that are selling out. Historical events going back several decades was what made me unsurprised at this behaviour. I won't name them, the point here is about animal testing.

Secondly you made a point that this is just economics and they have to do this to stay in business. I dispute this too - you're thinking about the economics of 20+ years ago. 10 years ago businesses realised that to stay in business they had to provide better customer service, tell people what their business stood for and stand by that. Did you know that for these big companies, 80% of their value is in their brand? Their brand is what people think about, when they think about that company. The numbers on the balance sheet and the assets they own only make up 20% of the value of a company like Coca Cola.

The economics of 'now' are different again. Because not only do we as customers care about what companies stand for, we're also able to tell the world through social media and quickly mobilise into groups that feel passionately in the same way. Social media means that in a short space of time people can feel very differently about a company and that hits their brand - hard.

These (mainly) French companies are thinking very short term, that they can sacrifice something that forms part of their brand in order to go for a bigger prize - a large untapped market. Only, they've underestimated the cost of doing this (remember that 80%) in comparison to the size of the prize. If they were smart they would have all sat and waited out the change in legislation that would have to happen as there is pressure from inside China from the newly rich to have local access to these brands. They could have then claimed to have played some part in this change and benefited from hugely positive PR around their ethical stance.

On another note, does anyone find it ironic that at the same time as these brands are wanting IN and willing to undergo animal testing to do it, fake equivalents make it out every day which I'm positive have absolutely no animal testing (given that we're all warned about the lead content in eyeshadows etc)?

 

[Julius]

Oh my goodness I am really surprised at the level of hysteria my post had brought! I would have credited people with more intelligence than to behave like a gaggle of dotty old Sarah Kennedy matrons! Animals are lovely. Cruelty to them is wrong. I understand that but there is a lot more cruelty and unfairness, greed and negativity in the world, and the presence or absence of a bunny symbol on a product line is not going to make much difference! If you buy a handbag in Primark it will most likely have been made by a poor 5 year old who is paid 2 rupees a month and has flies buzzing around their eyes. What about human suffering like that? Is that not the similar to or even worse than animal suffering? I'm not saying that they bunny symbol etc does not matter, but let's use logic. Let's use common sense and think about the bigger picture.

 

[boffy]

to put chemicals inside animals eyes,skin etc to see if they react to it is wrong. its people who use skincare so it should be tested on them with thier own consent of course and they should be paid for it. like i said before animals are highly unlikely to wear eyeshadow or antiageing cream.

 

[SparklyBarbs]

Its for that reason i wouldn"t shop or buy things in Primark, as i"d seen a programme about
how youngsters were exploited and got next to nothing for making those clothes, but its
a choice i make, and the same for cosmetics. I dont like to think of innocent animals being
tested on so i can use the cosmetics. Cruel and no call for it

 

[alter ego]

Maybe Karma will eventually see to it that Chinese consumers become animal-friendly (though I think it's gonna be a while). What will these companies do then?!