Author |
Message |
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:24 am |
http://www.makeupalley.com/board/m.asp?id=51346166&keywords=jan+marini
look at this link...could this be true...why would Jan Marini jeaopardize their rep and charge the same price (160) if it won't work! Seems like everyone is just speculating about he New formula. What are others thoughts? |
_________________ 35, mother of twins |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:37 am |
momtwin1998 wrote: |
http://www.makeupalley.com/board/m.asp?id=51346166&keywords=jan+marini
look at this link...could this be true...why would Jan Marini jeaopardize their rep and charge the same price (160) if it won't work! Seems like everyone is just speculating about he New formula. What are others thoughts? |
Thank you for that link. It would be really unethical to do this if there is any truth to it. I don't know if there will be any way to get a definitive answer until reviews of the new formulation start to come in. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:42 am |
PLUS....they would have a lot to refund to people if it doesn't work! So why would they risk that too! |
_________________ 35, mother of twins |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:45 am |
momtwin1998 wrote: |
PLUS....they would have a lot to refund to people if it doesn't work! So why would they risk that too! |
One other thing....i called Jan Marini and a rep told me that they it was tested and it does work. HMMMM.... |
_________________ 35, mother of twins |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:31 am |
Oh, mine has already shipped. I would be really mad if this is true. If so, i wonder what they replaced it with...Keratin Growth Formula? Horsetail? It's pretty unethical to sell something for alot more $ if the ingredients can be found much cheaper elsewhere. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:03 pm |
What I'd like to know is what is the name of that "larger company" with a patent to the drug for eyelash growth, and if that's true, wouldn't they already have that product on the market so we could buy that one instead of the JM? |
_________________ Aimee3 |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:17 pm |
I called lovelyskin.com where I had ordered and she said she was told by JM that all they did was add something to the formula so it was less irritating, they still have the SAME ingredients,that words comes straight from the co. itself.I hope they arent lying |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:35 pm |
No offense, but I don't think Jan Marini would want to jepardize her company. She has a reputation to live up to. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:55 pm |
The main ingredient WAS an irritant. It was dangerous for some who used it. It was a prescription ingredient the company did not disclose to its consumers. The ingredient is in glaucoma drops (side effects of the drops are increased eyelash growth) but you cannot sell a product with a prescription ingredient over the counter AND on top of that NOT disclose it to consumers. They might have replaced it with another ingredient that "enhances" eyelash growth (the word "enhance" comes from JM now) but why would they be allowed to keep the same ingredient in there, especially with all this about the FDA?
Either way...JM was wrong. Wrong to charge the same obscene amount for a new formula that is most likely missing their key ingredient (now strangely replaced with the mysterious "eyelash growth factor") and wrong for having an ingredient that could cause consumers problems (increased eye pressure, etc.). Even if it DOES still have the ingredient, they NEED to tell customers. It's ridiculous that they don't.
The company is trying to keep their devoted customers by trying to dilute the issue. They've got to do damage control...they could lost a lot of business. So the only thing left to do is to slap "new and improved" on the label, claim it's better than the first one, and that not much has changed. Of course they are going to say it works. They aren't going to tell you otherwise, they want you to buy it!
I'm sorry, but the number one goal of a company is to make money and limit loss as much as possible.
I don't hold what company reps say to mean anything. I was told by a Proactiv rep that their product would change my life. I was told how natural Clinique skincare was...yadda yadda yadda.
This whole case gets me uppity. JM needs to start realizing their consumers are smart people. |
_________________ 32, Fair Skin, combo/break-out prone. Simple routine of REN No. 1 Purity Cleansing Balm and Argan oil as a moisturizer; Clarisonic when needed. That's it! |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:59 pm |
Agree with ParisTroika,
I am staying away from it now. |
_________________ Simple but No Simplier...Approaching late 20s, Normal/Combination Skin, Rarely Breakout now but have some old acne marks, sunspots, & broken caps |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:01 pm |
hm if they can't tell the truth about this product it makes me wonder about all the other products in the Jan Marini line. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:02 pm |
I'd think it has too work a little. Meybe not as well as the original. How else could they sell it for so much? |
_________________ 40, fair skinned, dark hair, blue eyes |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:04 pm |
c4ward wrote: |
I'd think it has too work a little. Meybe not as well as the original. How else could they sell it for so much? |
Well, the fact they lied about it before already says they are a company who engage in unethical practices...The price does not always reflect positive result. IMO. |
_________________ Simple but No Simplier...Approaching late 20s, Normal/Combination Skin, Rarely Breakout now but have some old acne marks, sunspots, & broken caps |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:07 pm |
You go girl! I feel the same way, sorry Patty, I know you sell JM products but I think the way the company itself has behaved with this borders on scandalous. The reps are telling everyone what they want to hear and the story changes from rep to rep. What I'd like to see if everyone show their displeasure with their wallets but that won't happen. But I won't purchase one darn product again.
kimberly |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:08 pm |
...maybe it's time for Revitalash. |
_________________ 40, fair skinned, dark hair, blue eyes |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:18 pm |
They can sell it for so much because...well...they set whatever price they want.
I mean, there's nothing special about La Mer...you can buy the active ingredient (that supposedly makes LM soooo expensive) for 15 bucks! You can make Decleor YY oil for sooo much less than the 65 dollars it retails for.
Is a Louis Vuitton TRULY worth 1000 bucks? Is the leather $1000 leather? No. It's the brand name. As demand goes up, so do their prices.
I'm not boycotting because I think it won't work or whatever. It's the whole shady dealings and the fact that they didn't come forward with the active ingredient. Whether it's still in the new formula or not, my eyelashes aren't worth giving money to a company that I feel violated consumer trust. Perhaps my pride is too big, but I won't buy from them because they were not upfront...regardless of how their formula is now. They lost my trust. I'll take my money elsewhere. |
_________________ 32, Fair Skin, combo/break-out prone. Simple routine of REN No. 1 Purity Cleansing Balm and Argan oil as a moisturizer; Clarisonic when needed. That's it! |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:34 pm |
So does RL have that awesome ingredient that makes lashes grow?
Does this mean we should all switch to RL? |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:43 pm |
What I find fishy is (I like the old JM formula and what it did for my lashes and I stupidly would still like to use the old formula) that JM reps all seem to have a different story. Even the FDA is being sneaky by not coming clean about what they are/were investigating. I don't know what to believe anymore. If the FDA made JM stop selling the old formula, shouldn't they have made some announcement to the public about the possible dangers and tell people not to use whatever they might have left of the product?
IIRC, "new and improved" can be slapped on a product for the teeniest change, so that doesn't tell us if the formula really changed or the brush got slightly smaller/bigger etc.
|
_________________ Aimee3 |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:08 pm |
Aimee3 wrote: |
What I find fishy is (I like the old JM formula and what it did for my lashes and I stupidly would still like to use the old formula) that JM reps all seem to have a different story. Even the FDA is being sneaky by not coming clean about what they are/were investigating. I don't know what to believe anymore. If the FDA made JM stop selling the old formula, shouldn't they have made some announcement to the public about the possible dangers and tell people not to use whatever they might have left of the product?
IIRC, "new and improved" can be slapped on a product for the teeniest change, so that doesn't tell us if the formula really changed or the brush got slightly smaller/bigger etc.
|
Yeah, if a car seat is recalled they tell everyone why it was done. Why can't the FDA or Jan Marini spit out the truth? I have never used this stuff but I feel like the people who have used it have the right to get together and demand honest answers!
I think they just shot themselves in the foot..more business for CareKate when her lash serum is ready! |
_________________ 28 Fair skin, brown hair, blue eyes & acne prone combo skin |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:12 pm |
Read This:
Age Intervention® Eyelash Conditioner* NEW!
Breakthrough Technology
Your Lashes Will Appear Fuller, Thicker and More Lustrous
Age Intervention Eyelash Conditioner can rapidly induce dramatic improvement in the appearance of volume, texture and density.
By using breakthrough technology that features reconstructive components, Age Intervention Eyelash Conditioner prevents new virgin hair from being adversely affected by cosmetic and environmental factors.
Plus, by increasing flexibility and preventing breakage, eyelash hair can reach its full potential. Users will quickly perceive that their lashes appear far fuller and more lustrous.
.23 oz. mascara-style tube with eyeliner brush applicator (one tube lasts about six months)
* Age Intervention Eyelash Conditioner is not intended to stop, prevent, cure, relieve, reverse or reduce eyelash loss or to promote the growth of eyelashes.
http://www.janmarini.com/AgeInterventionEyelash.html |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:19 pm |
[quote="poohlisey"]Read This:
* Age Intervention Eyelash Conditioner is not intended to stop, prevent, cure, relieve, reverse or reduce eyelash loss or to promote the growth of eyelashes.
Very sneaky |
_________________ Simple but No Simplier...Approaching late 20s, Normal/Combination Skin, Rarely Breakout now but have some old acne marks, sunspots, & broken caps |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:26 pm |
Quote: |
By using breakthrough technology that features reconstructive components, Age Intervention Eyelash Conditioner prevents new virgin hair from being adversely affected by cosmetic and environmental factors.
Plus, by increasing flexibility and preventing breakage, eyelash hair can reach its full potential. Users will quickly perceive that their lashes appear far fuller and more lustrous.
|
To be Read:
JM coats your lashes.
Can you say "clear mascara" |
_________________ 32, Fair Skin, combo/break-out prone. Simple routine of REN No. 1 Purity Cleansing Balm and Argan oil as a moisturizer; Clarisonic when needed. That's it! |
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:32 pm |
Roughly the same thing is said by Revitalash. It probably has to do with FDA regulations. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:42 pm |
Jan Marini's website is very informative about their *new* eyelash conditioner. I don't think I will ever purchase it. |
|
|
|
Wed Apr 17, 2024 7:41 pm |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
|
|