A Dirty Little Makeup Secret Update

This story is about two or three years in the making, stemming from a previously written article. Most of my information was and is based on consumer reports from various beauty box subreddits. I will link them throughout as needed. Subreddit/consumer reports are especially vital as it is often difficult to depend upon brand and company transparency. There is often very little transparency from companies. 

Two years ago, I chronicled an incident where I noticed that supposedly "different" brands featured in subscription boxes such as ipsy, were actually not indie brands and all owned by the same person, an Emanuela deFalco. At the time I called this an "Ipsy Conspiracy," and while of course that article got no attention because this is an obscure little blog on the world wide web, major developments happened that I had no idea about. 

I would be more careful to call anything a conspiracy in these times, due to the legal implication, as well as the loss of credibility one who uses the word un-ironically would face. 

While I have unsubscribed from Ipsy for about two years now, and have lost track completely of beauty box/subscription service drama, some passing quarantine boredom prompted me to check back in. 

Has anything new happened? 

At the time, I was able to verify that Emanuela DeFalco was the CEO of the following brands:

-DLS (Dirty Little Secret) Cosmetics, the mothership brand, started in 2013

-Luna by Luna Cosmetics

-Bang Beauty

-Steve Laurant Beauty, with clear documentation proving it's just alibaba whole-sale, found here.

At the time (2018), a total of four "brands," with identical website configurations, the same photography company (verified in this reddit post from two years back) , the same packaging and ingredients, the same sub-par quality, and the same inflated prices. 

DeFalco, a self-proclaimed "entrepreneur," who started DLS (a fitting name) Cosmetics with a loan of $10,000 from her father, (Founder and CEO of FinCredit, Inc), was not necessarily trying to hide the fact that she was essentially Mom from Futurama who was just a little more subtle with branding. 

Pictured: Emanuela DeFalco's second release from her skin care brand, Faccia

Granted, was all this illegal? Well, I'm not a lawyer. But, as documented in my first post, these practices undoubtedly compromised the image that Ipsy was going for. I can only imagine that either 1.) Ipsy did not know, or 2.) could not weather the demands of this arrangement, or 3.) did not like the consumer feedback/response, which continued long after I dropped the story.

In the gap time of 2019-2020, more reports of additional brands under DeFalco's name cropped up. These are:

-Basic Beauty, verified in this reddit post. 

-Give Them Lala (as documented on a LinkedIn post of Joseph DeFalco (maybe an uncle?) documented in this reddit post. 

-Faccia, which claimed to be a luxury skin care brand, despite its non-luxury ingredients and absolutely no brand story/identity. Read here. To make matters worse, consumers confirmed what was already long suspected of her other brands- they were private labelled from wholesalers, in this case, Alibaba. Read here, too, for ingredient break-down.

The Faccia gold stuff resold from Alibaba seemed to be the major tipping point for many consumers, who were horrified at the apparent misinformation and false promises. 

It is important to note that there may be many more brands, not just owned by DeFalco, out there that operate in the same way. They seem to be like a hydra. For our purposes, we know now of at least eight (listed above) that DeFalco runs. 

But how did the subscription boxes respond to this outrage?

As of February 2020, Ipsy no longer sells Luna by Luna, Steve Laurant, Bang Beauty, and DLS cosmetics from their marketplace, documented here. This occurred after they sent an email to their customers, saying they will not work with her anymore. A much different response than two years ago, when they wrote to me informing me that these are indie brands. It looks like one other box dropped them, Fashionista. 

Boxycharm, however, seems to be another story. While you can't search the site directly from items, and you cannot (without an account) determine what items may be available in boxes, a google search will get you access to their marketplace, where one could purchase items directly. In this case, as of late May 2020, they are still selling Steve Laurant lipgloss for $22.00 (lol), gloss from Luna by Luna for $18.00 (also lol). It is funny how arbitrary the price point is for both of them. Though neither Boxycharm, nor Luna by Luna reports ingredients or amounts, I am sure they are identical. By the way, it is the law to produce ingredients, so I am not sure why neither has.


Amazon lists the ingredients for the Luna gloss, though, as "POLYISOBUTENE, MINERAL OIL, ETHYLHEXYL PALMITATE, CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE, ISOPROPYL MYRISTATE, SILICA DIMETHYL SILYLATE, PHENOXYETHANOL, CAPRYLYL GLYCOL, MAY CONTAIN: TITANIUM DIOXIDE, MICA, IRON OXIDES, RED 6 LAKE, RED 7 LAKE, YELLOW 5 LAKE" These ingredients also appear for a brand called KAB cosmetics, which has ties to a different group of reality-tv show people, but I am sure there are shared contacts and backing for both of them. Amazon Singapore also gives ingredients for Steve Laurant gloss (here, but link may expire), and surprise, surprise, they are the same.

Boxycharm also is still selling the Faccia face cream, but a reddit post revealed that after a consumer left a message about the Faccia/Ali-baba scandal, Boxycharm was unwilling to pull the plug on them. I could not find any apparent ties just yet between DeFalco and Boxycharm that would indicate something rather sinister, so for now I am just going to chalk it up to Boxycharm's greed and disdain for its own customers. 

Most of these businesses still seem active, unfortunately. Their sites are still up and running, and taking people's money. Boxycharm still seems like the last hold-out, but Ipsy's distancing seems like a big step. Two years ago, I was skeptical that all these brands would still be around, since they seemed like a ploy to make cash fast and run. 

I still feel that way, though, and am certain these are brands just exist to fill the subscription boxes of those brands who consider this type of business (subscription services) a way to cut corners. 

This story isn't finished, I don't think. While activity for everyone has slowed due to the pandemic, it remains to be seen what the future of these brands will be, and, to a greater extent, subscription boxes. I do not think S.B. can continue to thrive of this model of low-quality and low-transparency. 

For the consumer- take heed. I abandoned subscription boxes long ago, because I figured if I wanted one specific thing, I would just buy it. I didn't want to play essentially a game of risk with my money. When it comes to your own money, consider what (and who) it goes to. 

An Ipsy Conspiracy?

Ipsy is a subscription box service that charges you $10 for a box of 5 cosmetic/skin-care/hair-care products. These products are from brands that can range from affordable, drugstore, to high-end. There are brands many makeup lovers would recognize right away: Too Faced, Tarte, Nyx, Urban Decay, The Balm, Smashbox, etc., etc.

And then there is a whole line-up of brands I have termed on this blog previously as "filler brands." 

I called them this because, as a makeup junkie and *cough* scholar, these brands had no identity to me, nor did I particularly like the products from them that I tried. These brands include:

• Tini Beauty
• Dirty Little Secret (DLS) Cosmetics
• Bang Beauty
• Luna by Luna Cosmetics
• Steve Laurent
• Trestique
• Manna Kadar
• Doucce
• Hikari

To me, all of these are similar because Beauty Boxes, not just Ipsy, seemed flooded with such brands. Brands that don't have much of an online presence. Brands that are both common, yet unknown. 

What is interesting to me is that when a person signs up for Ipsy, or wants to change the kinds of products they are getting in their bag, they take a profile quiz. One section of the quiz asks you to check off which brands you want to try or are familiar with:

Note. NONE of the brands I listed up there are included in the quiz. 

To be fair, this does not necessarily mean Ipsy is being underhanded. Perhaps the logic is- well, if you like/love/are familiar with brand x, you will enjoy brand y. 

Still, I think it speaks to the fact that there is a contrast between promise/specter of established and respected companies versus the prevalence of what feels like pre-fab brands. 

I have NEVER, by the way, received anything by Tom Ford. I have been an ipsy subscriber for 4 years now, and it was never even a possibility. 

Moving on, the reason my focus on the issue of brands has intensified is due to a recent discovery I made regarding two brands: Bang Beauty and Steve Laurent (hmm..a bit of plagiarism). On separate months, Ipsy was sending out blushes by both companies, that was housed in the same compact. 

For the record, I own an eyeshadow by Kiko Milano called Champagne that is also in a compact like this. I think it is common, but, the fact that Blushed and ST had the same compact initiated an investigation/solicitation for help, chronicled on the r/BeautyBoxes subreddit. The link is here. 

I found that the two companies had identical websites, as well as the same ingredients, though slightly different pricing. 

Basically, I learned that it is not just Bang Beauty and ST that are related. There are actually four sister companies, all owned by a Jersey entrepreneur, Emanuela DeFalco: Bang Beauty, Steve Laurent (also not a real person), Dirty Little Secret ( I believe was the starter company), and Luna by Luna Cosmetics (a tad redundant, no?). These are all the same. 

I reached out to ipsy for more info, including the cruelty-free status. They did not answer this part, but stated that both are "independently owned companies." Yes, with the same owner. 

Technically, each is an indie brand, but they don't feel indie to me. None of these products have strong brand identity. Aside from DLS, the products are way too expensive for their ingredients and their packaging. And these brands came from nowhere. 

If DeFalco is getting profit for each of her (separate?) companies based on their partnership with Ipsy, I am sure she is making $$$. 

So, let's bring it back to the issue at hand. The whole point of ipsy is to sample brands and products. But are we really getting variety? And how can ipsy claim a value of a bag, if the products offered by these particular brands are clearly inflated? And yes, as a consumer, it does have a lot to do with the name and styling. And how many more "sister brands" of other companies are there? 

In terms of these random internet brands, I don't see them as permanent. Again, they feel pre-fab. Or, to use another analogy, fast fashion. No brick and mortar distributors, no influencers, nothing.  I couldn't imagine buying something from them off their website, what would motivate me to do so? The only reviews you can find of them are paid advertisements and the ipsy ratings. 

I hate to say this, because it has been a long and interesting road, but the time has come. This sounds obvious now, but Ipsy is no longer fun, especially as I see it now as an ouroboros of marketing and profit. If I want makeup, I want it from brands that are as transparent as they can be, that I like and recognize, and that I find to be reasonable with their prices. 

One trick is determining whether or not a brand is sold anywhere else besides ipsy and their own website. If they have an Amazon page, is sold by Amazon, Sephora, or other stores, then I have trust in the company. 

It is possible that it is early days for this quadruplicate brand. I mentioned this on reddit. Think about Morphe's journey- they went from private labelled, generic products and packaging, to having enough capital to carve out a stronger identity. But again, having these separate companies is strange. Morphe is one. It is possible all four are not going to make it. And not only that, the nature of Morphe's pricing is a lot more appealing to me, though I have never bought from them before. 

I feel like I am rambling now.

Long story short- let the buyer beware when it comes to ipsy. But I do think it's important to be aware of what you need to beware of, in the first place.

Buh-bye!!!!