Glossybox - June 2013

[FormosaHoney]

Quote: Originally Posted by evildrporkchop /img/forum/go_quote.gif


To be fair, I find all personal blogs to be self aggrandizing in varying degrees.

And while I don't appreciate the timing of the objection over the polishes being sold (again, assuming that this was actually the case), I'm wondering if Bondi was willing to compensate her for the use of her signature and illustration on the bottles. If they weren't and so much as balked at the suggestion, then I do see where she's coming from.
Quote: Originally Posted by MoiSurtout /img/forum/go_quote.gif

So not even an apology... I wasn't aware she had a brand, but at least now I know what to avoid. 

I agree with many people's take on Shaw's dispositioin.  

Without further information, from a busiess perfective Bondi's investing $50,000 of products and I personally don't believe that her curation hours, branding cache and projected loyalty fees matches Bondi's investment.  

 The fallout for her brand is bad.  Even if Bondi refused any loyalty, the exposure that the "Shaw" brand would have received through Bondi's broader distribution channel would have been invaluable for Ms. Shaw and her brand, because at this point the Bondi brand is stronger then the Shaw brand, IMHO.  Again, without addition information on the public's part, I think her lawyer had to make a tough call in support of Shaw's presumed "branding cache" and it came back unfavorably.

For me its a valuable lesson in Marketing 101 /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />...

 

I am still excited for the box(es) though!!

     But please, please no orange, me no creamsicle...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MaiteS]

i will actually use everything in the box so im really pleased with it - to me it looks great even with the switch. i dont own a polish from that company but i know its a good one. hoping the boxes get sent out at least next week!

 

[AshJs3]

I'm pretty excited for the box now that we see what's in it. I think the fallout over the Bondi polish is unfortunate, but I'm not going to blame anyone for that. In situations like this it's usually "your version, my version, and the truth falls somewhere in the middle." The illustration is way cute and I'm excited to try everything! Sounds like a win for me!

 

[princess2010]

I like the spoiler. It looks good to me! I wonder if there are variations?
 

 

[FormosaHoney]

Quote:
Originally Posted by AshJs3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

I'm pretty excited for the box now that we see what's in it. I think the fallout over the Bondi polish is unfortunate, but I'm not going to blame anyone for that. In situations like this it's usually "your version, my version, and the truth falls somewhere in the middle."
I like your optimism, don't have a whole lot today, applying for jobs is stressful...  Could I borrow a cup of that?

Originally Posted by princess2010 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

I like the spoiler. It looks good to me! I wonder if there are variations?
 

Oh golly-mosses I really hope so!

 

 

 

 

[page5]

Originally Posted by princess2010 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

I like the spoiler. It looks good to me! I wonder if there are variations?

From the spoiler pic it appears that

the hair item will vary and the polish color and the lip color. 

 

[sldb]

Originally Posted by AshJs3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm pretty excited for the box now that we see what's in it. I think the fallout over the Bondi polish is unfortunate, but I'm not going to blame anyone for that. In situations like this it's usually "your version, my version, and the truth falls somewhere in the middle."

 

[Tiffany27la]

I like the spoiler. It looks good to me! I wonder if there are variations? I KNOW!! It's killing me!!! I want to know if there are variations, too!!!  

 

[evildrporkchop]

Originally Posted by FormosaHoney /img/forum/go_quote.gif



I agree with many people's take on Shaw's dispositioin.  

Without further information, from a busiess perfective Bondi's investing $50,000 of products and I personally don't believe that her curation hours, branding cache and projected loyalty fees matches Bondi's investment.  

 The fallout for her brand is bad.  Even if Bondi refused any loyalty, the exposure that the "Shaw" brand would have received through Bondi's broader distribution channel would have been invaluable for Ms. Shaw and her brand, because at this point the Bondi brand is stronger then the Shaw brand, IMHO.  Again, without addition information on the public's part, I think her lawyer had to make a tough call in support of Shaw's presumed "branding cache" and it came back unfavorably.

For me its a valuable lesson in Marketing 101 /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />...

 
I am still excited for the box(es) though!!

     But please, please no orange, me no creamsicle...

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's the nature of business, no? Not all investments are good investments and no one should go into business thinking their losses can always be recouped.

You may think the Bondi brand is stronger than Shaw, but I don't see it that way. I had never heard of Bondi until their involvement with GB, but I did know of Shaw. She's done illustrations for some pretty major brands. After all, there are a ton of nail polish companies not so many known fashion illustrators. It's all relative. And again, it's important to consider that if a company stood to make money off of your name and your work, I'm sure you'd want to be proportionally compensated for it. It's not greed, it's just good business accuity.

 

[OiiO]

Originally Posted by princess2010 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

I like the spoiler. It looks good to me! I wonder if there are variations?

From what I gathered, there will be variations of the 

shampoo (based on the hair type), nail polish colors, and the shade of tarte lipstick.

 

[deactivateduser232015]

Originally Posted by FormosaHoney /img/forum/go_quote.gif



I agree with many people's take on Shaw's dispositioin.  

Without further information, from a busiess perfective Bondi's investing $50,000 of products and I personally don't believe that her curation hours, branding cache and projected loyalty fees matches Bondi's investment.  

 The fallout for her brand is bad.  Even if Bondi refused any loyalty, the exposure that the "Shaw" brand would have received through Bondi's broader distribution channel would have been invaluable for Ms. Shaw and her brand, because at this point the Bondi brand is stronger then the Shaw brand, IMHO.  Again, without addition information on the public's part, I think her lawyer had to make a tough call in support of Shaw's presumed "branding cache" and it came back unfavorably.

For me its a valuable lesson in Marketing 101 /emoticons/[email protected] 2x" width="20" height="20" />...

 
I am still excited for the box(es) though!!

     But please, please no orange, me no creamsicle...

 

 

 

 

 

 
Actually, the Bondi vs. Shaw agreement is pretty surface-level. Regardless of who was being unreasonable between the two of them in negotiations, the fallout is on Glossybox's shoulders, and it should've been their responsibility to mediate the discussions in the first place. Not only is it hurting their brand because they promised something (highly touted) to their subscribers and are failing to deliver, but it's extremely harmful to their brand in the sense that they are setting a pattern for making it difficult for other brands to work with them. I highly doubt Bondi is going to work with them in another box, and I'm not sure Shaw will want to be associated with this afterwards because it has been damaging to her brand, since it has made her seem unreasonable and malicious. Brands are going to be wary now because they might have to worry about whether they'll come out with damage to their own brands.

I mean it's easy to say it's not GB's fault because they are not directly party to the disagreement, but GB is their brand and their customers, and they've had and continue to have a bad habit of pushing off responsibility. If the Bondi-GB collaboration has been in the works since March, and Shaw was introduced later,why didn't GB ask if there was any stipulation to them working together? I'm guessing the issue was Bondi using her illustrations for the bottle, which in terms of copyright and royalty could be a thing, but then why didn't GB ask Shaw, "Hey, would it be cool if they used your illustrations on their bottles? Do you require royalty for that?" If did a better job at anticipating problems, maybe they should've pushed one of the collaborations to next month. Or, you know, not have the Bondi polish bottles have her design printed in the first place. This is GB's project. Bondi-Shaw probably never would've interacted it it weren't for them. The Bondi-Shaw collaboration is a Bondi-->GB<--Shaw collaboration, and since GB brought them together, it was supposed to be GB's responsibility to make sure it went smoothly the entire time it was happening.

Not trying to bum out anyone who's still getting the box 'cause it looks awesome, but geez, GB. Really needs to get it together. 

 

[FormosaHoney]

Originally Posted by evildrporkchop /img/forum/go_quote.gif


That's the nature of business, no? Not all investments are good investments and no one should go into business thinking their losses can be recouped.

You may think the Bondi brand is stronger than Shaw, but I don't see it that way. I had never heard of Bondi until their involvement with GB, but I did know of Shaw. She's done illustrations for some pretty major brands. After all, there are a ton of nail polish companies not so many known fashion illustrators. It's all relative. And again, it's important to consider that if a company stood to make money off of your name and your work, I'm sure you'd want to be proportionally compensated for it. It's not greed, it's good business accuity.

 

 
Nice come back!  Yeah, I'm going to eat my words now with a nice dousing of maple syrup, just read the following...  

Launched in 2013, Bondi New York is a collection of twenty fashion forward colors that are five free (formaldehyde, formaldehyde resin, camphor, toluene and DBP). Based out of New York, our brand is American made with all of the net profits going to our non-profit foundation which supports a wide variety of charitable causes throughout the United States.

The Shaw brand has been around longer and she'd done illustrations and deigns for some of the industry most respected fashion house. 

 

 
I wonder who their non-profit foundation is?

 

[Tiffany27la]

Actually, the Bondi vs. Shaw agreement is pretty surface-level. Regardless of who was being unreasonable between the two of them in negotiations, the fallout is on Glossybox's shoulders, and it should've been their responsibility to mediate the discussions in the first place. Not only is it hurting their brand because they promised something (highly touted) to their subscribers and are failing to deliver, but it's extremely harmful to their brand in the sense that they are setting a pattern for making it difficult for other brands to work with them. I highly doubt Bondi is going to work with them in another box, and I'm not sure Shaw will want to be associated with this afterwards because it has been damaging to her brand, since it has made her seem unreasonable and malicious. Brands are going to be wary now because they might have to worry about whether they'll come out with damage to their own brands. I mean it's easy to say it's not GB's fault because they are not directly party to the disagreement, but GB is their brand and their customers, and they've had and continue to have a bad habit of pushing off responsibility. If the Bondi-GB collaboration has been in the works since March, and Shaw was introduced later,why didn't GB ask if there was any stipulation to them working together? I'm guessing the issue was Bondi using her illustrations for the bottle, which in terms of copyright and royalty could be a thing, but then why didn't GB ask Shaw, "Hey, would it be cool if they used your illustrations on their bottles? Do you require royalty for that?" If did a better job at anticipating problems, maybe they should've pushed one of the collaborations to next month. Or, you know, not have the Bondi polish bottles have her design printed in the first place. This is GB's project. Bondi-Shaw probably never would've interacted it it weren't for them. The Bondi-Shaw collaboration is a Bondi-->GB<--Shaw collaboration, and since GB brought them together, it was supposed to be GB's responsibility to make sure it went smoothly the entire time it was happening. Not trying to bum out anyone who's still getting the box 'cause it looks awesome, but geez, GB. Really needs to get it together. 

I totally agree

 

[FormosaHoney]

[No message]

 

[sparklesgirlxox]

It sounds to me that Bondi wanted to sell the polish shaw was designing  She was desigining it for glossybox not for bondi. Bondi was putting there polish in glossybox so people could get to know there brand with her art or without her art. If someone liked the polish they could go to the bondi website and buy the polish . I do not see why they needed her art work to sell polish after someone liked it in glossybox;. Seems like they had bad communication. Seems like glossybox didn't mediate well with them. Also sounds like Dallas Shaw ( never heard of her before this) has a very inflated image of herself. She is not so famous that if bondi did sell her polish with her design it would be good publicity  for her I feel. In anycase if bondi did include there polish it would be the same publicity for them with or without dallas shaws designs. I somewhat do not understand why they backed out. The replacement brand is a good brand though

 

[Heather Hicks]

Originally Posted by MaiteS /img/forum/go_quote.gif

i will actually use everything in the box so im really pleased with it - to me it looks great even with the switch. i dont own a polish from that company but i know its a good one. hoping the boxes get sent out at least next week!

Seriously! As soon as I get a shipping notice, I will probably cancel my account. I'm trying to hold off until then.

 

[Heather Hicks]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth Mac /img/forum/go_quote.gif

From my personal experience, I was supposed to get a free model co. lipgloss once and they forgot to include it. When I emailed Glossybox about it, I was mailed one within about a week.

Also, I think it's normal for your June box to still say "pending" since they haven't started shipping out boxes.  

Yeah, and if ever they are likely to forget to include an extra, it would be this month, right?! LOL That's another reason I'm hesitating about cancelling. If I have to contact customer service, I figure they'll be a whole lot nicer if I'm still subscribed. Thanks for letting me know about your gloss Elizabeth.

 

[Heather Hicks]

Originally Posted by FormosaHoney /img/forum/go_quote.gif

 
I am still excited for the box(es) though!!

     But please, please no orange, me no creamsicle...

 

 

 

 

 

 
Me too. Excited, but HATE that orange polish. When, oh when, will this orange fad die already?!?!  

 

[SnowLeopard]

I feel like this was a failure of a colab box. Birchbox used to do good colab boxes and I like the Starboxes bc they actually have a MUA create a signature look with the products in the box. Maybe GB should've asked Dallas Shaw to contribute to the Glossy Mag, but her curating a box doesn't make sense to me she's not a MUA or a celebrity. She's not even popular enough to get GB more subscribers, she has less than 5,000 twitter followers. I'm sick of these bloggers and style gurus or whatever they call themselves with Kanye egos, just get over yourself.

 

[ewiggy]

Regardless of what we all think happened.. What we know happened is that Dallas Shaw signed a contract to do X, and then at the 11th hour tried to renegotiate the terms of the contract, which made Bondi uncomfortable enough to need to remove themselves from the collaboration.  And rightfully so, IMO.  If someone started sounding like they were going to try to pull a weird last-minute switcheroo on me, I'd get out too. 

This was a Dallas Shaw and Glossybox failure.  You don't sign a contract and then later on decide you don't like it anymore.  

I'm over Glossybox. 2 months in and it's already too much drama for me, lol.