We frequently get questions about which company owns what product in the beauty biz. It`s hard to keep track without a score card because all the big companies keep buying up all the little ones! In the past, we`ve written about the brands of corporate giants P&G and L`Oréal. (Want to be surprised? Follow the links to see who owns your favorite brands)
Well, here`s the latest news: L`Oreal has gobbled up the PureOlogy brand. This luxury American brand is sold through professional hairdressers and is known for its range of sulfate free shampoos. (By the way, you can click here if you want to learn about our cheap way to experiment with sulfate free shampoos.)
Only time will tell if, and how, L`Oreal plans to change this popular salon brand. Do any of our loyal Beauty Brainiacs us PureOlogy? Let us know what you think.
Loading ...
moneysmith Says:
I used PureOlogy shampoo for a long time and liked it a lot. Very nice for keeping color true and for not drying out hair.
KAOSINLA Says:
First item listed in the Pureology shampoos and conditioners is now water (not as concentrated anymore) and there is other ingredients changed and missing. I’m done with Pureology!!!
thebeautybrains Says:
Pureology is now just following the rules that everyone else in the industry is supposed to be following. If water is not the first ingredient listed in a shampoo it is either a powdered shampoo or it is mislabeled.
KAOSINLA Says:
Look like someone else isn’t satisfied.
Courtesy of Foilgirl:
We just got our shipment in today and did anyone else notice that the first item listed in the Pureology shampoos and conditioners is now water? Crazy how Loreal buys them and the first thing they do is “water down” the product (but not the price). Our loyal Pureology clients loved the fact that there was no water in the shampoos/conditioners because the product was so concentrated. It was also a major selling point - to many clients it justified the $24 they were spending on that bottle. They knew they were spending it on “pure” product - they really liked the first ingredient listed being certified botanical extracts of… I also noticed the addition of a few new ingredients i.e. in the volume shampoo lactic acid and mushroom extract and the ylang ylang is now missing. I didn’t really get a chance to look over the whole line to see what else changed (the hydrate shampoo changed too but I was limited on time). This is really disheartening, guess I’ll have to switch my Pureology clients over to something else because it no longer is a unique product.
ditching pureology Says:
Pureology isn’t so pure anymore! Just read for yourself…Our color salon is in agreement with your other responses/comments. The major selling point (of the original pureology) was the certified organic botanicals of pure ingredients. Now owned by Loreal, Those first 3 or 4 pure ingredients are no longer the first 3 or 4 (if at all in the list of ingredients.) There is no way Pureology will ever be what it once was. The consistency of the product (as well as the color) has changed too. With other “sulfate free” products growing in the industry, there are now many choices to choose from (since pureology can no longer “top” these without their pure ingredients. Pureology will hit the road in our upscale salon in NY! You can be sure that we will be sharing these changes that have been made to the consumer!
thebeautybrains Says:
You’ve got to understand that prior to L’Oreal buying Pureology, Pureology was essentially lying to their customers. They were mislabeling their products to make you think that there was more organic botanicals than there really were. L’Oreal, being a big company, is not allowed to get away with such tricks else they would get sued.
Amy Says:
I have been using and selling Pureology for 2 1/2 years. As of recently the ingredients have changed. (not as many botanical oils listed) The moisturizing properties are definitely not the same! I still have some old bottles at home, and the difference is definitely noticeable. Some of my clients have even come to me and asked if something has changed. I just recently found out about the recent sale to L’oreal and I can’t say I’m pleased with the changes being made to the ingredients.
KAOSINLA Says:
After many comparisons from the old to new forumla, the consensus is Pureology has changed for the worse. And on a side note, Nanoworks isn’t worth the cost either. Pureology is now officially filed into the growing list of very good manufacturers that were bought by L’Oreal and turned average i.e. Pure Hair, Artec, Aveda, etc. It’s not a coincidence that once these companies were bought, consumers started complaining they weren’t as good and without prior knowledge of the buyouts. You can always trust word on the street.
KAOSINLA Says:
I would love to know the concrete proof that Pureology was lying to it’s consumers. You can say that at the present time now that the original co. doesn’t exist anymore, but to do so without proof would be libel. Truth is the FDA doesn’t regulate the cosmetic industry besides color additives and blacklisted ingredients, so L’Oreal, just like other companies, can basically put what they want in the ingredients list within reason.
Based on your statement “Since L`Oreal is a much bigger company they tend to play by the rules that all the big companies are held to. In the end, this is better for the consumer because you`re getting more truth. Instead of being upset with L`Oreal, you should be thankful that they`re labeling the products honestly.
And by the way, since L`Oreal has a much larger research staff than Pureology, any formula changes they made are probably for the better!”
It seems you are biased towards L’Oreal and away from the needs and experiences of the consumers.
Left Brain Says:
Perhaps ‘lying’ is a bit harsh as we can’t be sure of their intention. Although we didn’t say they were lying. A better explanation might be ‘incompetence’.
You have a good point, we do tend to have a bias towards bigger companies. It’s just that they are more likely to spend money on R&D and less likely to have labeling ‘incompetence’.
If water isn’t the first ingredient on your shampoo label, the product is mislabeled. The only exceptions would be powdered shampoos.
KAOSINLA Says:
I definitely agree that water should be listed first as this is just fact. In addition, “incompetence” or something synonymous to this is much better than “essentially lying” or statements trying to determine intent. Thank you for correcting that.
Also, I agree that larger corp.’s have a much more hefty budget for R&D expenses and can usually produce better products, but in L’Oreal’s case it seems they choose to buy the name and/or company to boost their bottom line and remove competition, rather than with the intent to improve or sustain the effectiveness of the products. One of the means of profitability is to cut manufacturing costs.
Hands-on experience from many users notice a considerable change in effectiveness of products once acquired by L’Oreal in a somewhat defacto blind test. With Pureology, Artec, and Aveda, the new and old could and can easily be distinguished by viscosity alone (Pure Hair disappeared entirely so no comparison could be made). From this point, it’s all downhill.
Basically, all I’m saying is that it is no coinicidence that consumers, beauty suppliers, and salons all see a downward spiral of satisfaction once L’Oreal consumes a niche company in the hair care category.
Left Brain Says:
You could be right about L’Oreal. Of all the big companies, their products score the lowest in our blinded lab evaluations.
It actually makes sense that they would take a small brand that appeals to a small audience (Pureology only sold about $50 million a year) and try to create one that appeals to a larger audience. Big companies want brands that sell $500 million a year. This often requires changing the formula to be acceptable to more people.
Incidentally, you are mistaken about L’Oreal acquiring and considerably changing the performance of the following brands: Artec & Aveda
L’Oreal doesn’t own those brands.
They do own
Garnier
Kerastase
Matrix
Redken
Kiehl’s
La Roche-Posay
Lancome
KAOSINLA Says:
I believe you’re right on target for formula changes for the masses. I don’t like it, but unfortunately it’s a fact in many industries. I just wish prices reflected the changes.
But I digress - From the Press release:
In August 2002, “L’Oreal, the world’s leading cosmetic company, today announced the acquisition of ARTec Systems Group, Inc. by L’Oreal’s wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, L’Oreal USA. Terms of the transaction have not been announced.”
“Headquartered in Long Island, New York and founded in 1990 by Mr. Leland Hirsch and Mr. Michael Mazzei, ARTec markets hair care and hair color products for the professional salon industry. Among the company’s brands are ARTec Color Deposit System, Textureline, Purehair, Kiwi and Enamels, all of which are used and sold exclusively through authorized distributors to beauty salons.”
However, I stand corrected, Estee Lauder was the co. to acquire Aveda in Dec. 1997. Fortunately, their coloring system still works effectively.
Left Brain Says:
Yes, you are correct L’Oreal does still own ARTec. They just don’t publicize it on their website so they may be trying to let the brand die.
I don’t understand why you thought Aveda’s products were bad when you believed that L’Oreal owned them but when you found out it was Estee Lauder you thought the products were good.
KAOSINLA Says:
In referring to Aveda, I mentioned that their coloring products still are effective (dye, toner, etc.) not the FULL product line. Their shampoos, conditioners, and etc. did and do still suffer.
arayofhope Says:
You guys, L’Oreal only bought PureOlogy a few months ago. There is absolutely no way that anything that you have on your shelves was actually manufactured by L’Oreal yet.
I work in the manufacturing industry and know that the packaging changes were to meet international packaging standards, which are much more restrictive that US packaging standards. That means that all ingredients must be listed in order of concentration. So, the certified organic botanicals could no longer be listed as such. They had to be listed by their concentration of water and their binomial nomenclature.
You may feel that some of their claims were false, but everyone’s belief that somehow the product is all of the sudden worse means that you are all probably victims of a placebo effect.
Left Brain Says:
Arayofhope, I don’t know about all the packaging standards around the world but I do know that the US, Canada, and EU accept the nomenclature as laid out in the CTFA’s INCI dictionary. In this way they are not more restrictive than the US.
Ingredients do not exactly have to be listed in order of concentration. Anything over 1% in the formula has to be listed this way but 1% and below can be in almost any order they want.
What is a “binomial nomenclature”?
Elana B Says:
Stop being selfish here people and
think of the innocent animals…
How is a cruel company, in the ‘dark ages’ to animal rights, like L’Oreal which supports and promotes cruelty to animals by having their products tested on animals?
This isn’t a pleasant or humane process.
How is an effective product like Pureology going to be affected by the change to L’Oreal, since the Pureology brand is a product that ‘does not test on animals’ and in this sense, is cruelty free by supporting animal rights.
What is going on here? I really enjoy using Pureology products and am happy of their choice to be cruelty-free. I would like Pureology to be managed by a supporter of animal rights and even more for L’Oreal to step up and not disrespect, abuse and kill by suffering animals when there are ways to test products using humane methods.
Think about it people and smarten up! Animals do not need to be abused and in pain for our own selfish needs when there are indeed alternatives readily available to choose from.
Companies need to put their egos in check and selfishness aside and go for it! The animals need you and customers willing to buy and support your products need you no less!
EcoPretty Says:
Yep. Primary ingredient is now water–no more organic botanicals as the first 3 ingredients in their shampoos and conditioners. I used to LOVE this line. Now, I’m disgusted. Looks like my new HG shampoo will be Aveda’s Color Conserve (which I’ve been using recently and really like)
katrina Says:
I think its a pretty big coincendence that the formula label changed and it showed up in retail stores at the same time it got bought out by Loreal. Now they will only be concerned with the big picture, not the little guys…im having a hard time ordering it in right now at my salon!!
SalonColorist Says:
Ha Ha Ha, Ya’ll are killing me! This blog has gone from Loreal spending millions on Purology just to water it down and kill it, to Loreal is the anti-christ killing animals. Loreal had to quit animal testing to acquire Redken thanks to Paula Kent-Mehan. She would not sell the company unless they agreed to it. Loreal is a giant in the beauty industry because it diversified and is trying to conquer all segments of it. Whether it’s the OTC market, Professional market, or super luxury market. Take advantage of the deep pockets that have been given to Purology and capitalize on their marketing. Loreal has done more to help increase the standards in the beauty industry than anyother company. It’s ashame so many of us are to dang pig headed to realize it. OOPS, I guess I have a bias.
Salon owner of 16+yrs Says:
I will never purchase Pureology again. I am very upset with the line itself, and have witnessed the changes. My clients have been complaining on the product which leads me to believe they are “The ultimate Judge”.
christiane Says:
why is it that neither the LOreal website nor the PureOlogy site mentions that LOreal bought them?
VeroniqueBalet Says:
I found this link to the Pureology site answering some of the questions related to formula changes. This says that the formulas have not been altered since L’oreal purchased the line in May 2007, and explains why the ingredient lists have changed. Check it out here:
http://www.pureology.com/nochanges/faq.html
Karen Says:
I only just started using it. Maybe it isn’t as good as it was, but it is still the least amount of product I ever had to use to get good, creamy lather and it is the only shampoo conditioner I’ve used that I could tell a real difference. The nano glaze is great. It really is stupidly priced, but I bought it, so I must think it is worth the money.
Fake Hair Facts - Answers to Beauty Science Poll 27 | The Beauty Brains Says:
[...] store brands also make salon brands. For example, P&G owns Frederick Fekkai. L’Oreal owns Pureology. Save money by buying store brand hair products instead of [...]
Jaynelle Says:
I have used Pureology for about 3 years, and loved it! I am very disapointed that they were bought out…
But…I found a new one that is comparable (and maybe even better!) The salon I get my hair done at is going to start carrying it instead of Pureology. its called Kevin Murphy, and its from Australia. Its amazing! She used this stuff called Angel Wash and Angel Rinse on my hair, and it was so soft and silky I couldnt stop touching it! it is also sulfate free…Antways, give it a try if you come accross it
hairicari Says:
To Jaynelle: That’s not “Kevin Murphy” but “Kusco-Murphy.” While I am glad you seem to be enjoying it, K-M is hardly comparable to PureOlogy. Sure, they have recently reformulated many of their shampoos to be “sulfate-free,” but they do not have a color care focus, nor are they organic or vegan, and there are many questionable ingredients in this line.
In all the literature I have on Kusco-Murphy, from their very own representative, the word “organic” is absent. In talking to my rep, she claims they are an organic line, but feel that is not their market and they don’t want to promote it that way. Doesn’t it seem preposterous that a company could toot it’s organic horn, yet would choose not to in this day and age? Or perhaps something is awry there….
To the Stylists: It is not easy to find high performance, professional, organic salon products. PureOlogy delivers–yes, I’m still a fan, but I do get what you all are saying about it feeling different, only I’m not as critical– however, they are in no way pure. There is a certain degree of sophistication to the new Green Breed of consumers, and there are plenty of ingredients in PureOlogy that they still refuse to be exposed to. Could there be a perfect professional product out there? We need something PURE!
Good luck to all the Cosmetologists in their struggle with the L’Oreal purchase. It isn’t fun for me either, but none of my clients have noticed any changes and I’ll continue to use it and carry it at my salon. Meanwhile, I think we should all hold the industry to much higher standards, and I am continually looking for increasing quality and safety in our field.
hairicari Says:
To Jaynelle and everyone:
Well, SHUT MY MOUTH– I am SO SORRY I so quickly jumped to the conclusion that you had the name of your own shampoo wrong! I am so embarrassed that I knew nothing about Kevin Murphy, so when I saw that it came out of Australia, as does Kusco-Murphy, I put in my two cents’ worth. Please accept my sincere apology.
I came across their website just now and want to thank you for leading me to a new eco-minded product. I couldn’t find a list of their ingredients anywhere, or much about their philosophy,but it looks like a worthwhile endeavor to find out more. If anyone has any info or experience with it, I could obviously use some education! ;O)
Again, I am so sorry to be so ignorant and outspoken at the same time!