By now I'm sure you will know what post I am referencing.
Now I'm not here to drag the Blogger in question as she has every right to post her own opinions on the matter, although upon reading the post it was quite apparent that she has a serious problem with Makeup Revolution.
The Blogger used two images in her post to back up her claim that Makeup Revolution are "ripping off" Charlotte Tilbury. One from Makeup Revolution and the other one of her own Charlotte Tilbury lipstick collection, instead I will be using an image from the Charlotte Tilbury website.
Yes it is plain to see that Adam has drawn inspiration from CT... or did he? It only takes a small amount of searching to see that Estee Lauder has also used very similar packaging. So did CT "rip off" EL?
It is also true that if you visit the TAM beauty website you will find an abundance of dupes, but is there really anything wrong in that though?
The Blogger failed to mention that there are other brands out there that also do dupes- and even replicate the packaging to a degree- W7 to name one, are their boxed blushers not very similar to the Benefit boxed blushers?
I believe that they also have dupes of the naked palettes by Urban Decay.
Just recently I have noticed that there are more and more "brands" on instagram selling affordable products- claiming to be dupes, going as far to having the EXACT same packing as the higher end brands.
We see video after video on youtube about "how to spot the fakes" on Ebay, yet sometimes people still believe they are buying the legitimate product for £10 and fall victim to a fake.
I would much rather buy from a brand that I know is known for dupes than some random company who could be selling any old crap.
Something that I don't think this blogger actually thought about properly is the fact that people DO still want to try the latest trends and products but unfortunately not everyone has the funds available to spend £20+ on a lipstick or £30+ on a palette.
The Blogger implies that she doesn't have a problem with dupes- it's more the fact that MUR is "stealing designs" that she doesn't agree with, Yes some of the TAM beauty products are VERY similar to the more expensive counterparts but then there are others that differ- the chocolate bar palettes are obviously a dupe of the Too faced chocolate bar palettes (on another note I think I Heart Makeup have more palettes in their range) but you wouldn't look at them and think they are the same.
I saw an article on Cosmopolitan recently about how Tom Ford are releasing an affordable body spray, in fact the headline is "Finally, the Tom Ford scent you can afford" (the smallest bottle of the Private Blends collection would set you back £99) so I clicked the link because I'm curious, it turns out that TF are launching The Neroli Portfolio Collection of All Over Body Sprays... for £44 each; yes that's right, £44 for an aerosol body spray, clearly the person who wrote this article has much more disposable income than the Average Joe.
Now it is arguable that the demographic for Cosmo readers will be people who have a fairly decent income- yet with Facebook anyone can share posts, so while someone may not even "like" the cosmo facebook page, if a friend shares it then they will see it.
One of the reasons I swear by MUR, is that they have a wide variety of products out there (hell they even have a root touch up powder for your hair!), they are affordable and so what if they bring high end to the high street- I for one appreciate that. And they are actually good quality. I have extremely sensitive skin and not a single product has caused me any troubles.
And anyway, we don't know what Adam has up his sleeves for us, he could have a bunch of brand new MUR exclusive launches lined up that we aren't privy to.
I feel like I have rambled on enough now so I shall end it here.
What is your take on the matter?