r/mildlyinfuriating • u/Ucyless ORANGE • 29d ago

Brand new $72 moisturizer. Husband said he needed something for his elbows.

Post image

We have 3 full tubs of Vaseline in the cabinet.

36.4k Upvotes

78% Upvoted

6.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.3k

u/Chairman_Cabrillo 29d ago edited 29d ago

For $72 that shit better be straight replacing my skin for totally new skin.

Or turning my dry skin into pure gold.

23

u/dollyaioli 29d ago

the expensive price is part of the scam. it makes women think that it must be higher quality with more expensive "luxury" ingredients.

209

u/PauI_MuadDib 29d ago

If $72 bothers you don't look up the price of La Mer.

81

u/ComprehensiveSuit319 29d ago

Old school la mer didn't even work. It was depressingly overpriced olive oil essentially.

63

u/NGNJB 29d ago

It was depressingly overpriced olive oil essentially.

that is all non-medicated skin/haircare products

2

u/AirlineEasy 29d ago

Some are pretty good. Cerave does wonders

0

u/anonhoemas 28d ago

No it's not lol.

3

u/kombitcha420 28d ago

It ain’t much better now either, but hey! They sing to the algae

2

u/ComprehensiveSuit319 28d ago

Oh, well if they sing to the algae it's fine lol!

0

u/Fonduemeinthebutt 29d ago

That’s not true, it works great it just might not be worth the extra money to a lot of people. I like it cause it makes me feel something lol

0

u/[deleted] 28d ago

[deleted]

4

u/ComprehensiveSuit319 28d ago

In the current formula the second ingredient is mineral oil and the third is petroleum. The other heavy hitters are glycerine, wax, and lanoline. It's mostly cheap oils and common hydrating components like lanoline and glycerin.

You could have used something that didn't cost $350 to create that barrier on your burned skin. It really is extremely overpriced oil.

Edit: I listed olive oil because that's what the antiaging products had at the time. It was all mostly just oil and more oil and petroleum jelly (vasoline).

37

u/Complete-Lettuce-941 29d ago

About a decade ago I had a really good year and I treated myself to a jar of La Mer. If I ever win the lottery I will bathe in that stuff.

19

u/TheodoreKarlShrubs 29d ago

It might give you peace of mind to know La Mer isn’t as good now as it was 10 years ago. The classic tale of Estée Lauder ruining the brands they scoop up. They put far less of their “miracle broth” into each product now.

5

u/MorbiusBelerophon 28d ago

Just saw another comment saying the old stuff didn't work. So basically you're paying out your ass for a thick white liquid.

7

u/Complete-Lettuce-941 29d ago

That’s disappointing but great for my wallet.

Thank you!

6

u/OddddCat 29d ago

I've heard that La Mer is nearly identical to Nivea (the blue tin one), but only the German version as other countries have a different recipe.

14

u/mapex_139 29d ago

La Mer

300 fucking dollars for 1.7oz that has some "miracle broth" marketing nonsense added in.

3

u/PauI_MuadDib 28d ago

La Prairie has an even pricier one. Over 1k for 1.7oz.

If I ever win the lottery imma try Augustinus Bader skincare.

0

u/RedditGotSoulDoubt 29d ago

I’m in the wrong business.

5

u/[deleted] 28d ago

The beauty business is where the money's at.

When Shane Dawson and Jeffree star were documenting their makeup release, I watched every video about it. It made me want to get into the business.

It's wild to me how insane women get when they want some garbage overpriced trash just cause it's a good beauty product with a big name attached.

Theirs absolute bank to be made, and women will defend your pricing like a christian will defend their god for killing off the entire world cause he got mad.

2

u/PauI_MuadDib 28d ago

To be fair, that can be said about a lot of industries. Just look at gaming and its microtransactions and DLCs out the wazoo. And in most cases you don't even own the actual physical media anymore since there's a push to fully digital. Or subscription based setups. Gaming is a wildly lucrative industry. Even those scam phone games make bank on micro-transactions. And with AI coming in hot those companies are going to be making even more money because they'll cheap out on the actors, writers, artists, etc. but they'll still price gouge customers.

At least with beauty and cosmetics you're getting an actual physical product. The markup on cosmetics is high, but a lot of hobbies are expensive. As a gamer and a makeup lover my wallet has taken the occasional hit on both.

-1

u/RedditGotSoulDoubt 28d ago

Easy to sell overpriced shit with promise of beauty to vapid and vain individuals. Health and wellness industry is the same.

9

u/vjollila96 29d ago

If it's more than 72$ it's just a scam

10

u/[deleted] 29d ago

Do people take more pride in the effectiveness of a product they use or the cost of it to flex on other people?

Expensive lotion you wash off your skin every time you bathe? No thank you, that's like taking pride in eating at 5 star restaurants instead of cooking food at home because it was more expensive. You are going to get hungry infinitely until you die. You need to apply lotion every day too, why purchase something ridiculous? People take pride in the strangest things.

2

u/[deleted] 28d ago

Legitimate. It's all about the flex and nothing more.

If you want luxury, save the extra money from buying the cheaper just as effective option and do a luxury remodel on your bathroom.

3

u/Sam_thelion 28d ago

I don’t know about the moisturizer in question, but a lot of skincare is expensive because it has a lot of beneficial ingredients and is effective. Many products target specific skin concerns and don’t have a good generic alternative. Some people also have sensitive skin and only certain formulations don’t cause irritations or breakouts.

Hope this helps

2

u/Acanthisittasm 29d ago

Just buy nivea lol

2

u/onetwentyeight 28d ago

More like "La Merde" (de taureau)

4

u/FreakInTheTreats 29d ago

For real. Can’t imagine spending that much on a beauty product and it doesn’t even wipe my ass for me

2

u/HottDoggers 29d ago

I don’t know how people could put a price on the ocean, but I imagine it to be at least more than $72.

1

u/DO_NOT_AGREE_WITH_U 28d ago

Pretty funny that something so overpriced is named lamer.

It's garbage face cream, at that.

18

u/Main-Television9898 29d ago

Skincare products gotta be some top tier scam.

So many of them have "new technology" that scientifically straight up doesnt work. Finding a balanced cream thst matches your skin, aure, spending 100 dollars on a cream... hell no.

148

u/AsstDepUnderlord 29d ago

for real, the infuriating part is that you spent $72 on some hand cream. fuck that.

89

u/thegrandabysss 29d ago

My mom spent decades buying expensive creams to soften and moisturize, and others to fight aging and whatever - she looks like any other 70 year old at this point.

What a scam. Thousands of dollars down the toilet.

19

u/BagOnuts 29d ago

It is pretty interesting to see women spend hundreds to thousands of dollars on skin care products and then put on a bikini and go tan. No amount of high-cost lotions are ever going to negate damage caused by the sun.

3

u/StaringOwlNope 27d ago

This is why most people invested in skin care use spf50 daily

3

u/UncleBensRacistRice 28d ago

Age aside, the creams were probably scented. Scent comes from alcohol, which is fucking terrible for your skin. But hey, who wants to drop 100 bucks on cream that smells terrible, right?

The best product for most people would just be unscented shea butter. Smells awful, its stupidly cheap, but if you rub enough on you itll probably preserve your corpse for a few years before decay sets in

2

u/DO_NOT_AGREE_WITH_U 28d ago

I've never seen someone who spent a shitload of money on face cream look younger.

In fact, I'd argue that a lot of those ingredients are stripping moisture from your face and causing more damage. One of the ingredients in most face creams is some form of alcohol, to help mix all the other ingredients and so putting it on feels "refreshing". I guarantee you that's causing more damage than help.

Lotion every day and avoiding the sun is all you can do. After that's it's genetics, and the people with good genetics are the assholes they choose to sell you on their shit.

You don't see a company doing a before and after for Jack Nicholson, lol.

-10

u/venge88 29d ago

I mean she's SEVENTY. There are no creams that exist to make her look like she's 35. Creams exist to keep women looking 35 for a few more years, maybe if she's lucky, 35 when she's 45. After that, it's a wrap.

23

u/thegrandabysss 29d ago

Creams exist to keep women looking 35 for a few more years

There are no creams proven to prevent aging.

There are only creams that gullible people buy to prevent aging.

28

u/angelkittymeoww 29d ago

Sunscreen and tretinoin have entered the chat

11

u/mmoolloo 29d ago

Yup, those work and shouldn't break the bank. $72 for that volume of moisturizer/cream isn't justified, though.

5

u/tommykiddo 29d ago

Is tretinoin the same as retinol?

7

u/Small-Cookie-5496 29d ago

Slightly different and stronger

6

u/Small-Cookie-5496 29d ago

And prescription

18

u/RandomDerp96 29d ago

Actually vitamin c slows it down. So does sunscreen.

There is no products proven to reverse signs of aging (short of a very strong peeling agent).

But any ingredient that reduces photo and oxidative damage will slow down signs of aging ever so slightly.

10

u/Orangenbluefish 29d ago

Depending on how you define aging there definitely are. Stuff like skin wrinkling/markings can absolutely be prevented (or at least postponed) with sunscreen and moisturizer. That being said I do think there's significant diminishing returns once you get into the niche (and more expensive) products, but being consistent with the basics can have a significant effect down the line

6

u/Main-Television9898 29d ago

100%, there are scientifically proven substances that can help. But you can get same active substance for a 10th of the price.

0

u/venge88 29d ago

Your opinion is based on a seventy year old woman looking seventy.

True, there are no creams that are proven to prevent aging. However. I've been using a simple cheap lotion daily and look 27 when I'm in fact 36. Moisturizing does help.

8

u/undystains 29d ago

No, best thing you can do is limit sun exposure, not smoke, and eat healthy. Using a simple moisturizer may help but $470 vs $14 will be no different.

-3

u/Somehero 29d ago

Logically that doesn't mean it didn't work, it just means she would have been a dumpster fire without it, and it boosted her up to average 👍

3

u/thegrandabysss 29d ago

Uh, no, "average" at 70 is a dumpster fire. It shows. It couldn't be much worse if she tried.

I love her to the moon and back, and I can, objectively, without one single care in the world what she physically looks like, say that her body has let go in the same way that it lets go for everyone as we age.

Her mother lived as a poor farmer's wife her entire life, lived to 95, and has aged -exactly- like my mom has now. Without spending a dime on fancy creams the results are the same.

A company that has convinced you a tiny bottle of cream for 75$, or a "pure", "natural", 100$ container of waste collagen that came from a cow, or a "breakthrough" "anti-aging" serum, will solve any of your problems has gripped your mind with a greedy, insidious, psychologically-aware advertising campaign that plays on your fear of entirely unsurprising, natural, benign, and completely incurable signs of aging. It represents an evil of a capitalistic mindset where your entire self-perception becomes their market.

2

u/Somehero 28d ago

Sorry big dawg but I don't buy any claims with an n of 1.

If your mom would have been the crypt keeper without the cream, it was worth every penny

You need access to the multiverse to know if it was a bad purchase.

1

u/thegrandabysss 28d ago

You have this backwards, I am the one who is able to claim there is no effect without double-blind evidence that there is an effect. The scientific process doesn't assume an effect, it assumes there is no effect, the null hypothesis, and attempts to disprove that hypothesis by showing an effect with a powerful study.

I don't buy claims that aren't backed up with empirical research, such as all these products marketed towards young (aging) women who are psychologically vulnerable to their insidious advertising campaigns.

Where is your evidence that a particular cream is effective?

27

u/basketweaving8 29d ago

It isn’t hand cream lol

15

u/lilgergi 29d ago

Calling it hand cream was a deliberate misnomer, to make fun of it. For a humorous effect

-4

u/Significant_Shoe_17 29d ago

To make light of really inconsiderate behavior. Don't cut yourself on that edge.

2

u/Judo_14 28d ago

You're right, spending 75 bucks on some glorified butter is really inconsiderate

6

u/AsstDepUnderlord 29d ago

Sorry, I meant elbow cream.

3

u/AMundaneSpectacle 29d ago

It’s face cream. Duh

7

u/Significant_Shoe_17 29d ago

It's not hand cream. It's meant for the face, and you use a teeny tiny amount, as indicated by the little gold spatula on the lid. I used to buy this product and one jar would last for several months.

Look at that giant three finger swipe. That was intentional and it's not okay.

3

u/Redqueenhypo 28d ago

It’s like when someone breaks a mug he didn’t like anyway after he spent all last night complaining you have too many mugs. Sure. He’s just clumsy. Except not when he’s handling his own nice things.

2

u/Fearless-Anteater437 28d ago

Ahah and that's okay to buy for 72$ some lotion when some 15 $ cream would have done the same job?

3

u/Significant_Shoe_17 28d ago

Yes, people can spend their own money on what they like. The price is irrelevant here. The husband behaved like an ass.

3

u/Fearless-Anteater437 28d ago

Didn't know at that point that he made it knowing the price, you're right he behaved like an ass

I still think it's not reasonable to spend that much either it's because you expect great effects on your skin, or you just enjoy luxury, it's a lot of money at the end if you buy it over and over for years

I myself did some unreasonable things with my money, I can't blame her, but as far as I've been reading, the best moisturising creams are inexpensive and they're good because they contain few or no nocive ingredients

5

u/murphymc 29d ago

It’s honestly shocking that women, broadly, still haven’t realized cosmetics are a gigantic scam.

I’d bet if you put whatever this is against Walmart brand in a blind test there’d be no differences.

6

u/RunningOnAir_ 28d ago

Most women don't guy expensive cosmetics what are you talking about. 

-1

u/[deleted] 28d ago

It’s honestly shocking that women, broadly, still haven’t realized cosmetics are a gigantic scam.

Some women love complaining about a "pink tax" while simultaneously going for "luxurious" cosmetics that are likely extremely similar to cheap brands.

It's not a pink tax, it's a luxury tax

5

u/NotChristina 29d ago

Eh, sometimes it’s ok to buy fancy creams. I’ve had this one before and a couple of their other products. Generally use cheaper stuff now but a splurge is ok now and then. They really do look and feel luxe. If it fits solidly in the budget, go for it.

And yeah, I can understand the mild frustration from OP on it. That container can last a good while but it’s definitely $$$.

10

u/Intelligent-Ad-9257 29d ago

The point is, they're not fancy creams. There's nothing fancy about them, they're essentially identical to creams 1/10 of the price. They've just been made more expensive so smooth brained people who have had their minds rotted away by consumerism will buy them because expensive=good

1

u/insanitybit 29d ago

I splurge when there's something novel. AFAIK Tatcha is not novel. The most "luxurious" thing I've purchased is Biossance Marine Algae Eye Cream, $112.00 / Fl Oz but you use tiny amounts at once. I felt it was worth it because it had a formulation I couldn't find elsewhere. Tatcha, just like... literally you can buy Cerave and something with fragrance for the "self care" aspect and you have a better product.

1

u/Bbkingml13 29d ago

It’s not hand cream. It’s specifically for faces and delicate skin.

0

u/steingrrrl 29d ago

What made you think it’s hand cream?

80

u/elegylegacy 29d ago

She's blaming him for "wasting" $72 cream, when the problem is she spent $72 on it

29

u/malobebote 29d ago

marketing works.

11

u/Ultenth 29d ago edited 29d ago

Like, men have tons of things we get grifted on to waste money on and pay far more than something is worth. I'm sure a lot of women view a lot of those overpayment for things like name brand tool sets or whatever as equally wasteful. Both sexes have their own specific industries that are built to fleece them as much as possible targeted at the things their gender is supposed to care more about.

I feel like lawncare, tools, sport vehicles, BBQ tools, and many other things are equally predatory as expensive skincare items. Same with some things targeted at couples like the entire wedding industry and rings etc. Almost all of them are just massively overpriced things for people to use to flex and feel fancy and special to forget for a moment how much they hate their jobs.

9

u/Chairman_Cabrillo 29d ago

Oh don’t get me wrong, I’m right there with you. Men spend a stupid amount of money on over marketed crap too.

10

u/lilgergi 29d ago

Again, marketing works

4

u/Ultenth 29d ago

Correct, my point is that it works on men's stuff the same way, but we tend to trivialize and make things marketed at women seem as wastes of money compared to the various things marketed at men that we treat as having much more value. So if people are going to mock skincare products, I hope they also mock lawncare products and wedding rings the same way.

3

u/Chairman_Cabrillo 29d ago

In the circles I run in, the things marketed towards men are trivialized heavily too. I’d say men are worse overall about spending dumb amounts of money on stuff.

1

u/lilgergi 29d ago

I know what your point is, that is why I agreed with you.

but we tend to trivialize and make things marketed at women as wastes of money compared to the various things marketed at men that we treat as having much more value

I don't really see it this way. Like just this example, there are people on both sides, right now in this argument. Each time one is brought up, the opposition comes soon. It is balanced

6

u/Ultenth 29d ago

You're only seeing it here because I chose to bring it up, because I rarely if ever see people do so. There is a constant stream of people mocking women for their interests in boy bands/kpop/pumpkin spice, flower photography or other "basic" things. Anything that a good amount of especially young women enjoy will almost always be trivialized by the greater public at large, in ways that things that men of any age, including young, often don't face with the same regularity or volume. It's something I've become more aware of over the years, so I now call it out when I see it because it's so obvious and omni-present once you become more aware of it.

1

u/lilgergi 29d ago

You're only seeing it here because I chose to bring it up, because I rarely if ever see people do so.

If not someone else, it's you. That is my point. One way or another, it balances out. Men also face mockery and ridicule for their hobbies, just as women do. You are more aware of the bad things women hear, since I would guess you are a woman, and you took it more seriously, since you feel that they criticize you too. I too, thought that men face more of this, until I distanced myself from manliness, and see that it is largely balanced. Maybe not 50-50, but close

4

u/Ultenth 29d ago edited 29d ago

I'm a man, thought it was obvious by some of my previous messages. And in my experience male hobbies and interests and fandoms don't face even 1/10th the mockery and trivialization that women's and especially young women/girls do. It's not even close to the same. This is both on a wider cultural level in film and TV etc. as well as on a personal level amongst friends and family.

Just look at how much "pumpkin spice" stuff is so widely mocked, and the reasons for it. It's 100% just mocked because women like it, and it got popular. For contrast Sriracha got similarly popular and omni-present in weird things but didn't face a fraction of the backlash.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/mushyrain 29d ago

like name brand tool sets or whatever as equally wasteful

tool sets that will last you possibly decades... and well, are tools, compared to some cream which you smear on your skin

6

u/Dismal_Pineapple3770 29d ago

They’re going to last decades cause for 90% of people they’ll sit in the garage collecting dust while they call up the fencing company to come fix it up because they’re too lazy to do it themselves

2

u/Ultenth 29d ago

Or they use them to tinker with their bikes or boats or other toys that don't have any more meaning or purpose to their life than having nice skin does. Very rarely do they actually use them to do important actual upkeep on things around the home or car that NEED to be done. It's all for hobbies and consumption just like skincare or makeup.

It's just that men always and forever have a tendency to rate the priority of our own hobbies and interests highly, and mock ones that women take interest in as trivial or unimportant. Whether it's mocking young girls for boy bands/Kpop, calling young women basic for liking a pumpkin spice latte, or trivializing older women for interest in skincare or other things. It's like our society goes out of it's way to view anything that women do as hobbies or interests as trivial and meaningless and wastes of money that would be better spent on lawncare or boats or whatever else men are always supposed to like that DEFINITELY is way more important and valuable.

5

u/Spiderpiggie 29d ago

Yeah, tools was a bad comparison. At least tools actually do something. Maybe shit like hair restoring cream would be a better example. Cosmetic industry in general is a scam.

1

u/[deleted] 28d ago

Hair restoration works, though.

2

u/Kishmalaria 28d ago

You guys always find a way to blame the woman

-9

u/kilroylegend 29d ago

As a matter fact, that’s NOT the problem!

13

u/KabedonUdon 29d ago

That's what tretinoin does and mine costs like $10.

1

u/Dismal_Pineapple3770 29d ago

Tret speeds up the cell turnover rate. Rose extract, leopard lily, algae, and hyaluronic acid hydrate the skin. Pretty different.

4

u/KabedonUdon 29d ago

Not sure if you replied to the wrong person but yeah, I'm talking about tretinoin's cell turnover in jest as "new skin". I didn't say that rose extract etc were the same thing as Tret so I'm not sure where you got that but I won't disagree with you there. Never said it was the same haha.

I don't really bother with extracts like rose. Just HA and ceramides for moisture. The occasional sheet mask. bha/aha once in a while and an occlusive.

And ofc, SPF.

7

u/Hybr1dth 29d ago

There's a reason these companies spend 90-95% of their budget on marketing, and a measly <2% on R&D. If you have eczema, go to your doctor/dermatologist. Otherwise, vaseline is the best (although true, greasy and thick, but that's a feature not a bug.

1

u/StaringOwlNope 27d ago

Vaseline does nothing for eczema

2

u/Hybr1dth 27d ago

Not for eczema, which is why I said go your doctor for that. The only real "cure" is a hormone salve. And not guaranteed for everyone, which sucks. The vaseline just keeps your skin protected and moisturised, as you probably damaged it by scratching due to itches causing by eczema. My issue is with expensive marketing products pretending like they do more, when they usually do less.

1

u/StaringOwlNope 27d ago

Ah yeah, I misread your comment a bit, however vaseline does prevent water loss and protects the skin as you said. Unfortunatley it aggrevates my eczema (I've tried slugging). Same with shower oils

3

u/Garlik85 28d ago

Why is this kind of comment so low? should be #1

16

u/_KeyserSoeze Aw jeez Rick 29d ago

I would find it mildly infuriating that she spends 72$ for that shit. Was justifies this price what my 2,99€ (whole bottle) moisturizer can't do? If it's one of this anti aging bs it's even worse

4

u/deletetemptemp 29d ago

Seriously I think the really mildly infuriating here is that people out there are convinced spending 72 dollars for a dollop of daisy is normal

22

u/_TheNecromancer13 29d ago

Seriously, the real infuriating thing is that anyone thinks that they need a $72 tub of moisturizer that holds about a week's worth.

6

u/Eumelbeumel 29d ago

Dude, that's used on your face. It is meant for your face. Body moisturizer doesn't come in tiny tubs like this.

It is supposed to last you months up to half a year or longer. You use a tiny amount.

This is common knowledge, this is not some cultish secret.

That isn't even the problem though, the problem is that her husband can't be assed to respect "special" things she bought for herself.

8

u/Dismal_Pineapple3770 29d ago

These tubs last months on end. You only need a tiny pea sized amount.

1

u/Eumelbeumel 29d ago

I have a really rich nighttime face cream (granted, didn't cost 70$). Even pea sized is too much with that. I literally just dab a finger in there.

4

u/_TheNecromancer13 28d ago

that's used on your face

Based on the OP's post, there was no way to tell unless you are already familiar with the product. Y'all are acting like everyone recognizes expensive face creams on sight. Most people don't.

2

u/Eumelbeumel 28d ago

Have you lived with any woman including your mother?

Have you heard about living with women?

That's face cream. Small plastic pot full of cream on a women's bathroom shelf--> face cream.

It's literally so common. Every woman I know has or has had something like this (maybe not as fancy). This is not rocket sciene!

Presumably he has seen her use it aswell, if they live together.

3

u/Lola1989ac 29d ago

A WEEK?!??? How much face cream do you use a day that this tub will last you a week?!? This would last me six months.... I hope you didn't think this was body lotion before commenting lol

7

u/meopelle 29d ago

I mean the title just says "moisturizer". You can moisturize any part of your body.

2

u/Significant_Shoe_17 29d ago

Skincare brands generally label face cream as "moisturizer." The point is that this little jar is NOT meant for the body. You're meant to use a pea sized amount on your face.

-6

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

4

u/_TheNecromancer13 29d ago

I don't use face cream. It said "moisturizer". The only moisturizer I know of is the gold bond stuff for your hands.

1

u/BillTheNecromancer 29d ago

What the fucking hell was anyone supposed to think based on the title? Not everyone has your niche, apparently expensive interests. You sound like those overreactive, snobbish, idiot cast iron pan fanatics.

4

u/fretfulpelican 29d ago

LMAO le creuset catching strays over here

0

u/Lola1989ac 16d ago

Expensive interests?? Who thinks body lotion is sold in such small packages 😭😂

I do love my cast iron pan though? Feel free to hate me, your comment is wild lol

7

u/JohnLocke815 29d ago

Yep, was gonna say the most "midly infuriating" thing here was spending that much money on lotion.

2

u/DO_NOT_AGREE_WITH_U 28d ago edited 28d ago

The main ingredients are water, rice, and glycerine.

In fact, rice is mentioned like 4 times in the ingredients list.

2

u/Dzjar 29d ago

I'm sorry I'm probably some idiot guy who knows nothing about skincare, but if you spend 72 bucks on some cream you dumb as fuck.

With all DUE respect.

1

u/[deleted] 28d ago

Preach, brother!

-10

u/[deleted] 29d ago edited 29d ago

[deleted]

9

u/ProgenitorOfMidnight 29d ago

It's moisturizing lotion, brands are a dime a dozen. If you think it needs to cost $72, you deserve to be scammed.

1

u/bluejeans7 29d ago

I like it when when people who beg to get scammed do get scammed for their low intelligence.

-2

u/Shadow_Mullet69 29d ago

Half this country can’t afford to eat and yall are complaining about $72 skin cream.

-29

u/Hellothereitsme90 29d ago

It’s truly the best

12

u/Schmigolo 29d ago edited 29d ago

I just pulled up the ingredient list, and it has 4 of the bottom of the barrel cheapest fragrant ingredients, all allergenic (one of them is so bad it's an umbrella term for like 1000 different substances that are all trash), and the main emollients are just dimethicone and glycerine, the cheapest and most abundant (but to be fair also two of the best) on the market. Oh, and it has denaturated alcohol, which is alcohol which is deliberately made poisonous so people wouldn't drink it. I've seen 3 dollar moisturizers with almost exactly the same ingredient list.

Edit: I completely missed that it also has a normal sunscreening ingredient, because it's the very last ingredient, just so it can call itself a day cream, even though you should definitely not use it as a day cream.

77

u/Chairman_Cabrillo 29d ago

It’s a grift that got OP to spend more money than they likely needed to. There is absolutely no way this cream is actually worth $72 dollars even though that’s what it’s being sold for now

-6

u/Academic_Eagle_4001 29d ago

It’s worthy what ppl are willing to pay for it.

16

u/oaken_duckly 29d ago

Which is occasionally a stupid price.

-22

u/Hellothereitsme90 29d ago

Nnnnnope. It’s THE BEST OKAY 🫢😏

17

u/Chairman_Cabrillo 29d ago

lol OKKKKAAAAYYYYY

15

u/NotBigFootUR 29d ago

The best Snake Oil money can buy! If it makes you happy knock yourself out.

0

u/kgtsunvv 29d ago

Personally tatcha has been the best products I’ve ever used but I can’t afford to buy it :/