http://www.pinktruth.com

To say I'm stunned that Touch of Pink lost on all issues would be an understatement. The history of the case can be found in articles here. The verdict in the case is here. UPDATE: There is a chance that the judge could go against this jury verdict, and Touch of Pink could still be victorious. (Don't count on it, though. There's little chance  it will go that way.)

This is a huge blow to consultants, whether they realize it or not. Mary Kay now has the power to dictate exactly who you may or may not sell your products to. Once you purchase them from Mary Kay, they aren't really yours to do with as you please. Mary Kay can tell you who you can sell to.

This is obviously also a blow to inventory liquidators. Even though Touch of Pink made it clear that they were simply resellers of Mary Kay products, it's now been decided that they were "creating confusion" in the marketplace (Really? By saying "we're not affiliated with MK"?) and that they were "passing off" (Really? By stating that the products they sold were genuine MK products, which they in fact were?). 

How sad for Touch of Pink. How sad for consultants. Run for your lives, women. Don't deal with this corrupt and evil company called Mary Kay Cosmetics.

Comments

Search

raisinberry   |2009-04-02 00:09:34 I hope they appeal. I hope there are grounds. MK has the deep pocket. There is NO WAY that ToP "confused" customers in the marketplace. So now if you overbought from Mary Kay's incessant manipulation...And also fell victim to product upgrades packaging upgrades and "limited edition"...you are SCREWED...there is no way to recoup even some of your money unless you take a 50% off basket to appointments...(good luck with that) Mary Kay's main motive was to handle a recruitimg objection, period. This is going to backfire on them as IBC's wise up realizing there is NO WAY to get rid of overstocks without quitting altogether.

CareercrasHer   |2009-04-02 00:16:52 Very sad...

triumph   |2009-04-02 00:20:26 > strange decision

thinkingpinkstinks   |2009-04-02 00:21:16 This is very troubling. On another note, I'm shocked at the money they made. What a great business they had. But back to the story -- I'm so terribly disappointed in the outcome. I can't imagine this won't go on appeal. This could take years to resolve, and could have a great effect on other companies' products as well. I doubt that this is the end to it.

chopportunity   |2009-04-02 01:19:32 I find this very troubling. :o

puc4now   |2009-04-02 02:03:26 I am disgusted beyond words with the absolutely vile actions of the Mary Kay Company. I will never purchase another Mary Kay product. I will spread the word of this deceptive, manipulative PYRAMID SCHEME posing as a cosmetics company everywhere to everyone who mentions the words "Mary Kay" - to any IBC, potential IBC, customer, or potential customer. They are predators, nothing else. I swear I will loudly declare Mary Kay to be the equilvalent of financial POISON to everyone foolish enough to attempt to defend MK in my presence. I will increase my efforts to bring down this mess of an MLM, and that day can't come soon enough for me!!! Where did MK buy the simpleminded jury? Are they all former IBC's, relatives of IBC's, neighbors of IBC's?? Is the entire state of Texas so biased, bought, and dependent on Mary Kay cash that they can't render an intelligent and fair verdict? This trial by jury smells rigged to me. I hope the Webers can mount an appeal. This decision makes me furious. >

Truth Hurts   |2009-04-02 02:05:18 This really ticks me off. It's not really your own business! It's just a way for Mary Kay Corporate to not pay wages and give benefits. When you own your own business you can do what you want with it. You can advertise how you want, sell where you want and you can liquidate if you want! I hope some IBC who is still in the pink bubble see this and it pops.

overMK   |2009-04-02 03:02:55 Wow! :o >

The Artist   |2009-04-02 05:55:37 What is the next step? As far as I know TOP is still in business with more disclaimers on their web site. Have they been asked to stop? Any updates?

PUNKEDBYPINK   |2009-04-02 06:17:45 This is truly a shock. Can you still order form TOP? Creating confusion in the market place...sheesh! MKC does that every time they change the product packaging!! I thought there were no territories in MK. Is TOP outside the so called "territory"? I would love to hear MKC'S defination of that word. Raisin, Ihope you are right about this backfiring. It just gives the IBC one less option or hope about recouping any of their $$. This is such bullshit.

PUNKEDBYPINK   |2009-04-02 06:39:59 Just had another thought(I'm on a roll). Why is the word "Independent"thrown around so freely in this company? I guess it absolves MKC from any problems when the upline lies about the so called "avenues of income" and all the other crap they spew. I guess it is now a well known fact that Mary Kay is the #1 Best Seller in the US for what 13 years ina row now? But, it's to TOP!!!

Kinzie   |2009-04-02 08:05:13 Crap >

ifeelfree   |2009-04-02 08:15:08 This may mean much more inventory returned for the 90% buyback as more and more IBC's figure out that this is a pyramid scheme. Now, that would be justice!

angelia42   |2009-04-02 08:55:54 Even before the trial,I saw disclaimers clearly posted on the site that TOP was not affiliated with Mary Kay. They did state that they were geniuine MK products, which they are, so where does the deception come in? I love how they're not genuine products because they don't come with the "Mary Kay guarantee." TOP gives you 30 days to return the product, no questions, no pressure. I'd say that's better than the MK guarantee! Also, MK is now given the rights to a portion of TOP sales? Didn't they already get their cut when they bilked inventory dollars out of the IBCs? Who was on this jury?!

nomoremlm4me   |2009-04-02 09:22:29 I feel like I am going to vomit. Absolutely unbelievable. I am truly throwing away every item of MK I have, and I will never, ever use their products again. Unbelievable.

Truth Not Tears   |2009-04-02 09:34:42 This must be why I'm seeing so many directors offering 40% off sales of "everything" in the last 24 hours! Suddenly, they are desperate to move some of the stuff that's sitting on their shelves since they now realize they could be stuck with it forever! So much for the PROFIT of selling MK, huh? Talk about leading by example ;D Directors might as well say in their recruiting interviews...."just order a bunch of stuff so I can make my director commission and then you can sell it all for a huge discount. You won't make any profit but you'll get paychecks of the heart!"

Out of the Pink   |2009-04-02 09:56:11 Oh my goodness, I can't believe this. How could they lose? Will they have to shut down?

dupedbypinkfriend   |2009-04-02 09:56:30 Quote: Where did MK buy the simpleminded jury? Are they all former IBC's, relatives of IBC's, neighbors of IBC's?? Is the entire state of Texas so biased, bought, and dependent on Mary Kay cash that they can't render an intelligent and fair verdict? This trial by jury smells rigged to me. No. Case in point: ME! I wish I had been on this jury in order to trip up the verdict. Dontcha' know, there are brand-new excited IBCs all across the country who are being called upon by their directors to celebrate. I'm sure they are being told at the fake-o training meetings, "Look at how the company protects your interests!"  Little do they know, in time, they are going to want to dump their obsolete products somewhere, and get what little they can to offset their massive losses. Gag me.

babynurse   |2009-04-02 10:00:11 Yet another reason why we can truthfully say IBC's are NOT independant business owners..... >

raisinberry   |2009-04-02 10:21:28 TNT...I was just watching the same thing. They really think Directors are stupid. Massive liquidations in progress. These MORONS. Well maybe I shouldn't say that. Could Mary Kay Corp have found religion? Can they have figured out that this would be the obvious backlash? Wow, MK you won big. Now all your Directors are facing the reality of the fact that NO ONE EVER HAD A REAL "BUSINESS". You guys just can't quite think things through, can you? You just cut your own profiteering throats. The only way this makes sense is, IF Mary Kay has come under such conviction they are willing to suffer a huge sales force purge to reset. Hmm. Well I guess that's a good thing for consultants after all..but not in the way they (MK) had hoped. Directors will probably be mindful that all that excess inventory in any order over 600 is wasted cash flow. I guess we can see who was really driving TOP production! No more can anyone in MK sell a woman "her own business". All language in recruiting packets has to change. You are now stupidly PAYING to become an independent contracter WITH NO RIGHTS TO RUN YOUR OWN BUSINESS... Remember that disclaimer on all tapes and CD's? You were TOLD you had "the right to run your own business," with the quick disclaimer that "naturally your results might be different" YOU ARE NOW ONLY A SALES REP WITH NO BENEFITS, NO RETIREMENT, NO HEALTH CARE, NO CONTROL, A FLOODED MARKET OF COMPETITORS, NO INDEPENDENT ADVERTISING, AND YOU PAY FOR ALL OF YOUR TRAINING, SAMPLES, STARTER KIT,Your WAREHOUSE, DO YOUR OWN DISTRIBUTION, AND IF YOU DECIDE TO GET OUT, YOU WILL ALSO KICKED IN THE PANTS A LOSS OF 10% AS THE DOOR HITS YOU IN THE BEEHIND. Can I say it any clearer? Mary Kay Corp gets ALL the benefits as the sale force gets all the losses and costs. If you do Mary Kay now, as a consultant, You are PAYING FOR THE PRIVILEGE. Lucky You. All costs are yours, all losses are yours, and since we know your biggest weeks will be your perfect start sales to friends and family, you will NEVER need inventory on hand. Friends and family will wait. Shoot random new clients will too. Best way to protect yourself from not being able to move merchandise is to NEVER HAVE BOUGHT IT BEFOREHAND. The Rats are running off the ship Mary Kay. It was your Directors who dumped their massive inventory to liquidators. It is your Directors who know this business doesnt work at the "retailing" level. You just helped them face it. Aren't you glad you won your lawsuit?

pinkpeace   |2009-04-02 10:26:01 AMEN, Raisin! If I could vote your comment up more than once, I'd do it. You know, there are still MK products that I use. But after this lawsuit, I will ONLY purchase them from Touch of Pink. I'm just furious about this. (And by the way, Touch of Pink is an AWESOME company to purchase from. Their customer service is excellent, and I recommend that we support them as much as possible.)

Older_and_TimeWiser   |2009-04-02 10:38:05 Quote: Quote: This is going to backfire on them as IBC's wise up realizing there is NO WAY to get rid of overstocks without quitting altogether. Quote: This is why in spite of getting a new customer who saw my nearly disintegrated MK car window decal today, I am STILL certainly shipping all my drek back on or before the 15th!!!  I will fill her order since I have the 3 products she wants and is a momma with kid/s at my child's school, and then refer her to my recruit and/or PT! btw, the woman is also a former ibc who "sent all her stuff back"!

Truth Not Tears   |2009-04-02 10:39:35 Raisinberry, Now If MKC tries to find out WHO has been selling to TouchofPink, they will be shocked to find tons of the "Top Directors" who figured out long ago how to keep that production pumped up! Liquidators, flea market vendors, off-shore sellers...without these sources available to directors, MKC will see their "sales" figures drop dramatically! Of course, they HAVE extended the "FREE" (ya right) showcase into April. It's causing a surge in recruiting but I can't see it helping sales growth. Quite the contrary, all these new "recruits" are just flooding the potential market so Mary Kay will OWN all the customers and consultants will have no one left to sell to. When you recruit all your best customers, neighbors, co-workers and family, WHO is left to buy the product you have sitting on your shelf? I feel sorry for all the consultants and Directors who are buying into the hype created by MKC and the nsds. If directors have ANY business sense, they will NOT have all their consultants and everyone else they know with a temperature, call in to the "marketing calls" the nsds are doing. If directors REALLY care about the "success" of their consultants, they will help them SELL the products that are sitting on their shelves and NOT recruit their entire potential customer base! This business all comes down to....those with the most GREED succeed!

OhDonPiano   |2009-04-02 10:43:23 How disappointing... I hope that TOP pursues an appeal. I sold the remainder of my inventory to them and was very happy, After all of this, I am so angry with Corpse that I don't ever see myself buying any MK products again. but if I were to do so, I'd support TOP. The previosu posters are right that this will have a huge fallout from all of the active consultants and directors who will be unable to offload all of their surplus stuff to TOP.

Lazy Gardens   |2009-04-02 11:04:12 So the directors are dumping stuff over the sides of the slowly sinking ship? Great.  And Raisenberry has it right: YOU ARE NOT A BUSINESS OWNER, YOU ARE A TIGHTLY RESTRICTED, CONTRACTED, RESELLER. ONCE YOU BUY AN INVENTORY, IT'S YOURS TO KEEP. 'Cause you sure aren't going to sell it full retail when Craigslist and eBay are loaded with things at a fraction of retail.

chopportunity   |2009-04-02 11:08:07 I agree with all of you, no more MK for me. I do not use many things but from now on I am done. Raisin and Lazy are right, to call this owning your own business is ludicrous. IBC's are distributors, plain and simple. Looks like a lot of folks will be stuck with a truck load of product in the future. This is very disappointing. :'(

triumph   |2009-04-02 11:19:38 There are no business owners in Mk as an Independent Beauty Consultant. they are wholesalers to the I BC's and those I BC's are not allowed to sell there product except according to the contract. Mk is saying that even after you leave this stinking company you still can't sell it to anyone you want. I see Mk as a sleazy company that preys on the emotions of women looking for something. TOP was innovative and was able to make a profit. I say Bravo to them, especially in a world so misconstrued to deny profits for work done. Go to the TOP website now and you find other items besides mary kay and more disclaimers then ever before. They are still purchasing inventory. Mary Kay Inc, should be sued now for failure to follow employment rules. Anyone who ever thinks about signing a contract with this vile company should seriously reconsider. I agree with Raisinberry, this lawsuit will cost mk the company much more in the long run, because now it is in writing what the company expects. The fact that you could be sued by this monstrosity of a company would make you want to run and run away fast. This is absolutely the worst company to be involved in. Pathetic

pinksedition   |2009-04-02 11:36:00 Does anyone think that other companies might try to do this too? What does that mean for the market place in the future should this precedent continue?

The Scribbler   |2009-04-02 11:36:37 Let not your hearts be troubled, friends. There is a time under the sun for everything and this is no exception. The verdict states that Mary Kay says that the products Touch of Pink sells are not "genuine" because they are past their shelf life.  Frankly, I feel someone's lawyers were digging in the graveyard by lamplight for this one. If I buy a gallon of Land O' Lakes milk, I know what I am getting, who made it, and which Winn Dixie I bought it from. Suppose I take it home and let it sit in my fridge until it turns into cream cheese. Now that it is comfortably expired and way past its "sell-by" date, does it mean that it is no longer a genuine Land O' Lakes product? I mean, the label on the gallon clearly says, "Land O' Lakes."  Should there be a disclaimer on the milk that reads, "Product is no longer affiliated or endorsed by Land O' Lakes Corporation when used past the stamped expiration date?" In the spirit of Bill Clinton, that depends on whut yer definition of "is", is.

angelia42   |2009-04-02 11:39:21 "In the spirit of Bill Clinton, that depends on whut yer definition of "is", is." That's funny! Honestly, though, that was a pretty far reach in my book, too.

dupedbypinkfriend   |2009-04-02 11:58:56 Quote: YOU ARE NOW ONLY A SALES REP WITH NO BENEFITS, NO RETIREMENT, NO HEALTH CARE, NO CONTROL, A FLOODED MARKET OF COMPETITORS, NO INDEPENDENT ADVERTISING... Not only that, but you are not compensated for the advertising and marketing that you do for the company! When you put a MK sticker on your car you are doing the marketing for MKC. When you recruit, you are advertising "business opportunities" for MKC. And the fact that YOU purchase the recruiting materials is pure folly. YOU are paying them to allow YOU to do free advertising and marketing for THEM. It is sheer idiocy to fall for this crap.

Pax   |2009-04-02 12:06:06 How disappointing. However, I can't say that I'm surprised that corpse won in Dallas. If they were in the city where Touch of Pink resided in then they probably would have lost. Guess we know who owns Dallas!

dupedbypinkfriend   |2009-04-02 12:08:25 Quote: When you recruit, you are advertising "business opportunities" for MKC. Kaybots might argue that by paying commissions for their recruits' orders, they are being compensated. Wrong.  They do not necessarily get to keep those commissions. And, what about all the hours they put in recruiting those who do not take the bite? MKC is saving a bundle by not having to hire a marketing company.  They've talked their sales force into doing it for them for free, and that the sales force might thank them for the opportunity to do so, shows how brainwashed Kaybots really are!

coppermine   |2009-04-02 12:37:50 Like this website has always said MARY KAY SUCKS! for all the reasons everyone above has said again and again. looking on the brite side, the pink ship may sink faster now, lower the lifeboats mateys! have a great day ladies

ttp   |2009-04-02 12:38:23 I am appalled and dismayed at this outcome. I hope ToP appeals. I have to reiterate what many have already stated. From start to finish, your Mary Kay business is never yours. You have absolutely no control. Such bottom feeders. >

shyblush   |2009-04-02 12:51:50 I have to agree on location, location , location. Dallas is MK so I would expect them to loose. Probably have the Judge in their pocket.

ILikeRedBetter   |2009-04-02 13:10:43 This is absolutely ridiculous!! I was only using a small number of products after quitting MK, but now I am done. I will be looking elsewhere for those products! >

RubySlippers   |2009-04-02 14:39:21 Is MKC going after everyon on eBay? Who will MKC go after next? Sue PT for slander??? Could you imagine?!?!

chopportunity   |2009-04-02 14:51:56 I have given this more thought. Liquidators are everywhere. Big Lots is a liquidator, you have lumber liquidators, flooring, clothing, you name it. Businesses sell their surplus and then the liquidators pass on the savings to the public. It is a win, win situation. I believe Raisin that you are right. This is not about sales but it is about recruiting. MK is more concerned about how this site will effect recruiting which is their bottom line. In my mind this lawsuit is further evidence to the fact that MK is a pyramid scheme, an MLM that gets its biggest payoff from new blood that comes in and orders these large packages of product under the direction of a sales director which has been programmed by MK to believe that you can't sell from an empty wagon. This lawsuit reveals the very nature of this company. As I said earlier, I consider this the final straw. I will no longer use anything MK! > >

Out of Pink   |2009-04-02 15:34:46 I'm with you Chops on every point!!! MK is a MLM and it has always been about recruiting. Anyone who decides to start their MK-buy-a-dream business after reading these posts is just plain stupid....as we would say here is TEXAS....!!!

whypink   |2009-04-02 15:49:52 Ok, let me see if I understand this correctly...in Summary Judgement the Judge said basically: they are not forcing the consultants to liquidate, therefore they are not interfering with their contracts, so ToP and others like them can BUY old stuff but they can't resell it?? I'm getting so confused. And as far as Ebay sellers go, how about all the sellers that sell MAC and Lancome as well as non-cosmetic brand name products? Used children's clothes are a huge business on there, aren't they materially different since one kid has already worn them? (Stains anyone?) My Gosh! HOW can a court let MKC set a precedent such as this that effectively would/could halt American enterprise as we have always known it? Wow...just wow...

pinksedition   |2009-04-02 16:27:12 I am also a little confused about all the implications contained in the verdict of this lawsuit. I haven't read it through either though. I agree with Raisin and Chop that this is more about recruiting than anything. It's a scary thought that you might purchase a shirt someday, get tired of it or gain some weight, and then not be able to sell it to a resale shop; or more effectively, the resale shop could buy it from you but then they couldn't sell it. How weird.

pinksedition   |2009-04-02 16:51:51 Ok, reading it now.... 1st...if MK products are not considered MK products after they expire, then how should they be identified? 2nd...when, if ever, did touch of pink endeavor to create the impression that they are affiliated with MK cosmetics and are trying to benefit from the goodwill associated with MK's image? (I'm nauseated here) MK's argument about expired goods being materially different seems pretty weak. What, does foundation magically morph into poison on the expiration date?j The only standing they have is that TOP purchased some key phrases from google for their search engine. Otherwise, the rest of it is just plain crap. I think MK was pretty heavy handed in this one behind the scenes. I don't see a whole lot of merit in this one.

windycitygal   |2009-04-02 18:02:53 This is so sad and frustrating.

What   |2009-04-02 18:40:19 Quote: From start to finish, your Mary Kay business is never yours. You have absolutely no control. Yep! >

thinkingpinkstinks   |2009-04-02 18:43:33 What prevents a consultant or director, after they leave MK, from putting their products for sale on E-bay? I have heard that some consultants (who were still in MK) were notified that they couldn't sell on e-bay, but once you leave what can they do?

PUNKEDBYPINK   |2009-04-02 18:44:31 "PRAY FOR ME, BUT DON'T PREY ON ME" would be a good catch phrase. Maybe have t-shirts made? They could be sold at all the fvaorite warm-stalking areas(malls,target).

PUNKEDBYPINK   |2009-04-02 18:45:48 Oh why do I proof read AFTER I've posted? > I meant favorite!

DLPSOY   |2009-04-02 19:56:30 Very disappointing. I'm shocked! Did MKC win the right to have TOPs list of past and current IBC's/Directors who've liquidated product through them? IF SO.......what will they do with that list? ?Terminate all their top producer IBC/Directors? What can they do to IBC's and Directors who have already terminated their agreements? Hmmmmm....will they try to punish them by making them place NEW wholesale orders with MKC? ....Maybe in the amount of wholesale they sold on eBay or to TOP or other liquidators at LESS THAN WHOLESALE? OMG...it's true...."ANTHING is possible in Mary Kay" Yes, it's really all about recruiting. :o :o

DLPSOY   |2009-04-02 20:01:50 Anyone waiting to return product should hop to it. When MKC gets hit with the backlash of returns, they'll probably reduce or eliminate the buy-back guarantee. FYI, MKC must be getting ready to CHANGE the Starter Kits in anticipation of the big recruiting blitz. I got a survey about it a couple days ago.

gladitsnotjustme   |2009-04-02 20:40:44 Unbelievable! Must have been a jury of morons.

ILikeRedBetter   |2009-04-02 21:02:04 gladitsnotjustme said: Unbelievable! Must have been a jury of morons Probably MK users as well, thinking they were helping their favorite makeup company.  (....this is where I throw up)

icanbecomesane   |2009-04-02 21:44:49 !@#$%^&*(*&^%$#@!)! 4;#$%^&*!!! Game On, MKC!

TRACY   |2009-04-02 22:13:38 I am still stunned that because some idiot woman didn't read TOP's website or understand it, and *thought* they were somehow affiliated with MK, that means TOP was creating confusion and trying to pass off as MK.

madsmom   |2009-04-02 22:37:37 "Where did MK buy the simpleminded jury?" They found them shopping at Big Lots or whatever their local liquidator company is. You can't tell me that no one in the jury has bought anything from a liquidator before.

RubySlippers   |2009-04-03 03:34:53 MMMMM, side note: in quarterly contest prizes - they haven't been using a 'real' model, but an drawing of a woman to show the prizes - maybe MKC can't afford to pay for the real model. MKC is using their money to pay for lawyers instead to harass (sp?) others.

Katharyn   |2009-04-03 06:25:06 I'm an ebay seller of Mary Kay products, and this verdict is very disturbing to me. Particularly the issue of whether or not the products Touch of Pink sold were genuine. Mary Kay claimed that the products Touch of Pink sold were not genuine because they were past shelf life or were past the stated expiration date. Although the expiration date issue is fairly clear, I have not been able to find any OFFICAL statement from Mary Kay as to the shelf life of their products. It's not in the Mary Kay product guide, it's not on any of the packaging, it's not on their website. I've found plenty of ebay guides on the subject etc. but nothing that is from Mary Kay itself. Does anybody have anything official on the shelf life of Mary Kay products? And possibly more importantly, that Mary Kay informs IBC's what the shelf life is and instructs them not to sell products that are past the stated shelf life? I find the lack of this information in the Product Guide in the section on the Product Coding System fairly damning to Mary Kay’s argument. Thanks much to anyone who can help me with this.

whypink   |2009-04-03 07:26:50 This is an article from an Ebay reviewer that I found ages ago, it concerns MK product shelf life. http://reviews.ebay.com/ Mary-Kay-Product-Shelf-Life-Se crets-Revealed_W0QQugidZ100000 00000087831

julia_tennille   |2009-04-03 09:29:17 Unfortunately I am not really surprised. I am also a liquidator who was sued. I had sold Mary Kay on Ebay for 7 years and was one of the top Mary Kay stores. I actually made Mary Kay look good. I had 99.9 percent feedback and still have people emailing asking where my store is because they would much rather buy from me than be hassled with a facial party everytime they want to buy a tube of foundation. Fortunately my Dallas based lawyer knew the judge involved and a couple lawyers on the Cox team and told me there was a very slim chance I would win and therefore I had an opportunity to sell my stock and get out. I personally had over $25,000 in stock on my shelves. Beware to ebay sellers. If you have lots of stock I would get out now. I have been told by directors that this past summer Mary Kay Inc tried to get Ebay to end Mary Kay sales based on "trademark violation". Of course Ebay doesn't want to loose all those sales so they didn't cooperate. Now with the Touch of Pink case Mary Kay has more power to stop Mary Kay being sold on Ebay. You could easily be stuck with loads of stock if you don't get out. Believe me I have dealt with Ebay since 2002 and they do not protect their sellers. They cover their own tale and will drop you in a heartbeat. As for Mary Kay it's going to come back on them. If consultants don't have liqudators and hopefully are directed to Pink Truth they are quickly going to learn to send those packages back to Mary Kay Inc. The griping directors are going to loose their commission and what goes around will come around. My guess is greed will bite them eventually.

whypink   |2009-04-03 09:44:54 I sort of disagree with you Kathy, I don't see the additional power from this loss in court. Liquidators can purchase without fear of being ordered to turn in the people they are buying from, they can sell as long as the product is NOT expired, very few of MK items actually have dates of expiration...acne gel, the stuff with spf...thus, items like lipsticks and eye and cheek colors even though discontinued, are NOT materially different, they DON'T have an expiration date. They are the same stuff MK manufactured, sold and made money on in the first round. Now, if you try to sell day solution with an expiration date of 2006, apparently that's a no-no. Also, if you purchase advertising that places your ads above MK ads, that's a no-no as well, because you need to use wording "that COULD cause confusion" in ditzy minds. That's how I'm interpreting it. Please someone, correct me if I'm interpreting this differently. Now, ToP is definitely still in business, listed new items just this morning (I've been watching) and their prices have gone up, but they are definitely selling and I'm sure the increased pricing is so they can give MK their cut. I, too, sell on Ebay and have heard from other sellers. One big namer in fact I have heard received a letter from MK insisting she close her store and send her records to them (LOL), her lawyer said she didn't have to. Guess we'll have to wait and see...

xmkc   |2009-04-03 09:54:34 Odd, a few years ago Liz Clownborn (sic) sued liquidator Tuesday Morning over the whole trademark infringement thing in the very same court and lost. Two differences 1. Tuesday Morning is Dallas based. 2. They (Tuesday Morning) could afford better Corp. Litigators.

adh123   |2009-04-03 10:01:52 This entire case and verdict is troubling. Free enterprise took a beating on this one. Under the "first sale doctrine", you must (1) show that you did not suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder, and (2) products must be genuine goods. (1) Internet consumers are not stupid. TOP is clearly a liquidator. As are hundreds and thousands of other sellers online. Internet purchasers are pretty savvy folk on this issue. (2) The jury instructions read, "MaryKay also argues that defendants' goods differ materially from MaryKay goods because defendants do not have the same or similar quality control procedures with respect to the production, storage, and transportation of those goods." "quality control procedures with respect to the production, storage, and transportation of those goods" -- Firstly, why would "production" even be an issue? Secondly, as far as "storage and transportation" are concerned, once the goods leave MKay's warehouse, "quality control" is completely out of their hands -- whether it's IBC Silly Sally or TOP's Amy Weber who is storing and transporting. Smoke and mirrors. "First sale doctrine" absolutely does apply. This jury was not thinking clearly......nor were they thinking long-term in what this judgement could mean in the larger scheme of things. They have set a disturbing precedent.

pinkpunch   |2009-04-05 18:43:41 I am absolutely disgusted with this whole thing. I hope that TOP appeals this. I have a good feeling that the SD's will now frontload even harder and to more women because this puts a hault to them "Buying" their way to either keep their position or gain a higher level. They will now be stuck with all of that product. Those SD's that were buying their way up were also dumping it, "liquidating", more then the IBC even know!! I can get these printed for about $5.00 a shirt!! ;D You will want material, in hand, with pinktruth.com on it if your going to wear it!!

chopportunity   |2009-04-03 11:49:57 I am only aware of specific products having an expiration date. Other than those that are marked with a date, I had no other instruction from MK regarding the shelf life of their products. Can eye shadow, lip stick, and blush go bad? If someone buys from a legitimate IBC they are not guaranteed to get a product that has not sat on her shelf for sometime. In fact once the product is ordered and shipped to the consultant MK has no idea how she is managing it, storing it, transporting it or any thing else that may be happening to the product. How is that different? I believe this ruling is a bad one and will affect far more than TOP or Ebay.

Be gone, bee   |2009-04-03 12:15:41 MK, what goes around comes around. You better get prepared for the big butt bite now and hire a lot more people for your return department. You are evil with no scruples whatsoever. >

TRACY   |2009-04-03 13:42:26 whypink wrote: Quote: I sort of disagree with you Kathy, I don't see the additional power from this loss in court. Liquidators can purchase without fear of being ordered to turn in the people they are buying from, they can sell as long as the product is NOT expired, very few of MK items actually have dates of expiration... Whypink, I think you're taking a very common sense approach to this, which is NOT at all what the jury did. If the judge upholds the jury verdict, there is a very real danger to all liquidators. This verdict is not based in common sense, and I believe it's not even consistent with the law. Yet liquidators won't be able to take any chances because MK has one wide-reaching verdict under their belt. This is exactly what MK is hoping for. If they get such a twisted ruling against TOP, they will start going after every single liquidator that has an established presence. This is exactly their intent in filing the first suit, I believe. Go after the biggest fish, and if by some miracle you can bring them down, you go smack down everyone else. I am praying the judge rules in favor of TOP, because if not, MK is only going to get more powerful and more ridiculous.

Delightful1   |2009-04-03 13:53:33 I will add my voice to the above comments too. I can't believe it!! I think we will begin to see a big change in MK, as IBCs and directors jump ship. I too have product on my shelf that doesn't move...and then what to do with it?? Because my IBC business is very small, I have only a small amount of inventory. Occasionally I get rid of product using one of the following ways: 1. Donate it to a crisis center 2. Make a gift basket to be sold at a school fundraiser 3. Give it to a "rummage sale" outlet...school fundraiser, church organization, etc 4. Give it to a school drama department...our school LOVES and uses the free glamour! And, some of the more garish (spelling?) shades look great on stage!! 5. Give free product (their favorite discontinued shades, or whatever) to ANY customers who order ANY amount. 6. Donate a gift basket to nurses' stations in hospitals, clinics, nursing homes, teachers' lounge at schools, etc. 7. Our local assisted living center welcomes groups in to "do nails". The residents love it! Give all your nail colors to them! Add your own! Do whatever you can to get the stuff out of your house.

vintagegold   |2009-04-03 14:10:21 What disturbs me about this whole thing is that Mary Kay knows good and well how pyramids eventually crumble when customers are turned into recruits in the name of DIQ or other MLM equivalent, and they don't care because they have all new markets to churn in China, India, etc.

thinkpinkagain?   |2009-04-03 14:32:05 So what happens next with TOP? Are they forced to close their doors or relabel their website or what? I, myself, was never confused. I ordered from there all the time and I was always in the know of what I was getting. Anyway...its sad. It really is.

puc4now   |2009-04-03 15:13:50 No customer was ever confused by the Touch of Pink website - that's a totally bogus argument. Women sought out the website just wanting to buy a lipstick without being hounded to death to reorder by email and phone by the Mary Kay Consultant From Hell. TOP never badgered me endlessly like my nitwit recruiter still does, even though I returned my junk to corpse 6 months ago. And I know where they got the jury. They're left over from the OJ trial - 12 people too dumb to spell DNA, left alone understand the science behind it. Bunch of idiots. Please appeal, Touch of Pink.

Acapella   |2009-04-03 15:40:56 MKC should be sued for their practices. Selling a dream that doesn't exists. MKC was paid for the products that end on at TOP, they aren't loosing anything. They don't care that consultants and directors have thousands of dollars worth of product in their basements collecting dust. Consultants should only order what they have actual sales for. Forget about being a Star Consultant, or finishing up for the Sales Court. The junk that is dangled in front of your faces at the meetings only costs a few bucks. Save your money.

MKvictim   |2009-04-03 18:16:22 I don't think MK realizes the backlash that this will cause THEM! Think about it, resellers provide a service to not only consultants and Directors but to MK as well. Just wait... there will be lawsuits against MK soon enough... class action hopefully... for frontloading women with HUGE amounts of inventory, discontinuing products constantly so women CAN'T get their 90 % back for those products. Mary Kay and it's consultants will soon find out what WE knew all along... there is NO "ultimate consumer" willing to pay RETAIL for their crap, sub par products... not many anyway.... not much more than the "Friends and family" members that the consultants bother and guilt into buying at parties...And they sure are going after eBay sellers. I am one of them and I'm fighting them. eBay sellers don't purchase keywords... not this ebay seller anyway... if a buyer is CONFUSED about an eBay seller's site being affiliated with MK then they need their head examined. It's become apparent after reading about many Texas civil cases that Texas' legal system is a bit corrupt... not even referring to MK cases.. just referring to the Judges that seem to get payoffs from big companies.... I'll fight MK here on my turf... where I can get a FAIR TRIAL outside of Mary Kay LAND..... I don't think any person being sued by Mary Kay in texas can get Due Process or a fair trial

MKvictim   |2009-04-03 18:20:11 I'm also curious how MK "enriches" women's lives... Last time I checked my mortgage company didn't accept MAKEUP or SKINCARE for payment.. nor did the grocery store to feed my family.... enriching women's lives???? I think not!

The Scribbler   |2009-04-03 23:53:52 I think I'll start a liquidation business. Here's the prototype for one of my advertisements: "We have all your favorites, to include the products you've wisely used time after time! Looking for color? Doesn't mattter if you're "raisin' berries" or eating frosting in your denim, we have your swatch of the rainbow waitin'!" I may be on to something here. ;D

180degrees   |2009-04-04 00:50:06 Oh, Scrib, LOL! You are hilarious! Perfect example of how to get around anything... I'd like to order some products right away! Do you have Melly Kae "Autograph" foundation? It's my FAVE! SO rich and creamy, and SO retro.

180degrees   |2009-04-04 00:51:00 Hey! What happened to my avatar? I'm generic!

Rural   |2009-04-05 00:55:47 I'm certain the jury was in a fog and did not take TIME to do the WISE thing!

lightershadeofpink   |2009-04-05 04:48:44 I just received a quote to TOP for some section 2 items. I was shocked when the quote came back with only 1 item they will take because "they are flooded with section 2 inventory right now". Wow, I think SD/IBCs are dumping inventory quickly in case they loose this avenue of liquidating expired, limited edition, or overstocked inventory. I returned mountains of product to MK but I still have some items to liquidate. I have no prayer of selling this stuff so I need the help of a liquidator. Gee, TJ Max, Marshalls, and other stores liquidate merchandise all the time. Why is MK exempt? They are scum.

IKNOWTHETRUTH  - How VERY Disappointing...   |2009-04-11 23:12:53 To say I'm disappointed is an understatement. I'm vehemently saddened by the jury's decision. It's quite obvious to me that they don't understand the real picture. And, I don't say this because MK screwed me BIG time, but simply because I reviewed the facts. What a travesty of justice..........

Only registered users can write comments!

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."