Artistry Essentials lacks a real reason for being.

REMEMBER THE GRAYSON maxim, "without a positive reason for success, failure is inevitable?" Well, the only way Artistry Essentials will be successful is if it is the only brand in the beauty rep's bag! Surely it will not be because of anything unique about the products, or the advertising that does nothing to get the juices going.

More Missed Opportunities

Artistry Essentials is a new/restaged skincare and cosmetic line which could have been introduced 20 or more years ago. It has emerged out of a time warp, as if the technology and competition in the skin care category hadn't created truly outstanding products coupled with brilliant positionings.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

First, a little background. Artistry is a long-established brand name in the Quixtar (formerly Amway) stable of skin care and cosmetic products. It has been a virtually invisible (non-advertised), direct-sell brand. According to the website, Artistry is the only direct-sell brand in the prestige category, with over $1 billion in annual sales. We assumed that the figure represents retail sales. Obviously, it's not so invisible to its distributors. But we question the "prestige" classification with the new Hydrating Lotion selling for $19.50 for 2.54 ounces ($7.68 per ounce). However, that may be the secret to its success. Tell your distributors and consumers that you are a prestige line, yet price it at low mass and you get lots of value-added. Artistry does have a Time Defiance Lifting Serum at $94.50 which, the company is happy to tell you, compares to Estee Lauder's ReNutrive Lift Serum ($175). Other higher-priced products also compare to Lancome. Just being a little picky-picky.

TheBrandAudit score of 53.22 for the new line is the lowest score ever published. So what we have here is a restage of this line with a first-time consumer ad (that we can recall) for the new Artistry Essentials line. Here is the positioning: "... the first and only care and colour solutions that blend smart skin thinking with a simplified point of view. Designed to work together, everything from cleanser to concealer is created for maximum effectiveness--but minimum complication."

Is that a reason for a new line of 15 or so products based upon--now hear this--cleansing, toning and hydrating or balancing, depending upon skin type? Where have they been? More background. You can appreciate how they came up with the simple approach. Consumers are time-stressed and magazines like Simple have touched a very responsive chord. But please, bring something new to the table!

This new line is brought to your attention, not because it earned that astonishing low score, but because it goes against every rule of successful marketing. First, (as our readers have heard for years) lines are built around successful star products. If you don't have a star, make one. Second, consumers are a visual lot. If you say "simple," show simple--not five products. What's simple about that? Another maxim, "consumers do not buy concepts, they buy products and product benefits."

Nothing in theAdAudit analysis has news, targeting, significance or "permission-to-believe," producing an equally poor 61.04 score. In fact, while, the individual products may have something going for them, you would never know it from the advertising. Also, without a visual that incorporates a "face," it is difficult to connect with the target market to establish a presence with the consumer most likely to find the concept to have appeal. No need for the product shots to be so huge. But if they were smaller, perhaps Lancome users wouldn't notice the "rose" connection. So the real benefit of the advertising may be the ability for additional exposure to sell products online, and to recruit for their wholesalers and representatives--always a plus for direct sellers. What a waste, especially in view of the direct competition the ad faced in that January issue of Allure. See the competition segment of the chart! Nothing to worry about for the rest of the industry. Whew!

THEBRANDAUDIT IS A GRAYSON ASSOCIATES PROPRIETARY NEW MARKETING TECHNIQUE TO DETERMINE THE SUCCESS POTENTIAL OF A NEW PRODUCT CONCEPT OR EXECUTION, PRIOR TO LAUNCH, OR, FOR AN EXISTING SLUGGISH PRODUCT OR LINE, IT WILL ANALYZE ITS STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES, AGAINST KEY COMPETITION. THE AUDIT SCORE IS BASED UPON GRAYSON ASSOCIATES' 29 "KEYS-TO-SUCCESS" CRITERIA FOR THE KEY MARKETING CATEGORIES OF PRODUCT, POSITIONING, CONSUMER APPEAL, COMPETITION AND MARKETING POTENTIAL. A SCORE LESS THAN 80 (OUT OF 100) MEANS TROUBLE IN THE MARKETPLACE. THEBRANDAUDIT WILL APPEAR BI-MONTHLY. CONTACT: SUZANNE @GRAYSONASSOCIATES.COM.

SUZANNE GRAYSON

GRAYSON ASSOCIATES TheBrandAudit Category Score % Achieved Product 11.90 59.50 Positioning 11.93 53.00 Consumer Appeal 11.70 58.50 Competition 3.00 20.00 Marketing Potential 14.69 65.30 Total: 53.22 Start over TheAdAudit Category Score % Achieved Headline 13.01 52.05 Visual Impact 21.12 76.80 Copy 15.61 62.45 Consumer Appeal 11.30 50.20 Total: 61.04 Start over Copyright: Grayson Associates, 2008