SIC 2844

This category includes establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing perfumes, cosmetics, and other toilet preparations. Manufacturers of shampoos, shaving products, personal deodorants, hair preparations, suntan lotions and oils, talcum powders, toothpastes and powders, mouthwashes, and premoistened towelettes are included.

NAICS Code(s)

325620 (Toilet Preparation Manufacturing)

325611 (Soap and Other Detergent Manufacturing)

Industry Snapshot

In 2001 the total value of industry shipments was $28.8 billion, up from $19.7 billion in 1994 and $22.8 billion in 1997. Traditionally, retail products are classified as upscale, mid-level, or low-scale, depending on where they are sold and their pricing structure. Upscale product lines are typically sold in major department stores or specialty boutiques; mid-level product lines are sold in department stores at lower prices; and low-scale product lines are sold in drug stores, discounters, or through catalogs. The trend through the 1990s and into the 2000s was away from upscale markets toward mass discounters.

According to Chemical Week, the typical cosmetic product stays on shelves for just four years—at most. This creates a unique situation of continual renewal, revival, and innovation. To meet the expectations of consumers, the cosmetic and toiletries industry must remain in sync with rapidly changing fashion trends and preferences.

Organization and Structure

Many participants in the cosmetics, fragrances, and personal care products industry were members of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association (CTFA). The CTFA, which was founded in 1894, represented manufacturers and distributors, as well as industry sup-pliers. It provided scientific, legal, regulatory, and legislative services.

The federal agency most often involved in regulatory encounters with the industry was the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA required that color additives be tested and approved before use. It banned or restricted the use of some specific ingredients including mercury compounds, chloroform, and methylene chloride. Other regulations dictated that cosmetics contain no poisonous or harmful substances and no filthy, putrid, or decomposed substances; they must also be made and held under sanitary conditions. The FDA also instituted labeling requirements that compelled manufacturers to list cosmetic ingredients in descending order according to the quantity used, with some flexibility allowed for the protection of trade secrets. The FDA also had the authority to take legal action against cosmetic companies if problems developed with the safety of products already on the market. To do so, the agency was required to prove in court that the product was harmful or misbranded.

The FDA, however, did not require the same type of pre-market approval for cosmetics as was required for drugs. According to a report published in FDA Consumer, cosmetics were legally defined as "articles other than soap that are applied to the human body for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance." The FDA recognized 13 categories of cosmetics: skin care products, fragrances, manicure products, eye makeup, makeup other than eye makeup, hair coloring preparations, shampoos and other hair products, deodorants, shaving products, baby products, bath oils and bubble baths, mouthwashes, and sunscreens.

The distinction between cosmetics and drugs was sometimes vague. According to FDA guidelines, products claiming to offer medical benefits or physiological effects were over-the-counter (OTC) drugs. Examples of items with controversial classifications included antiperspirants, which were classified as OTC drugs in the late 1970s, sunscreen products that listed a Sun Protection Factor (SPF) number, hair care products claiming to protect or restore hair, and shampoos professing to cure or remove dandruff. If the FDA deemed a cosmetic product to be an OTC drug, it was regulated as a new drug. The manufacturer was then required to demonstrate product safety and efficacy to gain FDA approval.

The cosmetic industry, under the sponsorship of CTFA, developed the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) in the mid-1970s to gather information about ingredient safety and make the information available to manufacturers. Reviews were conducted by a panel of scientific and medical experts. One report claimed that by 1988, 85 percent of the most frequently used 700 cosmetic ingredients had been reviewed, were under review, or were being regulated or studied by other procedures such as the FDA's process of reviewing OTC drugs. Another report claimed that a review performed by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health found that 884 of the 2,983 chemicals used as ingredients in cosmetics were toxic substances. The CTFA refuted the claim and maintained that scientific and medical studies demonstrated the safety of ingredients used within the industry.

The fragrance segment of the industry organized the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM) in the mid-1960s to independently test and certify the safety of natural and chemical aromatics. During its first 25 years of operation, the RIFM tested approximately 1,400 different materials. The studies resulted in recommendations to restrict or prohibit about 100 of the ingredients reviewed. In an effort to further cooperation between cosmetic and fragrance manufacturers and the FDA, the regulatory agency instituted a voluntary registration program in which manufacturers participated in monitoring adverse reactions to products.

Background and Development

The use of cosmetics, fragrances, and personal care products can be traced back to human's earliest days. Neanderthal man painted his face with reds, browns, and yellows derived from clay, mud, and arsenic. Bones were used to curl hair. Makeup, tattoos, and adornments conveyed necessary social information.

During the reign of the Pharaohs, Egyptian aristocrats wore cones of solidified perfume that would melt under warm temperatures to provide cooling and mask odors. A mineral called hematite was applied as rouge and faces were painted with white lead. Black kohl encircled eyes. Aloe vera was known as an anti-irritant.

Greek women also painted their faces white and put red circles on their cheeks. Galen, an ancient Greek physician, invented cold cream. The Romans used oilbased perfumes on their bodies, in their baths and fountains, and applied them to their weapons. In the ninth century, Arabs developed alcohol-based perfumes. Crusaders of the thirteenth century brought fragrances back to Europe from the Far East.

The perfumes developed during the sixteenth century were powders or gelatinous pastes. They could be applied to scented fans or carried in jewelry with fragrance compartments. The ability to create new fragrances by blending ingredients was developed during the seventeenth century in France. Some of the compounding establishments developed in France during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were still operating at the close of the twentieth century. America's first cologne water, Caswell-Massey's Number Six, was a blend of 27 ingredients and was said to have been a favorite of George Washington.

Natural perfumes were made from a variety of ingredients containing aroma. These included: essential oils, which were found in flowers, roots, fruits, rinds, or barks depending on the type of plant; resinoids, which were gums or resins that were purified with a solvent; and absolutes, which were aromas extracted with solvents existing in viscous liquid form. Natural perfumes were expensive, primarily because of the labor involved in gathering ingredients.

Chemical formulations developed during the nineteenth century began to replace expensive natural ingredients and make perfumes more widely available. Early synthetic fragrances included vanilla and violet. In the United States, Francis Despard Dodge developed citronella with various floral scents.

The nineteenth century also brought changes in facial makeup. Ceruse, a cosmetic that had been widely used in Europe since the time of the second century, was replaced by a powder made from zinc oxide. Ceruse, made from white lead, was discovered to be toxic and was blamed for causing physical problems such as facial tremors, muscle paralysis, and even death.

Antiperspirants and deodorants were developed during the 1890s. Aluminum chloride, the original active ingredient, frequently caused skin irritation and damage to clothes. These difficulties were overcome during the 1940s when aluminum chlorohydrate was developed. Although additives were subsequently produced to improve antiperspirant activity, aluminum chlorohydrate remained the primary ingredient in antiperspirants for the remainder of the twentieth century.

Cosmetics played a role during World War II. Leg makeup was developed in response to shortages of stockings. In Germany, women sacrificed lipstick, but U.S. officials judged it vital and necessary. Following the war, biological ingredients began to receive attention. Human placental products were first used in cosmetics during the 1940s. Cosmetic makers claimed that they stimulated tissue growth and removed wrinkles. The FDA ruled that such claims were medical in nature, and as a result classified these products as drugs and declared them ineffective. Placental products later reappeared in cosmetics but were listed only as a source of protein. Other biological ingredients (derived primarily from cows) included amniotic liquid, collagen (a protein substance), and cerebrosides (fatty substances with carbohydrates produced at the deepest layer of skin).

Fashion trends continued to bring new innovations. Artificial skin tanning aids were developed during the late 1950s. False eyelashes became popular during the 1960s. The 1960s also saw the introduction of "natural" products based on botanical ingredients such as carrot juice and watermelon extract.

During the 1970s, the growing environmental movement brought challenges to the cosmetic and fragrance industry. The use of some popular ingredients was banned following the enactment of endangered species protection legislation. Some examples included musk (from Himalayan deer, Ethiopian civet, and certain types of beaver) and ambergris (taken from sperm whales).

Concerns about contaminated makeup emerged during the late 1980s. An FDA report in 1989 found that more than 5 percent of samples collected from counters in department stores were contaminated with molds, fungi, and pathogenic organisms. Such contamination was supposed to be controlled by preservatives in the cosmetics. Preservatives, however, proved ineffective against the microorganisms responsible for causing product contamination when they lacked stability or when a particular product was kept longer than the shelf life of its preservative system.

Although cosmetic products seldom caused serious injury, some problems did occur. Most common among them were eye infections (caused by scratching the eyeball with a contaminated mascara wand) and allergic reactions. Fragrance additives were often blamed as a source of allergic responses. Two fragrances, acetylethly tetramethyltetralin (AETT) and 6-methyl coumarin (6-ME), caused sufficient numbers of adverse reactions for the FDA to take action against them. AETT, a neurotoxic, caused flushing, dizziness, nausea, and other reactions. 6-ME, which was frequently used in sunscreens, was photo-toxic and interacted with UV radiation occasionally leading to irreversible skin depigmentation and/or hyperpigmentation.

Manufacturers began to offer products labeled "hypoallergenic" or "natural." The term "hypoallergenic" meant a product was considered by its manufacturer to offer less potential for allergic reaction. Some makers conducted clinical tests to determine the likeli-hood of allergic responses. Others merely reformulated products without adding fragrances. An effort by the FDA to regulate a precise meaning for the term "hypoallergenic" was overturned in the courts. The industry used the word "natural" to refer to any ingredient that was not synthetically produced. It had no regulated meaning implying "pure" or "clean."

Controversy continued into the 1990s over cosmetic ingredients and claims. Some popular materials were Nayad, liposomes, and vitamins. Nayad (a trade name) was a yeast extract said to make the skin look and feel smoother by reducing lines and wrinkles. Liposomes were round, microscopic sacs made of fatty substances that cosmetic makers claimed could penetrate the skin's surface to deliver other ingredients into deeper skin layers. Vitamins were listed on display labels to imply that their usage would nourish the skin. The FDA, however, prohibited manufacturers from making therapeutic claims based on the vitamin content of skin care products.

As the perfume, cosmetic, and toiletry preparations industry entered the 1990s, it faced many challenges including regulatory changes, product safety concerns, calls for scientific data to document product claims, increasing environmentalism, and pressure from the growing animal rights movement. Congress began investigating possible revisions to the traditional "drug" and "cosmetic" definitions established under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. A report titled Classification and Regulation of Cosmetics and Drugs: A Legal Overview and Alternatives for Legislative Change included provisions for a third category of "cosmeceuticals" to include products like sunscreens that fell in the gap between "drugs" and "cosmetics." Some industry analysts welcomed legislative changes to clarify product distinctions but doubted whether manufacturers would accept proposals that would require safety and efficacy testing to substantiate label claims.

The FDA continued compiling complaints from customers about neurological reactions to perfumes including symptoms such as burning of the eyes, nose, and throat; flushing; dizziness; nausea; difficulty in breathing; memory loss; and drowsiness. Some hospitals banned the use of perfumes by operating room nurses. A group calling itself the National Foundation of the Chemically Hypersensitive wanted to ban the use of fragrances in public meeting places.

Some spokesmen within the fragrance and cosmetic industry claimed that, because no one had ever been killed or seriously injured as a result of fragrance use, the FDA's resources would be better spent on bigger health problems. They advocated individual avoidance of offending ingredients as a solution to skin irritations and allergic responses. Although the industry's safety record before the 1990s had been good, some seasoned industry watchers expressed concern about continued safety as many small, new companies emerged.

Growing concern about environmental issues also affected the industry. Several surveys demonstrated increased awareness of pollution and related issues. In 1990, Find/SVP (a New York survey group) estimated that 18.8 million U.S. households were environmentally interested shoppers. These consumers, called "Green consumers," accounted for about 20 percent of the U.S. population and their number was expected to increase. In a report on Green consumers, Find/SVP cited three main concerns: animal rights and species preservation, availability of clean air and water, and waste management.

One of the most controversial environmental matters facing the fragrance industry was pressure to reduce its use of volatile organic chemicals (VOCs). The most popularly used VOC was ethyl alcohol, which functioned as a solvent. The industry claimed that water was not a good substitute for ethyl alcohol because many fragrance ingredients were not water soluble. Ingredients designed to help materials dissolve in water affected product texture and also presented possible safety concerns. Propellants and many other ingredients used within the industry were also VOCs.

VOCs were blamed for contributing to ground-level ozone. In California, VOC emissions from colognes, perfumes, toilet water, aftershaves, and body splashes were estimated at almost 1,700 pounds per day. Consequently, in the early 1990s, California proposed limits on VOC usage in fragrances. New York and other states were expected to follow. In California, regulations took effect January 1, 1995, that limited VOCs to 70 percent of perfumes, colognes, and toilet waters; 60 percent of aftershaves; and 50 percent of other fragrances. Colognes, perfumes, and toilet waters that were on the market before the regulations took effect were exempt.

In addition to planned compliance with VOC regulations, many fragrance and cosmetic companies brought "green" products to the market place. Estee Lauder introduced its Origins Natural Resources line of skin care, body products, aromatherapy, and makeup. The line was promoted as natural and non-animal tested. Items were sold in recyclable containers. Revlon brought out New AgeNaturals, skin care products made of all degradable ingredients, and Pure Skin Care, a line of products developed without animal testing. Mary Kay Cosmetics' Countryside Colors line emphasized its use of recyclable packaging made from recycled materials. Mary Kay also eliminated most external packaging on men's skin care products. As some companies eliminated, reduced, or refabricated outer packaging to emphasize their concern about waste disposal problems, others, particularly fragrance manufacturers, expressed concern about the trend because packaging contributed to their image.

Critics claimed that many of the environmental efforts advertised by cosmetic and fragrance manufacturers were exaggerated, false, or meaningless. For example, "biodegradable" packages were incapable of degrading under conditions present in most landfills. Some products were labeled "ozone friendly" because they did not contain chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), but CFCs had been banned since the late 1970s. "Recyclable" notations on plastic containers were meaningless when recycling plants for particular plastics (like polystyrene) were not available.

Along with increased environmental awareness came concern for healthy products. Items seen as safe for the environment were perceived as healthy for users. This philosophy drove a trend toward increased use of natural products containing ingredients such as proteins and vitamins. It also brought expanded use of botanical ingredients such as aloe, cucumber, and berry extracts. In perfumes, the trend led to the increasing popularity of discreet scents, floral freshness, and sea smells. In makeup, consumers began turning to functional products. Cosmetics were expected to do more than add color and cover skin imperfections. Buyers wanted products to contain ingredients such as sunscreens and emollients to nourish and protect their skin. The focus on natural products also led to more realistic product claims.

The emphasis on natural ingredients, however, extended only to plant sources. Animal products were shunned and animal testing fell into disfavor. Many companies promoted cosmetic lines that were developed without animal testing. One example was SafeBrands Inc., which prohibited the use of animal testing in the development of its products and by its raw ingredient suppliers.

The Cosmetic, Toiletries, and Fragrance Association (CTFA) remained firm in its support of some animal testing, however. According to the CTFA, even products that claimed to use non-animal test methods relied on models that were acquired as a result of animal testing. The organization believed that human health and safety were more important than animal rights. The CTFA reported that 74 percent of Californians polled opposed legislation that would prohibit animal testing to insure product safety.

In addition to the social and political concerns surrounding animal testing, environmentalism, and product safety, the industry was also affected by the nation's economic situation. The perfume, cosmetic, and personal care products industry had established a "recession proof" image when sales of inexpensive cosmetics had outsold mid-priced food items and clothing during the Depression of the 1930s. Cosmetics also did well during the recessions of the 1960s and 1980s. The recession of the early 1990s, however, brought new challenges. Counterfeit products were offered at low prices. Customers resisted high prices and demanded value. The numbers of distribution channels for upscale lines decreased as traditional department stores closed. Costs associated with product promotion increased and marketers turned more often to expensive strategies such as giving free products.

In an effort to move away from traditional department store cosmetic counters, upscale manufacturers turned to self-serve packaging and sold greater volumes to discounters. This enabled retailers to place items on sale. Depressed pricing, however, sometimes diminished a product's image. Bridge brands were increasingly aimed at a niche between the upscale and mass markets. Mass marketers focused on increasing volumes to generate more profit. In 1999, it was reported that one of the major movements in the industry was a trend toward providing consumers with premium versions of health and beauty products.

Due to the growing trend toward industry globalization, industry leaders have focused product lines and marketing at the ethnic niche market, primarily targeting the specific makeup and skincare needs of Asian, African American, and Latino consumers. This segment reported sales of $210 million in 1997, and this market is expected to continue its rapid growth.

Current Conditions

Between 1996 and 2000, the cosmetic and toiletry industry grew by an average of more than 5 percent annually. In 2001 and 2002, growth slackened to just 2 percent each year, resulting in industry experts bemoaning the lack of innovation and new product development within the sector. However, considering the downturn in the U.S. economy during the early 2000s, the cosmetic and toiletry industry held its own. Although revenues grew by only 2 percent during 2001 and 2002, any growth under the duress of the poor economic conditions could be considered a positive sign. Two product categoriesdrivinggrowthwereanti-agingcreamsand premoistened wipes.

Anti-aging creams, which boast protection against the detrimental effects of sun and age to the skin, are dominating skin care products. As a result, sales of the old standard moisturizers have plummeted. Although anti-aging products are targeted heavily to age groups most in need of repair, prevention, and concealment of skin flaws, companies are also pushing products to the younger set. Anti-aging product introductions in 2001 totaled $1.45 billion.

Premoistened wipes have begun wiping up the marketplace. Between 1999 and 2003, more than 40 new wipe products hit the shelves of stores. Worldwide, retail sales of wipes generated $3.9 billion in 2002, a number that is expected to increase to $5.3 billion by 2006. While non-baby wipes sales are increasing, so are premoistened floor cleaners, including Clorox's Ready Mop. The top seller generated revenues of $56 million in 2002. Swiffer's wet and dry versions combined for sales totaling $98 million. As wipe offerings have become more specialized, the mature market of baby wipes, which was once a catch-all for wipes sales, has shrunk by approximately 5 percent.

Industry Leaders

One of the largest companies involved in the perfume, cosmetic, and toilet preparations industry was Procter & Gamble (P&G), which posted total sales in fiscal 2002 of $40.2 billion (including noncosmetic items) and employed 102,000 workers. In the early 1990s, P&G's Cover Girl held 59 percent of the makeup market; Oil of Olay was the leader in mass-market skin care with a 29.7 percent share; and in men's products, Old Spice was a best seller. To expand Old Spice's appeal to younger men, P&G developed a new marketing campaign, which focused on sports and action.

P&G increased its involvement in the global cosmetics market through the purchases of Beatrix and Max Factor. Beatrix, a German cosmetic manufacturer, had annual sales estimated at $200 million. Max Factor's sales were estimated at $600 million per year. Domestic sales accounted for only 25 percent of the total. Japan and the United Kingdom were the largest overseas customers.

Max Factor, the company, took its name from the Hollywood makeup artist Max Factor. In 1914, Factor began making cosmetic products according to the demands of the technologically evolving film industry. One Factor creation, Pancake makeup, first appeared on the screen in 1937. Max Factor continued to develop new formulas to meet the needs of Technicolor movies and color television. In 1990, the company introduced a new makeup designed to meet the demands of high density television in Japan. New Definition Perfecting Makeup used four times more pigment dots than other products. Max Factor was also a leader in cosmetic development outside the film industry. In 1988, the company introduced the "no makeup look" with a no-color mascara and "Invisible Makeup," made of light-diffusing ingredients to blur skin imperfections. The "Transparencies" line, introduced in 1991, used a new combination of color pigments to avoid heaviness or opacity.

Johnson & Johnson, a diversified healthcare product manufacturer, was involved in producing consumer toiletries, as well as pharmaceuticals and professional medical products. In 2002, the company brought in sales of more than $36.3 billion and employed 108,300 workers.

Within the fragrance segment of the industry, The Estee Lauder Companies Inc. was one of the nation's largest companies. Estee Lauder first began marketing skin products in 1946. Lauder's earliest perfume, called Youth Dew, was introduced in 1953. Since then, other perfumes were developed including Estee, Cinnabar, and Beautiful. Lauder's marketing efforts presented American women with the idea of wearing perfume all day long, not just on special occasions. In 2002, Lauder's sales totaled $4.7 billion, most of which was in prestige markets.

Within the men's toiletries market, many companies were experiencing declining profits in the early 1990s. An exception was Gillette. Gillette, founded in 1901, was the world's leader in sales of razors and blades. The company's 2002 sales were $8.5 billion. The company's line of toiletries was one of the top sellers in the United States yet pulled in about 60 percent of its revenues from outside the United States. The innovative Gillette Sensor razor was introduced in 1990 and sold at premium prices that helped bolster the company's bottom line. As a result of the Gillette Sensor's success, the company expanded efforts to upscale some of its lines and aim them at a market niche between mass market items and upscale products. Gillette was also working toward encouraging retailers to group men's grooming products together in a single section containing shaving supplies, as well as men's fragrances.


Although industry shipment figures demonstrated overall growth during the 1980s and the early 1990s, employment figures fell. In 1988, the toilet preparation industry employed 72,200. In 1991, several manufacturers including Colgate-Palmolive, Gillette, Revlon, Procter & Gamble, and American Cyanamid closed plants or announced future plant closings. Ten years later, in 2001, employment had fallen to 67,600 workers.

America and the World

At the turn of the century, globalization of the industry was exploding. Eastern Europe, Latin America, Russia, and the Asia Pacific region are driving up sales. The global industry reported 1998 sales of $125.7 billion, with fragrance leading the pack in growth, with sales of $24.2 billion. Skincare was reported at $30.0 billion, hair care at $24.6 billion, makeup at $23.7 billion, and personal care products at $23.2 billion.

In the early 1990s, the United States was a net exporter of perfumes, cosmetics, and toilet preparations. Canada, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Mexico were major purchasers of U.S. goods. About 55 percent of the nation's imports were received from France. Other countries supplying products to the U.S. market included the United Kingdom, Japan, and Mexico. Within the fragrance segment, U.S. demand represented the largest national market in the world, only slightly smaller than the entire European market. Demand in Japan was estimated to be about one third the size of the U.S. market.

As the industry moved increasingly toward globalization, new markets were developing in Latin America, Eastern Europe, and the Pacific Rim. While American companies like Procter & Gamble increased their penetration in overseas markets, foreign companies increased their involvement in American markets. Globalization brought efforts to adopt common terminology, particularly in describing ingredients. The Cosmetic, Toiletries and Fragrance Association (CTFA) expected wider use of the CTFA Ingredient Dictionary.

Research and Technology

During the 1990s, research and technological improvements within the industry focused on reformulating products to move away from synthetic chemicals and to rely on natural products. Consumers were becoming more knowledgeable about products that were good for them, demanding effective and appealing products. Within the class of natural products, the primary emphasis was on vegetable and plant materials. Chemists also sought to meet customer demands for mildness and reduced toxicity. Within the growing sun-care segment of the industry, scientists researched products with improved protection, especially against year-round ultraviolet rays. Color market formulators worked to develop new silicon-based products that promised better color retention and improved waterproofing capabilities.

According to a report published in Seventeen magazine, Tony Barone, vice president of Barone Cosmetics, predicted further changes within the cosmetic industry. He guessed that as Americans shunned the sun because of health concerns, paler faces would become more fashionable. He speculated that modern habits of living in controlled environments would lead to a loss of body hair including diminished eyebrows and less head hair. Barone considered the advancement of medical cosmetics, where beauty doctors would tattoo permanent makeup in place and perform routine cosmetic surgery, a possible future development.

Further Reading

Bittar, Christine. "Moving Upscale with Day to Day Items." Brandweek, 21 June 1999.

Dibon, Marie Alice. "Anti-Aging Takes Over." Soap & Cosmetics, February 2003, 26-28.

"Employment—National, Not Seasonally Adjusted Data." Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1999. Available from .

Hoover's Company Profiles. Hoover's Online, Inc., 2003. Available from .

"Indulgence Products Offer Comfort." Retail Merchandise, January 2002, 30.

Jones, Liz. "A Child of Our Time?" Cosmetics International, 28 February 2003, 3.

Keane, Maggie. "Some Stuff of My Own." Soap Perfumery & Cosmetics, August 2002, 13.

"Lip Makeup." Chain Drug Review, 20 January 2003, 13.

"Polish, Artificial Nails Strong." MMR, 26 August 2002, 76.

Prior, Molly. "Views Self-Indulgence as an Everyday Event." DSN Retailing Today, 16 December 2002, 27.

Schmitt, Bill, and Nancy Jeffries. "Six Trends Guide Supplier to Market's Attractive Features." Chemical Week, 4 December 2002, 52-54.

"State of the Industry." Global Cosmetic Industry, June 1999.

Teng, Andy. "Wiping Up Profits." Nonwovens Industry, February 2003, 28-34.

"Tracking Beauty." WWD, 21 November 2002, 18.

"U.S. Slump Blamed on Lack of Launches and Innovations." European Cosmetic Markets, May 2003, 158.

"War No Barrier to Cosmetic Sales." Cosmetics International, 28 March 2003, 1-2.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: