Beloved British skincare brand to DISAPPEAR from shop shelves after 25 years as consumer giant pulls plug
Unilever said it was a 'difficult decision" to dismantle the British brand
WASHED AWAY Beloved British skincare brand to DISAPPEAR from shop shelves after 25 years as consumer giant pulls plug
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
A BELOVED British beauty brand is to disappear from shop shelves, Unilever has confirmed.
Beauty brand REN Clean Skincare is being cut after a quarter of a century with its parent company citing 'internal factors' and 'market challenges'.
Sign up for Scottish Sun
newsletter
Sign up
4
Its legendary Ready Steady Glo AHA tonic developed a fanatical following
Credit: supplied
4
Unilever is a massive consumer conglomerate worth over £89bn
Credit: Reuters
4
The company vaguely blamed internal and market difficulties for the closure
Credit: Reuters
Consumer behemoth Unilever announced that it took the 'difficult decision' after realising that the brand was 'unable to sustain success in the long term.'
Whilst there is no set date for the sensitive skincare brand's closure, they predicted that the brand will be terminated by the end of the year.
Last August, Sky reported that the consumer giant was trying to offload both REN Skincare and Kate Somerville, but neither has been sold.
A spokesperson said: 'We are proud of the REN team for all they have accomplished during 25 years of business, putting 'clean' skin care on the agenda and creating positive change for both people and planet and thank them as they continue to support us through this closure.'
The pioneering brand which was ahead of the 'clean beauty' trend was founded by Rob Calcraft and Anthony Buck in 2000.
Some of its prestigious products, such as Ready Steady Glow Daily AHA Toner (£30,) and the Evercalm range (£75), developed a cult following.
Its innovative approach to skincare attracted the attention of Unilver's prestige Brand director, Vasiliki Petrou.
Unilever bought the company for an undisclosed amount in 2015.
Under Petrou's mentorship, the 2023 turnover ballooned to £1.2bn.
However, last year she left the department, and almost immediately, profits started to dip.
After she left, REN reduced the number of its skincare products by a third in an attempt to 'modernise' and crack the US market.
But just last August, trouble was in the works as the division reported 'muted' profits.
Under Petrou Unilever's Prestige department also gobbled up other clean beauty brands such as Dermalogica and Kate Somerville, which are currently still available.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
OnlyFans is giving HMRC what it wants
Fenix International occupies the ninth floor of an innocuous office block on London's Cheapside. The street's name comes from the Old English for marketplace, and once upon a time Cheapside was just that: London's biggest meat market with butcher shops lining either side of the road. Today, the street houses financial institutions and corporate HQs. But Fenix still runs a marketplace. Some may even call it a meat market, albeit one that operates on the phones of hundreds of millions of users worldwide. Its name: OnlyFans. OnlyFans is best understood not just as a porn site, but as a social media platform with a paywall. Creators – mostly women – post photos, videos and voice notes behind monthly subscriptions. Users pay extra to tip the women, customise content and have one-to-one chats with their favourite models. Not everything on OnlyFans is X-rated, but that's the content that makes the money. An entire ecosystem has grown around OnlyFans since it was founded nine years ago by two British brothers, Tim and Thomas Stokely. One 'e-pimp' explained that successful models outsource much of their work to offshore call centres to give the illusion of intimacy with customers. Low-paid workers in Venezuela or the Philippines are hired to impersonate creators over text chats, maintaining dozens, even hundreds, of relationships with lonely men. OnlyFans' profits are enormous. In 2023, it generated nearly £5 billion in sales – up more than 2,000 per cent in four years. The company paid £127 million in tax last year, £110 million of that in corporation tax. Because Fenix is based in London, the bulk of that cash is flowing straight into the Treasury. For comparison: Britain's fishing industry – supposedly a red-line issue in Brexit – brings in just £876 million and pays next to nothing in corporation tax, while also receiving £180 million a year in tax concessions. We don't think of OnlyFans as a media company (if we think of it at all) and so we ignore what it is in business terms: a staggering success. With more than four million 'content creators' and 305 million subscribers, it would easily rank in the top three British publishing companies. It is perhaps the most successful creator-based subscription service ever. Traditional platforms can't compete – OnlyFans' revenues are twice that of North America's Aylo, which operates the world's biggest porn websites. Britain's sex industry brings in far more to the economy than politicians are comfortable admitting Britain's sex industry brings in far more to the economy than politicians are comfortable admitting. The Office for National Statistics estimates Britons spend in excess of £6 billion annually on it. It is one of the few British industries which remains a net (digital) exporter. Indeed, OnlyFans is perhaps the strongest unicorn (a privately held start-up worth more than $1 billion) in the country. It's more profitable than any other British tech start-up. And it's doing something our other digital start-ups can't: exporting to America while keeping tax revenues onshore. Two-thirds of its revenue now comes from the US, proving that even in a global tech economy dominated by Silicon Valley, British firms can still compete. OnlyFans' success makes it all the more striking that, according to Reuters, Fenix is in talks to sell. Los Angeles-based Forest Road Company is leading a group of investors in negotiations to buy the business for £6 billion. It's rumoured that other suitors are vying for attention and that shares may be sold on the stock market. Either way, one of Britain's few successful exports could soon be gone. It's awkward to defend pornography, and so politicians don't try. Parliament hosts thousands of lobbying events every year – payday lenders, bookies, vape companies, even arms dealers turn up for drinks and canapés. There is no 'sex tech reception'. Ministers fall over themselves to visit impressive-looking factories that are in fact barely relevant. For example, Glass Futures, a research and production plant for the glass industry based in St Helens, was recently picked by Keir Starmer as the perfect location for his speech decrying 'Farage's fantasy economics'. The plant is a not-for-profit that makes £7 million in annual sales. OnlyFans pays more in tax in a month than Glass Futures earns in a year. But no MP would be caught dead at OnlyFans' Cheapside HQ, despite, I'm told, many invitations to visit. Neither has any politician ever defended the porn industry in a debate on innovation, exports or growth. The most recent House of Lords research note on 'the impact of pornography on society' contains no mention of the words 'economy', 'tax' or 'finance'. Of course, money isn't everything. The harms of porn – to women, to relationships, to the minds of teenage boys – are real and considerable. We might well be better off banning the whole thing. But if we are going to wage a moral war on porn, we should at least be honest about what we're sacrificing. The money is real – and it's already in the bank of HMRC.
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
What's up with the wacky CBOT corn spreads? -Braun
NAPERVILLE, Illinois, June 11 (Reuters) - U.S. corn supply estimates for the waning 2024-25 marketing year have been dwindling in recent months, though a notable rebound is expected for 2025-26. But the futures market might not be reflecting these trends, leading many to wonder if old-crop stockpiles are actually larger than the government has predicted. Normally, that supply trajectory might put Chicago futures in an inverse, where old-crop corn is pricier than new-crop. But so far this month, CBOT July corn has traded at an average of around 3 cents per bushel cheaper than December corn , reflecting a small carry in the market. Analysts think the U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday will trim its forecast for 2024-25 U.S. corn ending stocks to 1.392 billion bushels, rendering stocks down 21% on the year. In past Junes, such a decline in corn stocks has been associated with July-December inverses exceeding 50 cents. The closest comparison in terms of stock declines would be 2018, when July-December corn traded at a 21-cent carry during the first two weeks of June. At that time, U.S. 2017-18 ending stocks were pegged to ease 8% on the year, but the actual estimate was more than ample at 2.1 billion bushels. This demonstrates that contracting year-on-year supplies can be associated with market carry in June. Additionally, there are examples (2008, 2018) where this carry existed despite a reduction in stock estimates over the previous several months. Still, the current setup may suggest that either July futures are too cheap versus December, old-crop stocks are being understated, or some combination of both. Given the present market structure, what might this mean for old-crop corn stocks – and trade expectations – moving forward? If old-crop stocks are too low, it may not come to light on Thursday. There is no relationship between the old-new crop futures spread and the trend in USDA's old-crop ending stock estimates from May to June. Fast-forward to June 30, when USDA publishes its June 1 stock survey, and the chance for a bearish bomb increases. Since 2008, whenever July-December corn traded near flat or in a carry during early June, analysts underestimated June 1 corn stocks about 73% of the time. On the flip side, analysts underestimated June 1 corn stocks in just one out of six years when old-new crop corn featured a strong inverse relationship. Since 2008, there is also a 73% hit rate for final corn ending stocks to be the same or higher than was estimated in June whenever July-December corn traded near flat or in a carry during early June. This same early June spread, however, does not suggest that final ending stocks will be bearish as the trade has gone on to both underestimate and overestimate September 1 corn stocks. The outcome is still wide open for the end of September, when USDA will publish final 2024-25 corn ending stocks. But right now, CBOT corn for expiration in mid-September is the cheapest of the bunch. July-September corn is trading at an inverse averaging 12 cents per bushel so far this month, which is unusual given the slight carry in July-December. The historical relationship between these spreads suggests that one or both are a bit out of sync. With multiple anomalies in the futures market setup having been identified, this might simply mean that 2025 is an outlier year. And if that's the case, historical odds may be increasingly less reliable from here. Karen Braun is a market analyst for Reuters. Views expressed above are her own. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X., opens new tab
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
The treaty Gibraltar wants, for the future we all need
For over five years, Gibraltar has been at the centre of one of the most complex, technical, and geopolitically sensitive negotiations undertaken by the United Kingdom and the European Union since Brexit. The process has consumed me. It has occupied close to half of my time in elected office, taken over almost every waking hour of the last five years, and, in truth, deprived the people of Gibraltar of their Chief Minister in the way they are used to having him, that is, from fixing housing and parking complaints to defending their sovereignty in the international arena. For much longer than I would have wanted, I have been behind closed doors, in physical or virtual boardrooms, working through the details of a document that will shape the next generation of our people. It has been a relentless, exhausting endeavour. Throughout this time, the UK and Gibraltar teams have worked together seamlessly, 'hand in glove', without a flash of daylight between us. We have worked in close partnership with both Conservative and Labour prime ministers and foreign secretaries; from Dominic Raab, Liz Truss and James Cleverly to David Cameron and now David Lammy. What we have negotiated is not the product of fragmented agendas, but the position of a unified British family determined to find a solution worthy of our people. Without a treaty, Gibraltar could be staring down the barrel of a hard border, marked by endless queues, disrupted supply chains, and a deeply uncertain future for many of our businesses. Our hospitals and elderly care homes would face chronic understaffing, and the surrounding region would suffer the almost certain loss of employment for many of the 15,000 cross-border workers who depend on Gibraltar's economy to support their families. The services we deliver to our people would all come under strain. Our public finances would be pushed to the brink. The self-governing Gibraltar we have built would be diminished, replaced by something poorer, more isolated, more inward-looking, and ultimately less able to thrive as a proud, British European Territory. Instead, we now stand at the threshold of something remarkable, and not just for Gibraltar, but also for the United Kingdom, for Spain, and for Europe and our people. Something bold. Something forward looking and hopeful. Something that finally breaks free of the negative inertia that has defined too much of our recent past. Unlocking potential across borders This is politics at its most elevated. The service-led principle of working for our people's benefit and not the performative personal antagonism that too often infects public life. Real, hard graft that overcomes challenges to deliver progress. This is the kind of result our people demand when they voice distrust and decry the political 'establishment'. Our Spanish and EU counterparts, for their part, have brought to the table a seriousness of purpose that also reflects the gravity of the moment. They, too, have recognised that this treaty is not merely about fluidity of movement, but about unlocking human and economic potential across borders. Make no mistake: the treaty that is now within reach is not one that the Gibraltarians have been forced to accept. Our people voted for us to have a mandate to turn our New Year's Eve agreement of 2020 into a UK/EU agreement/treaty. So we say 'yes' to this agreement, but not because we don't know how to say 'no' when we have to. We did so, emphatically, in 2002, when we triggered a referendum to reject Jack Straw's proposal of joint sovereignty with Spain, and I am just as adamant today that this treaty will not in any way compromise British sovereignty over Gibraltar. That will be set out, black upon white, in the treaty when it is published. It is a legal undertaking given by both sides in clear and unequivocal terms. So to be clear: in this treaty we have not ceded any control of Gibraltar to any authority. Just like today, only Gibraltar will decide who enters Gibraltar – exactly as we agreed in 2020 when Dominic Raab was foreign secretary and Boris Johnson was prime minister. This treaty unleashes the potential to usher in a new era. One in which we move beyond the tired narratives of the past on constant sovereignty disputes, towards a future defined by hope, cooperation and shared prosperity. It will pave the way for better jobs, more investment and lasting stability for Gibraltar and the wider region. It can deliver more harmonious human relations and a better quality of life for all our people. When you read it, I ask that you to look up from the pages of this treaty and see that better reality as it peers back at us from the future. This will be the treaty Gibraltar wants. It will be a treaty the UK and the EU can be proud of. And it will be a treaty that will propel us all to the better future politicians are elected to deliver. When the time comes, back Gibraltar and its proudly British people by backing the Gibraltar treaty.
