Beauty Advent calendars follow the same basic principle of the chocolate tradition, but fill their 24, or 12 doors with makeup and beauty products. They can contain full size or miniature products, and come from individual brands or retailers like Boots or Sephora. They’ve become a relatively new phenomenon over the last few years — exploding in popularity whilst targeting women to indulge in the festivities. Despite their attractiveness, the question arises: are they an indulgent act of self-care or gift-giving, or a new way that brands are capitalising off of Christmas?
Whilst on the surface, these calendars often seem like a great deal; a whole collection of different products, for a month of excitement that emphasises the build-up to Christmas. But, are they just using the façade of a tradition to market themselves as Christmas necessities? There seems to be a bombardment of advertisements telling women how much money they are saving and how greatly they would miss out without one of these calendars, despite their steep costs – usually over £100.
This is not casual disposable income for the average person, especially Gen Z and Millennials, who answer most to trends in the beauty world. If you factor in the fact that these calendars are for the lead up to Christmas, and don’t account for the money spent on gifts for the actual day, the ‘deal’ no longer seems so lucrative.
Furthermore, the retail versus value prices that are so heavily pushed in the marketing of these calendars, like the ‘Sephora Favourites’ calendar priced at £225 but valued at a seemingly arbitrary £1025, seem to reveal the actual profitability of the beauty industry. These companies are not pushing such deals to lose income, or out of pure Christmas generosity – in reality, the profit margins on beauty products are incredibly large, meaning that they are cheap to manufacture and marked up very heavily. This unveils a separate issue in the beauty sphere, of overpriced brand names and the lies of luxury, all underscored by the culture of overconsumption. This only ramps up during Christmas, when purchases are the most seasonally expected.
A further issue is that these companies rely on the excitement (and dopamine fix) of opening a box every single day, to distract from the actual contents of the calendar. It is extremely rare that one person actively wants 24 different beauty products at once, let alone from one brand. Each person has different preferences on shades, and formulas can work differently on skin textures. The likelihood that each item actually ends up being used is very slim.
When disappointment hits, the user can just look forward to the next door to open. Most products will sit unused for months — essentially a gamble in the usability of products, dressed up in the aesthetics of a Christmas tradition. This is not to say that good products aren’t included, more that a selection of 24 products will not match the preference of each individual. There is an incompatibility between the mass marketing of a ‘Christmas must-have’ and the individuality of a beauty routine; people spend time curating a collection of products that works with their skin type, budget, and tastes. The homogenous products behind the 24 doors cannot recreate this.
Brand names are clearly trying to associate themselves with the intimacies of Christmas joy by marketing a calendar as essential. This is reiterated when women remember chocolate advent calendars as a part of their childhoods, and are influenced into purchasing a beauty advent calendar as a sort of step-up. But this is less a tradition and more of a cultural phenomenon of brand involvement in everyday life to prevent the idea that we could live without them.
Endless content about this one genre of product is generated in the festive period, from articles reviewing the contents of calendars, influencers encouraging their consumption, and even long-form interviews by beauty marketing teams — essentially a long advertisement in the form of digital press.
Likewise, a lot of effort is put forth into the marketing of this expensive and underwhelming product, normalising seasonal overconsumption and brand power over festivity. For example, Vogue is selling a calendar for £355, described as “A coveted collection of wellness, skincare, beauty, jewellery, haircare and more curated by Vogue’s editors“. Whilst Vogue is not a beauty retailer, it uses its supposed expertise and household name to make a more lucrative product, that exudes luxury and capitalises off of the same exploitative model of festive association.
Make no mistake, beauty products can still make excellent gifts, or self-care indulgences. Consumers have the agency to buy specific products that they actually want, or researching for the sake of their friends and family. A selection of products can be curated with travel or miniature sizes, or larger individual goods can be packaged with a personalised touch for a sense of care.
The Christmas period should not be lost to the consumptive practices of brands looking to maximise profits, and we do not need to squeeze our pockets dry for the sake of beauty Advent calendars. These products can make thoughtful gifts, but none are a necessity or ‘must-have’.
