-
Beauty Entrepreneurs: Working With Cosmetic Contract Manufacturers
You’ve hired an independent Formulation Chemist to develop your products (this is a good idea because you will own your formulas) and have transferred your formulas to a contract manufacturer. But, the prototypes from the contract manufacturer are not quite matching up to the prototypes from your Formulation Chemist. Why?
It is not uncommon for a contract manufacturer to substitute the suppliers of commodity ingredients in your formula. Most all contract manufacturers have “stock” commodity ingredients that they use in manufacturing. These could include Xanthan Gum, Fatty Alcohols (Cetyl, Stearyl, Cetearyl) and many others. The CM has already qualified these stock ingredients, have ready volumes in supply and have experience working with these stock ingredients.
Substitution of commodities specified by your Formulation Chemist with Contract Manufacturer stock ingredients help keep your costs low since your CM do not have to qualify a new ingredient/supplier and does not have to special order a commodity ingredient specifically for your production run. Most of the time, you will not notice the substitution of ingredient suppliers in the haptics (sensorials) and performance of your product. But, that is not always the case.
If your CM prototypes are not quite matching up with your Formulation Chemist prototypes always ask the question: For which ingredients in your formula is the CM using a different supplier than the ingredient supplier specified by your Formulation Chemist?
You will usually find that ingredients from a different supplier is the root cause of differences between your Formulation Chemist and Contract Manufacturer prototypes.
Case In point: I developed a Skin Barrier Cream for a client. The client was not happy with any of the prototypes from the CM. After several iterations, I told the client to ask the CM for the list of suppliers they were using for all ingredients. It turns out that the CM had substituted suppliers for approximately 50% of the ingredient supplliers in the formula. While most of the substitutions were acceptable, there were a couple that were key to the difference in the prototypes. Had the CM disclosed this upfront it would have saved lots of time and effort as I could have easily pinpointed the ingredients that were causing the issue.
Case in point: I developed a Serum for a client. The Serum was crystal clear because I specified a Xanthan Gum that yields clear solutions. The CM’s prototypes were always cloudy. It turns out they were using a different Xanthan Gum that was causing the cloudiness.
It is important to clarify with your CM when they are costing-out your formula what ingredient supplier substitutions they are including in your formula and before the CM makes any prototypes have this agreed to. It may be more expensive because you will likely have to pay upfront for the MOQ from a specific supplier that is not stock for the CM, but is more efficient in getting your product to market.
-
This discussion was modified 3 months, 3 weeks ago by
MarkBroussard.
-
This discussion was modified 3 months, 3 weeks ago by
-
4 Replies
-
Thank you @MarkBroussard , and @Graillotion (for the comment on CCT that opened my eyes in this regard)- I’m still formulating for myself and family/friends, but it’s good to know beforehand such important details.
-
I started work with a CM who (without saying anything to me) swapped out my working preservative system with one of the “natural” ones they liked to work with. Of course, the stability test failed. They just didn’t want to work with parabens. I found a new CM.
-
It’s an issue of transparency. The CM has a responsibility to be 100% transparent about the ingredients. In my 20-year experience in CM, this was always my approach.
-
And another thought. If you don’t ask, you won’t get. So as a customer, it is incumbent on you to ask the CM these types of questions.
Log in to reply.