Latest / Brand Storytelling with Fexingo: Narrative, Mission, and Stories That Sell / How Fenty Beauty Built Inclusion Into the Product
Transcript
- Lucas: It's July 2026, and I can still remember exactly where I was when Fenty Beauty dropped its first 40 foundation shades back in 2017. It felt like the entire beauty industry suddenly had to answer for why it had never done that before. Luna: And it wasn't just the shade range. It was the way they made inclusion feel like the product itself, not a corporate value statement. Lucas: Exactly. So today I want to unpack what Fenty Beauty did differently, why it worked so well financially, and what happens when a brand's central idea becomes the new baseline. Because the thing about raising the bar is, eventually everyone else jumps over it. Luna: Yeah, and that's where the real test starts. But let's start with the launch. What was the actual state of the market before September 2017? Lucas: So the conventional wisdom in prestige cosmetics was that you needed maybe 10 to 20 shades for a foundation line. Most brands covered light to medium, a few went deeper, and almost nobody had a consistent undertone system across the full spectrum. Estee Lauder's Double Wear had about 30 shades, but that was considered generous. L'Oreal, CoverGirl, they were in the 10 to 15 range. And consumers of colour had been complaining about this for decades, but the industry treated it as a niche concern. Luna: Right, because the assumption was that women with deeper skin tones just didn't buy as much foundation, or that the R&D cost to formulate for more melanin wasn't justified. Lucas: That was the implicit logic. And then Rihanna and her team at Kendo, which is LVMH's incubator, came in with 40 shades. But here's the detail everyone misses: they didn't just add dark shades. They built the line with a systematic undertone approach — warm, neutral, cool — across all depths. So a pale person with olive undertones and a deep person with golden undertones both had options. That was unprecedented in prestige retail. Luna: And they launched in 1,600 Sephora stores globally on day one, plus online. Which meant any woman could walk in, find her shade, and buy it right then. No 'we don't carry your colour' moment. Lucas: The emotional payoff of that moment is the whole story. Because what Fenty Beauty actually sold was the feeling of being seen. The foundation was very good, but it wasn't radically better than other luxury formulas. The innovation was the message embedded in the product. And the market rewarded it immediately. They did about $400 million in revenue in the first month. Luna: That's a staggering number. To put it in context, Kylie Cosmetics did an estimated $300 million in its entire first year. Lucas: Yeah, Fenty's first month was bigger than most celebrity brands' first year. And it forced a reckoning. Within 12 months, every major brand had expanded its shade range. L'Oreal went to 35. Estee Lauder pushed into the 40s. Even drugstore brands like Maybelline and CoverGirl rushed to catch up. The baseline moved from 10 shades to 30-plus basically overnight. Luna: But here's my question: if everyone now has 40 shades, what is Fenty's differentiator now? The inclusion story became the standard. Lucas: That's the central tension. Fenty's brand meaning was 'we see you'. When everyone says that, it loses power. And we've seen some erosion. In 2020, Fenty's sales growth slowed. LVMH doesn't break out Fenty Beauty numbers separately, but analysts estimated that by 2022, the brand's market share in the US prestige category had slipped from around 8 percent to maybe 5 or 6 percent. Luna: But is that because the brand lost relevance, or because the category got more competitive? Lucas: A bit of both. The competitive landscape is way more crowded. Brands like Uoma Beauty, Mented, and Danessa Myricks, which were founded specifically to serve underserved skin tones, now compete directly with Fenty. And the incumbents have learned to tell inclusion stories of their own. So Fenty's original proposition is no longer unique. But I'd argue the brand still has a moat, and it's Rihanna herself. Luna: The cultural gravity of a pop icon who also happens to be a billionaire entrepreneur. Lucas: Exactly. She is the embodiment of the brand's message. She's Black, she's biracial, she's a woman, she's a mogul, and she's personally credible on inclusion in a way that a corporate marketing department never could be. That's nearly impossible to replicate. You can copy the shade range, but you can't copy the founder. Luna: So the lesson for other brands might be that product-level inclusion is table stakes now, but the founder story is the real differentiator. Lucas: I think that's exactly right. And it's why we're talking about Fenty on a branding show, not just a beauty show. Because the framework applies across categories. If you're a consumer brand thinking about inclusion, the easy part is expanding your size range or your shade range. The hard part is making sure the founder or CEO has the authority to tell that story authentically. Luna: And if you don't have a Rihanna, you have to find another way to embed inclusion into the product itself, not just the advertising. Lucas: Right. And that's where the real work is. So let's look at a couple of other brands that have done this well. Glossier, for example, built its brand around 'skin first, makeup second' and the idea of the everyday person as the model. But their shade range was criticised early on as too limited. They expanded, but it felt reactive. Fenty's move felt proactive. Luna: Because it was the entire premise of the brand from day one. You can't retrofit inclusion. Consumers can smell a pivot a mile away. Lucas: And that's the core insight of this episode. Inclusion as a brand strategy only works if it's baked into the product architecture from the beginning. Fenty's 40 shades weren't an add-on. They were the product. Compare that to, say, a clothing brand that adds plus sizes two years after launch. The customer who needed those sizes already felt ignored. She's not coming back. Luna: That's a really good point. And it makes me think about the long-term challenge for Fenty. If inclusion becomes the standard, what's next for the brand? They've launched skin care, which is a logical extension, but the brand halo has faded a bit. Lucas: I think the next frontier for Fenty is category expansion into something that feels as disruptive as the original foundation launch. Maybe fragrance, maybe hair care, maybe something completely unexpected. But the brand needs a new story that feels as fresh as '40 shades for everyone' did in 2017. Luna: And that's the hard part. Because once you've changed the industry, you can't change it again with the same move. Lucas: Exactly. So the question becomes: can Fenty Beauty remain a leader, or will it be remembered as a brilliant one-act play? I don't know the answer, but it's fascinating to watch. Luna: And if these marketing conversations have sparked something you've actually used in your own work, or even just made you think differently about a brand you love, listener support is what keeps this show ad-free and independent. It's a small thing, but it helps us keep doing deep dives like this one. Lucas: Yeah, if you find value in these episodes, you can support the show at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. No pressure, but every bit helps us stay focused on the stories that matter. Luna: Alright, back to the branding question. So we've established that Fenty's inclusion was product-level and founder-authentic. But let's talk about the risk of that strategy. When your brand is built on a specific promise of inclusion, what happens when you make a misstep? Lucas: Well, we saw that play out in 2020 when Fenty faced backlash over a foundation shade that oxidised orange on deeper skin tones. Customers posted videos, and the brand had to reformulate. Because the promise was 'we see you', any failure felt like a betrayal. That's the liability of a high-identity brand. Luna: So the higher the emotional stake, the higher the expectation of perfection. Lucas: Exactly. And Fenty handled it reasonably well. They acknowledged the issue, pulled the shade, and reformulated. But it was a reminder that when your brand is built on a promise of inclusion, every product flaw is read as exclusion. Luna: That's a really useful cautionary note for any brand thinking of making inclusion central to their identity. You have to be willing to invest in R&D and quality control to a degree that matches your promise. Lucas: Yeah, and that's expensive. Fenty's foundation formula is more complex than a typical luxury foundation because it has to perform across a wider range of skin tones and undertones. The cost of goods is higher. But that's the price of authenticity. Luna: So let's zoom out. What's the one concrete thing a brand can take away from Fenty's story that applies beyond beauty? Lucas: I'd say it's this: if you want to make inclusion your brand story, don't make it a campaign. Make it a product feature. Build it into the way your product is designed, not just the way it's marketed. Because marketing can be copied in a quarter. Product architecture takes years to replicate. Luna: That's a clean takeaway. And I think that's why Fenty's influence will last, even if its market share ebbs and flows. They changed what 'good enough' means in an entire category. Lucas: Yeah, and that's a legacy very few brands achieve. So whether you're in beauty, apparel, tech, or finance, the question is: what's the 40 shades of your industry? What is the unexamined assumption about who your product is for, and what would it take to design for the overlooked customer from day one? Luna: That's the question we should all sit with. Thanks, Lucas. Lucas: Thanks, Luna. And thanks to everyone listening. See you next time on Brand Storytelling with Fexingo.