Do We Need A Point of View?

The reality of a “skin prep” range

It seems like we can’t go a month passing without a new beauty brand being launched by a celebrity, public figure or “influencer”. This month it is beauty guru Mikayla Nogueira’s turn, with her announcement of Point of View. A brand which she terms as a “skin prep” as opposed to a “skin care” range.

Which…. Frankly. Is just a marketing gimmick. She claims that the line is specifically designed to stop pilling before makeup and will make your makeup look better. But any form of skincare before your makeup will make your cosmetics look better. That is just common sense. Makeup on crusty, dry skin, will look crusty and dry. It will cling to patches, it won’t sit well, half of it will soak into the skin as your epidermis leaches any water or oil out of the foundation.

And as for her assertion that it’ll specifically reduce pilling… there’s no guarantee of that. You can most effectively reduce pilling by not layering too many silicone-based products together, as well as maintaining an effective and regular skincare routine. Things like using hydrating ingredients, retinoids, a weekly exfoliation, all of these can reduce the likelihood of pilling. But again, there’s no guarantee either way that you won’t get pilling.

Beyond that, it feels odd for Mikayla to be launching a skincare line (I refuse to call it skin prep, it’s skincare ffs). She doesn’t really have any skincare knowledge, her expertise is strictly in makeup and she’s never really been known for skincare besides what she posts about in pr.

Now look, I don’t particularly like Mikayla. Her personality annoys me, her content is clickbait-y and she fakes… a lot. So my opinion is naturally going to be skewed towards the negative. But let me put my neutral hat on.

This range is designed to make money. From the neutral packaging which will photograph well, to the custom componentry that will look good in video as brown-nosy influencers drip it, whip it and amp it all over their faces. The packaging is very clearly designed as an homage to Rhode packaging, and to be honest is the main reason why I’d argue the milk toner was included in the line. The price point is good, which means they’re banking on selling a lot to make a profit. Considering her social following, it’s a pretty safe bet.

Mikayla is working with a few good people to make this. It’s being funded by Imaginary Ventures, who have invested in Glossier and Kosas to name a few. She’s also working with beauty executive Ani Hadjinian of Bobbi Brown and Augustinus Bader. Whilst I believe Mikayla has some input in it, this is definitely being driven with Mikayla as the figurehead. They’ve utilised Korean-inspired ingredients and development technologies to expand the target market of the line. With K-Beauty only going from strength to strength, they’re of course banking on that to pique people’s interests.

Now the products themselves, from what I’ve seen of the textures, they look nice! A rehydrating milk toner, a humectant serum, a whipped cream (not my preferred texture tbh, but I get why they opted for whipped in America), a lip balm, and a tacky primer (again, not my preferred primer texture). They look fine, the ingredients look nice, I’m sure the range will be lovely for people, especially those who perhaps haven’t used this style of product before. But nothing here is revolutionary.

The argument can absolutely be made that no recent skincare launches have been revolutionary, and that is totally valid. But there is a difference between a brand expanding out their offering based on what is trending or what their lineup is missing, and a whole new brand launching claiming to be “innovative.” When it is not.

What are your thoughts on Point of View? Let me know in the comments!