I am editing gradually my planned forthcoming book on Haircare. This shortened page is from that book. To know the author's background, click  parachute2. The book will also contain the duping practices of some hair products.

Since 1969 I have not come across a single case where a Company which indulged in Duping the Public got caught and punished adequately to deter others. Only case is HLL Vs Colgate. Case closed without any sting. Lever is a notorious, duping Scoundrel

 

Law of the Land

Know the terms and spirit of the Law and then study the page. Wonder where the enforcers are ?

MRTPC, now renamed as Competition Commission, quoted the below mentioned Ruling of the Supreme Court of India, while passing the verdict in the first case between Colgate and Hindustan Unilever

The Supreme Court had ruled that  "the object is to bring honesty and truth in the relationship between the manufacturer and the consumer". And "if the general impression conveyed is false, the most punctilious and scrupulous accuracy in immaterial minutiae will not render the representations true"  [a lie is a lie even if covered with irrelevant packing and convoluted explanations]

2. MRTPC: "if the claim of "102"% anti- bacterial superiority is ultimately not found to be true," consumers by and large can be said to have been duped by such advertisement campaign - if the advertised claim is ultimately not found to be true can be substituted for the earlier words within quotes. That is, the observation is not meant for one case but for all tall, dubious and unproven claims

3 Affected Party / Public: 'This injury caused to the public in general can hardly be compensated in terms of money, as the feeling of being duped cannot be evaluated in monetary terms'. This observation is against Hindustan Lever.

Has the Public ever been compensated, in deeds, money or punishing the guilty in the last 50 years ?

Hindustan Unilever, Colgate, Johnson & Johnson and many others have violated the terms and spirit of the Law of the Land. Please check Site Map 2 and select your page

'Parachute Therapy's claim - invisible,  efficacy and expertise

We do not need a Anna. We have to pray for 1000 Annas for betterment of India. I felt that in 1970 and badly now in 2012

 

Parachute is plain Coconut Oil as per the label. It is just repacked and branded by Marico Industries. On TV, it is a hair oil. I suspect that they pay Sales Tax as applicable to Edible products.

They criticised / ridiculed Ayurveda in their advertisements in 2007 and tried to portray themselves as Hair Experts without any exhibited proof for expertise. If they can do it, do not the Public get the right to blast them ? This act of Marico is another case of cheap and disgusting advertisement - no protests, reprimand or accountability. Money / Corruption is the victor

 

"Methi, Shethi Chod thoe, Use the Hair Expert's product’ . Another similar sounding one was perhaps ‘mehendi, vehendi chod thoe’ - National Geographic Channel, Sunday, 23-12-2007

Denigrating Centuries old Therapy like Ayurveda, so offhand without any basis, is in very bad taste. How they rated themselves to be higher than Ayurveda is not clear. Whatever gave them right to denigrate Natural Therapy / Ayurveda, makes them liable to receive the following comments

One who is very skilled in a field, adroit etc, can be called ‘Expert’. To me, Marico / Parachute is no Expert. Why ? They referred to me in 97 for the Technology of Swapna Hair Enricher. Am I or are they, the better ‘Expert’ ? Their letter dt 20-1-1998 is made open in my website, under the title ‘parachute2’

In 2002, 3 major hair oil makers including Marico, accounting for 60% share of the branded Hair Oil market, referred to me for ‘non sticky hair oil’ technology. I then decided that this Technology should go free to the Public and not for commercial use. Letters were discarded. You have to take my words in trust.

Feb 14, 2012: Marico has bought Livon and Set Wet as per Business Standard.

Marico is no Hair Expert if we account the above 3 instances together. They did not have the expertise to make such products so far is a reasonable inference.

 

Misuse of the Term -  Hair Fall therapy / therpie

Therapy normally means a ‘system / method of treatment of an ailment, as per protocols / procedures, laid / handed down with reasonable historical evidence for efficacy and safety’. I could not get the exact definition in Chamber’s dictionary.

Therapy normally gives an impression to the public that it is a well tested and used for years, ‘system of treatment‘ somewhere in the World and that the plus and minus points are known. Therapy term is not normally used for a ‘treatment’ that a single individual, Doctor or company may follow.

Marico is morally guilty of misusing the term ‘therapy’ and giving a larger than life picture to the public - unwarranted and baseless

[ When they advertise a lie on TV, public is duped. So, what is wrong in my in exposing a letter and more ?]

 

reduction in hair fall was not supported / checked in the survey done by Claims Ltd for Parachute’s ‘hairfall therapy’ treatment. 27 % of the 270 users surveyed [72.9 persons ? ] mentioned only about smoothness. What a survey and results for an expert ?

Yet there were baseless claims on TV. ? The dubious claims were absent in labels. Are these not cheap unfair trade practices ?

 

 

1. They claim that there are 22 factors for hair fall - shocking unsaid fact is, it is ineffective for the earlier 21 factors. It is implied that the 22 factors are independent and not interlinked. The basis if any for the 22 factors is unknown. And the factors must be in order of relevance to hair fall.

2. Ineffective / Illogical : If loss is due to ‘22’ factors, anyone factor has relevance for 4.5% of people / of the loss. By the time, you reach 22nd factor, you have lost already 95% hair. Look at a hereditary total baldy on the street. He would have a hair band across the ears at the back - more than 5% hair without any fuss.

Why go for Parachute Therapy ? Does it indicate any expertise ? No. To me, the claim shows the abject depravity of the company.

 

1. Market facts: Marico advertised in 2002, their "Dandruff Solution". I have not heard it in the last 7-8 years. Expertise is claimed by money not demonstrated by results !

2. ‘hairfall control’ unchecked - Cheapness in presenting the facts

3. ‘Stress / Tension is the 22nd factor for hair loss’ - not backed by users, survey or research. So, it is a baseless claim.

4. There is no list in any of the 20 Major Medical Therapies of even 10 hair loss causes in order of importance. Is not Marico challenging all, without an iota of research ? Deriding Ayurveda was the provocation for my blast. They are at a much lower level

5. Ridiculous: Recommended in cases where the hair fall is between 50 to 100. With 100 fall per day, head will be become clean in 3 years. Quoting a high figure, I suspect that they have kept ready 21 excuses, if ‘hairfall therapie’ does not work.

 

Mussolini ‘s answer for such a  excuse

Mussolini visited a Church while in power. The Church Bell did not ring in his honour. Annoyed, he summoned the Cardinal for the disrespect. The Cardinal said that there 22 reasons why the Church Bell did not ring and that there was never any intention of showing any disrespect. The Cardinal said that the first reason for not ringing the bell was that the Church has no Bell. Mussolini did not bother to hear the other 21 excuses. Parachute’s hair fall therapy reminded me of this old joke read in now defunct ‘pageant’. Marico’s claim is a cheap duping exercise

 

 

Parachute’s warm oil advertisement on 15-1-2011 about extra benefit for the hair is unscientific and illogical. Warming reduces the viscosity / thickness. Thinned Oil can penetrate better. Warming is a minor physical change and does not improve or reduce the benefit of Coconut Oil. It is like saying, Ice is more beneficial than Water. How they dare to mouth such nonsense ?

 

Poser

Perhaps some readers may understand as to why I did not sell the Technology of ‘non sticky hair oil’ in Feb 2002. The research head of another company asked whether it can work for Coconut Oil extracted from Copra as well as from Coconut. And I had said then also that the Technology would work for Castor Oil.

I am not known. I know that. But please do not mistake 'popularity' and 'quality / trustability' as synonyms. Dawood Ibrahim is known in India and Pakistan but I am unknown even in my street. Realising the difference, do what soothes the brain. Why have Stress ?

Cheap Selling tricks: fair n lovely  jnj baby oil   question Lever  parachute therapy  Unfair practices

 

Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, Krishi Bhawan,   New Delhi 110001. Website www.fcamin.nic.in. [ You may complain to them.]

They advertise nowadays on TV about 'Rights and Responsiblities' of the Consumer. How will they protect that right and penalise the guilty is unsaid. Ever since I joined IIM, Ahmedabad in 1967 as a student and took interest in Marketing, not a single case has been taken up against any offending company in the last 44 years

 

	Errors and Omissions exempted.  If there be any unwanted oversights, mistake in content or suggestions for improvements,  I will be thankful for your feedback
	Personal website of R. Ranganathan M.Sc., [ MBA - IIMA]    Main / original content: around 2002: last minor modification, Feb 18, 2012.    Supply   Contact