L'Oreal won't be making an offer to Anita. It will be making an offer to the shareholders of The Body Shop PLC, a publicly traded limited liability company whose shares are readily tradeable on the stock exchange.

The Body Shop Ltd started off as a privately owned company. But somewhere down the line, Anita decided that she should float it on the stock exchange to raise money in order to expand the business so that it could do more nice ethical stuff than ever before and also understandably so that she could live a well deserved more comfortable lifestyle. After all, what's the point in working hard to start a successful business if you don't get to be a millionaire a few years down the line.

So, the majority of the shares in this company have not been owned by Anita for a very long time now. It is not to Anita that L'Oreal are making the bid. It is to the fund managers who own most of the shares.

Anita is not selling out. She sold out a long time ago, naively believing that putting the company on the stock exchange would not destroy its independence or her control over it.

--

By the way, did you know that L'Oreal is itself owned by Nestle?

--

That bloke who said it's "not the wacky, ethical business it used to be" is a total fuckhead. He's implying that to be ethical is somehow "wacky and crazy and outa this world, man". Gotta be a bit of a hippy if you're going to be ethical. Normal business people don't bother being ethical, oh no. Only weird strange, wacky, zany eccentrics would even think of it.

UH?????

Look ethical up in the dictionary. It just means not doing something that's WRONG, ie NOT HURTING PEOPLE. Not fucking people over....

It's not some luxury or exotic idea for people who want to be a bit trendy or a bit alternative or even just a bit self-righteous. It just means not being a fucking evil cunt. That's all ethical means. And if this guy thinks that not being a fucking evil cunt is somehow "wacky" and "zany" and a little bit "out there", then he can suck my arse.

If I met this guy, and I (hypothetically) gave him a kick in the teeth, he would think that was a bit unfair. He would think it was wrong of me to have given him a kick in the teeth. He'd say "What the hell did you do that for? That's way out of order. I can't believe you just did that". Then I could, according to his warped twisted logic, say "Well, I thought about refraining from kicking you in the teeth. But then I thought well, even though it's not very nice, I'm going to do it anyway because choosing not to would make me wacky and zany and a bit of a mad crazy hippie".

People are all too happy to talk about right and wrong when it suits them. 9/11? "That was totally immoral". Harold Shipman - was he an ethical person? "Was he fuck"

But when it comes to BUSINESS, the concept of BUSINESS having to obey some kind of moral / ethical code... the idea of BUSINESS having to constrain itself so far as to restrain from hurting other human beings - the mere suggestion that it should, shock horror, pay people evough to live (or maybe even more than that, god forbid!) or that it should resist the temptation to torture animals for the benefit of people who want to wear the latest brand of makeup, or that a company should not sell bulldozers to a hostile occupying army that is arbitrarily destroying people's houses, etc etc etc... all of that is considered, for the birds - or at best for the hippies, for the loony left, or for the bleeding heart liberals of this world. No. "The Business Of Business Is Business". "Ethics and Economics Don't Mix". "It's The Economy Stupid".

That's the way it always seems to me. "PEOPLE MUST LEARN WHAT IS RIGHT AND WHAT IS WRONG!!! PREFERABLY FROM THE BIBLE GOD DAMMIT!". But when it comes to **business** to suggest that business people should seriously be concerned about anything other than trying their hardest to make themselves rich - that is apparently considered... "wacky".

If that ain't double-think what the fuck is???

1. As I understand it The Body Shop has not received an approach from L'Oreal as yet, so it's hard to accept that this is an approach that they are welcoming.

2. Anita and Gordon Roddick do not have control over the day to day running of the business any longer. They are significant shareholders. I don't think it's fair to throw accusations at them for 'selling themselves too cheaply' when they have little control over what offers either L'Oreal make, or The Body Shop respond to in return.

Shareholders do have a major influence on these decisions, If the body shop is bought out by L'Oreal I will be the first outside campaigning against them.

Am disgusted at the news of the sale of Body Shop to L'Oreal. I do not buy L'Oreal cosmetics/shampoos because of their testing cosmetics on animals and will now never buy Body Shop products again either. Now I have to find an alternative to Body Shop products. Any suggestions of a suitable ethical alternative?

I used to be a customer but I will no longer purchase any Body Shop products. I don't want to support L'oreal or Nestle, or animal testing L'oreal conducts. I'm extremely disappointed in Body Shop's actions. I think this cannot but have negative effect on their image and the brand itself. It's business of course, but giving up all your basic principles which in the beginning made Body Shop differ from other campnies, for a huge amount of money. It's disgusting.

I bought regularly from Body Shop but I will not anymore... L O R E A L + Body Shop = a joke


The only one I trust after Body Shop is Occitane...
 http://www.loccitane.com/

What do you think ?

Do you have a list we can trust and products we can find in Europe(I am from Belgium).

A way to make things happen is to change the way we buy... Buy cruelty free products !

Regards,

Rudy Vissers

I have certainly taken Body Shop off my list, have written to tell them so  UKCustomer.Relations@the-body-shop.com and will be taking my loyalty card back to my local shop on Saturday, hopefully when there will be plenty of customers around who may not have heard the news...

I believe Weleda and Lavera are non-animal-tested brands. Both are available from health food stores (at least they are here in France).
There is a list of non-animal-tested products on the website of French animal rights group One Voice  http://www.experimentation-animale.org/ressources/produits_non_testes.html Body Shop is still listed; I've written to inform them of the proposed buyout by L'Oréal.

Let's make sure we tell as many people we can about this as Body Shop's testing policy is a major reason why people buy their brand.

Best regards
Sandra P
Paris, France

Don't you, those of you who are threatening to boycott The Body Shop now that it's been taken over by L'Oreal, think that doing so would be counter-productive to long-term ethical goals? The Body Shop will still be run as it was before (it's part of the contract) so the Body Shop brand itself will still be as 'ethical' as before. As L'Oreal see how well it does (as they've obviously already seen) they will be encouraged, especially with the growing swell of ethical consumerism, to develop ways of making their other brands more 'ethical'. There is no short-term solution. Big businesses getting involved with 'ethical' businesses must be a step in the right direction. Hopefully...:)