????大家可能還不知道，我們現(xiàn)在生活在一個全新的零售世界里。這個世界并不僅是一個龐大的消費群體，而是被經(jīng)濟地位劃分成兩個消費階層。富裕階層購買高檔商品，貧窮階層只能努力生存下去。

????這種兩極分化的趨勢既出現(xiàn)在服裝和家用電器方面，也出現(xiàn)在唇膏、睫毛膏和保濕霜的市場。談到美容產(chǎn)品的銷售，有錢人開心購物，而窮人則黯然走開。

????美國美容和個人護理產(chǎn)品銷售額近來總體表現(xiàn)低迷。根據(jù)歐睿信息咨詢公司（Euromonitor）的統(tǒng)計，這個市場去年增長了1.8%，分別低于2012年3.2%的增長和2011年4.3%的增長。

????但是仔細(xì)觀察高檔美容和個人護理用品（售價21美元以上）的銷售額，大家會發(fā)現(xiàn)完全不同的情況。高檔美容產(chǎn)品行業(yè)去年的銷售額增長了3.3%，在2008年到2013年期間銷售額增長了16.9%。另一方面，大眾美容產(chǎn)品（售價20美元以下）的銷售額在2013年僅增長1.3%，在過去五年的增長幅度也只有8.3%。

????奢華美容產(chǎn)品的銷售額較高，這些產(chǎn)品通常在百貨商店和絲芙蘭、MAC或資生堂等美容產(chǎn)品專賣店出售，反映了美國經(jīng)濟復(fù)蘇僅限于最高端的消費者。截止到2013年9月，2009年以來美國收入最高的1%人口占據(jù)了全部收入增長的95%。結(jié)果是，美國收入最高的5%人口支出增長了17%，而收入最低的95%人口支出只增長了1%。

????歐睿信息咨詢公司的高級研究分析師弗吉尼亞?李說：“隨著股市的良好表現(xiàn)和房地產(chǎn)價格的回升，富?？蛻舾敢飧跺X購買高端產(chǎn)品。”她表示，由于食品券開支削減和醫(yī)療保健的不確定性，低收入客戶并不具備同樣的消費信心，因此藥店銷售的廉價美容產(chǎn)品業(yè)績不佳。

????比較銷售類似美容產(chǎn)品的高端和大眾品牌時，富人和窮人的差異更為明顯。莎莉漢森（Sally Hansen）主要銷售價格在4美元到6美元的指甲油，該品牌在2013年的銷售額下降了7.3%。與此同時，艾茜（Essie）品牌銷售的每瓶指甲油定價為8美元到8.50美元，銷售額同比增長了13.6%。封面女郎（Cover Girl）主要銷售廉價化妝品系列，人們可以在沃爾格林藥店（Walgreens）和CVS藥店找到這些產(chǎn)品，它在2013年的銷售額增長了1.9%。相比之下，化妝品售價更昂貴的MAC品牌銷售額增長了7.2%。露得清（Neutrogena）銷售的4盎司面部保濕乳液每瓶只賣12.99美元，它去年的銷售額增長1.3%。倩碧（Clinique）銷售的4.2盎司保濕化妝水售價27美元，去年銷售額增長了6%。

????當(dāng)然，銷售數(shù)字不僅反映了消費者信心，也揭示了零售商的營銷策略。完全脫離經(jīng)濟不平等大辯論的一個影響因素就是絲芙蘭和Ulta等專業(yè)美容產(chǎn)品零售店的迅速增長。這些零售店把聲譽良好的品牌從百貨公司專柜帶到顧客手中，顧客現(xiàn)在感覺更愿意購買昂貴的產(chǎn)品，因為她們可以先試用產(chǎn)品?；瘖y品訂購公司Birchbox也讓顧客在家中享受類似的體驗。

????此外，零售商也贊同窮人不想購買非必需品的理論。研究家用和個人護理產(chǎn)品行業(yè)的消費者前沿公司（Consumer Edge Research）執(zhí)行董事哈維爾?埃斯卡蘭特表示，2013年第三季度，大型零售商都在“消化庫存”。這些商店把美容產(chǎn)品撤下走道兩端的陳列架，也就是零售賣場吸引消費者沖動型購買的促銷區(qū)，取而代之的是更實用的商品，這種做法抑制了大眾美容產(chǎn)品的銷售收入。埃斯卡蘭特說：“零售商決定了人們不買睫毛膏，而是購買海綿。從某種程度上說，它成了一個自我實現(xiàn)的預(yù)言。”（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：孟潔冰

????

????If you're not aware already, we're living in a new retail world, where there isn't so much one large consumer base, but two divided by economic status. The well-off are buying bigtime, the worse-off are just trying to survive.

????The bifurcation trend is present in apparel and home appliances, and it's holding true in the land of lipstick, mascara, and moisturizer too. When it comes to beauty product sales, the rich are puckering up, while the poor are pulling away.

????Beauty and personal care sales overall in the United States have been sluggish of late. The market grew 1.8% last year, a slowdown from the 3.2% and 4.3% growth it recorded in 2012 and 2011, respectively, according to Euromonitor.

????But a look at the sales of premium beauty and personal care products (priced $21 and up) tells a slightly different story. In that sector, sales grew 3.3% last year, and there was an increase in sales of 16.9% in the period between 2008 and 2013. On the flip side, sales of mass beauty products (priced $20 and under) grew just 1.3% in 2013 and 8.3% in the past five years.

????The higher sales of luxury beauty products that are typically sold at a department store or stand-alone beauty stores such as Sephora, MAC, or Shiseido reflect the economic recovery that's confined to the upper echelon of consumers. As of September 2013, 95% of the income gains since 2009 have gone to the top 1%. As a result, spending by the top 5% of earners has risen 17%; it's risen just 1% among the bottom 95% of earners.

????"With the good stock market performance and the recovery in housing prices, affluent customers feel comfortable spending on premium products" says Virginia Lee, a senior research analyst at Euromonitor. With food stamp cuts and uncertainty over health care, lower income customers don't have that same confidence, she says, and cheaper beauty products for sale at drugstores have struggled as a result.

????The rich vs. poor divide is obvious when comparing sales of premium and mass brands that sell similar beauty products. Sally Hansen, which sells nail polish that costs between $4 and $6, saw sales decrease by 7.3% in 2013. Sales at Essie, meanwhile, where a bottle of nail polish will run you $8 to $8.50, grew 13.6%. Cover Girl, with its inexpensive line of makeup you can find in any Walgreens (WAG) or CVS (CVS), saw 1.9% growth in 2013. Compare that to MAC's more expensive makeup, whose sales grew 7.2%. Neutrogena, whose 4 oz. bottle of facial moisturizer costs $12.99, saw sales increase 1.3% last year. Clinique, which sells a $27 4.2 oz bottle of moisturizing lotion, saw a 6% bump.

????The sales figures don't only reflect consumer sentiment, of course, but also point to retailers' strategies. One influence that's totally separate from the economic inequality debate is the proliferation of specialty beauty stores Sephora and Ulta, which bring prestige brands out from behind the department store counter and into the hands of consumers, who now feel more comfortable purchasing a pricey product since they can test it first. Subscription box company Birchbox gives customers a similar experience at home.

????And then there's the case of retailers buying into the theory that poorer people don't want discretionary items. In the third quarter of 2013, mass retailers did what's called a "de-stocking," according to Javier Escalante, an executive director at Consumer Edge Research who covers the household and personal care sectors. The stores removed beauty items from aisle endcap displays -- retail real estate known to prompt impulse buys -- and replaced them with more practical items, which helped depress mass beauty sales. "Retailers made the decision that people aren't into mascara, they're into sponges," Escalante says. "In a way, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy."????