Face moisturisers: raising the price costs less than it earns
I measured 3,237 price changes across 207 face moisturisers and compared each one against the products that held their price. A price increase moved rank by less than the increase itself, and the range stays below one for one — so this is demonstrable, not a hunch. Discounts sit at a similar level but their range still touches one for one, so no clear verdict there. And in the cheapest third of the category, price barely moves rank in either direction.
In short
- A 10 percent price increase cost about 8 percent of rank (range 6 to 10). Less than the price gained — the range stays clear of one for one, so the finding holds.
- A 10 percent discount improved rank by about 8 percent, but its range still touches one for one. Whether discounting pays here is not demonstrable.
- In the budget third (€5–19), price is barely a lever at all: cuts 0.49, increases 0.52, both demonstrably weaker than the price move itself.
- The budget and mid ranges for discounts do not overlap — a demonstrated difference between the segments.
- Competitors barely answer. Price moves are followed only 6 percent more often than their own repricing rhythm would produce. This is a slow market.
Price cuts
A 10% cut improved rank by roughly 6 to 11 percent.
Price increases
A 10% increase cost roughly 6 to 10 percent of rank.
Where price still works, and where it does not
The budget third is the clearest result in this report. A discount there moved rank by 0.49 and an increase by 0.52 — both with ranges that stay below one for one, so in that segment price demonstrably buys and costs less than the price change itself. For a product under €19, a discount gives away more margin than it wins in visibility, and an increase costs less rank than it adds in price.
Above €19 the picture changes and becomes less certain. Cuts measure 1.14 in the middle group and 1.12 at the premium end, but both ranges cross one for one, so I cannot say whether discounting there earns more than it costs. What is demonstrated is the difference between the budget and the mid group for discounts: their ranges do not touch.
Increases are the more useful side of this report. At category level and in the budget and mid groups, they cost less rank than the price gained. Only at the premium end does the reaction reach roughly one for one — and even there the range is wide.
The full picture
01 · 1 · Does the size of the discount matter?
Yes, steadily — and there is no ceiling.
Rank after price changes of different sizes
All six sizes produced a demonstrable effect. A small discount improved rank by 11 percent, a moderate one by 20 percent, a quarter off or more by 30 percent. The increase side mirrors it: 12 percent worse rank for a small rise, 32 percent for a large one.
So the direction of every step is clear, even though the category-level figure for cuts is not. That is not a contradiction: the bins measure how far rank moves at a given discount depth, while the category figure asks whether that movement is bigger or smaller than the price change that caused it. Rank moves reliably here — it just tends to move less than the price does.
02 · 2 · Will competitors follow?
Barely. This is a slow market.
Time until the first competitor answers a price cut
Across 5,064 price changes from 217 products, rivals answered a cut only 6 percent more often than their own repricing rhythm would produce, and an increase 11 percent more often. Both are real but small. Just over half of the answers land on the same day, against three quarters in face serums — the automated repricing that dominates the serum market is weaker here.
03 · 3 · Where could a new product enter?
€8.75 to €11.04 — and it is a hard door.
Competition and demand by price range
Two of twelve price ranges clear the demand baseline. The stronger one is €8.75 to €11.04: eleven products, more than half of them in the top third of the ranking, and prices that hold for about ten weeks. The second is €17.60 to €22.22, the most crowded band in the category with 51 products and a typical review count of 462.
But the recommended corridor is a hard door, and the report should say so plainly. Its typical product carries 279 reviews, and of three recent entrants only one is building — none is winning yet. This is not an underserved niche; it is the least defended part of a well-defended category.
One band scored higher and was skipped: €71.22 to €89.90 reaches the demand baseline on a base of two products, but its ranking evidence is too weak to call it a corridor. Entrants trying a price level is not proof that buyers are there.
For the category as a whole: of 318 priced products, 86 launched within the last two years, 19 have reached the top third and 3 disappeared. Newcomers arrive, but few break through.
04 · 4 · What the market looks like underneath
Calmer than it looks, and loosely defined.
Of 6,363 price changes found, 1,065 had another change from the same product running in the same window — about one in six, against one in five in serums. Another 344 coincided with a burst of new reviews and 258 with a stockout; both move rank on their own and are excluded. 278 events were dropped because the product was already sliding before the price came down.
The category's own boundaries are loose. Amazon files the majority of these products under day care rather than moisturising care, and 122 of the 440 products sit outside that branch entirely — 1,299 of their events are excluded from every figure here. Observed price changes run from 67 percent off to more than tripling.
Data appendix
440 products on amazon.de, taken from the category listing and then narrowed: no serums or essences (they are a separate market and a separate report), no multipacks or gift sets, no eye or body products, no cleansers, masks or peels, no face oils or balms, no sunscreens above SPF 25, no tinted or BB creams, no men's or baby lines, nothing below €6 or above €90, container sizes between 15 and 200 ml where stated. Only products that describe themselves as a cream were kept, which excludes fluids and lotions, and the set was limited to at most two listings per brand and to products with at least 50 reviews so that a single catalogue cannot dominate the control groups. That review threshold makes the set measurable but leaves out the youngest listings, which is why the entrant figures in section 3 rest on fewer launches than in other reports. Products that Amazon does not place in this branch are flagged automatically and excluded from all figures. The product list is available on request for methodological review.
| Step | Events | Removed because |
|---|---|---|
| Price changes found | 6,363 | at least 5% and €0.30, held for 7 days |
| Gaps in the price history | −160 | the change cannot be located precisely |
| Too little ranking data | −464 | less than 70% of days covered |
| Overlapping price change | −1,065 | another change from the same product in the window |
| Deal or coupon markers | −0 | none recorded in this set |
| Stockout signals | −258 | rank moves for availability, not price |
| Burst of new reviews | −344 | more than 10% and at least 15 new reviews |
| Listing too young | −187 | less than 60 days of history |
| Too few control products | −186 | fewer than five comparable products held their price |
| Passed every check | 4,346 | an event can fail several checks, so the removals sum to more than the difference |
| Used for the figures | 3,237 | from 207 products, after removing 278 with a pre-existing trend and 1,299 from other category branches |
price change ≥ 5% and ≥ €0.30, held ≥ 7 days · comparison: 14 days before, days 3–14 after · control products: same category, price moved less than 2%, at least 5 of them · rank coverage ≥ 70% of days · listing older than 60 days · review burst = more than 10% and at least 15 new reviews · ranges are 90%, from a bootstrap clustered by product
Observed price changes: −67.1% to +226.8%. Where a range crosses one for one, I report that the direction is measured but its size relative to the price change is not settled.
Limits — I measure the ranking, not units sold, in the 14 days after a price change. Results hold only for the price range actually observed. Every figure is for the category as a whole or for one of its three price groups, never for an individual product. Where a range touches the level at which nothing happens, I say so instead of quoting a number.
- 440 products
- 6,363 price changes found
- 4,346 passed every check
- 3,237 used for the figures
- 207 products in the fit set
- ref 8ddf2358
The Monthly
Each weekly report measures a single category. The Monthly is where they get compared, and it carries the quarterly report when one is published.