Allies of Skin Lost Me at the Met Gala. Now It’s Losing Its Founder.

I was a big fan of Allies of Skin.
WAS.
Past tense, no regrets.

I wrote about their packaging back in April, commending them and other premium skincare brands for investing in proper components to protect their expensive, active formulas rather than cutting corners.

Less than a month later, they posted about a collaboration with Lauren Sánchez Bezos for the Met Gala. There was huge backlash, and I felt betrayed by the brand.

I made my feelings known, right in the comments of their Met Gala post: “I’m a loyal customer, but let me tell you, this is not the flex you think. And stop deleting comments that point this out.” My comment must have resonated with quite a few people, because it received 246 likes. Actually, there were more comments than “likes” on that entire post - and the comments were mostly negative.

Many of us loyal customers saw the Bezos collaboration as a betrayal of the brand’s commitment to community and inclusivity, and we walked away. Not “we considered walking away.” WE WALKED AWAY.

Now founder Nicolas Travis is stepping down just months after the Met Gala uproar. Travis has given six months’ notice and will exit the brand in February 2027, with Alicia Valencia (ex-Makeup by Mario) stepping in as interim President. Every official announcement frames it as a clean, planned transfer of power. Not one mention of the “Met Gala” or the controversy that followed. Funny how that works. 🤨

The Flex That FAILED

In case you missed the drama - Allies of Skin posted about supplying the skincare used on Lauren Sánchez Bezos for the Met Gala. Her husband, Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon and the third-richest person on the planet, donated roughly $10 million to co-chair the legendary annual fashion event. Plenty of people called the donation reputation laundering, not philanthropy.
Activists protested outside the Gala, Zendaya (a Met Gala fashion icon) chose to skip the event, and even New York’s new mayor turned down his invite.

It was the most politically charged Met Gala on record, and Allies of Skin walked right into the middle of the controversy and acted like they were just posting a regular red-carpet moment.

No one was buying the brand’s claim that it was uninterested in the billionaire’s political ties. Allies of Skin’s post promoted their “proud” association with Sanchez-Bezos, whose husband’s businesses are linked to labor violations, union busting, and inhumane working conditions. On top of that, Bezos cemented his alignment with the current administration by donating $1 million (from Amazon) to the tRump inauguration fund.

So, how did Allies respond to the backlash?
“Thank you for sharing your thoughts…Today [the Met Gala day] we celebrate fashion as a form of art and acknowledge this important fundraiser supporting both the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the future of fashion. As a brand, we do not partake in any political discussions nor do we have a POV on political views - because we believe everyone is entitled to theirs.”

BULLSH*T
One reply to Allies’ tone-deaf, unapologetic comment nailed it: “Thus, you stand for nothing. And you fail to understand that you have already stated a political POV.”

Then came Allies’ attempt at defusing the controversy, a three-word statement:
“We hear you.”
Three patronizing words, while negative comments calling out their association with Bezos were quietly deleted. Allies claimed, “We hear you,” but felt justified deleting negative comments? Actively silencing people who called attention to their poor judgment is not “hearing us”; it’s damage control.

Someone Has to Take the Blame

I’m not claiming Nicolas Travis resigned because of the Met Gala backlash. Nobody’s said that (out loud), and I’m not trying to present a theory as fact.
BUT when a founder is recovering from the worst PR crisis in his brand’s history and then suddenly announces his resignation, people will connect the dots - even if the company won’t address it honestly.

#MyTwoCents

I built my reputation on knowing the difference between well-crafted cosmetics and marketing noise, and Allies of Skin used to be one of the brands I trusted to consistently deliver thoughtful, effective formulas.
The way this Bezos controversy has been handled soured my trust in the brand.

“We hear you” isn’t an apology, it’s a stall tactic.
Sit with that for a second: Allies offered three words- no apology- while hundreds of negative comments were either deleted or quietly ignored.
These types of tactics don’t earn back brand trust. They buy time until the next crisis appears, which in this case turned out to be their founder’s exit.

How a brand responds to criticism directly reflects its moral compass.
Not the packaging, not the ingredient deck, not celebrity placements. Allies of Skin had the chance to do right by the people who supported its business, and instead they chose to placate them with three patronizing words, followed by silence.
Now Allies is in the middle of another controversy, and what are they doing? Ignoring it, again. WTF?
The consumers investing thousands of dollars in Allies’ very expensive skincare deserve better - they deserve transparency.

What do you think? Let’s discuss this in the comments.

---

Kevin James Bennett is the publisher of In My Kit®. He is an Emmy Award-winning makeup artist, cosmetic developer, educator, and consumer advocate. Learn more at www.kjbennett.com