因為個人蠻關注環境生態課題、加上從事超高碳排產業之一(汽車業)的補償心理，我從2010年就開始注意歐萊德這家位於桃園龍潭的小公司，而且是有點病態的那種：問太太在髮廊用歐萊德洗髮精的經驗感受(這合理)、有這公司的媒體報導就詳細讀一讀(也OK)、十多年來投履歷到這家公司應徵大概10次(已經有點那個，不過全都已讀沒回)、有順道沒順道會開車去桃園龍潭中豐路上的這家公司門口晃晃希望能去參觀拜訪大概4次(我住台北，這就不太理性了)、……。
十幾年前，歐萊德O’right的洗髮精只賣髮廊通路沒有零售；再來是針對國內大型企業做專案式推販；隨著這家公司的成熟發展，這幾年已經有包括直營門市、百貨公司、購物中心等專櫃約30個實體展售據點，還有一鍵就有的多家線上通路商可以購買產品。
不過當我第一次逛到歐萊德的台北市永康門市(信義路二段，永康街附近)，問到O’right這瓶零碳新產品咖啡因洗髮精原來1000ml一瓶定價是1,980元，其實我是強裝微笑但內心盤算要閃人告退了。主要原因是阿北本人一直都是用95元一罐的花Ｘ洗髮精，這20倍價差實在太震撼。在臉皮薄裝闊、太太不在旁邊、加上還是試一下好了心態、2瓶打七五折、…….，天人交戰下我刷卡拎了2瓶偷放在汽車行李廂拿回家。
洗髮精無論成分多珍貴、製造理念多高尚，最重要的功用就是洗頭髮。這2瓶咖啡因洗髮精，我與我太太各洗了頭髮近一年的使用經驗，歸納如下：
一、洗淨能力：非常優秀，與傳統化學洗髮精(含各式有自然或特殊配方添加的款式)洗淨效果無差異，比純正草本配方洗髮精效果要理想。洗淨效果測試，最理想的試驗就是染髮後的洗髮，這支咖啡因洗髮精的用量與化學洗髮精相同，洗淨效果亦同。
二、發泡起泡能力：雖然發泡能力與洗淨能力不是必然相關，但這卻是洗髮精能否被消費者接受的最大關鍵。不起泡就覺得洗不乾淨，是消費者很難被說服改變的重要門檻，所以純正草本的各式洗髮精、肥皂、洗劑(一般多以無患子為基底)大抵都會遇到這個銷售的天花板，只能成為利基型的商品。這支O’right咖啡因洗髮精能有化學陰離子界面活性劑洗髮精發泡效果約8成，可以通過大部分消費者的主觀考驗。
三、使用量：2瓶合計2公升3,000元(折扣售價)的洗髮精，從2022年七月購入使用至2023年五月用完計10個月。老實說一直只用百元洗髮精的我在前半年每天洗頭都忍不住自問怎會買了這瓶比紅酒還貴的洗髮精。但結算下來每人每月的洗髮精花費約為150元，一個名店排骨便當的支出對於市井小民其實是可以接受的。
四、1000ml大瓶裝的42公分超高瓶身：這個天鵝頸瓶身的特殊規格，說實在我放在洗臉台、淋浴間置物架、或是浴缸檯面上都不就手，但用過幾天習慣就好。據廠商銷售服務人員解釋，這是適用放在浴室地板的設計。整體說來，這個瓶身對於消費者的利益不大，但日後若要在實體通路上架塞不進去的風險蠻高的，算是有些”Over-design”的衝過頭產品。
五、尚待進一步科學認證的個人主觀使用經驗：多年來我有每隔3~4天在浴缸排水口揀頭髮的習慣，每次數量約10~15根，大部分都是我太太的長髮；在使用這支咖啡因洗髮精半年後，我才突然發現大概1個月揀一次排水口的頭髮就夠了；更有趣的是，在O’right洗髮精用完，我與太太改回使用傳統洗髮精的四個月(2023年九月)後，我又需要較頻繁揀頭髮了，目前頻率是1週乙次。
描述完攸關個人消費者利益的使用經驗後，再提到環境保護的大我課題：包含洗劑的家庭污水，經常含有環境賀爾蒙、各式化學毒物、柔珠塑膠微粒的部份，全球約10億家戶每天以至少數十公升的規模排放，在幾天之內以很少甚或是直接排放的方式迅速回到地球生態系。我自己有個多年飼育的小魚缸，可以就近觀察只要半度的水溫溫差、pH值酸度變化、或是外來微生物、化學品進入魚缸，生態系就可能在一覺醒來之後崩解，也很能理解感受洗頭、洗澡、洗碗、洗衣服這樣的日常小事，聚沙成塔聚水成洪的生態衝擊嚴重性。從這支咖啡因洗髮精，我看到廠商的努力成就：
(1)
綠色原料，不包含壬基酚(環境賀爾蒙)、塑化劑、硫酸鹽類界面活性劑、對羥基苯甲酸酯(防腐劑)、甲醛、染色劑、DEA衍生物(增稠劑)、環氧乙烷衍生物等8種環境有害毒物。
(2)
動物福利，不添加動物來源成分。
(3)
瓶身使用100%消費品再生塑膠料(PCR)製成，供乳彈簧壓頭，也是PCR製成。
(4)
導入溫室氣體盤查、管理碳足跡與水足跡，從廠房(綠建築)、製程、產品、甚至CSR企業社會責任，都往「綠色零碳循環」執行。
(5)
引進第三方認證：計有美國USDA
Biobased天然永續認證、英國Carbon
Trust PAS2050(產品碳足跡)、英國BSI PAS2060(產品碳中和)、台灣TABC鑽石級綠建築(碳足跡)、台灣EEWH綠建築黃金級認證、經濟部綠色工廠、產品水足跡等……
這支洗髮精(其實蠻多樣豐富的整套洗髮精系列都是)的驚人售價當然是個重要課題。在2010年代曾有美國經濟學者提出環保永續產品的售價約高出傳統產品30%的估算主張，歐萊德這系列零碳洗髮精高出傳統洗髮精10倍以上的售價，真是讓我超受衝擊。但即使產業這第一張成績單的分數很嚇人，至少有廠商挑戰證實了零碳洗劑的商品可行性，這是很有意義的一大步。另外，就市場行銷方面來說，有3個區隔市場，我認為實際存在，而且已經有一定的規模：
一、餽贈禮品市場：餽贈禮品需要有高品質、特殊機能話題、足以表彰炫耀、非低價的特性。O’right洗髮精從600~2,000元不等的價位，如果有適當的包裝，歡迎且鼓勵大家從餽贈紅酒、高級食材等改贈洗髮精，無甚違和感，而且相當有意義。
二、最近我有機會服務金字塔頂端(年收入500萬、住宅市價5,000萬以上)的客戶家戶，訪談才發現這些家戶對於購買使用700元以上洗髮精是很自然的事。(……是我自己只用95元窮人洗髮精限制了我的想像，我承認)
三、其實，從每月每人零碳洗髮精支出才150多元的觀點來看，是年輕世代手機吃到飽行動上網費約三分之一的花費。只要年輕族群能注意到這個產品，它可以是人人都合理買的起的生活消費品。
尤其是目前歐萊德這系列洗髮精的售價，甚至有機會遇到6折店頭促銷來推販，與中高價位的特殊機能傳統洗髮精的價差有限，與消費大眾市場更加親近了。再接下來需要期待的，則是政府能逐步推動規範例如矽靈(製造商常用的D4、D5成分是環境賀爾蒙)、塑化劑、甲醛在洗劑產品的限制用量或禁用，讓傳統洗劑製造商與環保零碳製造商的成本差距逐漸縮小，鼓勵更多的環保減碳洗劑產品能順利銷售。
對於歐萊德這支咖啡因洗髮精，我們略為保守地給予4.5顆星的評價。這支相當優質且成熟的商品沒有滿分的原因，主要顯然是高昂售價，再來是目前還沒有能實際查訪查證製程與產品的環境親善是否與廠商宣稱相符一致。不過，在虛榮裝闊、也許太太可以少掉一些頭髮、店頭促銷、以及愛護地球小心願的混動驅使下，我還是跑去新買了3瓶400ml的茶樹、桃花配方洗髮精回家洗洗看。日後如果有其他有趣重要的發現，再向各位讀者報告。
最後，要提到由歐萊德發起，聯合報系與願景工程基金會共同贊助倡議的「解凍格陵蘭」計畫。整個倡議訴求的內容，在底下這支影片，有相當臨場與簡潔入理的呈現，很值得大家一看。
Due to my personal
deep concerns about environmental and ecological issues, and a compensatory
mindset from working in one of the ultra-high carbon emission industries (the
automotive industry), I’ve been paying attention to O’right, a small company
located in Long-Tan, Taoyuan since 2010. And it’s a bit obsessive: asking my
wife about her experience using O’right shampoo at the hair salon (sounds
reasonable), reading media reports on this company thoroughly (also OK),
applying for jobs at this company about 10 times over more than a decade (a bit
much, though all were left on read with no response), and driving to the
company’s front door for hoping to visit about four times, whether I had a
reason to go or not, (a bit irrational because my home in Taipei is over 50 km away
from O’right headquarters)…
Over a decade
ago, O’right shampoos were only sold through salon channels and not available
for retail. Then, they started project-based promotions targeting large
domestic companies. As the company has matured in recent years, they’ve
established around 30 physical sales outlets, including direct-operated stores,
department stores, shopping mall counters, as well as multiple online retailers
offering one-click purchase options.
However, when I
first visited O’right’s Yong-Kang store in Taipei (Section 2, Xinyi Road, near
Yong-Kang Street) and found out that the price of this new carbon-neutral
caffeine shampoo was USD$66 for a 1000ml bottle, I forced a smile but was
mentally preparing to leave. The main reason is that I had always used shampoo
that costs USD$3.2 a bottle, and this 20-fold price difference was quite
shocking. But with a mix of feeling embarrassed to leave, my wife not being
around, a mindset of "I might as well try it," and a 25% discount for
two bottles, I ended up swiping my card and sneaking two bottles into the car
trunk to take home.
Regardless of how
precious the ingredients or noble the manufacturing concept, the most important
function of shampoo is to clean hair. After nearly a year of use, my wife and I
have summarized our experience with these two bottles of caffeine shampoo as
follows:
A.
Cleansing ability: Extremely good, with no
difference in cleaning effectiveness compared to traditional chemical shampoos
(including those with natural or special formula additives). It performs better
than purely herbal shampoos. The best way to test cleansing effectiveness is
after dyeing hair, and the amount of this caffeine shampoo used is the same as
chemical shampoos, with the same cleaning result.
B.
Foaming ability: Although foaming and
cleansing abilities are not necessarily correlated, foaming is key for consumer
acceptance. If it doesn't foam, people feel it isn't cleaning well, and this is
a major hurdle that’s hard to change. This is why purely herbal shampoos,
soaps, and cleansers (usually based on soapberries) hit a sales ceiling and
remain niche products. O’right’s caffeine shampoo has about 80% of the foaming
effect of chemical anionic surfactant shampoos, passing the subjective test of
most consumers.
C.
Usage: Two bottles totaling 2 liters, priced
at USD$1,00 (discounted), lasted from July 2022 to May 2023, about 10 months.
Honestly, as someone who usually uses shampoo costing less than USD$3.3, I
couldn't help but question my decision during the first six months of daily
use—how did I end up buying shampoo more expensive than wine? But in the end,
each person’s monthly shampoo cost averaged around USD$5, which is about the
price of a pork chop bento from a famous shop, making it acceptable for
ordinary folks.
D.
The 1000ml bottle’s 42cm height: This
swan-neck bottle is not convenient to place on the sink, shower shelf, or
bathtub edge, but after a few days, I got used to it. The sales staff explained
that it’s designed to sit on the bathroom floor. Overall, the bottle offers
little benefit to consumers and poses a significant risk of not fitting on
physical store shelves in the future, making it somewhat of an
"over-designed" product.
E.
Subjective experience awaiting further
scientific validation: For years, I’ve had a habit of picking up hair from the
bathtub drain every 3–4 days, usually about 10–15 strands, mostly my wife’s
long hair. After using this caffeine shampoo for about six months, I suddenly
noticed I only needed to clean the drain once a month. More interestingly,
after switching back to traditional shampoo for four months (as of September
2023), I’ve had to clean the drain more frequently again, now about once a
week.
After describing
the personal consumer benefits, let’s move on to the bigger environmental
protection topic: Household wastewater from detergents often contains endocrine
disruptors, various chemical toxins, and plastic microbeads. Globally, about 1
billion households discharge tens of liters of wastewater daily, which quickly
returns to the Earth’s ecosystem, sometimes directly. I’ve had a small fish
tank for years, and even a half-degree temperature change, pH shift, or the
introduction of foreign microorganisms or chemicals can cause the ecosystem to
collapse overnight. This makes me acutely aware of the ecological impact of
everyday tasks like washing hair, showering, doing dishes, or laundry. From
this caffeine shampoo, I see the company's efforts and achievements:
(1)
Green ingredients: Free of eight
environmentally harmful toxins, including nonylphenol (endocrine disruptor),
phthalates, sulfate surfactants, parabens (preservatives), formaldehyde, dyes,
DEA derivatives (thickeners), and ethylene oxide derivatives.
(2)
Animal welfare: No animal-derived ingredients
are added.
(3)
100% post-consumer recycled plastic (PCR) is
used for the bottle, and the milk pump head is also made from PCR.
(4)
Greenhouse gas auditing: Management of carbon
and water footprints, from the plant (green building), manufacturing process,
product, and even CSR, all move toward a “green, zero-carbon cycle.”
(5)
Third-party certifications: These include the
USDA Biobased certification, the UK’s Carbon Trust PAS2050 (product carbon
footprint), BSI PAS2060 (product carbon neutrality), Taiwan’s TABC
diamond-grade green building (carbon footprint), Taiwan’s EEWH golden-grade
green building certification, Ministry of Economic Affairs green plant
certification, and product water footprint certification.
The shocking
price of this shampoo (and actually the entire shampoo series) is, of course, a
key issue. In the 2010s, an American economist suggested that eco-friendly and
sustainable products are priced about 30% higher than traditional ones. The
fact that O’right’s carbon-neutral shampoo is priced more than 10 times higher
than traditional shampoos really shocked me. But even though the industry’s
initial report card has such an alarming score, at least a company has taken on
the challenge to prove the feasibility of a carbon-neutral detergent product, which
is a significant and meaningful step. Additionally, in terms of marketing,
there are three market segments that I believe exist and have already reached a
certain scale:
A.
Gift-giving market: Gifts need to be high
quality, have special functions or be a conversation starter, be worth showing
off, and not be cheap. With O’right shampoos priced between USD$20 and 70, if
packaged properly, I encourage everyone to consider gifting shampoo instead of
wine or high-end food ingredients. It wouldn't feel out of place and is
actually quite meaningful.
B.
Recently, I had the opportunity to serve
high-income households (those with annual incomes above NT$150 thousand and
homes valued at over NT$1.5 million), and during interviews, I realized that
purchasing and using shampoo priced over USD$25 is completely natural for them.
(…I admit, it's my own use of USD$3.2 “poor man’s” shampoo that limited my
imagination.)
C.
From the perspective that monthly spending on
carbon-neutral shampoo per person is just over USD$5, this is roughly one-third
of what young people pay for unlimited mobile data plans. If the younger
generation takes notice of this product, it could become an affordable everyday
consumer good for everyone.
Especially now,
with the current pricing of O’right’s shampoo series, there's even a chance of
encountering a 40% off promotion at stores, making the price difference between
these and mid- to high-priced specialty-function traditional shampoos more limited
and bringing them closer to the general consumer market. The next step is to
hope that the government gradually enforces regulations, such as limiting or
banning the use of ingredients like silicones (D4 and D5, commonly used by
manufacturers, are endocrine disruptors), phthalates, and formaldehyde in
detergent products. This would reduce the cost gap between traditional
detergent manufacturers and environmentally friendly, carbon-neutral
manufacturers, encouraging more eco-friendly and carbon-reducing detergent
products to sell successfully.
For O’right’s
caffeine shampoo, we give a slightly conservative sez-Score of 4.5 points. The
reason this high-quality and mature product doesn’t get a perfect score is
obviously its high price, and also the fact that there’s currently no way to
personally verify whether the manufacturing process and product’s environmental
friendliness are fully consistent with the company’s claims. Nonetheless,
driven by vanity, perhaps hoping my wife will lose less hair, store promotions,
and a small wish to protect the Earth, I went and bought three more 400ml
bottles of the tea tree and peach blossom formula shampoos to try at home. If I
discover anything interesting or important later, I’ll report back to you, my
readers.
Lastly, it’s my
pleasure to mention the “Unfreeze Greenland” project initiated by O’right,
sponsored by the UDN (United Daily News Group) and its Vision Project
Foundation. The entire message of the campaign is vividly and concisely
presented in the video below, and it’s definitely worth watching.
沒有留言:
張貼留言