Mitchells Wool Fat Shaving Soap is no longer Tallow based

[Mr. Shavington]

Good morning everyone,
I work here at Kent Brushes, and we are looking into this issue with our SB2 Shaving soap immediately. We contacted Mitchells on 31st May 2023 to confirm the rumours of the formula change in their own product and confirm the formula they were using for our branded soap still included Tallowate; they confirmed our soap was not yet affected as they did not have the ingredients in stock yet.
We are now sending the current batch away for testing, and I will update you with the results as soon as soon as we have them.

We appreciate your patience whilst we look into this problem,
We are disappointed that we may not have been given an honest reply when we checked this out last week,

Thank you for your understanding,
Kalie

Thank you very much for posting here, Kalie. I’m sure we all look forward to your update after the testing. It’s very strange when we already see members’ photos of Mitchell’s soaps with the new ingredients listed and reports that the soap behaves differently, yet Mitchell’s seem to be telling you that they are only now receiving those ingredients.

Hard to trust what Mitchell’s is saying and I can only applaud the transparency we are getting from Kent. Glad you are testing the soaps so we will all know for sure, and I’m sorry you have to go to this expense.

 

[Brutus]

Good morning everyone,
I work here at Kent Brushes, and we are looking into this issue with our SB2 Shaving soap immediately. We contacted Mitchells on 31st May 2023 to confirm the rumours of the formula change in their own product and confirm the formula they were using for our branded soap still included Tallowate; they confirmed our soap was not yet affected as they did not have the ingredients in stock yet.
We are now sending the current batch away for testing, and I will update you with the results as soon as soon as we have them.

We appreciate your patience whilst we look into this problem,
We are disappointed that we may not have been given an honest reply when we checked this out last week,

Thank you for your understanding,
Kalie

Don’t own any Kent brushes, but I really do like that attitude.


B.

 

[Kalie]

Hello again,
Mitchells have just replied and confirmed that, in their error, they had not informed us that batch number 9265 had been involved in the new formulation; they have not updated the labelling they provide on the product to us or informed us that this change would be happening, they also mentioned that they did not expect that there would be such disappointment with the change of ingredients our product and their own.
We are very sorry that this product has been sold with incorrect ingredient information, please do contact us directly if you would like to arrange to return any recent orders from batch 9265.
We are updating our website as we speak,
Thank you,
Kalie

 

[Kurkahn]

Hello again,
Mitchells have just replied and confirmed that, in their error, they had not informed us that batch number 9265 had been involved in the new formulation; they have not updated the labelling they provide on the product to us or informed us that this change would be happening, they also mentioned that they did not expect that there would be such disappointment with the change of ingredients our product and their own.
We are very sorry that this product has been sold with incorrect ingredient information, please do contact us directly if you would like to arrange to return any recent orders from batch 9265.
We are updating our website as we speak,
Thank you,
Kalie

Thanks.

This confirm all the bad things we've said about MWF.

 

[Mr. Shavington]

Hello again,
Mitchells have just replied and confirmed that, in their error, they had not informed us that batch number 9265 had been involved in the new formulation; they have not updated the labelling they provide on the product to us or informed us that this change would be happening, they also mentioned that they did not expect that there would be such disappointment with the change of ingredients our product and their own.
We are very sorry that this product has been sold with incorrect ingredient information, please do contact us directly if you would like to arrange to return any recent orders from batch 9265.
We are updating our website as we speak,
Thank you,
Kalie

Thanks for confirming, @Kalie. Not a surprise, unfortunately. Can you tell us how long ago it was that Kent received this 9265 batch? From your first post it sounded like you’ve had it for a while and Mitchell’s must have changed the formula some time ago.

 

[Brutus]

Thanks.

This confirm all the bad things we've said about MWF.

A lot of bad things have been said or speculated about MWF and others, but what it essentially burns down to is this:

There was no knavish plot by EU bureaucrats, no greed by MWF to save a few pennies, no devious move by the airlines to hoard all available tallow for Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) to make them look greener than they actually are, in this case it is IMO just case of Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

“…they [MWF] also mentioned that they did not expect that there would be such disappointment with the change of ingredients [in] our [Kent] product and their own [MWF]”.

MWF frankly admitted that they had no clue that this, what they probably thought to be a logical and reasonable move, would create such a kerfuffle among members of this site.
What it also tells me is that MWF don’t know their customer base, MWF don’t know what is important to their customers, MWF have no clue why customers are buying their products, by substituting tallow with problematic palm oils MWF proves ethical and environmental consideration are not on their mind, and that MWF - when one ingredient could no longer be obtained with the same ease as before - just move on to what is easily available.

This inability to appraise the consequences of a change proves to me again: MWF is a one-trick pony and anything beyond wool fat (a.k.a. lanolin) is secondary to them.

Some might want to speculate whether MWF will now go back (or not) to the previous formula, but to me it seems this thread has run its course and the remaining principal question is: Am I going to continue using MWF shaving soap or am I going to move to an alternative?

For my part, I can say that the last two weeks have renewed my interest in Haslinger, I use their products more often again, and at least they seem to know what they are doing.



B.

 

[Mr. Shavington]

No, not really.

There was no knavish plot by EU bureaucrats, no greed by MWF to save a few pennies, no devious move by the airlines to hoard all available tallow for Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) to make them look greener than they actually are, in this case it is IMO just case of Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

“…they [MWF] also mentioned that they did not expect that there would be such disappointment with the change of ingredients [in] our [Kent] product and their own [MWF]”.

MWF frankly admitted that they had no clue that this, what they probably thought to be a logical and reasonable move, would create such a kerfuffle among members of this site.
What it also tells me is that MWF don’t know their customer base, MWF don’t know what is important to their customers, and that MWF - when one ingredient could no longer be obtained with the same ease as before - just moved on to what was easily available.

This inability to appraise the consequences of a change proves to me what I stated on this site before: MWF is a one-trick pony and anything beyond wool fat (a.k.a. lanolin) is secondary to them.

Some might want to speculate whether MWF will now go back (or not) to the previous formula, but to me it seems this thread has run its course and the remaining principal question is: Am I going to continue using MWF shaving soap or am I going to move to an alternative?


For my part, I can say that the last two weeks have renewed my interest in Haslinger, I use their products more often again, and at least they seem to know what they are doing.



B.

I think it does confirm that:
- Mitchell’s failed to inform Kent about reformulating the Kent soaps
- When Kent asked about the rumours last week Mitchell’s falsely told Kent that they had not produced any of the new soaps yet
- Mitchell’s shipped new formula soaps to Kent with the old labels, misrepresenting the ingredients

We could ascribe that to gross incompetence, that Mitchell’s didn’t think about all the Kent soaps and that the respective Mitchell’s staff didn’t know that their own company had changed the formulation. I think it’s more likely that Mitchell’s made a big mistake and then tried to conceal it from Kent. Or perhaps Mitchell’s contract with Kent doesn’t allow them to change the formula unilaterally and they tried to hide it rather than risk losing the order.

Lots of possibilities. All of them reflect very badly on Mitchell’s. Result is Kent sitting on thousands of falsely labeled soaps, which are not what Kent had ordered from Mitchell’s and may be unsellable due to the labelling.

If there is any good news here it is that Mitchell’s are now hearing from many quarters how much of a problem their replacement of tallow is.

 

[Kalie]

So good news! I have just been down to the warehouse, and we have approx 1000 of last year's batches of soaps (tallow). It seems the newest stock from this year's order is the 9265, and only one box has been sold of this (annoyingly, this shouldn't have happened, but I'm glad in a way as we are now aware of the situation with the formula) this means I can exchange soaps for those of you who have received 9265 from us and those of you who might want to stock up before they are gone now have the opportunity,
Thank you to all of you who have been so kind whilst we got to the bottom of the issue, and I really hope Mitchells take note of the change not being for the good of the shaving community!
Best wishes,
Kalie

 

[Mr. Shavington]

Kalie, you are amazing. I think this will make many people very happy and it’s great you found so many of the older stock. Top marks for customer service from Kent.

 

[hobber]

Just a thought from a little experiment / hack I did a little while ago when Haslinger sheep's milk went away from tallow. I went to amazon and bought a bar of 100% tallow soap. I then took the new version of Haslinger soap and grated it with a cheese grater. It is actually quite soft and grated well. I then added about 10% by weight of grated tallow soap into the shredded pile and mixed it up. Re-pressed my new super-duper tallow sheep's milk Hobber formulation back into a puck and tinned it in a new can. This entire process took all of 5 minutes. All I can say is that the result is a glorious, rich, smmmmoooooottttthhhh soap and lathers quite (as in, EXCEPTIONALLY!) well. For those of us who MUST HAVE TALLOW, I found this to be a very good way to keep tallow in my shaving diet. You guys might want to give this a try. Pro Tip (even though I am by no means a pro): Avoid putting any higher percentage of tallow into an existing soap as that might change / wreck the overall formulation and render an otherwise usable soap as unusable.

 

[ChriWilson]

Deluge incoming

Fantastic news on your end @Kalie
Epitome of customer care !

 

[Darth Scandalous]

Hello again,
Mitchells have just replied and confirmed that, in their error, they had not informed us that batch number 9265 had been involved in the new formulation; they have not updated the labelling they provide on the product to us or informed us that this change would be happening, they also mentioned that they did not expect that there would be such disappointment with the change of ingredients our product and their own.
We are very sorry that this product has been sold with incorrect ingredient information, please do contact us directly if you would like to arrange to return any recent orders from batch 9265.
We are updating our website as we speak,
Thank you,
Kalie

Really appreciate your honesty and directness.

Normally in the US a blatant labeling mistake like this would result in a product recall. Although I believe the FDA has the authority to seize mislabeled products under certain circumstances.

I'm still trying to wrap my brain around what a colossal screwup this is on MWF's part.

 

[Kurkahn]

So good news! I have just been down to the warehouse, and we have approx 1000 of last year's batches of soaps (tallow). It seems the newest stock from this year's order is the 9265, and only one box has been sold of this (annoyingly, this shouldn't have happened, but I'm glad in a way as we are now aware of the situation with the formula) this means I can exchange soaps for those of you who have received 9265 from us and those of you who might want to stock up before they are gone now have the opportunity,
Thank you to all of you who have been so kind whilst we got to the bottom of the issue, and I really hope Mitchells take note of the change not being for the good of the shaving community!
Best wishes,
Kalie

Thanks a lot!

Very disapointed in MWF.

 

[Loner16]

Very surprised to see a company like Kent being so honest and forthcoming. It's very refreshing in this day and age, and they get high marks from me for it.
I'm not as ready to throw Mitchell's to the wolves, though, but I do think there was a few massive mistakes made.
But, who among us has not made mistakes? And, perhaps the road ahead will be the better for it...

 

[Mr. Shavington]

Very surprised to see a company like Kent being so honest and forthcoming. It's very refreshing in this day and age, and they get high marks from me for it.
I'm not as ready to throw Mitchell's to the wolves, though, but I do think there was a few massive mistakes made.
But, who among us has not made mistakes? And, perhaps the road ahead will be the better for it...

Yes, mistakes. But mistakes that may break the law, grossly mislead a major client, and leave that client with thousands of unsellable products.

It’s MWF’s obligation to have procedures to at least ensure they comply with the law. They’ll have to put this right, somehow, and it will probably cost them a lot. Maybe they’ll lose Kent as a client as well.

But there it is. Lessons to learn. I would hope that MWF does the right thing now - presumably that starts with refunding Kent for the last order or paying someone to manually stick corrected labels on every puck.

All that aside, I do get the impression that MWF genuinely didn’t view tallow or any of their other ingredients besides lanolin as being important. It seems as though for them the soap was just a vessel for selling lanolin and they had no real inkling that their shaving soap was actually a formulation that many shavers valued. Either they don’t understand their business or we don’t. But I suppose it’s better for them to hear this now rather than be left years later wondering why their shaving soap doesn’t sell as much.

 

[LoveTheSlant]

Don’t own any Kent brushes, but I really do like that attitude.


B.

I own two. Their brushes were outstanding . . . before their reformulation.

 

[Neil Jones]

I’m UK based and own a V4, AP8, BK4, BK8, H4, H8, T4 and T8 so you could say that I’m a Kent fan. I’ve just had a conversation with Kalie from Kent and she said I could return my batch number 9265 soaps and they are posting replacement soaps out to me. She is a credit to Kent Brushes and their excellent customer service. Lets hope that this mistake by Mitchell’s can be a positive for Kent.

 

[Loner16]

Yes, I've got a number of Kent brushes. They were always well presented and classic performers.

My Kent puck just arrived minutes ago. Batch # 9027.. so, I'm happy!

 

[Loner16]

Yes, mistakes. But mistakes that may break the law, grossly mislead a major client, and leave that client with thousands of unsellable products.

It’s MWF’s obligation to have procedures to at least ensure they comply with the law. They’ll have to put this right, somehow, and it will probably cost them a lot. Maybe they’ll lose Kent as a client as well.

But there it is. Lessons to learn. I would hope that MWF does the right thing now - presumably that starts with refunding Kent for the last order or paying someone to manually stick corrected labels on every puck.

All that aside, I do get the impression that MWF genuinely didn’t view tallow or any of their other ingredients besides lanolin as being important. It seems as though for them the soap was just a vessel for selling lanolin and they had no real inkling that their shaving soap was actually a formulation that many shavers valued. Either they don’t understand their business or we don’t. But I suppose it’s better for them to hear this now rather than be left years later wondering why their shaving soap doesn’t sell as much.

Indeed. I agree that Mitchell's has some ground to make up.

Disclaimer... I was born in Wales, my dear Grandfather was an Englishman, and I have a definite soft spot in my heart for the U.K., and UK based concerns. They may get a wee bit of a pass from me for that.

 

[Doc Dan]

I wrote an email to Mitchell's. I was nice, but I let them know what I mistake I thought this was for them to reformulate what was already a great shaving soap. I think we should all write to them, each and every one of us.