Let’s talk about Rini for a second.

I get why brands want in. Gen Alpha (parents) spent $4.7 billions on beauty in 2023 and its expected to grow 6.2% YoY by 2030.

When I first looked at this in 2024, my thought process for kid/tween personal care was: earn the parent’s trust by protecting childhood and solving an existing family tension. Then give kids a safe way to play. Protect first, play second.

Protect childhood first because parents are already filtering social media, ingredients, and what is age appropriate. Play is the expression, not the strategy, or it looks like you are selling the algorithm to a child.

Main sentiment in recent responses: “Why does this exist?” Yikes.

Rini reads as accelerating optimization and consumption instead of protecting play pretend (which is free). Parents and consumers are too informed to believe this was a response to a real parent need. It clearly followed a creator-led wave. That is why it answered to trendy performance (cute, K-beauty, mini adult aesthetic) and did not solve for family use (low effort, age logic, boundary support). Parents do not want to treat their 6 year old like an early adopter lol

We saw the same thing during Sephora Kids. Highly visual platforms will make you believe there’s a gap in the market, a white space opportunity (no). Always double check on Reddit, my friends. This is where you can find a more human tension. The response to Sephora kids on Reddit says “I am tired, help me set limits”. That is household reality.

Can you do this right at all? Yes!

JB Skrub did this right: it spoke to the parent and the kid, responded to puberty changes as hygiene and growing up, and gave parents language. Just look at their website.

Rini spoke to the algorithm and got attention (the attention economy!), but it also activated our collective consciousness, “are we really selling beauty standards to babies?”

I’m sure this too shall pass but let’s be clear of what we expect from brands in this space.