When a Brand Like Ami Colé Closes, the Beauty Industry Tells on Itself
It’s not just that Ami Colé is closing — it’s what that closure reveals about the kind of beauty brands we claim to want versus the ones the system can actually support.
As a South Asian beauty tech founder, I’ve been sitting with the closure of Ami Colé like a lump in the throat, not just because it’s sad, but because it’s predictably tragic.
Ami Colé wasn’t just another clean beauty brand. It was intentional. Rooted. Specific. Designed unapologetically for melanin-rich skin, not diluted down for mass appeal, but crafted with cultural clarity. It earned press. Community loyalty. Sephora shelf space. VC dollars.
But still: it couldn’t hold. And that’s not a failure of product, branding, or purpose. It’s a failure of the system it was trying to grow within.
As founder Diarrha N’Diaye-Mbaye said herself:
“When the economy feels uncertain, funding becomes even more risk-averse — which often means underfunded, minority-owned businesses will suffer.”
Because here’s the cruel paradox:
Many Black-owned brands, like Ami Colé, are primarily supported by Black and POC consumers. But those same communities are the most disenfranchised — especially during moments of economic stress. So inclusivity? It comes at a cost.
“Selling consumer goods is a numbers game. Black-owned brands must evolve to include a wider demographic and greater purpose.”
But why must they?
It’s a tricky thing — because yes, there are real dollars for brands like Ami Colé. And of course inclusive, community-rooted beauty matters. But the catch is this: the same qualities that get these brands celebrated — authenticity, specificity, doing it “for the culture” — are often exactly what’s used to rationalize their downfall. They’re “too niche.” “Too focused.” “Too hard to scale.”
It’s a contradiction: we demand excellence from them, then penalize them for not being everything to everyone.
Why is the burden of expansion always placed on the brands serving underserved markets while legacy companies get to coast on “diverse shade ranges” every election cycle?
The reality is:
The beauty industry loves to fund what looks inclusive
It struggles to sustain what actually is inclusive
What’s being exposed here isn’t just the precarity of indie beauty, but the deeper truth that success isn’t just about product-market fit. It’s about investor-market fit. It’s about who VCs believe in long-term. And what they define as “scale-worthy.”
From my own perspective in beauty tech, I can tell you this:
The more specific your community, the harder the path. Not because your product doesn’t work, but because your market isn’t pre-approved by capital.
Ami Colé didn’t collapse because it lacked ambition. It collapsed because ambition isn’t enough when infrastructure doesn’t exist to support ethical, intentional growth.
Let’s stop romanticizing launches. Let’s start interrogating why we keep losing the ones that mean the most.
💌 Subscribe to read more founder thoughts, cultural critiques, and behind-the-scenes beauty tech observations:
👉 sabeenkhan1.substack.com