A lot of money is going into a market that often isn’t built with these customers in mind, and not much of the profit — wages, royalties, whatever a sale eventually nets — makes its way back into Black households. “Buying power” headlines usually stop at the spending number and never get to where the money actually ends up.

The beauty numbers are just an easy way into a much bigger question. Black Americans have shaped enormous parts of fashion, music, media, personal care. How much of what’s actually built on top of that do they own?

Ownership Is Harder to See

There were over 200,000 Black-owned employer businesses in the U.S. by 2023, generating $249 billion combined and supporting around 1.8 million jobs — up from roughly 124,000 such firms in 2017. Brookings still puts Black people at only 3.4% of employer-business owners, against 14.4% of the population.

Business equity is one of the main ways households actually build wealth over time. People who’ve already succeeded at owning one thing also tend to find it easier to finance the next thing, rather than having to go ask permission all over again.

Most Black consumer spending, given that gap, ends up somewhere other than a Black-owned company almost by default. Trying to shop with one specifically sounds easy until you actually try to check — a brand can keep the “Black-founded” language on its packaging for years after the ownership behind it has completely changed. The founder’s story tends to stick around because that story is the reason people trusted the product in the first place.

SheaMoisture and Bevel After the Sale

Richelieu Dennis started out selling soap and shea butter on the streets of Harlem with his family. That became Sundial Brands, and Sundial eventually got SheaMoisture onto shelves at every major retailer — mostly by taking a category seriously that mainstream beauty companies had mostly ignored.

Unilever bought Sundial in 2017. Terms weren’t disclosed. Dennis stayed on afterward, and the deal led to the New Voices Fund, aimed at businesses owned by women of color. Unilever says the fund and the Dennis family have put more than $100 million into portfolio companies since.

Tristan Walker’s story runs parallel. He built a shaving system for people dealing with razor bumps from coarse or curly hair, took Walker & Company from direct-to-consumer into Target, and then P&G bought the whole company outright in 2018. Walker stayed as CEO.

When I started Walker & Company Brands, I set out to build a company that would meet the health and beauty needs of people of color on a global scale. — Tristan Walker

Selling gave both founders real money and real infrastructure — manufacturing and distribution reach that’s genuinely hard to build alone. Dennis used part of that to fund other founders.

Unilever owns Sundial’s brands now. P&G owns Walker & Company. Every SheaMoisture and Bevel sale flows up into those companies, and both brands still trade on credibility their founders built, years after neither one was a Black-owned business anymore.

Who Owns the Rights

For most packaged products, the value that sticks around lives somewhere you can’t see on a shelf — formulas, the brand name, supplier deals, customer data. Whoever holds those can reuse them across markets indefinitely without ever recreating the original idea that made the brand work.

Music makes this plainer. A song carries two separate sets of rights — the composition and the recording — and who owns the publishing versus who owns the master determines who gets paid when it streams, gets sampled, or lands in a commercial. WIPO describes copyright as exactly this mechanism: the legal structure that lets creators control use of their work and get compensated for it.

Black musicians have shaped the language of popular music for a century. Being associated with a sound isn’t the same as legally owning it. Salt-N-Pepa went to court trying to terminate old grants over recordings from early in their career, and in 2026 a federal judge dismissed the case, ruling they’d never owned the masters they were trying to reclaim, according to Pitchfork.

Nobody disputed Salt-N-Pepa’s place in music history. The case was only ever about the recordings, and who’s owed money from them.

Creators Can Reach Audiences They Do Not Control

Social platforms gave Black creators a real way around old media gatekeepers. A dance or a beauty tutorial can reach millions now without a broadcaster or publisher signing off first, and plenty of creators have turned that into sponsorships, subscriptions, product lines.

None of that reach belongs to the creator, though. Instagram, TikTok, YouTube hold the user data, decide what shows up in whose feed, and can change the rules or throttle an account whenever they want. Creators make the content people stay for. Platforms own the advertising system wrapped around it.

Even the sponsorship money reflects the gap. A 2024 study of UK creator rates found Black influencers being paid roughly 34% less than white influencers for comparable work, and the gap had widened since the same study ran in 2022, per Business Insider.

A big following gets you a brand deal. It doesn’t travel with you if a platform buries your account tomorrow — which is why some creators have started building email lists, memberships, or their own shops on the side, places an algorithm can’t reach.

Why Many Founders Decide to Sell

Selling isn’t always about a tempting offer landing on someone’s desk. Sometimes it’s the only realistic way to fund what comes next.

A national retail order means stocking inventory before the retailer pays you back. Expansion eats cash on staff, freight, marketing, and building an independent sales operation from nothing can burn through capital for years before it works. Crunchbase found U.S. startups with at least one Black founder raised about $942 million total in 2025 — 0.32% of all venture investment that year.

That figure doesn’t count bank loans or private money or a company just growing off its own revenue, and most companies shouldn’t be chasing venture funding anyway. Still, it’s a striking snapshot of how little of one major funding pool reaches Black founders at all. A company that can’t finance its own distribution ends up staying small, taking bad terms, or selling to someone who already has the shelf space sorted out.

How much leverage a founder has in that conversation usually comes down to financing. Someone who can borrow or fund growth from revenue gets to decide how much control they’re willing to give up. Someone staring down a cash crunch is negotiating an acquisition offer while also wondering if payroll clears next month.

Where Consumer Pressure Stops

The NAACP tried turning consumer spending into direct corporate pressure in 2025, publishing guidance that scored companies on whether they’d kept or dropped diversity commitments.

“If corporations want our dollars, they better be ready to do the right thing.” — Derrick Johnson

Shoppers can reward companies whose behavior they respect, and it’s worth checking who actually owns a company today instead of just trusting the name on the label. What consumer choices can’t do is hand a founder growth capital or renegotiate somebody’s old recording contract.

Founders need capital early enough that they’re not forced into trading away equity just to survive. Creators need real advice before signing anything away. Businesses need a way to reach customers directly instead of paying a platform’s toll every time. Shoppers need honest information about who they’re actually supporting, since a product built for Black consumers can still have no Black ownership behind it at all.

Beauty revenue, business ownership data, music rights, creator pay — different corners of the same market, same unfinished math.

Frequently Asked Questions

What’s the difference between Black-founded and Black-owned?

Black-founded describes history and doesn’t change. Black-owned describes who currently holds ownership and control, which can shift the moment shares or the whole business get sold.

Why does intellectual property matter here?

Rights over a brand, formula, or song can generate income for years or decades. Whoever owns them can license, sell, or reuse them long after the original work is finished.

Are acquisitions automatically bad for Black founders?

No. A sale can create real wealth and give a company resources it couldn’t have built alone — whether a specific deal was good depends on price, what rights transferred, retained equity, and the founder’s alternatives at the time.

How do platforms make money off creators?

Mostly advertising and subscriptions built around user attention. Creators get a share through sponsorships or revenue splits, but the platform holds the audience data and decides what gets seen.

What can Black businesses do to hold onto more value?

Register IP properly. Keep customer data somewhere other than a social platform. Read distribution agreements closely before signing. The right financing lined up early is often what separates selling on your own terms from being forced into a sale before you’re ready.

The post Black Consumers Built the Demand. Who Gets to Keep the Margin? appeared first on Black Elites.

The Half She Cannot Control 

In October 2025, Reuters reported that LVMH had hired Evercore to explore a sale of its 50 percent stake in Fenty Beauty, the cosmetics company it co-owns with Rihanna. None of the parties publicly confirmed the process. By May 2026, the Financial Times and Reuters were still describing the stake as being considered for sale within LVMH’s broader portfolio pruning. Even the valuation reports diverged: Reuters sources placed the entire business at $1 billion to $2 billion, while the Financial Times later reported that JPMorgan valued LVMH’s half at €1.5 billion to €2.5 billion. Those are estimates, not a transaction price. 

Fenty’s significance is not in doubt. When it launched in 2017 with 40 foundation shades, it did not invent demand among women with darker skin; it made the industry’s neglect visible and expensive. The brand reset the commercial standard. The potential stake sale exposes a different question: who controls the asset after the market has been proved? Rihanna controls her half. LVMH controls its half. The consumers whose demand made the launch consequential control neither side of the transaction. 

A Trillion-Dollar Deck Slide 

Black households accounted for $272 billion in discretionary spending on nonessential goods and services as of fall 2025, MRI-Simmons estimates — 14 percent of the U.S. total, up from $259 billion a year earlier and 44 percent over five years. In metropolitan Atlanta, Black households account for one-third of an estimated $45 billion in annual discretionary spending. These are not marginal-market numbers. Any brand ignoring them is making a growth decision, whether it admits that or not. 

Nielsen gives marketers an even larger figure: projected Black buying power of $2.1 trillion in 2026, based on the University of Georgia’s Selig Center for Economic Growth. Buying power is income available for spending after taxes; it is not the amount actually spent, and it is certainly not wealth. Both figures establish commercial relevance. Neither identifies who owns the firms positioned to capture that demand. 

Four Numbers, One Category Error 

Four numbers routinely collapse into one story. Buying power is income available after taxes. Discretionary spending is the portion directed to nonessentials. Revenue is what a company books from sales. Equity is an ownership claim carrying economic rights and, depending on the structure, governance rights. They may move together, but they are not interchangeable. A community can expand the first three while holding very little of the fourth. 

Much of the coverage built on Black-consumer statistics runs on exactly that error: it tracks money moving through households and into markets, then presents the total as if it proved power retained by those households. It doesn’t. 

The Market Johnson Built — and Owned 

Marketers have made this substitution for generations. In the postwar era, corporations began treating Black Americans as a distinct consumer market, often using the period’s language of the “Negro market.” John H. Johnson forced advertisers to take that market seriously. In 1952, he described it as $15 billion strong, “ripe and ready.” Proving that Black people bought products was only part of what Johnson achieved. Through Ebony and Jet, he owned one of the most important channels through which national advertisers reached them. 

The distinction became stark decades later. Johnson Publishing sold Ebony and Jet in 2016 to Clear View Group. The remaining company filed for Chapter 7 liquidation in 2019. The audience did not disappear, and advertisers did not lose interest in reaching it. What disappeared was the original Black-owned institution that had converted knowledge of that audience into media power. 

Pepsi took a different route to the same market, and it makes the point in reverse. The company began building a specialized Black-consumer marketing operation before World War II; in 1947, it revived and expanded the initiative under Edward F. Boyd, one of corporate America’s earliest Black marketing executives, whose team is credited with pioneering what marketers now call niche marketing and with cutting into Coca-Cola’s advantage in Black neighborhoods. The sales force was Black. The bottling plants, the distribution network and the balance sheet were not. Pepsi captured brand loyalty that outlasted Boyd’s tenure by decades. Ownership of the company doing the capturing never moved. 

The same asymmetry keeps recurring: Black culture identifies demand, Black consumers validate it, and outside capital often owns the infrastructure that scales it. Agencies, distribution, retail shelf space, financing, data and acquisition markets determine who captures durable value. Discovery gets celebrated. Ownership is treated as a footnote. 

What Eleven Corner Offices Actually Control 

Fortune counted 11 Black chief executives on the 2026 Fortune 500 — a record — overseeing companies with $432 billion in combined annual revenue. The full list generated $21 trillion. Eleven seats represent 2.2 percent of the ranking, and Fortune reports that only 28 Black executives have held a Fortune 500 chief-executive role since the list began in 1955. This is meaningful representation, and proof of how narrow the path to the top remains. Ownership sits on a separate ledger entirely. 

The pipeline helps explain the scarcity. A 2021 McKinsey study covering 24 companies and about 3.7 million U.S. employees found that Black workers made up 14 percent of employees, 7 percent of managers and 4 to 5 percent of senior-manager, vice-president and senior-vice-president roles. The distinction matters because executive authority is delegated through corporate governance. Public-company CEOs may receive substantial stock, but they do not ordinarily possess the controlling or founding stake that determines the residual economics of the enterprise. 

Consumer-opportunity language can blur the same line. McKinsey estimated a $300 billion annual opportunity in meeting underserved Black consumer needs, including roughly $260 billion that consumers were willing to redirect toward companies serving them better. Those figures are valuable for strategy; they identify revenue at stake. They do not say whether the winning supplier is Black-owned, whether Black investors participate in the upside, or whether the gains strengthen Black institutions. 

Fenty keeps the distinction visible because its 50-50 structure has been publicly reported — materially stronger than the royalty-only license most celebrity beauty lines settle for, since Rihanna holds actual equity rather than a fee. It also creates shared control. A sale of LVMH’s stake would not erase Rihanna’s ownership, but it could change her capital partner or activate rights governed by agreements the public has not seen. Calling the story a simple triumph of representation misses the capital structure. 

Loyalty Without Governance 

Demand can make a brand valuable without giving consumers governance. LVMH’s capital, Kendo’s operating platform and Sephora’s distribution helped Fenty reach global scale at a speed few independent beauty brands could match. Rihanna’s vision, cultural authority and equity were central to the same result. The structure worked because the partners contributed different assets. It also means control is divided, and the terms of a partner’s exit are governed by contracts consumers never see. 

Fenty isn’t the only version of this trade-off. It may not even be the cleanest one to read. In November 2017, Unilever agreed to acquire Sundial Brands, the company behind SheaMoisture, Nubian Heritage and the Madam C.J. Walker Collection, in a transaction later estimated at $1.6 billion; Unilever never disclosed official terms. Forbes reported that founder Richelieu Dennis and his mother, Mary, who had co-founded the company with him, together owned 51 percent and stood to receive roughly $850 million before taxes. Dennis stayed on as chairman and chief executive, directed part of the proceeds into the New Voices Fund for women of color entrepreneurs, and stepped down from both roles in December 2019. SheaMoisture now operates as a wholly owned Unilever subsidiary alongside Dove and Axe. 

The two structures do not produce identical outcomes. Dennis exercised full ownership by choosing a complete exit at a negotiated valuation — he was not cheated, he was paid, and paid well, for something that was entirely his to sell. Rihanna retains substantial equity in an ongoing business, but a partner’s proposed exit can still alter that company’s capital structure without originating from her side of the table. Both cases point to the same underlying truth from different directions: ownership matters most at the exact moment the asset’s future is being decided, and that moment doesn’t always arrive on the founder’s schedule. 

Nielsen reports that 70 percent of Black consumers would stop buying from brands they believe devalue their community — real leverage, capable of denting revenue, reputation and valuation all at once. What it can’t do is buy a seat at the table. Consumers cannot appoint a director, exercise a contractual purchase right or sign an acquisition agreement. Their power is consequential, but it remains downstream from governance. 

A Different Test for the Next Trillion 

The answer is not to retire buying-power statistics. It is to label them honestly and stop asking them to prove what they cannot. Every large Black-consumer number should force a closer examination of what is being measured, which company books the revenue, who owns the equity and who has authority when the asset is financed, governed or sold. 

Fenty is not a cautionary tale about Rihanna failing to own. She owns half of a globally scaled beauty business — an unusually substantial position. It is a warning against confusing cultural influence with unilateral control. The Black ownership decade will not be won by larger market-size headlines. It will be won when more of the companies converting Black demand into enterprise value remain Black-owned after the capital arrives, distribution expands and the exit conversation begins. 

FOUR NUMBERS, FOUR DIFFERENT THINGS 

$2.1 trillion  — projected Black buying power for 2026, based on Selig Center data cited by Nielsen. This is income available for spending after taxes, not wealth or ownership. 

$272 billion  — Black household discretionary spending on nonessentials as of fall 2025, per MRI-Simmons. This is 14 percent of the U.S. total and a subset of broader buying power. 

$432 billion  — combined annual revenue of the 11 companies led by Black CEOs on the 2026 Fortune 500. It is revenue those executives oversee, not equity they collectively own. 

$1–2B / €1.5–2.5B  — conflicting valuation reports: Reuters sources estimated the entire Fenty Beauty business at $1 billion to $2 billion in October 2025; the Financial Times later reported that JPMorgan valued LVMH’s 50 percent stake at €1.5 billion to €2.5 billion in May 2026. Neither figure is a closed-deal price.

The post The $272 Billion Black Consumer Economy Brands Still Misunderstand  appeared first on Black Elites.

This figure goes beyond just consumer spending. Analysts believe it indicates a deeper change in cultural influence, digital engagement, entrepreneurship, and corporate responsibility in the American economy.

For decades, Black consumers have influenced trends in music, fashion, beauty, entertainment, technology, and sports. Now, their economic impact is becoming impossible for corporate America to overlook.

Nielsen’s 2026 Diverse Intelligence findings stated that Black consumers are clearly communicating to companies that seek long-term loyalty and market growth. The research found that 67% of Black consumers pay more attention to brands that reflect their culture. Additionally, 70% said they would stop buying from companies that seem to devalue their communities.

A Historic Economic Surge

The increase in Black buying power has accelerated rapidly over the past two decades. Nielsen reported that Black Americans’ spending power has grown roughly 2.4 times since 2000.

The latest projections estimate that Black buying power will be about $2.1 trillion in 2026, a significant jump from earlier estimates of around $1 trillion in the late 2010s.

Several factors are driving this growth, including rising educational attainment, the increase of Black-owned businesses, younger demographics, expanding digital entrepreneurship, and higher participation in well-paying professions.

A 2026 analysis by Urban Insite reported that the number of Black Americans with net worths over $500,000 increased by 70% in the past five years. The report also noted that Black-owned businesses grew by more than 61% between 2018 and 2023.

The Black population itself continues to expand and diversify. NielsenIQ estimates there are now about 48.4 million Black individuals in the United States, with more than a third under the age of 30.

This younger demographic is becoming crucial for marketers and corporations aiming for long-term growth.

Why Brands Are Paying Attention

Major corporations are feeling the need to rethink how they connect with Black consumers.

Research from Nielsen in January 2026 revealed that nearly three-quarters of Black adults aged 18 to 34 want to see more representation of their identities in the content they consume.

The same research indicated that Black audiences spend significantly more time on digital media compared to the broader U.S. population. Black consumers spend around two extra hours each week on smartphone apps and web platforms than the national average.

This has made Black consumers one of the most valuable groups in streaming, social media, podcasts, and creator-driven content.

According to Nielsen’s 2026 audience engagement findings, Black consumers are more likely to support brands that collaborate with creators and organizations connected to their interests and cultural identity.

Charlene Polite Corley, Vice President of Diverse Insights and Partnerships at Nielsen, stated that companies can no longer depend on generic advertising strategies.

In comments shared by several outlets, Corley said brands need to go beyond simply reaching Black audiences and focus on real engagement that reflects “diverse Black experiences and cultural nuances”.

Industry analysts warn that companies that do not change risk losing their relevance in one of the fastest-growing consumer markets in America.

The Cultural Influence Behind the Numbers

Black consumer influence extends far beyond direct spending.

From viral internet slang and music trends to beauty standards, fashion styles, sports culture, and entertainment, Black culture continues to influence mainstream American consumer behavior.

Nielsen’s latest reports emphasized how Black audiences drive engagement across digital platforms, especially through creator culture, podcasts, YouTube, and streaming services.

A Nielsen Brand Lift study referenced in 2026 found that 77% of creator fans felt more connected to brands featured in creator content.

Black consumers are also redefining how brands approach representation.

Essence magazine reported in January 2026 that many Black audiences still feel misrepresented in media, despite the growth in diversity campaigns in recent years. The publication cited Nielsen research showing that 71% of Black audiences believe brands still oversimplify Black identity and experiences.

This rising demand for authenticity is changing advertising strategies across industries, including beauty, retail, banking, healthcare, automotive, food, and technology.

Business Leaders See Long-Term Opportunity

Executives are increasingly viewing Black consumer engagement as a long-term business strategy instead of a temporary diversity initiative.

NielsenIQ described Black consumers in 2026 as a young, culturally significant population with growing digital influence and strong loyalty to brands that show respect and inclusion.

The company urged businesses to treat Black culture as a competency rather than just a marketing trend.

Media analysts note that this shift is especially important as younger consumers prioritize values, representation, and social alignment in their purchasing decisions.

eMarketer also observed in 2025 that streaming now makes up nearly half of total TV viewing among Black audiences, surpassing both cable and broadcast television combined.

This trend is prompting advertisers to shift billions of dollars toward digital and streaming platforms where Black audiences are very active and influential.

Beyond Spending Power

Economists and social commentators caution against confusing buying power with wealth equality.

While Black consumer spending continues to rise, significant racial wealth gaps still exist in areas such as housing, investment ownership, and generational wealth across the United States.

Still, many experts argue that the rapid growth in Black economic influence marks a major shift in American business dynamics.

The rise in Black entrepreneurship, creator economies, digital businesses, and leadership roles is creating broader opportunities for economic participation and cultural ownership.

For many analysts, the predicted $2 trillion milestone reflects more than just an economic figure. It indicates a structural change in who shapes American consumer culture and where corporate America needs to invest for future growth.

As companies strive for relevance in a more diverse economy, Black consumers are increasingly seen as a central force shaping the future of American commerce, media, technology, and culture.

The post Black Buying Power to Exceed $2 Trillion by 2026, Reshaping U.S. Consumer Influence appeared first on Black Elites.

In an era when beauty consumers demand more than just products on shelves, SheaMoisture is stepping into experiential retail with purpose.

According to reports, the Black-founded haircare brand launched Shea Scalp Studio, its first in-store activation, marking a shift in how textured haircare reaches consumers in physical retail. The multi-day pop-up opened on April 9, 2026, at the Walmart Supercentre in Scarborough Town Centre, Toronto, Ontario. It offers shoppers a hands-on, educational, and personalised approach to scalp health.

At its core, the activation is more than a beauty display. It is a strategic brand experience built around a simple but relevant message: healthy hair begins with a healthy scalp. Visitors to the studio can book one-on-one consultations, receive an expert-led scalp diagnostic, and get tailored guidance on how to build scalp care into their regular hair routine. The activation runs from April 9 through April 12.

Why SheaMoisture’s Shea Scalp Studio matters

The launch arrives as the beauty industry pays more attention to scalp care, but SheaMoisture’s approach is significant because it places textured hair consumers and Black hair education at the centre of the conversation.

For decades, Black consumers have had to navigate haircare aisles with limited education, inconsistent representation, or products that failed to account for the unique realities of curls, coils, and protective styling. By creating an in-store educational experience, SheaMoisture is doing more than promoting a product line. It is attempting to close the gap between shelf presence and actual hair knowledge.

That makes this launch notable not just from a marketing standpoint, but from a cultural one.

A launch tied to SheaMoisture’s new Anti-Dandruff Collection

The Shea Scalp Studio was launched to celebrate SheaMoisture’s new Anti-Dandruff Collection, which the company says is formulated to address flakes, dryness, buildup, and itch while supporting the scalp barrier. According to the brand’s release, the line is powered by what it describes as a “Dual Active System” and includes ingredients such as Amino Complex, Shea Butter, Coconut Oil, Glycerin, and Vitamin B3.

The collection includes:

• Anti-Dandruff Shampoo
• Anti-Dandruff Conditioner
• Anti-Dandruff Spray
• Anti-Dandruff Serum

The framing is important. Rather than presenting dandruff care as purely corrective or clinical, SheaMoisture positions scalp care as part of beauty confidence, hair versatility, and self-expression.

That shift reflects a wider evolution in beauty messaging. Consumers increasingly seek products that don’t just “fix” a concern but also support how they want to show up in the world.

SheaMoisture says the activation is about access, education, and visibility

In a statement announcing the activation, Shanice Atkins-Broome, Brand Lead at SheaMoisture, said the initiative is rooted in accessibility and community care.

“This activation is about meeting our community where they’re at,” Atkins-Broome said, adding that the brand wants to provide “knowledgeable hair insights” so consumers do not have to compromise on the looks they want to achieve.

She also emphasized the emotional and cultural significance of hair, noting that “hair is such a powerful form of self-expression” and that care should begin “at the root.”

That language aligns closely with the brand’s broader positioning, which has long tied beauty to identity, empowerment, and community investment.

The cultural significance goes beyond beauty

There is also a broader cultural read here.

Black hair has always been more than cosmetic. It carries identity, creativity, history, resistance, professionalism, and pride. A scalp-focused activation for textured hair is not just about anti-dandruff care. It is also about visibility, representation, and normalizing Black hair needs in mainstream spaces.

That is part of why this launch feels timely.

When a brand like SheaMoisture creates a branded space that centers Black hair rituals and education in-store, it signals that Black consumers are not an afterthought or niche segment. They are the audience around whom the experience is built.

And in retail, that kind of intentionality matters.

Quick Answer

What is SheaMoisture’s Shea Scalp Studio?
Shea Scalp Studio is SheaMoisture’s first-ever in-store activation, launched on April 9, 2026, at the Walmart Supercentre in Scarborough Town Centre, Toronto. It offers expert scalp consultations, diagnostics, and education tied to the brand’s new Anti-Dandruff Collection.

Why is it important?
It marks a significant move in textured hair retail, combining scalp education, consumer access, and Black hair-centred beauty experiences in a mainstream shopping environment.

What products are being featured?
The activation highlights SheaMoisture’s Anti-Dandruff Shampoo, Conditioner, Spray, and Serum, formulated with ingredients including Shea Butter, Coconut Oil, Glycerin, Vitamin B3, and Amino Complex.

The post SheaMoisture Launches Its First-Ever In-Store Shea Scalp Studio appeared first on Black Elites.