Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Sales & Retail · Strategic decision · 2016–2026

Blank me (半分一) was No.1 base makeup — then LVMH walked away and 105 lawsuits followed

Li Jiaqi's livestream to LVMH to bankruptcy in three years — blank me shows what happens when a brand's only moat is a sales channel.

Blank me (半分一)

What happened

Blank me (半分一) was founded in 2016 by Yang Boya, a former investment director at Decheng Capital. The brand focused entirely on base makeup (foundation, concealer, primer), positioning itself in the ¥250-450 mid-premium tier with a 'scientific base makeup' and 'skin optics' concept. Its first product launched in 2019, and in April 2021 a feature on Li Jiaqi's livestream drove explosive growth — by 2022 it was named to the Forbes China New Brands Top 100.

In November 2023 L Catterton, LVMH's private equity fund, invested in the company through its first RMB fund, taking a 10.18% stake as the third-largest shareholder. It was L Catterton's debut China deal — a stamp of approval that made blank me the hottest Chinese beauty startup on the market. But just three months later, in February 2024, L Catterton unilaterally terminated all investment agreements, citing 'dissatisfaction with business and financial due diligence results and undisclosed pending legal proceedings'. The statement was a death sentence for the brand's fundraising ability.

From 2024 the business unravelled rapidly. Social media accounts went silent — Weibo in December 2024, Xiaohongshu in March 2025, Douyin in April 2025. Suppliers and agencies filed lawsuits for unpaid bills. By early 2026 parent Shanghai Yongxi had 20 enforcement cases totalling ¥10M+ and 29 restriction orders against founder Yang Boya. There were 105 legal cases against it with claims over ¥30M. In June 2026 a supplier filed for bankruptcy. The brand that once owned China's base makeup category was fighting in court, not the market.

Why it happened

  • L Catterton's public termination destroyed the brand's fundraising credibility — no investor touches a company another has publicly flagged for due diligence issues.
  • The business depended on Li Jiaqi's livestream and influencer marketing for distribution, building awareness but not repeat purchase loyalty or cost-efficient acquisition.
  • A high cost structure — overseas supply chain, expensive brand films, and top-KOL commissions — meant the company needed premium pricing that could not hold when cash ran short.
  • The legal cascade started with one unpaid supplier and grew to 105 cases — a chain reaction where a single default triggered more, each one adding enforcement pressure.
What it cost¥1B→zero; ¥10M enforcement; 105 suits; bankruptcy filingcatastrophic

The lesson

A brand that rises on a single channel and a single investor endorsement has not built a business — it has built a dependency. When either goes, both go.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →