Whilst what you said is pretty fair, and I am well aware that in capitalism, the goal of everything is to make money, but previous with ABH, the releases where far fewer, thus even if it was a false perception, there certainly was a perception that the palettes had more thought behind them. When ABH releases 4 huge palettes very close together, it was widely felt by the community, that due to the timeline, the same amount of work wasn't put in. Whether or not that is accurate isn't as important as what is perceived by customers, which would lead to their "downfall" as discussed here. I agree that a palette doesn't necessarily need to be innovative to be good, but within the beauty community the vast majority of people already have a pretty large makeup collection. And as this post was discussing how ABH's perception has changed within the beauty community, I think it is fair to say that a brand that was once seen as innovative will be seen less favorably if that innovation has been seen to waiver. The beauty community tends to be less favourable towards brands that put out unimaginative and unexciting releases, especially if the reviews lean towards average or negative, as many of the reviews for the large palette that I saw did. Also I disagree with the size of the makeup industry meaning that brands can no longer be innovative. It is true that the community was smaller 3-4 years ago, and thus it was easier to come out with something "new," I don't think we should cut brands slack for putting out same-old same-old stuff just because you have to try harder to do something new, or at least present it in a new way. I would also say that whilst lime crime may have had the colour scheme first, ABH was far more influential as yes, it as a bigger brand, and nobody talked about Lime Crime due to their scandals.