Yardley=Wrisley?

[Straight Arrow]

It seems to have become an accepted truth around here that Wrisley shaving soap is nothing but re-branded Yardley. The assertion has been made enough times that everyone seems to believe it without question. But where is the proof? Can someone provide a link to any documentation that bears out the truth or fallacy of this assertion? All I can find through searching online is that the Wrisley company was a soap and toiletry firm based in Chicago. Maybe they did market re-branded Yardley but I haven't been able to find any evidence that supports it. Let's try to get to the bottom of this.

[Greybeard]

You raise a very good point. The Allen B.Wrisley company manufactured their own soap and had a large soap works in Chicago. Why would they need to have Yardley make their shaving soap for them? If they licensed it from Yardley, wouldn't they want to tout it on their packaging?

Also, from doing some quick research, Wrisley was sued at least twice by the Iowa Soap Co. and the FTC for trademark infringement. Wrisley won both times. They won because even though the packaging and product was almost identical, the labeling stated quite clearly "Wrisley" and the ingredients in the product were widely in use in soap manufacturing and not proprietary. Who's to say that they didn't just make a knock-off of Yardley's soap under their own label in a similar bowl.

[michiganlover]

As I understand it, the Wrisley = Yardley declaration, is probably based upon the experience of people who have tried both products, and found them to be so similar in performance, that they are regarded as being the same.

Who's to say that they didn't just make a knock-off of Yardley's soap under their own label in a similar bowl.

And such a thing would support the two soaps being so similar that they could be considered to be the same formulation/ product.

Even if Wrisley is nothing more than a clone of Yardley, it wouldn't really matter in the eyes of the wet shaving community. Yardley is valued because it is considered to be an amazing quality vintage soap. The actual brand name has no impact on it's performance.

[SliceOfLife]

That was the impression I got as well.

[Greybeard]

And such a thing would support the two soaps being so similar that they could be considered to be the same formulation/ product.

Even if Wrisley is nothing more than a clone of Yardley, it wouldn't really matter in the eyes of the wet shaving community. Yardley is valued because it is considered to be an amazing quality vintage soap. The actual brand name has no impact on it's performance.

I agree.

[bythbook]

weren't many Yardley products made in the USA? (see Yardley labels with NY first....)

Maybe Wrisley made Yardley!

[Ru4scuba?]

You raise a very good point. The Allen B.Wrisley company manufactured their own soap and had a large soap works in Chicago. Why would they need to have Yardley make their shaving soap for them? If they licensed it from Yardley, wouldn't they want to tout it on their packaging?

Also, from doing some quick research, Wrisley was sued at least twice by the Iowa Soap Co. and the FTC for trademark infringement. Wrisley won both times. They won because even though the packaging and product was almost identical, the labeling stated quite clearly "Wrisley" and the ingredients in the product were widely in use in soap manufacturing and not proprietary. Who's to say that they didn't just make a knock-off of Yardley's soap under their own label in a similar bowl.

Before writing a review of Wrisley soap in the reviews section, this was basically what my research uncovered as well. Further, there was some sort of fire in the Chicago Wrisley factory in the 50s....I got the initial gut impression (key words here...just my assertion) that the fire helped Wrisley's downfall.

As to whether or not Yardley actually = Wrisley...couldn't find enough to substantiate that claim.