It doesn't make sense at all Hollin, the ones on sale should be the lowest price. It also doesn't help that it shows up in euros on my end, I think. I'm just being pouty as my shade is the most expensive
Fizzy, on Skeen. As mentioned they're a bit French and a smaller company. If we were talking one of the big juggernauts here (and not French) I'd be really damning of them at this point. The eye powder claims to be paraben-free and the entire range claims to be artificial colourant-free on all their communications and website, however, here is the INCI they sent me:
Aqua (Water), PEG-8, Talc, Sodium Carboxymethyl Starch, Glycerin, Methyl Methacrylate Crosspolymer, Titanium Dioxide, Mica, Trimethoxycaprylylsilane, Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Triethanolamine, Ascorbic Acid, Caffeine, Sodium Stearyl Fumarate, CI 19140 (Yellow 5), CI 42090 (Blue 1), Methylisothiazolinone, Methylparaben, Propylparaben.
Now as previously mentioned parabens don't concern me too much, those approved for skincare application are still considered safe and have a long history of safe use. For personal reasons wrt them being possible hormone disruptors in a 'rather safe than sorry' mode, I avoid them. Methyl- and propyl- paraben are the most innocuous of the lot. Methylisothiazolinone, however, is one I'd think once or twice about as it's a known irritant and under the advice of dermatological bodies most EU manufacturers have voluntarily chosen to phase it out. It only really is an issue if you're actually sensitive to it. I expect Skeen just doesn't have the funds to overhaul older formulations as of yet but will do so in the future.
I asked for the information mostly as I'd like to find some eye creams with a good % of active Vit C in L-AA (ascorbic acid) form to rec but preferably ones without silicones too for those sensitive to that (so powder seemed like a good starting point). This one does contain some silicones (but for a change, it isn't the main ingredient) which presumably aid in the magic transforming from powder to gel like substance.
Anyhow, it's an interesting one and the reason I mostly think my friend is so happy with it is down to the fact that it's gimmicky and feels tingly. I find men are a bit different when they get into serious skincare, almost getting a bit competitive about it, far more susceptible to marketing talk and suggestive 'research' and are very much convinced by stinging sensations = potent efficacy. He is now also importing the BR P50 1970s version from the US (after I suggested he try the normal P50 knowing he'd love that) convinced the banned phenol makes it so much better (it mostly just feels more stinging 
). So, yeah, somewhat ambivalent on reccing the powder mostly since for your DH Vit C would be a supportive player, not the main active to help out with the wrinkles so I'd give this a pass for now. They also have yet to get back to me on the % of L-AA and don't think they will answer that.
I do like the look of the Reviving Fluid for Eyes, the % of pure Retinol in that is 0.05%. INCI as follows:
Aqua (Water), Isopropyl palmitate, Caprylic/Capric triglyceride, Caprylyl methicone, Glycerin, Cetearyl alcohol, Dimethicone, Butyrospermum parkii (Shea) butter extract, Glyceryl stearate, PEG-100 stearate, Ceteareth-20, Butylene glycol, Octyldodecyl PCA, Menthyl PCA, Acrylates/C10-30 alkyl acrylate crosspolymer, Caffeine, Hesperidin methyl chalcone, Disodium EDTA, Sodium hydroxide, Steareth-20, Retinol, PEG-40 hydrogenated castor oil, Sodium citrate, Dipeptide-2, Citric acid, Palmitoyl tetrapeptide-7, Tocopheryl acetate, Tocopherol, Sodium ascorbate, BHT, Sodium ascorbyl phosphate, Ascorbic acid, Chlorphenesin, Methylisothiazolinone, Chlorhexidine Digluconate, Potassium sorbate
Now the retinol % is lower in comparison to the LRP (which is 0.1 pure retinol plus some 0.1 booster) so on the back of that LRP looks to be a better contender for your DH and his specific issues but what I do like about the fluid is the addition of many other beneficial ingredients like Hesperidin methyl chalcone that helps reduce the appearance of black and blue undereye areas as well as being a poweful antioxidant that helps minimise inflammation, Caffeine (though also in LRP), Vit C and E (not in LRP), peptides (including the proven and effective Matrixyl, also not in LRP).
So it makes for a nice all round formulation and that's what I quite like about the brand. It's not going to be the most potent strengths you're going to find out there but the active ingredients aren't there in minimal amounts either to be listed on the box while doing nothing. They aren't the cheapest (though with the 20% off with newsletter sign up it helps a bit) but nor are they downright extortionate. Had they not been a small French company I'd immediately have written them off as willful false advertisers, etc. but they're just not stellar in that department in a typical French small business way. What speaks for them is their formulations, they're very clean, they contain a well-rounded balance of effective ingredients at a level of concentration that won't irritate most people with no needless fillers. They do use silicones but not in insane amounts and generally the well tolerated ones. What they do well is effective products at a mid level price level with as little irritants as possible and concentrations that aren't likely to make your face go insane and would be well suited for those who don't want an extremely extensive routine and use skincare preventatively or not looking for very immediate results. I like that on their website they're very honest about what makes for good skincare, including lifestyle and diet info. They're not promising the world but will deliver something decent without being shouty about it.
There's a few products of interest there, the revitalising serum looks intriguing containing Vit C at 11% - which is a great starting point for Vit C especially if using for general benefits of brightening and collagen production, not looking to reverse pigmentation or scarring, etc. and glycolic and lactic acid. I've asked for the pH as it's a water solution so curious what it is due to stability and whether the glycolic and lactic will perform some exfoliating properties.
Their Anti-Aging concentrated Corrector contains 0.13% pure Retinol which is 0.03% more than the LRP Redermic highest strength (for the face). It also has an additional boosting Retinol form (which I don't know the concentration of). The hyaluronic looks good (if a bit pricey), as does the Correcting Touch a sort of primer/illuminator/dark circle and pigmentation corrector/CC cream (claims to be silicon free but I'd have to check that for certain, definitely has colourant in it) that makes for that bonne mine look but we can't call it any of that as it might sound like makeup for men, which it basically is.
Anyhow for your DH, I think the Reviving Fluid or the LRP Redermic R for eyes will both be a decent starting point, it simply depends on whether he wants to go with the additional beneficial ingredients at the cost of a bit of strength (though they are supporting boosting ingredients and some that work towards the same goals in a different way/on a different level unlike the single booster in the LRP that does much of the same but is of a less proven variety). If he's up for indulging me in an experiment, would he consider doing one eye with your Verso and the other with LRP/Skeen? I'm really quite curious how these square off against each other as I use the Verso preventatively. I'd only really need progress pictures of the eye area now and then 
.