Anna Wintour Doesn't Understand Why Price Fixing Has To Be Illegal
The editor-in-chief of American Vogue, Anna Wintour, proposed a novel solution to the problems that plague clothing retailers at a recent industry meeting. And by "novel" we mean "she's completely clueless."
The Vogue editor stood up to offer, "Could someone lead a committee that would make ground rules for retailers of when the discounting starts, and then all the retailers can agree to it?" Von Furstenberg interjected that that was illegal - in fact, if the big department stores had any such agreement, it would amount to price-fixing and collusion, an anti-trust lawsuit in the making. "Is that something we can change?" asked Wintour. "We have friends in the White House now!"
"How Do You Solve A Problem Like Fashion Week?" [Jezebel via noturnonred]
(Photo: Karin Bar)
Post a comment
Comments:
Well, this lady has a point. The Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price has no basis in reality, since nobody actually pays that price.
All the merchandise is discounted to "sale" pricing as soon as it hits the department store floors - brand new. Then further discounting applies when the merchandise is considered off-season. For example the Holiday stuff goes on "sale" in mid-December. The summer stuff goes on "sale" about the end of June.
So the word "sale" doesn't mean much any more.
@futuresuperbowlMVPJayCutler: I think that maybe Ms. Wintour thinks that her position in the fashion industry and wealth means she can control and direct people to do whatever she wants....delusional!
Maybe, but if she actually had her way, most people would be wearing burlap sacks before the end of a year. Fashion pricing may be absurd, but at least stores are competing somewhat for the best prices.
@Harry Pothead: That point is also made in the article...that sending winter coats to stores in July encourages retailers to discount earlier and deeper to get rid of the stuff.
The article is basically about the big fashion people trying to find ways to stop hemorrhaging money.
Please, have you seen First Lady Obama's wardrobe. Sure looks like she has immunity to me.
This scares the crap out of me. If there are that many people out there that are that stupid... No, really. this means they're paying a lot of money in campaign funds. Isn't it a fact that the candidate with the most money has a better chance? Then these stupid people can actually make stuff like this happen.
Scary. Very, VERY scary.
@futuresuperbowlMVPJayCutler: It's kindof like watching the chefs on Top Chef Masters try to shop in Whole Foods.
@aguacarbonica: @Hoss: Michelle Obama wears a lot of J.Crew...the same stuff that is in my wardrobe, and I am by no means a millionaire. All first ladies had designer dresses.
@futuresuperbowlMVPJayCutler: You should have claimed, "Furstenberg!".
If only I could let you all hear how that name should be properly pronounced..... a high pitched feminine voice with one arm up in the air....
@SkokieGuy: She looks like Edna the Super Hero Costume designer on "The Incredibles"
[www.cinematicwallpaper.com]
@morganlh85: I also think the point the article made about the mis-timing of the shows versus when the product actually hits retail was spot-on.
The target audience for these high-end designers is likely to not buy the $600 pants or $800 dress when the low end retailers snatched up publicity shots and pumped out look alikes at vastly smaller prices (and debatably, quality) mere weeks after the shows. Why spend the money when the same look has already flooded the closets of so many others?
I think DvF and Betsey Johnson hit the nail on the head; they need "shop shows" -- as well as to stop sending us coats in July!
"What nobody was apparently willing to address was that fashion became, during the long recent boom, simply too expensive: there are not enough good designers willing to make a beautiful dress that costs not a few thousand dollars but a few hundred dollars. True designer fashion will never be available at Wal-Mart or H&M prices, but why can so few people manage to make a dress that a member of this country's middle-class could actually, in a good month, splurge on and wear with enjoyment?"
This is why designer collections at places like Target do so well. Everyone wants a taste of high-end fashion, something different from the offerings at every other retailer. There has to be some middle ground between mass-market and couture that these designers would be willing to compromise on.
Of course some design houses would never sacrifice their reputation to appeal to a broader audience, but pride does seem to be the root of this problem.
@aloria:
Shoot, she doesn't even have to pay for those handbags. The designers beg her to take them for free.
Reminds me of that wonderful quote by the wife of that disgraced home builder...
"What does a banana cost nowadays? $10?"
Anyone remember her name?
My mom and I were discussing this a while back - places like JCPenney, Marshalls and Kohls don't have winter gloves in teh winter, only Sept-November, then then in December the bathing suits would come out. My response was don't buy crappy cheap gloves at TJ Max, goto EMS, LL Bean or a similar store and get a pair of good, durable gloves (like Burtons). Sure, you may pay $30 for the gloves, but they'll last more than one season and you won't be looking for them again next September.
@I Love New Jersey: I have never read a more clueless statement on Consumerist than this.
Yeah,this is Communism, and China is a Republic.
@I Love New Jersey: Collusion, price-fixing, and private monopolies are symptoms of anarchocapitalism, not communism. The proper slippery slope fear of alleviating the "burden" of competition from a "free market" is fascism (where the gov't works hand-in-hand with private enterprise), not communism (where all enterprises are state-owned).
@The-Lone-Gunman: I agree. It makes me cry to look at my future of mediocre wages vs. this royal idiot who can't think past her bank account to see how that would effect the world market.
I work in a City Hall but that doesn't mean I'm going to try to get policy changed for my own benefit when it would hurt everyone else.
Damn. And they wonder why fashionista's are viewed as airheads?
@Harry Pothead: "The Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price has no basis in reality, since nobody actually pays that price."
That really depends on what one is shopping for.
@Harry Pothead: Oh, sale has the same meaning it always had. The catch is - Is the item ON sale or FOR sale? Many times retailers use the word sale to make people think it's a great deal, but the item is merely FOR sale.
@catskyfire: "Many times"? I've never seen it used in that manner unless it was a high-demand item (such as a Wii before a few months ago) that the store was advertising as having in stock. Of all the games I've seen retailers play, this hasn't been one of them.






























I refuse to think the woman in that picture could have said something stupid. Quick, ask her how much she thinks a gallon of milk costs.