Gransnet forums

News & politics

So incredibly wasteful!

(45 Posts)
granschemeofthings Thu 19-Jul-18 17:40:21

Apparently Burberry has burnt millions of pounds worth of stock in order to protect their brand. How is this even legal? They say it was done in an environmentally friendly way but I'm not buying that for a minute. Makes me so cross. Here's the BBC article.

Jaycee5 Fri 20-Jul-18 15:09:32

Clothing like this used to be sold in Leather Lane market. The stallholders just had to agree to cut the labels off which they always did. Suddenly everything is a problem. I doubt that there was that much over ordering in the past though. They could give it to fashion colleges to remake or rip it up and sell it as rags. It just seems like they've taken the easiest way.

patriciageegee Fri 20-Jul-18 16:25:27

smilelucky girl. Totally disgusting unethical behaviour from a pretentious brand which smacks of a publicity stunt anyway - as if it wasn't going to become common knowledge in this mass communication age.

Neilspurgeon0 Fri 20-Jul-18 16:40:11

I do object to the expression worth when they mean cost, they are totally different concepts. The value of these items is a simple sum (cost of materials + cost of labour) which I estimate would be a value of circa £20,000 to which, if they have actually been delivered to the shops (which I actually doubt) might double the cost of manufacture at most

mgtanne71 Fri 20-Jul-18 17:00:41

Never again will I buy Burberry

HannahLoisLuke Fri 20-Jul-18 17:04:29

Nothing exclusive about Burberry since every market stall has been selling a version of "Burberry check" for decades.
This obsession with labels is pathetic.

Grandmama Fri 20-Jul-18 19:31:21

They don't want the 'wrong' people wearing their stuff so they destroy it.

Jalima1108 Fri 20-Jul-18 20:00:16

It is shocking.

If you want to be exclusive, you don't make lots and then burn it. You just make less in the first place. That is the ultimate ecological solution.
That would be the sensible option - obviously people do not want their over-priced items so they have been left with them.

The only thing that wearing 'Burberry' means is 'I have more money than sense - this item cost peanuts to make and I have paid an extortionate price for it'.
Stupid.

keriku Fri 20-Jul-18 20:10:44

I worked in a factory over 30 years ago which made garments for several companies including Burberry. The main difference was a slightly better grade of fabric, plus the linings were hand cut individually to ensure they matched exactly. That was it! The garments then sold for much, much more than the other items we manufactured - madness!

Jalima1108 Fri 20-Jul-18 20:11:27

That doesn't surprise me keriku!

Deedaa Fri 20-Jul-18 21:19:06

About 20 years ago I bought an Armani coat in Brick Lane for £50. The trader said she bought up their left overs at the end of the season because Armani couldn't be seen to have stuff left to reduce.
In the days when Victoria Beckham was famous for her Gucci habit Tom Ford asked an aide what they could do to stop "that awful woman" wearing their clothes. He was told nothing could be done because she actually bought them!

Beau Fri 20-Jul-18 22:17:22

I heard someone on Radio 4 today say that all the expensive brands do this to protect their intellectual property - Burberry just happen to be the subject of this story.

Grandma2213 Sat 21-Jul-18 01:15:24

My school raincoat years ago was actually called a 'burberry' so I had no idea it was now a 'posh' brand name! Did the firm grow from humble beginnings then as I'm pretty sure that my coat would have been cheap to buy. The only brand names I wear are 'George' and 'F&F, though I did buy some Adidas trainers in a sale this year.

Synonymous Sat 21-Jul-18 02:59:55

What a waste!
I really don't understand this obsession with labels. It is 'The Emperor's new clothes" all over again.
If anyone wanted me to wear an item of clothing with their name on it I would tell them that they could never pay me enough to do so as it makes the wearer appear very needy.

NfkDumpling Sat 21-Jul-18 07:23:22

I hate this obsession with wearing labels with clothes attached. It’s like wearing free advertising.

If I were to wear Burberry all my friends would assume it was a copy so there’s no point. And I don’t like it anyway.

NfkDumpling Sat 21-Jul-18 07:25:19

You’re right Synonyous. It does make the wearer look needy. Like school kids having to all have the same in order to be included in the gang.

Synonymous Sat 21-Jul-18 17:56:09

Nfk Absolutely! grin

GillT57 Sat 21-Jul-18 18:16:02

I think they are too late if the purpose of destroying their surplus stock was to achieve exclusivity. The Burberry check is copied everywhere, every market stall has bags/scarfs you name it, the factories knock out the pirated copies. To me, seeing someone wearing Burberry is seeing someone wearing a knocked off/pirated article. Not classy, not exclusive. Sorry Burberry, that boat has sailed as it has with Tommy Hilfiger.

lilypollen Sat 21-Jul-18 18:39:38

Burberry at Bicester Village used to be great for bargains but now they cater for the foreign market so there are no value purchases to be had.

Daisyboots Sat 21-Jul-18 21:37:01

In the 80s and 90s Burberry had a factory in Littleport Cambs. Every so often they would have a sale there but you could only be admitted with an invitation. I used to go with a friend but mist of the time the clothes etc were poorly made and not even worth the "sale" price which was still high. My ex did buy a raincoat there which he wore for years. Other than their famous check are their clothes instantly recognisable? Surely the labels could be removed and the clothes sold rather than burnt. A total waste of resources in my opinion.