27

It first ran across the notion with this meme www.fullpunch.com/random/28-interesting-general-facts.html/

Every year Louis Vuitton burns all their unsold bags

A google search yields lots of results but none of them seems credible. Snopes yields nothing.

Any credible info?

Sklivvz
  • 78,578
  • 29
  • 321
  • 428
raam86
  • 383
  • 1
  • 4
  • 12
  • 4
    fwiw it sounds credible. A product where your entire value comes from the few letters stitched or printed on the front of the bag in a notoriously time-sensitive and fickle industry that is rife with counterfeiting, they will do whatever they can to make sure that last years genuine models don't end up on the counterfeit market. – Mark Henderson Sep 29 '12 at 21:05
  • 3
    They can just sell it 15% off – raam86 Sep 29 '12 at 21:51
  • 1
    Even after selling some of the last year's collection 15% off, there is perhaps some bags left. Why doubt that the unsold bags are burned, shredded or somehow disposed of? What else should they do with their excess production? – Tor-Einar Jarnbjo Sep 30 '12 at 01:11
  • 1
    Anything but destroy it. It won't go bad. – raam86 Sep 30 '12 at 02:15
  • _What else should they do_? Why not some sort of recycling? – Nivas Sep 30 '12 at 03:06
  • 9
    @raam - unlikely, they have an image to protect and discounting their prices discounts their exclusivity. Don't get me wrong, I don't endorse their actions, but the claim does sound plausible to me. I would like to see it confirmed though. – Mark Henderson Sep 30 '12 at 07:11
  • 1
    1) I see a picture of what looks like a guy decorating a wall. 2) In said picture there is text that states "Every year Louis Vuitton burns all their unsold bags" 3) Under the picture there is a statement "Every year Louis Vuitton burns all their unsold bags" So my questions are: 1) How does the picture have anything to do with the question? 2) Where are the quote attributions? 3) Approximately how many people have said this? Questions like this have to be believed by a "large number" of people according to the FAQ. – Everett Sep 30 '12 at 18:14
  • @Everett: that is a guy cleaning the glasses of a Louis Vuitton store. – nico Sep 30 '12 at 18:27
  • @nico - Thank you for pointing that out. Okay, it's a Louis Vitton store. Maybe the picture should be of bags being burned? I guess what I'm saying is, I could post a picture of a a guy cleaning the windows of an Apple Store, and put a quote under it that reads, "Every year Apple burns all their unsold laptops." – Everett Sep 30 '12 at 18:40
  • There was a picture with the millions of results Google has on this bit it was edited out – raam86 Sep 30 '12 at 18:52
  • Also the picture description contains the source – raam86 Sep 30 '12 at 18:53
  • Although I agree this sounds plausible, you're unlikely to find an official admission from LV and that makes this unverifiable – Jamiec Oct 01 '12 at 08:45
  • As far as I know, Louis Vuitton does not make special sales (-15% for old colection for instance). And you can only buy the bags in Louis Vuitton shops. But I'm not sure they have so many bags left each year. Or that they change their bags every year. – Nikko Oct 01 '12 at 09:26
  • a lot of the image of LV products is derived from their price and relatively poor availability. So discounting the product towards the end of the product lifecycle reduces the perceived value customers associate with it far more than the discount percentage, hurting future sales a lot. Burning or otherwise destroying excess production is the only thing that makes sense for products like that (and of course attempting to minimise the overproduction to an absolute minimum). – jwenting Oct 01 '12 at 11:44
  • From what you are describing it is common practice all around the fashion industry. Any proof? – raam86 Oct 01 '12 at 12:39
  • @Everett: Apple parallel is total miss. Apple is not exclusive brand, it brand for the masses (of baristas), they sell millions of their products. Now, if you'd say that Bugatti burns their unsold cars, that would be more appropriate parallel. – vartec Oct 01 '12 at 22:02
  • @Vartec - I'm sorry, after the hundreds of articles about the "Apple tax" and constantly hearing about how Apple is the brand of elitists, I just assumed.... Oh well, insert Bugatti in case it suits you ;) – Everett Oct 02 '12 at 03:07
  • @vartec except Bugatti keeps no stock at all, builds all their cars to order (as do afaik all car manufacturers in that market segment) :) raam86: see Ilya's answer below – jwenting Oct 02 '12 at 10:12
  • btw. I've seen interview with a store manager in similar case - designer jeans; journalist were outraged, that these were not donated to charity. The manager explained, that they would have to remove all the trademark elements, which in case of jeans a) would make them unusable (trademarked buttons and rivets), b) be rather expensive, as unlike the production, would not be outsourced to China. – vartec Oct 02 '12 at 13:52
  • @Everett apple does generally sell its products marked up at least 100% from equivalent in power machines from other retailers, but they don't create scarcity by destroying product, they drop prices on the old models when the new are released like everyone else. The dropped price is still a heavy markup though. – Ryathal Oct 02 '12 at 14:02
  • @Ryathal: *"up at least 100% from equivalent in power machines from other retailers"*, well it isn't exactly the case. The thing is most other retailers have either entry level notebooks, or premium notebooks. First use low end components and cheap plastic enclosures, second use high end components and high quality carbon fiber or aluminum enclosures. Meanwhile Apple uses low/mid-end components, but high quality aluminium enclosure. So it's really Apples and oranges. – vartec Oct 02 '12 at 16:08
  • OK. I asked a very good friend who has worked in the haute couture industry in Paris for most of her life. She verified to my shock and disbelief (believe me, I asked her three times because I didn't believe her) that Chanel, Louis Vuitton and others actually DO burn their bags as well as unsold garments. I kept asking if she was sure and her answer was, "Of course, I know this because I know so many people in the industry." Still hard to believe! –  Jan 04 '13 at 21:32

2 Answers2

26

I work nearby the flagship LV shop in Paris, and I am pretty surprised by this kind of rumours. In fact, there is a constant line to enter the shop, like an Apple store if they were releasing a new iPhone every day of the year. Does Apple burn unsold iPhones? No because there are none.

For the record, 2 years ago, Louis Vuitton had to close all shops 1 hour early during fall season, in order to avoid stock shortage during Christmas holidays, despite raising price (yes, raising already over-priced items), according to Le Figaro, a credible French newspaper.

I honestly don't see why LV could not sell all their production.

SQB
  • 3,339
  • 2
  • 22
  • 48
  • Ah, but what about second choice, returned or damaged items that can't be sold in such a shop? – Sklivvz Oct 02 '12 at 17:34
  • returned and damaged items are likely destroyed, every company would do that (I doubt Apple'd repair an iPhone that was returned with a cracked screen, they'd trash it as building a replacement in China is cheaper and faster than having a tech in the US or EU fix it). – jwenting Oct 03 '12 at 07:38
  • 2
    As for damaged merchandise, I can tell you from experience that Mulberry (Equally high value, but lesser known British brand) have a whole section of their factory dedicated to repairing damaged leather goods. – Jamiec Oct 03 '12 at 08:10
  • Sounds more like a British tradition than fashion – raam86 Oct 03 '12 at 08:48
  • 1
    Makes more sense to repair leather goods than phones though. The latter's components can be more easily recycled (in small pieces. Melted down, chopped up or some such). – Jonta Oct 04 '12 at 15:55
  • 1
    Well... _logically_ this means that the statement is true. Like "all elephants in my bedroom are red" is true, because there are none. Not the kind of logic people use... I'll go away now... – RomanSt Oct 10 '12 at 01:39
  • @Pandaiolo: *"raising already over-priced items"* - in free market economy the "right" price is where supply and demand curves cross. – vartec Jan 07 '13 at 10:32
  • 1
    @jwenting: AFAIK, Apple is one of the few (if not the only one) major electronics retailer, which sells refurbs in their official stores. Thus for them it might be profitable to ship damaged ones (in bulk) to China and have them repaired there. – vartec Jan 07 '13 at 10:38
  • 2
    @vartec It is my opinion that these items are way too expensive, relatively to their original value (material + labor). Maybe the term "overpriced" is technically wrong, especially if you think that HYPE is never overpriced... but I think everyone got the point, and this debate is somewhat OT - Sent with my overpriced smartphone :-) –  Jan 07 '13 at 16:56
  • 3
    This answer appears to be anecdotal. Closing early does not mean they sell out of everything--merely the popular items. It could also be artificial hype. The supply of luxury items is often artificially constrained to create the illusion of scarcity. LV is capable of making unlimited bags--whether they destroy their merchandise or not, they carefully control the supply to avoid saturating the market. – denten Apr 25 '13 at 20:51
  • There is a line out the door at the Apple stores and their iPhones all sell out, in the simplified scenario. Do all the iPods and all the MacBooks and all the iMacs sell out, as well? No. Not all product lines are equally popular. There will inevitably been some stock of some product lines that don't sell as perfectly as the most popular ones. – PoloHoleSet Jun 01 '17 at 16:17
  • 1
    This reads like an ad. In a fashion business with seasonal product and huge mark ups I would expect old product to be destroyed or de-badged . – daniel Jun 01 '17 at 21:06
17

They probably do.

While I couldn't find evidence for Louis Vuitton destroying their unsold products, except for the original article, there are proof for other companies doing it.

H&M and Wal-Mart:

The clothing retailer H & M promised on Wednesday that it would stop the practice of destroying new, unworn clothing that it could not sell at its store in Herald Square, and would instead donate the garments to charities...

She also found bags of new Wal-Mart garments with holes punched through them...

A Wal-Mart spokeswoman, Melissa Hill, said that she had been unable to learn why new clothing with the store’s tags had been destroyed, but she added that the company typically donated or recycled such items.

Chanel:

And yes, this rumor appears to be true. Chanel has been known to burn leftover goods at the end of a season. In an attempt to outrun counterfeiters who make millions each year producing fake designer bags, Chanel has burned leftover stock so that no part of its brand is left to easily duplicate. Coco Chanel herself is believed to have initiated the first conflagration. In addition, disposing of leftover stock this way helps to preserve the upper-class nature of the brand (only a few can afford it, as opposed to deep-discounted sale items winding up on the arms of middle-class soccer moms). In addition, the idea of a Chanel bonfire only adds to the mystic of Coco and her brand.

Also, from the same source about LV:

Myths circulating around fashionable Internet forums claim Chanel never goes on sale. This is not true, however, the myth likely stems from other, high-end designers of handbags, such as Louis Vuitton, which historically does not put its pieces on sale.

Another source for Chanel:

Years back I had written about how Chanel burns any merchandise that doesn't sell.

LV doesn't sell its products with discounts, and destroying unsold products is a common practice with both high-end and less expensive brands to avoid counterfeiting and increase the exclusivity of the brand. So it's a safe assumption that LV are destroying their unsold products. Not necessarily by fire, but still destroying them instead of putting them on sale.

Community
  • 1
SIMEL
  • 29,037
  • 14
  • 123
  • 139
  • 10
    All those quotes are just repeating the same legend. I still dont see any *evidence* that it is taking place. I maintain that without official word from CoCo, LV or any other high end brand that this is a specific tactic (eg, to stop counterfeit) that this is anything but urban legend. Its much more likely (to me anyway) that they just dont manufacture much more than they need, and what is surplus they give away to staff, as promotional gifts, and other such things. Just because they dont markdown their surplus doesnt equate to them destroying it. – Jamiec Oct 02 '12 at 07:30
  • 1
    @Jamiac, There is an official admission from H&M that this was a practice and an admission from Walmart that this was done at least once in their NYC store. As well as credible sources that cite the same for Chanel. – SIMEL Oct 02 '12 at 09:38
  • 5
    How is ehow a credible source, moreover, how is "Lisa Henshall, eHow Contributor" in any way linked to Chanel? Answer: Its not, and she's not. As for H&M and Walmart, neither are in any way related too the question - neither are high-end, luxury brands. To use an argument from above, if you showed that Bugatti torched their unsold cars it might be relevant, but telling me 2 low-cost bulk sellers dump unsold merchandise irrelevant to the question. – Jamiec Oct 02 '12 at 10:22
  • @Jamiac, thestar.com is the online edition of the Toronto Star, one of the major Canadian newspapers. – SIMEL Oct 02 '12 at 10:33
  • 5
    And....? You point? Author writes about the *supposed* practice of high-end luxury retailers burning surplus product... same author references it again. Still hardly conclusive evidence. – Jamiec Oct 02 '12 at 10:36
  • mhhh... the article about _H&M and Wal-Mart_ quotes their spokespeople as saying that destroying leftover stock is __not__ their standard procedure. They usually _donate_ or _recycle_. This makes me wonder if Louis Vuitton bags can be recycled? – Oliver_C Oct 04 '12 at 10:38
  • @Oliver_C, If recycling means that the bags are dismantled back to raw materials that are then used to create new LV bags, I would call it destroying as well. – SIMEL Oct 04 '12 at 12:04
  • H&M and Walmart are frankly not comparable to Louis Vuitton. They sell cheap clothes that are worth nothing in the next season and just take up space in the store or warehouse. Louis Vuitton bags are barely changed from year to year. There is no point destroying them, because they can easily be sold for the same price in the next year. – gnasher729 Jul 12 '14 at 16:43