NPR anchors/hosts are probably making $175,000 to about $375,000. Reporters (not the stars) are probably making about $110,000. But at that age/level, most of them are married, with spouses who earn either the same or more.
Did anyone hear the "Bagging a Birkin" story on NPR's Planet Money?
- Thread starter hopingoneday
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
Yes that's a good salary. After 30 years with the top print journal and multiple awards for his work my husband retired at far less than 110,000. All the more reason they don't need my money.
I've just listened to it, even though not familiar with it but had to know what the fuss is all about [emoji14]
Yes there are bits that are true but then, when I heard Wednesday Martin talk I instantly knew where it was heading and didn't bother to take anything that serious, it's all a bit condescending and tongue in cheek ,
This I can totally relate and know of, I see this with many upper class English folks, they have the means, but they would never buy expensive bags or logos, that's why when the reporter said Kate Middleton has one, made me question the accuracy of some of the facts, the middletons aspire to be UC, they would never be seen wearing anything recognisable as the B or K or Even Chanel ,
But there is a trend going on, that if you really want to make a fuss , generate attention <this podcast certainly did, I've heard about it in my home town and forwarded it to some friends> then just mention the Birkin and their carrier and just watch happens!
Yes there are bits that are true but then, when I heard Wednesday Martin talk I instantly knew where it was heading and didn't bother to take anything that serious, it's all a bit condescending and tongue in cheek ,
This I can totally relate and know of, I see this with many upper class English folks, they have the means, but they would never buy expensive bags or logos, that's why when the reporter said Kate Middleton has one, made me question the accuracy of some of the facts, the middletons aspire to be UC, they would never be seen wearing anything recognisable as the B or K or Even Chanel ,
But there is a trend going on, that if you really want to make a fuss , generate attention <this podcast certainly did, I've heard about it in my home town and forwarded it to some friends> then just mention the Birkin and their carrier and just watch happens!
I think you need to listen to the piece again, because you may have taken offense too quickly. For one thing, they didn't "assume the husbands buy the Birkins", it was recommended to an interviewee by a person who has multiple Birkins that she send her husband in pursuit - presumably because men have an easier time getting one. As I've said before, this is advice given and a tactic employed by people here. The piece merely repeats advice given (here and others) countless of times on how to get a Birkin: buy lots of other items and then ask, send in a "husband", go to Tokyo (or Paris).
The main piece is mostly about the (counterintuitive) way Hermes has gone about selling the Birkin -- artificial scarcity, saying no, outrageous prices/price increases -- resulting in people practically (sometimes literally) begging for the bag (as we've seen here). And this marketing strategy is used by lots of places.
Last edited:
A reminder: there is no political discussion permitted on PF. Please stick to discussing the story, not the politics of NPRs listeners or of NPR itself, not the reasons why people buy Hermes, what else you could buy with the money spent on a bag, etc.
Thanks.
Thanks.
I wish the husband would buy the Birkins. All my bags are paid for by me as well as the occasional small or not so small item from H that I buy him. Then to top it off, he'll still snag my gavoches to use as pocket squares and not give them back!
The most interesting part of the story was the advertising guy who said H "doesn't get greedy" and put more Bs on the market. And I'll admit, as much as I love the bag on its own merits, a definite part of the appeal is that you don't see that many on the street. It does still feel special. But the story buried the lede on that and went for the attention-grabbing "hey listen to this story about $60,000 bags!"
The most interesting part of the story was the advertising guy who said H "doesn't get greedy" and put more Bs on the market. And I'll admit, as much as I love the bag on its own merits, a definite part of the appeal is that you don't see that many on the street. It does still feel special. But the story buried the lede on that and went for the attention-grabbing "hey listen to this story about $60,000 bags!"
Just listened to the podcast, and while I do understand why it felt offensive to many, I guess I personally am in agreement with apey. By and large the facts were correct (though the insistence that the bag was 60k--yes, first they said "average" price, but then the main reporter kept calling it "a 60,000 dollar bag"--was irksome). The "hazing" process, the false scarcity, the having to "buy in" to the brand, the whole weird upside-down nature of the retail experience ("Pleeeeeez, can I buy your product?") are all largely accurate. I'm sure for some here, this is not descriptive of their buying experience--but it was for me and is for many, as innumerable threads on this forum demonstrate.
The main thrust of the piece was more about luxury sales strategies, I think, but the Birkin was a rather notorious example and therefore a useful hook. The thing that was overlooked by (or not really of interest to) the presenters was the quality of the Birkin and of all Hermes leather goods. They may be plain (which I have come to prefer--I can't take bags with lots of studs and hardware seriously anymore), and most of the leathers are firm, which might feel less pleasant to the casual Birkin observer, but which mean the products LAST, both in style and in functionality. The smooshy, blingy bag will look exhausted and worn in a year, while the Birkin can be handed down to the next generation.
So, it's a very expensive bag. It has caché. The style is not for everyone. And Hermes' sales strategy is genius and an often intimidating challenge for the would-be buyer. All true. And the description of the husband prevailing in his Birkin quest in Tokyo by dint of simply persisting beyond the point of politeness was pretty darn funny!
The main thrust of the piece was more about luxury sales strategies, I think, but the Birkin was a rather notorious example and therefore a useful hook. The thing that was overlooked by (or not really of interest to) the presenters was the quality of the Birkin and of all Hermes leather goods. They may be plain (which I have come to prefer--I can't take bags with lots of studs and hardware seriously anymore), and most of the leathers are firm, which might feel less pleasant to the casual Birkin observer, but which mean the products LAST, both in style and in functionality. The smooshy, blingy bag will look exhausted and worn in a year, while the Birkin can be handed down to the next generation.
So, it's a very expensive bag. It has caché. The style is not for everyone. And Hermes' sales strategy is genius and an often intimidating challenge for the would-be buyer. All true. And the description of the husband prevailing in his Birkin quest in Tokyo by dint of simply persisting beyond the point of politeness was pretty darn funny!
The NPR story states that the Middleton's own Birkin bags. Someone in this thread states that they don't. Clearly one, or both, do. Isn't posting photos of them with their Birkin's in keeping with the NPR story? Nothing political/royal there; simply clarifying facts about the NPR story.
It's not a debate among members on who owns bags or why. And your first photo wasn't even one of the Middletons.
Many political posts have already been removed from the thread. And they will continue to be if they veer off topic. Thanks.
I just listened to the NPR piece. I agree, it's more about Hermes' marketing "schemes" to keep the Birkin bag on top - to make sure it stays the most-desired bag.
And I wouldn't say that $60,000 is the average price of a Birkin. It's more like the median price. There are probably a lot more $12,000 Birkins produced than there are $120,000 ones. So average would probably be more like $20,000.
Otherwise, her report is pretty much on point. The point of the story is, if you play hard to get, people will want you more.
As for "cracking the code," haven't people on TPF said that SAs don't get commission on Birkins? So it would make sense that if you purchase other items from H, so that the SA can receive commission, the reward is you get to own a bag that doesn't provide the SA with a commission.
And I wouldn't say that $60,000 is the average price of a Birkin. It's more like the median price. There are probably a lot more $12,000 Birkins produced than there are $120,000 ones. So average would probably be more like $20,000.
Otherwise, her report is pretty much on point. The point of the story is, if you play hard to get, people will want you more.
As for "cracking the code," haven't people on TPF said that SAs don't get commission on Birkins? So it would make sense that if you purchase other items from H, so that the SA can receive commission, the reward is you get to own a bag that doesn't provide the SA with a commission.
The bolded was what got me. Felt like they were bashing the Birkin at the end because they couldn't walk in and get one. They ignored the fact that these are handmade and have a purposeful scarcity, despite reporting that they are made by experience artisians, and just ran it off as it's expensive just to be snobbish. And to say people with Birkin bags (who isn't even sure if the bag the lady was carrying was a Birkin) are snobs who run people off into trashcans, was really demeaning.I can ignore the incorrect price (never bought a Birkin, but from the tpf price list, it sounds off), but to be childish about it ruined this story.
I expected something more from an NPR story. Less childish/petty and more factual.
Though, do you all think everyone who wants a Birkin will go send of their husbands off to buy15 scarves then casually asking for one? Haha.
I did notice that "buy a pile of scarves and get a Birkin!" conclusion made by the reporter. Er, no, actually. If listeners think they will automatically be offered a B using this technique, I believe they will be disappointed. But this little piece was definitely pretty fluffy--Journalistic rigor was not its strong suit.
Now, if you buy a WATCH. . . .
Now, if you buy a WATCH. . . .
Last time I saw one in-store (three months ago) it was USD $279K (I admit to spending a little time with it
even though it's well over my personal threshold of what i would pay for a bag). I can see how, if NPR averaged the costs of varying models, they could get to $60K, but across production lines in terms of quantities, it's a very misleading and almost certainly inaccurate number.The media are the media
As many have said, they want a "hook" to a story and "$60,000 handbag" is a much better hook than "$11,000 handbag", given the prices of most luxury goods these days and the lifestyles people are used to seeing on TV.What is getting tiresome is any level of scorn aimed at women for buying items like Birkins, when you will never hear similar derision aimed at a guy with an expensive watch, or at anyone with an expensive camera, stereo, etc. I wish the media would not reinforce this.....