+1I hope people read carefully enough to see you’re NOT talking about LV.
I wish posters wouldn’t confuse the thread with stories about other retailers, actually.
+1I hope people read carefully enough to see you’re NOT talking about LV.
I wish posters wouldn’t confuse the thread with stories about other retailers, actually.
I clearly stated that it was a Michael Kors bag and which store it was purchased from. I was trying to give an example of a time I experienced something similar in a different situation. There seem to be so many unspoken rules here at this forum. I rarely post and it's discouraging to be called out for something so innocent. I don't think this is the way to encourage others to post. It certainly has given me pause about ever posting again.I hope people read carefully enough to see you’re NOT talking about LV.
I wish posters wouldn’t confuse the thread with stories about other retailers, actually.
No, they generally don’t do it in front of you, BUT they don’t ‘usually’ do it “later”.
What would be the point? They inspect it prior to giving you the new bag/store credit/whatever you’re looking to get. Because if you bring back a bag that’s used, they deny the return. Maybe if you’re VIC or a movie star or something they might take your bag back no matter how many scuffs or dog hairs are in it, but we normals, no
There wouldn’t be a way to deny a return if they never look at the return until after the returner leaves as a matter of course.
Simply using ‘used’ as one example among others. The point was that they ‘generally’ inspect the return, thoroughly, while you are there. Not necessarily right there in front of everyone, but also not after they’ve sent you on your way. My previous comment was that yes, strictly playing the numbers, and since they sometimes bend their own rules and DON’T fine-tooth-comb it then and there, they cannot have NEVER taken a fake back. A good fake, anyway. But as far as a fake getting through all the many subsequent bottlenecks in addition to that first one to get successfully resold to a second person...again, purely statistically it ‘could’ happen, and people who want to say otherwise just are blindly defending a system that is made of humans, not infallible superbeings...but the ODDS of this happening more than, you know, once in a hundred and thirty-nine years or whatever, is small, so for purposes of living our lives, we can totally shop in an LV boutique and not worry about that. I mean, you might fall into a sinkhole tomorrow that opens up in the parking lot where you work. But is this really a worry you need to be planning for? No; the odds are against it.Oh I don’t mean they don’t check for stuff like does it look used. They do a quick check on that and refuse returns for used bags would not be surprising. I meant like a full on authentication checking all the little details - that could easily be intepreted as insulting and even discrimination for some so that’s what I meant about possible complaints and problems if they did that. This thread is about possible (good) fakes not about obviously used bags so I was thinking along that line.
Honestly even if they get a super fake they later find out about I think it’s better for a big company to accept that cost and just destroy the fake bag - I believe there are some data on this and it’s in the long term less costly to do it this way (accept and question later, flag frequent abusers and ban them - rather than be strict on the first try to everyone). It’s why companies like amazon, Nordstrom, etc basically asks no question when you want to return - but if you keep doing it hundreds of times they will blacklist you.
Simply using ‘used’ as one example among others. The point was that they ‘generally’ inspect the return, thoroughly, while you are there. Not necessarily right there in front of everyone, but also not after they’ve sent you on your way. My previous comment was that yes, strictly playing the numbers, and since they sometimes bend their own rules and DON’T fine-tooth-comb it then and there, they cannot have NEVER taken a fake back. A good fake, anyway. But as far as a fake getting through all the many subsequent bottlenecks in addition to that first one to get successfully resold to a second person...again, purely statistically it ‘could’ happen, and people who want to say otherwise just are blindly defending a system that is made of humans, not infallible superbeings...but the ODDS of this happening more than, you know, once in a hundred and thirty-nine years or whatever, is small, so for purposes of living our lives, we can totally shop in an LV boutique and not worry about that. I mean, you might fall into a sinkhole tomorrow that opens up in the parking lot where you work. But is this really a worry you need to be planning for? No; the odds are against it.
No, I follow you, I’m pickin’ up what you’re puttin’ downlol I’m not the one who thought I need to worry about it. I was commenting in because I thought it surprising people thinking they didn’t see their bag get inspected and that meant they could have people return fakes. I was saying that I would be surprised if they made the client see them go inspecting for fake, because then the client would potentially feel insulted. Not sure we are talking about the same issue here...like I would totally believe that they do more before they sell it again so there are more bottlenecks.
Hear hear. . .I hope people read carefully enough to see you’re NOT talking about LV.
I wish posters wouldn’t confuse the thread with stories about other retailers, actually.
I hope people read carefully enough to see you’re NOT talking about LV.
I wish posters wouldn’t confuse the thread with stories about other retailers, actually.
I clearly stated that it was a Michael Kors bag and which store it was purchased from. I was trying to give an example of a time I experienced something similar in a different situation. There seem to be so many unspoken rules here at this forum. I rarely post and it's discouraging to be called out for something so innocent. I don't think this is the way to encourage others to post. It certainly has given me pause about ever posting again.
I'm sorry one of your first posting experiences turned out to be not that positive. I hope you don't take it to heart too much. Gotta just learn to ignore certain comments after awhile.I clearly stated that it was a Michael Kors bag and which store it was purchased from. I was trying to give an example of a time I experienced something similar in a different situation. There seem to be so many unspoken rules here at this forum. I rarely post and it's discouraging to be called out for something so innocent. I don't think this is the way to encourage others to post. It certainly has given me pause about ever posting again.
I thought your post was very interesting from a different designer experience....I hope you continue to post.....I clearly stated that it was a Michael Kors bag and which store it was purchased from. I was trying to give an example of a time I experienced something similar in a different situation. There seem to be so many unspoken rules here at this forum. I rarely post and it's discouraging to be called out for something so innocent. I don't think this is the way to encourage others to post. It certainly has given me pause about ever posting again.
Slightly off topic, Overstock is a second hand retailer that has been known to sell fakes. However, I wouldn't trust MK either. I brought in an authentic older MK Hamilton purchased on Net-A-Porter to a MK boutique for repair. A SA insisted it had to be fake because she never saw that color. I told her where it was purchased and everything changed.I clearly stated that it was a Michael Kors bag and which store it was purchased from. I was trying to give an example of a time I experienced something similar in a different situation. There seem to be so many unspoken rules here at this forum. I rarely post and it's discouraging to be called out for something so innocent. I don't think this is the way to encourage others to post. It certainly has given me pause about ever posting again.