DSW sale not good for Gucci's brand image...

  1. Is it just me or is this whole DSW Gucci sale totally killing their brand image? Before when I thought of Gucci, I did not connect it with tables of cardboard boxes with patent monogram accessories scattered all over the place, shoes all over the floor, damaged bags getting trampled on, etc.. in general, a mad house with ppl elbowing each other over a $100 mini-purse. I don't think a sale like this is something a premiere luxury brand should've done for marketing's sake.
  2. I agree I love Gucci but cant understand how they do this. I like there products because of quality and style but it turns me off that I pay full price to have the newest stuff an in a couple of months later or even once a year they decide to have a "cash for clunkers" event hahah:nuts: I agree with you. NOT GOOD AT ALL!!!!!!!!!
  3. I agree. I'm in the market for a new wallet and stumbled upon some new Gucci ones for the fall but knowing that they could go to bargain basement prices makes me think twice about buying it.
  4. i agree with you. it def cheapens the brand but i never buy gucci full price so it really doesn't affect me too much.
  5. It may or may not be in Gucci's control. DSW has buyers and they could've obtained the Gucci shoes from a third party. Much like how Costco obtained jeans from Calvin Klein a long time ago.

    Gucci has outlets too. So you could also argue that an outlet is not good for their own brand image.
  6. Outlets are usually not madhouses though. I don't think I'm bothered by the sale itself, because let's face it, in the economy a lot of brands are having big sales. It's more about the manner that the items are being sold. Extremely disorganized and messy, a lot of damaged stuff either from during shipment or getting trampled on by crazy buyers.
  7. They didn't do it for marketing's sake. They did it to recoup money on unsold past season merchandise. During the past three weeks, Gucci group companies (under the holding company of Pinault Printemps Redoute) Stella McCartney and Alexander McQueen held their first-ever sample sales in NYC. Neither brand has an outlet so renting a space and holding a sale probably made economic sense. Gucci has quite a few outlets so the expense to rent out a space (or multiple spaces) to unload merchandise that is at least a year old wasn't justified. Instead, the company unloaded the merchandise to a discounter for a guaranteed flat fee versus the iffy money they could have gotten for a sample sale. Think of it this way -- would you rather sell a bag from your collection for a guaranteed $100 or would you try your luck on eBay to see if you could get $125 but then have to pay listing fees, final value fees and Paypal fees?

    Sales for these brands are not up. They are not flat. They are most decidedly down. This is what companies are doing to avoid bankruptcy.

    Would you rather they not cheapen their image and go bankrupt, never to produce another bag again?
  8. Well, if the outlets are madhouses, this is nothing that Gucci (or any other brand) has control over. They can't stipulate what a third party does once it is in their hands.
  9. Everyone expected a madhouse once the news broke out about DSW selling Gucci... I'm pretty sure the ppl at Gucci knew this was going to happen (unless they are stupid), but they let it happen because they need the money.
  10. Ah brands, they are a' changin'.

    If you look at it from a different perspective, Gucci has done something very smart by getting its merchandise into customers' hands that wouldn't otherwise be able to afford Gucci. That provides more brand recognition, a new customer and possible brand loyalty in the future from that customer. Not to mention the added revenue to the company.

    Other companies have been doing this as well, Calvin Klein was mentioned and Tiffany has done so by expanding its less expensive silver line. If you think about it, Louis Vuitton did the same thing by offering the Neverfull line -- it was designed to be an "entry level" bag for a new customer.

    Personally I don't care where a product is sold, if I like it I buy it. There are a lot of customers out there who are thrilled they can finally own Gucci, and I'm happy for them.
  11. I agree with you...its made me re-think about buying a Gucci bag..to be honest
  12. yeah i agree. i think it does lower their brand alittle bit.
  13. I'm happy for those went a little crazy and bought a lot of bargains. Some of the merch was 18 months old so great if people missed it the first time around and a great buy if people didn't mind.

    I'll continue to buy the one or two pieces early in the season to guarantee I'll get the items I want rather than lots of bags and other bits and bobs.

    Its not the same in Europe - certainly not the UK because most things sell out here and not much good stuff makes it to sale let alone an outlet.

    BTW I read Gucci that made a profit last year not a loss as did many high end retailers. Its one of the surprises of the recession.
  14. It is funny because years ago Gucci could be found in many department stores. Gucci then decided they wanted to become more exclusive and pulled out - only to sell in their own stores. For them now to be available in DSW is surprising.
  15. Bag*Snob forget the bags I want your dog. Is he/she a Doberman Pointer like my own Ziggy? (RIP sweetest darling)

    There seem to be so few DPs around where ever I go nowdays

    Er sorry for the diversion

    Yup Gucci sales love them and hate em