I think they are many issues with this lawsuit and I would never file anything like that, but I do think it is valid that someone had the courage to do it and is making it very public that their business practices are not ok. The plaintiffs know they are not going anywhere with it, and they know they might not get anything, but they are standing up for something they believe is incorrect and I admire them for that. The guy seems to be a professional class suit plaintiff 😅, but I empathize with the woman. I think there should be limits to their sales practices - if they know the resale value of a new Birkin is around 25k and they require prespend, have the person spend 12-13k plus the bag. It is not correct to be lying to people constantly and leading people on with a wishlist that might not materialize for many without a lot of prespend.
Hermès Faces Class Action Suit Over Birkin Sales Practices
- Thread starter FrenchNewbie
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
Whilst individuals may feel aggrieved about their own personal experience, I'm just not sure that provides a basis for saying Hermès is "lying to people constantly."
I am surprised by the comments in this thread. I am someone who no longer shops at my local store anymore because of my SA pushing me. I’ve spent >$60k at Hermes. And now 4 years later, still don’t have a quota bag. Of course, it bothers me to some extent, but it’s also whatever. One time, my SA was showing me jewelry, and I showed her a VCA bracelet I wanted to buy. She told me if I instead used that money to buy a $30k diamond Kelly bangle, that I could get any quota bag I wanted. I am surprised how many people think that it would be nigh impossible for the plaintiffs to find any evidence of a prespend requirement being endorsed by the company, whether overtly or implied. All it takes in discovery is a few witnesses, a few emails from managers, a few texts from SAs, some receipts. I think the proof would be in the pudding once data is extrapolated on the number of first-time buyers who get offered a bag while buying dinnerware, clothes, and jewelry vs. customers who get offered a Birkin without buying anything else in the same transaction.
A lot of comments are talking about the admissibility of evidence. Anonymous comments may not be admissible in the context of proving what Hermes SAs precisely said or did not say. But they can be admissible to show the impression left to consumers or the reputation of the company. Moreover, a lot of people are getting stuck on the anonymity part. Meanwhile, there are so many TikToks, YouTube videos, Facebook posts, books, articles, etc. written about the Hermes subject with easily identifiable authors.
Do I think Hermes engages in tying? Uh, yes to a degree. The SAs have told me how in the backroom, they have so many QBs of styles that I could only ever imagine, but that they will only advocate for me if I buy more XYZ. Some people seem to think that it would be hard to trace individual SA behavior back to the company if there is no written policy about specific numbers or thresholds that customers have to meet to get a QB. But the company has received notice of its perceived practices. I’m sure other customers have complained to stores or headquarters before, whether orally or in writing. A company can enable or endorse certain behavior without having to write in corporate letterhead that it wants SAs to sell a couch before offering customers a Birkin. Circumstantial evidence may be weaker, but it is still relevant. Also, again, all it takes is a few email exchanges of SAs and managers talking about customer prespend to show whether the practice is being enabled by the company.
All that being said, will this specific complaint be successful? Of course, it is a bit premature to say, since complaints can be amended. I’m inclined to say no right now, though. But considering how this lawsuit is gaining traction, it’s very possible that it will be able to receive more funding or attract other attorneys who want to work on the case. I mean, certainly, if the plaintiffs were to subpoena me, I would willingly testify about how my SA told me about the family who bought a sofa set before being offered a shadow Birkin. Or my own story of how she said I could get the quota bag of my dreams if I bought the pave Kelly bracelet. I truly doubt I am the only customer who has an upfront story like this. I mean, I’m not. One of my close friends also has a similar account.
Does Hermes still have some plausible deniability with outliers who go into the store and buy a Birkin on their very first visit, without ever having bought even a scarf? Sure. But I would be willing to bet $100,000 that this can be proven to be the exception. Once the sales data is disaggregated, I think the trends would be very much aligned with what we expect from the company.
I think another interesting question is whether tying as a practice applies to luxury markets in the same way as it would for more typical household goods. I think it is undeniable that Hermes’s sales of furniture, homeware, jewelry, etc. are artificially propped up because of its QB prespend system. I also think it’s very obvious how spending $12,000 on a set of Hermes dishes would be a non-negligible amount of money for the other companies working in the ceramics market. Just based on resellers, it seems self-evident that customers would not be as interested in Hermes blankets, pillows, or iPhone accessories, if they weren’t tied to buying a BKC. The broader implication is that Hermes relies on the marketing and demand around its Birkins and Kellys to support its ventures in other industries. Hermes’s less profitable products would not be able to be sustained based on market demand if SAs did not encourage customers to shop in those categories.
Anyway, a class action is very difficult to get certified. I’m not sure this suit in its current iteration will get very far. However, I would not describe this complaint as frivolous. I would also say that it is not difficult to understand how Hermes’s prespend system could be perceived as anticompetitive.
A lot of comments are talking about the admissibility of evidence. Anonymous comments may not be admissible in the context of proving what Hermes SAs precisely said or did not say. But they can be admissible to show the impression left to consumers or the reputation of the company. Moreover, a lot of people are getting stuck on the anonymity part. Meanwhile, there are so many TikToks, YouTube videos, Facebook posts, books, articles, etc. written about the Hermes subject with easily identifiable authors.
Do I think Hermes engages in tying? Uh, yes to a degree. The SAs have told me how in the backroom, they have so many QBs of styles that I could only ever imagine, but that they will only advocate for me if I buy more XYZ. Some people seem to think that it would be hard to trace individual SA behavior back to the company if there is no written policy about specific numbers or thresholds that customers have to meet to get a QB. But the company has received notice of its perceived practices. I’m sure other customers have complained to stores or headquarters before, whether orally or in writing. A company can enable or endorse certain behavior without having to write in corporate letterhead that it wants SAs to sell a couch before offering customers a Birkin. Circumstantial evidence may be weaker, but it is still relevant. Also, again, all it takes is a few email exchanges of SAs and managers talking about customer prespend to show whether the practice is being enabled by the company.
All that being said, will this specific complaint be successful? Of course, it is a bit premature to say, since complaints can be amended. I’m inclined to say no right now, though. But considering how this lawsuit is gaining traction, it’s very possible that it will be able to receive more funding or attract other attorneys who want to work on the case. I mean, certainly, if the plaintiffs were to subpoena me, I would willingly testify about how my SA told me about the family who bought a sofa set before being offered a shadow Birkin. Or my own story of how she said I could get the quota bag of my dreams if I bought the pave Kelly bracelet. I truly doubt I am the only customer who has an upfront story like this. I mean, I’m not. One of my close friends also has a similar account.
Does Hermes still have some plausible deniability with outliers who go into the store and buy a Birkin on their very first visit, without ever having bought even a scarf? Sure. But I would be willing to bet $100,000 that this can be proven to be the exception. Once the sales data is disaggregated, I think the trends would be very much aligned with what we expect from the company.
I think another interesting question is whether tying as a practice applies to luxury markets in the same way as it would for more typical household goods. I think it is undeniable that Hermes’s sales of furniture, homeware, jewelry, etc. are artificially propped up because of its QB prespend system. I also think it’s very obvious how spending $12,000 on a set of Hermes dishes would be a non-negligible amount of money for the other companies working in the ceramics market. Just based on resellers, it seems self-evident that customers would not be as interested in Hermes blankets, pillows, or iPhone accessories, if they weren’t tied to buying a BKC. The broader implication is that Hermes relies on the marketing and demand around its Birkins and Kellys to support its ventures in other industries. Hermes’s less profitable products would not be able to be sustained based on market demand if SAs did not encourage customers to shop in those categories.
Anyway, a class action is very difficult to get certified. I’m not sure this suit in its current iteration will get very far. However, I would not describe this complaint as frivolous. I would also say that it is not difficult to understand how Hermes’s prespend system could be perceived as anticompetitive.
I’m currently in the middle of college admissions season with the Knight, so that may flavor my opinions.
Several Universities have told him that his application would be stronger if he attended their summer program. Over the last four years, we’ve done summer programs and volunteering and developed a well rounded resume.
So if my kid doesn’t get into Harvard, can I sue them for recommending their Youth Summit?
SA’s and SMs distribute bags on an arbitrary system that isn’t consistent between stores, and the plaintiff would need to prove that the prespend requirement are actual requirements, and applies consistently through the Class. It will depend on how kindly the judge views this suit, but I could see this being a long, expensive and unsatisfying suit.
But hey, if they get a positive result, maybe I’ll go after Harvard. (I’m being sarcastic in this last statement)
Several Universities have told him that his application would be stronger if he attended their summer program. Over the last four years, we’ve done summer programs and volunteering and developed a well rounded resume.
So if my kid doesn’t get into Harvard, can I sue them for recommending their Youth Summit?
SA’s and SMs distribute bags on an arbitrary system that isn’t consistent between stores, and the plaintiff would need to prove that the prespend requirement are actual requirements, and applies consistently through the Class. It will depend on how kindly the judge views this suit, but I could see this being a long, expensive and unsatisfying suit.
But hey, if they get a positive result, maybe I’ll go after Harvard. (I’m being sarcastic in this last statement)
In your example, it would be more parallel if Harvard made it a requirement for applicants to attend a $20,000 summer camp in order to be considered for admission.
If children who would otherwise not attend Harvard summer camps, attend them because it is a requirement of being considered for the school’s college admission. Then, yes, I think the hypothetical child applicant would have a very strong case on anticompetitive practices for summer camps. (Among other things.)
The elite college admissions process has been considered controversial for years and the process has been in court several times. Which isn’t to say that the Hermes plaintiffs are going to win but that any process of resource allocation will likely come under scrutiny for “fairness”.
All colleges repeat over and over again that attending their summer program does not assist with getting into the college itself. I’m not sure who is telling you this but it is not coming from a college and it is 100% incorrect. Attending their programs does nothing as far as admissions considerations.
Colleges have been sued over various admission practices and to stay on topic, if we are making a parallel, colleges came out as winners, as far as I know, in all of the cases so Hermes might as well if we think it’s a similar case.
Thanks for sharing. I believe what you're saying here.
So to others: is this anecdotal? I know some of y'all are saying this has never happened to you (and I believe that, too). Given these disparate experiences, is this SA is just a bad apple, or is the SA openly verbalizing what others say under different rhetoric such as "build a profile," "explore other metiers," "get to know the maison," etc?
Here's another thing. As others have shared, why are SAs instructed (likely by legal but definitely as corporate policy) not to text, write or email anything to do with bag offers? And if it came from legal, whose job is to protect the company from lawsuits, does that mean that having documented material related to bag offers opens up the company to liability? Even if this is CYA, it's "Cover your a** lest the customer initiate a lawsuit" for.... what, exactly? And what's interesting is that CYA usually works the other way around: you write stuff down to protect yourself from misaligned expectations and to document exactly how protocol was followed. I'd be interested in anyone's justification or explanation of this policy.
Quick edit to add: @OnlyModa , Harvard got its booty handed to it in the affirmative action/discrimination case and took the L.
Unpopular opinion alert. This is all a result of the generation of buyers on a ridiculous "Hermes Journey" 
I remember when I started posting (mostly questions to learn about the brand) in the Hermes forum. Coming from the Chanel forum, I had no clue what I was in for. Hermes collectors are sharp and if you don't do your research, many are not kind to newbie questions. It's definitely a "club". Really. It is. And I'm ok with that and that is why I'm STILL HERE. It used to be a much smaller group back then. Now that every "Influencer", "quiet luxury connoisseur" & Jenny from the Block is scrambling to add a Hermeeeeees (or however you pronounce it) Berken/Birking to their TikTok, Hermes' sales are exploding and SA's commissions are too. In case you haven't noticed, many Hermes SAs just got hired after quitting their last job at Abercrombie or Zara. They don't know anything about Hermes leathers, colors, history or the brand (much like those on a Journey). But they do know YOU ARE DYING FOR THAT Berking and they are hungry for your money! They will eat off of the customer's desperation!!! Thus, the spend is now about 3 to 1 in order to "score" a bag. Even the OGs of Hermes have had to increase spending to keep 2 quota bags a year flowing. It's life. It's a business. It's working.
Nothing will change except that the plaintiffs will be banned. *sad face* Once those on a "journey" figure out it leads to nowhere but broke, they will stop... and things will relax a bit.
Hermes can sell to who they want. What's next? Let's sue VCA because they won't sell you a pair of Ghilloche earrings and "the list" is closed? *gasp*
I think I recall seeing an article in the news a decade ago... Tom Ford or something refused to show/sell an exotic bag to Oprah Winfrey. And?
I remember when I started posting (mostly questions to learn about the brand) in the Hermes forum. Coming from the Chanel forum, I had no clue what I was in for. Hermes collectors are sharp and if you don't do your research, many are not kind to newbie questions. It's definitely a "club". Really. It is. And I'm ok with that and that is why I'm STILL HERE. It used to be a much smaller group back then. Now that every "Influencer", "quiet luxury connoisseur" & Jenny from the Block is scrambling to add a Hermeeeeees (or however you pronounce it) Berken/Birking to their TikTok, Hermes' sales are exploding and SA's commissions are too. In case you haven't noticed, many Hermes SAs just got hired after quitting their last job at Abercrombie or Zara. They don't know anything about Hermes leathers, colors, history or the brand (much like those on a Journey). But they do know YOU ARE DYING FOR THAT Berking and they are hungry for your money! They will eat off of the customer's desperation!!! Thus, the spend is now about 3 to 1 in order to "score" a bag. Even the OGs of Hermes have had to increase spending to keep 2 quota bags a year flowing. It's life. It's a business. It's working.
Nothing will change except that the plaintiffs will be banned. *sad face* Once those on a "journey" figure out it leads to nowhere but broke, they will stop... and things will relax a bit.
Hermes can sell to who they want. What's next? Let's sue VCA because they won't sell you a pair of Ghilloche earrings and "the list" is closed? *gasp*
I think I recall seeing an article in the news a decade ago... Tom Ford or something refused to show/sell an exotic bag to Oprah Winfrey. And?
Last edited:
They always have K or B available for purchase. SAs and managers just choose how the bags will be allocated. Hence they are lying to people constantly, because there are bags, they are just not being allocated to that particular person.Whilst individuals may feel aggrieved about their own personal experience, I'm just not sure that provides a basis for saying Hermès is "lying to people constantly."
This 100%.Unpopular opinion alert.
Hermes collectors are sharp and if you don't do your research, many are not kind to newbie questions. It's definitely a "club". Really. It is.
And this.
And this!
But if they’ve been allocated they’re not really available for purchase. Much like an empty table that is reserved at a restaurant. Is that table really available? Is it fair that I’m at the restaurant and that person isn’t there but they’re keeping that table open for them?
Maybe it depends? Since they reserved it months ahead? Or maybe they go there way more often than I do so they get perks?
The crux of the complaint is not focused on discrimination or a shortage of BKC stock.
I think we can all agree that Hermes would be greatly enriched if it could rely on just a few coveted bags to support the entire rest of its businesses in jewelry, fashion, furniture, homeware, etc. The argument is focused on the extent to which Hermes’s prespend requirement is anticompetitive as a marketing strategy.
If there were no implied or explicit prespend threshold to get a QB, what would Hermes’s sales figures look like?
How much lower would the company’s sales in other categories be?
How much lower would demand be for non-leather products if Hermes did not utilize prespend?
Hermes continues to expand production because they are continuing to open new stores in cities where they previously had no presence at all or need additional coverage (I.e. Manhattan used to have 1 store and now has 3 stores). The market for new H stores has not yet reached saturation point and the new stores need to be stocked too while maintaining stock levels in existing stores.
Ages ago, Hermes in the US was also on the waitlist system (at least that's what I heard) just like some of the European countries. Generally, the US luxury market is much larger than all of eruopean markets combined, and my guess is that they had to do something to make their bags available to their clients who are consistently shopping at Hermes. The waitlist probably got way too long even back then, and they moved to the current system of whatever it is that they're doing, and now we are here with so many ppl suddenly wanting a b/k. If I remember correctly, the b/k chase exploded during the pandemic, and with the leather school math, of 200 ppl being hired a year, it's been 4 yrs since 2020, we are only now at +200 ppl who are qualified to make b/k on their own, after 4 yrs of the demand explosion. Lets just assume that 100 of them are fully dedicated to making b/k, it takes 5 weeks on average (I recall something like 4 wk on b production and 6 wk on k production) plus the month off in August, that's about 2000 more bags a yr that now gets produced for b/k. We have waaaaaaay more than 2000 ppl who are now chasing b/k. It's not scalable for Hermes.
Yes I do think they're willing to give anyone who wants a b/k if they could. And that's evidenced by some of the anecdotes I've been reading online about how some seem to be getting their first qb on a very light prespend (like 5k). They often ask their SA how they got their qb so quick, most quoted their SA telling them the maison wanted to give chance to new customers to experience their most coveted bags. Even the plaintiffs in this lawsuit each got a bag is what I read. I get that there are ppl who reached 5:1 without a bag, but the exact opposite can be true as well. Hermes wanting lot of ppl to experience the bag is also evidenced by the said waitlist system in some of the European countries (I'm also assuming this is a true waitlist system)
They're ramping up production in general, bc there aren't enough goods to go around! There are ppl who are not after a b/k that also wants Hermes goods, and Hermes just can't keep up.
Again, from my personal experience, they're are no sales to be made in other metiers, they don't have them for me to purchase! I have multiple outstanding orders I've put in and waited for over 3 yrs across various categories, I've been searching for a particular charm in over half a decade 😭