The official name in the 65th anniversary catalog was Ali shoulder flap. The catalog doesn't state whether it is vachetta or glove-tanned leather. I can't tell for sure but my 2006 Legacy bag's leather feels different from my glove-tanned leather bags, so I think it could be vachetta. I've seen light colored Legacy bags that have leather that has darkened at the edges like vachetta, but I can't be sure that all colors are vachetta. Some Legacy bags have horrible verdigris and others don't. This is a big problem with the 2006 Legacy collection. I have no idea why. I have vintage bags that have solid brass hardware, rather than just plated like these, and it doesn't have the problems these do. I suspect there was supposed to be some kind of coating to keep the brass from tarnishing like on most Coach bags, and whatever they used didn't hold up as well as it should have.
ID This Coach item! -- Post any Coach item name questions here! --
- Thread starter chelsssea
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
I have that bag and had the same problem with verdigris. I think I read in one of the forums the problem issues from the antiquing of the brass plate on these bags. Even with the problem, i love my Ali, for her hefty feel and nice details. I also believe she is vachetta.
I wasn't sure whether to post this here, on the chat thread or the authentication thread.
I've never seen these and wonder whether the jewelry is made by Coach as shown or if someone used Coach scarves to make her own jewelry. (Is this another case of a seller butchering other Coach items to make her own unique but not "Coach" item?)
What's interesting is that the listing for the necklace shows a tag but sadly, we can't see whether the tag is for that item or if she (or someone) attached a tag from a different item to this one.
The necklace listing describes the charms as made with fabric or a Coach stone, something I've not seen before. It looks like some bought beads and jewelry hardware, covered the beads and inserted them into the holder.
Opinions?
Seller littleshopthatcould
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Coach-P...639481?hash=item2ef444b679:g:hl4AAOSwMgdX1Y5A
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Coach-P...623562?hash=item2ef444784a:g:P5sAAOSw-kdX1YqK
I'd love to see what the tag in this picture says on the inside!
I've never seen these and wonder whether the jewelry is made by Coach as shown or if someone used Coach scarves to make her own jewelry. (Is this another case of a seller butchering other Coach items to make her own unique but not "Coach" item?)
What's interesting is that the listing for the necklace shows a tag but sadly, we can't see whether the tag is for that item or if she (or someone) attached a tag from a different item to this one.
The necklace listing describes the charms as made with fabric or a Coach stone, something I've not seen before. It looks like some bought beads and jewelry hardware, covered the beads and inserted them into the holder.
Opinions?
Seller littleshopthatcould
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Coach-P...639481?hash=item2ef444b679:g:hl4AAOSwMgdX1Y5A
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Coach-P...623562?hash=item2ef444784a:g:P5sAAOSw-kdX1YqK
I'd love to see what the tag in this picture says on the inside!
I wasn't sure whether to post this here, on the chat thread or the authentication thread.
I've never seen these and wonder whether the jewelry is made by Coach as shown or if someone used Coach scarves to make her own jewelry. (Is this another case of a seller butchering other Coach items to make her own unique but not "Coach" item?)
What's interesting is that the listing for the necklace shows a tag but sadly, we can't see whether the tag is for that item or if she (or someone) attached a tag from a different item to this one.
The necklace listing describes the charms as made with fabric or a Coach stone, something I've not seen before. It looks like some bought beads and jewelry hardware, covered the beads and inserted them into the holder.
Opinions?
Seller littleshopthatcould
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Coach-P...639481?hash=item2ef444b679:g:hl4AAOSwMgdX1Y5A
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Coach-P...623562?hash=item2ef444784a:g:P5sAAOSw-kdX1YqK
I'd love to see what the tag in this picture says on the inside!
Wow, lol. Just when you think you've seen it all, in comes.....this......necklace. It looks off to me for a few reasons. The first being that the majority of material covering the beads looks like grossgrain ribbon, which is usually cotton and decorative, and I've only seen on small bolts. When the ends of the ribbon are cut, both fray badly and quickly, and are not suitable for larger projects.
My other concerns would be the asymmetry, and that I can't see from the picture how the body of the piece attaches to the satin ribbon portion very well. I understand artists who design asymmetrical pieces out of personal preference, or to try a new skill, etc., but in the necklace it just looks somewhat random or misplaced without really making sense to me. It would be nice to see how it attaches to the ribbon. In my experience making jewelry for myself, working with satin, especially a longer length or a skinnier width, is always the hardest and most frustrating detail for me to put in my work, but so lovely when the item is completed too!
If able, are you allowed to let us know of your findings in the future? I'm sorry if I've done anything wrong, or broken any rules. I am WAY newbie and trying to navigate thru everything here has been very confusing so far. Thanks and much luck!
My other concerns would be the asymmetry, and that I can't see from the picture how the body of the piece attaches to the satin ribbon portion very well. I understand artists who design asymmetrical pieces out of personal preference, or to try a new skill, etc., but in the necklace it just looks somewhat random or misplaced without really making sense to me. It would be nice to see how it attaches to the ribbon. In my experience making jewelry for myself, working with satin, especially a longer length or a skinnier width, is always the hardest and most frustrating detail for me to put in my work, but so lovely when the item is completed too!
If able, are you allowed to let us know of your findings in the future? I'm sorry if I've done anything wrong, or broken any rules. I am WAY newbie and trying to navigate thru everything here has been very confusing so far. Thanks and much luck!
If you're seeing a grosgrain texture rather than silk, then littleshopthatcould's items would be fake. Coach doesn't make its fabrics available as yard goods or in ribbon rolls. However the fakers do make and sell the junque!
I thought I was seeing silk and that it might possible that littleshopthatcould made her jewelry using genuine scarves. (And if that's the case, it's not "Coach jewelry" since it's not made and sold by Coach.
ETA: Another interesting thing I just noticed is that although one of the listings shows the tag, the seller states that "The tag will be removed prior to shipping."
I wonder why she'd do that unless there's something to hide.
Clearly, the tag is just a prop.
Her story is that the necklace "may have been a sample" and was given to her a couple of years ago by a friend who "works for the company." (Uh, which company?)
It's an interesting legal question. Can someone take an authentic Coach scarf, cut it up, and use it to make something else? I think it's called "repurposing" or "upcycling."
What about artistic license? Didn't Andy Warhol appropriate the Campbell Soup can for his famous paintings?"Andy Warhol was notorious for his paintings of Campbell’s Soup cans, and was sued by Campbell Soup Company for copyright infringement. But Warhol and his works became so popular that the corporation later decided his paintings were actually good, free, advertising, so they let him continue his use." http://artbistro.monster.com/benefits/articles/11435-copyright-trademark-protection-must-knows
Anyway, it seems to me she can't really prove the necklace is an authentic Coach product, made and sold by Coach. Can she still sell it as "designer inspired" merchandise? What about claiming it's a "sample"?
Personally, I question authenticity, particularly if @GatorGirl99 is correct about seeing grosgrain texture. (BTW, the seller got a negative feedback after selling a 99999 bag, another item that we've said many times that it can't be authenticated.) But without proof, it's not reportable, at least not yet.Clearly, the tag is just a prop.
Her story is that the necklace "may have been a sample" and was given to her a couple of years ago by a friend who "works for the company." (Uh, which company?)
It's an interesting legal question. Can someone take an authentic Coach scarf, cut it up, and use it to make something else? I think it's called "repurposing" or "upcycling."
*snip*
Anyway, it seems to me she can't really prove the necklace is an authentic Coach product, made and sold by Coach. Can she still sell it as "designer inspired" merchandise? What about claiming it's a "sample"?
As for the part I've highlighted, I believe repurposing is perfectly legal as long as the materials come from authentic items and as long as the item is APPROPRIATELY described as "made with Coach (whatever)." Selling as "Coach necklaces" as littleshopthatcould is NOT correct and would be a valid SNAD claim should a buyer file.
Another issue I have with littleshopthatcould is she isn't confirming authenticity of her items prior to listing as required by law. (Clearly, the 99999 bag wasn't authenticated because it can't be! And her comment about this jewelry sounds like a stretch. "May have been a sample" isn't good enough for the law. She needs to KNOW.)
Whenever I've offered advice either on TPF, on the ebay boards and on other forums on which I've participated, I suggest that for the seller's reputation, credibility and for their accounts (to not risk suspension), if they didn't personally buy from an authorized and licensed retailer, they should verify authenticity.
I wasn't sure whether to post this here, on the chat thread or the authentication thread.
Opinions?
Seller littleshopthatcould
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Coach-P...623562?hash=item2ef444784a:g:P5sAAOSw-kdX1YqK
I'd love to see what the tag in this picture says on the inside!
Even if it was legit, it would be highly uncomfortable to wear. Look at the back!!
Looks like an amateur job, IMO.
I don't disagree! Coach wouldn't have made that and there's a reason why she's not showing the tag and claims to no longer have the tag.
Clearly, the tag is just a prop.
Her story is that the necklace "may have been a sample" and was given to her a couple of years ago by a friend who "works for the company." (Uh, which company?)
It's an interesting legal question. Can someone take an authentic Coach scarf, cut it up, and use it to make something else? I think it's called "repurposing" or "upcycling."
"Andy Warhol was notorious for his paintings of Campbell’s Soup cans, and was sued by Campbell Soup Company for copyright infringement. But Warhol and his works became so popular that the corporation later decided his paintings were actually good, free, advertising, so they let him continue his use." http://artbistro.monster.com/benefits/articles/11435-copyright-trademark-protection-must-knows
Anyway, it seems to me she can't really prove the necklace is an authentic Coach product, made and sold by Coach. Can she still sell it as "designer inspired" merchandise? What about claiming it's a "sample"?
I agree, the construction details really look cheap, and the fabrics don't look like the kind of material Coach uses for their bags and accessories.
As for Campbell's Soup, they should have just accepted the free publicity gracefully. And it's not as if they have the exclusive right to that name. I read that Torquhil Campbell, 13th Duke of Argyll and worldwide head of Clan Campbell, even has one (or maybe a copy of one) of Warhol's Campbell's Soup can paintings in Inverary Castle.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/7aadf626-35df-11e5-bdbb-35e55cbae175.html#axzz4K5j2QuXI
Considering how far back the line stretches, I'd say the name goes back a wee bit farther than some soup company.
(Any MacDonalds here are free to disagree, of course, and who could blame them?. But that's a discussion for another place and time. And in the famous words of "Mad Men's" Pete Campbell "The King Ordered it!")
The link probably won't play, so just Google "youtube pete campbell "the king ordered it"
Last edited:
Probably, but it would be hard proving it in a court of law. No one who really knew Coach would probably be fooled by it, but the tag being removed before shipping is definitely a sign of an attempt to deceive. The seller already has a Negative for selling a fake Coach with a 99999 style number. I suppose her "friend who worked for Coach" gave her that too.