Model Number Variations?

[linusvanpelt]

Does anyone know if there are product model number variations by region/country, etc.?

For example, I was looking at this item, listed with model number MP2222:
https://eu.louisvuitton.com/eng-e1/products/lv-galaxy-astronaut-necklace-nvpro

In some used listings, I see the tag etched with "MP2222/OB1118". Example:
https://www.grailed.com/listings/14063759-louis-vuitton-louis-vuitton-galaxy-astronaut-necklace

However, in some other used listings (in particular the Japanese market), I see the tag etched with "M2222/OB0198" (missing a P). Example:
https://global.rakuten.com/en/store/atlantis/item/045287/

Thanks.

 

[BULL]

MP2222 is the model number. OBXXXX is the date code. One of them was made on the 9th week of 2018, the other on the 11th.

 

[linusvanpelt]

Thanks for the break-down!

Any idea regarding the "MP2222" vs. "M2222"difference , even though it's supposed to be the same product?

 

[Redenkeew]

Thanks for the break-down!

Any idea regarding the "MP2222" vs. "M2222"difference , even though it's supposed to be the same product?

Probably a mistake in production. The correct code for the item in question is MP2222. The product code for most items is 6 characters long and it's universal as far as I know.

LV items (not including RTW and footwear or sunglasses) product codes are like so (With "1234" is a random number given by internal staff to identify the item):

MP1234: Runway/runway-inspired products
N12345: Damier
GI1234: Gifting collection
LP1234: Les Parfums
LS1234: Les Parfums Accessories
M12345: Generally everything else

There are more but I'm too lazy to list.

 

[linusvanpelt]

I was worried that the ones on the Japanese market were replicas, due to the "M2222" typo, which didn't make sense because Japan has very strict counterfeit laws, and the sellers appeared very reputable. It also didn't help that I stumbled upon multiple replica websites during my research, which were all of the "M2222" variation as well.

Based on your explanations, it makes more sense now that both variations could be valid due to a mistake in production - perhaps a typo in the 2018/09 batch, which was later corrected in 2018/11. I'd be interested to find out how often these kinds of production mistakes happen.

Thanks again everyone!