Really? Anthropologie?

[payitoff]

This place is like a dream, the minute you walk in their store, you'd want to buy every single piece you see in there, i always walk around there and just check out their stuff, but can never afford or can never get myself to spend that much for a piece of clothing. 

unlike Jcrew when they have a factory website, Neiman Marcus where they have last call, or Nordstrom Rack for Nordstrom, ive always wondered if there's ever a chance for me to at least buy a top 70% off from Anthropologie. well i guess its only gonna be a dream.

my jaw dropped when i read this:

http://effortlessanthropologie.blogspot.com/2008/12/catharsis-what-happens-to-items-that.html

so disappointing.

[dragoncar]

I really wonder if this makes financial sense for them in the long run.  I guess with Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus, they are actually discounting items that aren't their brand.  I've never seen a Nordstrom brand shirt at Nordstrom rack. 

On the other hand, everyone knows these clothes cost like $1 to manufacture.  It's wasteful, but most of the people who buy the clothes probably throw them away within a few years anyways.  It's the entire consumption culture... better to just not buy that stuff to begin with.

[ginastarke]

I'd recommend Ebay -  some of the things are gently used but there's some deals to be had :-D

[FIREman2036]

The problem for brands like this is the whole idea of their value is an illusion. People don't buy them because the product is actually 10x better than a regular brand but because people know that and they want to show off.  If you give away unsold items or heavily discount it damages the brand as anyone can have one not just the elite.

[NumberCruncher]

On the other hand, everyone knows these clothes cost like $1 to manufacture.  It's wasteful, but most of the people who buy the clothes probably throw them away within a few years anyways.  It's the entire consumption culture... better to just not buy that stuff to begin with.

To be fair, I'd say the quality of clothes there is significantly better than, say, Target or H&M. There will still be a huge mark up, of course...but not that extreme :)

[golden1]

I love the style of Anthropologie, but I can't bring myself to buy any of those clothes at those prices, even on clearance. 

Now I am really turned off by that practice - it makes me wonder how often this goes on with other companies and other types of merchandise.

The thought of all that wasted time and effort is staggering.  All of that waste must get priced into the other clothes and items that they do sell.

[oldtoyota]

I think Anthro sells an attractive dream. Who would not want to walk barefoot on the sand with gently mussed hair and the ocean musically crashing in the background?

However, their clothing is often strange once it's on you. I find a much better selection at a place like Modcloth.

I used to work in retail so I am not surprised at all that they destroy clothing. Bookstores destroy books.

I once worked for a catering company that threw out edible food instead of giving it to hungry/starving people. I made a case and wrote an entire paper to get them to give it away and they said they might get sued if the food was rotten. Flash forward. Years later, someone else took up the same cause and got them to do it. So, sometimes you just have to keep trying in order to see change because it sometimes take a cultural shift in thinking to get to yes...

[GuitarStv]

Having not been in a clothing retailer that wasn't a factory outlet or thrift store for about five years I don't really know anything about this clothing store.  Their policy seems stupid and wasteful though.

[skyrefuge]

The several comments on the blog entry that dispute "Anthropologie's destruction policy" convince me that the original entry, if not an outright fabrication, is at least a case of miscommunication.

The anecdote about the shopper who bought all the stock of a particular shirt (in order to prevent anyone else from having it) also doesn't pass the sniff test. If you have a lot of money and want your clothes to be unique, why the hell would you even go to an off-the-rack store? Just hire a designer to make a bespoke shirt for you, it would be even more unique, better quality, and probably cheaper too! (I write this while wearing a unique, impeccably designed and crafted shirt of my own making... maybe there's a point of extreme antimustachianism where it circles back and becomes mustachian again?)

[MgoSam]

Honestly, I have no problem with that. Is it waste? Yes it absolutely is, but businesses are there to make money not to avoid wasting. They do it to protect their brand. When I walk into stores to buy nice quality clothing my first task is to go to the back to find the discounted items, consumers are trained in this way and so stores have the option of responding by not discounting their items and hurting their brand. Does it suck? Yes, it does.

I think of it as akin to bakery donating their food rather than selling it for 10% at the end of the day, the reason because then people will just come in and buy the older items rather than the full-priced bread.

[warfreak2]

I think of it as akin to bakery donating their food rather than selling it for 10% at the end of the day, the reason because then people will just come in and buy the older items rather than the full-priced bread.

It's akin to the bakery poisoning the leftover food and letting it rot in the garbage. Donating something doesn't destroy value.

[ASquared]

I LOVE Anthropologie.  I dislike the prices, even if I can "afford" it.  This is why I love ThredUp - excellent quality used clothing. Some are still new with tags.  They have an "anthropologie shop" with brands/styles like the store. 

Check it out - http://www.thredup.com/r/5J4JXT
Free $10 credit for both of us if you try it

[payitoff]

I LOVE Anthropologie.  I dislike the prices, even if I can "afford" it.  This is why I love ThredUp - excellent quality used clothing. Some are still new with tags.  They have an "anthropologie shop" with brands/styles like the store. 

Check it out - http://www.thredup.com/r/5J4JXT
Free $10 credit for both of us if you try it

Thanks! i signed up! lost a lot of weight and need some clothes, i see prices are still a little steep for my budget but ill check it out :)

[yahui168]

I like the Anthropologie furniture but it's too expensive. I've only bought furniture on Black Friday along with a 10% Birthday discount that you get yearly for signing up for the free members club. I've gotten up to 50-60% discount.

[MgoSam]

I think of it as akin to bakery donating their food rather than selling it for 10% at the end of the day, the reason because then people will just come in and buy the older items rather than the full-priced bread.

It's akin to the bakery poisoning the leftover food and letting it rot in the garbage. Donating something doesn't destroy value.

No it is not. If you want an apt example, take Caribou and Starbucks. A few years ago a manager at Caribou that I know told me that they dispose of their coffee beans after 21 days, not give it out or donate it, but toss it in the garbage. I imagine that high-end clothing chains will do it for a similar reason, not because they are cold heartless bastards (though they very well may be) but because they are protecting a brand. I don't like it, but then again I don't like spending a ton of money on clothes and instead shop at Target, but for some companies that have expensive clothes they need to defend their brand.

[warfreak2]

It's akin to the bakery poisoning the leftover food and letting it rot in the garbage. Donating something doesn't destroy value.

No it is not. If you want an apt example, take Caribou and Starbucks. A few years ago a manager at Caribou that I know told me that they dispose of their coffee beans after 21 days, not give it out or donate it, but toss it in the garbage.

That may be what coffee chains do, but it's not what Anthropologie (allegedly) does. Anthropologie (allegedly) shreds their clothes before putting them in the garbage, so that even if you stole from the garbage, you wouldn't get something useful. But nonetheless, they put it in the garbage; that's not even remotely similar to donating it, unless you consider landfill to be a charitable cause.

[skyrefuge]

Honestly, I have no problem with that. Is it waste? Yes it absolutely is

But see, as Mustachians, waste is one of the few things that's supposed to incite burning fires of rage within us. Sure, there's plenty of stuff outside our sphere of influence or control that we should rightly say "eh, live and let live". But we're all negatively affected when resources are wasted, so we shouldn't just give 'em a pass.

When a brand is so valuable that it requires such extreme measures to protect it, that necessarily implies that the intrinsic value of the products attached to that brand are really quite low; after all, if the products' value was self-evident, they wouldn't work so hard to prevent consumers from pulling back the curtain and revealing a naked emperor. Spending a buttload of money to create a brand and then artificially constraining supply is certainly one way to run a business, but since it preys on those with less-Mustachian constitutions than ourselves in order to succeed, it doesn't feel particularly nice.

[warfreak2]

I think the point that the "the businesses think it's profitable, so no problem" crowd tend to miss is that customers can change business behaviours by voicing their concerns and voting with their wallet. "I think it's very wasteful and irresponsible to shred clothes and put them in the garbage" is exactly that - so yes, businesses destroying surplus goods may be just the free market working as it's supposed to, but us criticising it is also the free market working as it's supposed to.

[rocklebock]

This is very common. I worked in fashion retail when I was younger (not Anthropologie, but similar), and I've been the one who did it. I remember watching a co-worker methodically ripping the insoles out of pricey designer shoes. The stuff doesn't always go in the dumpster. Sometimes it gets destroyed and then shipped back to the manufacturer, who is contractually obligated to take a certain amount of it back under the pretense that a customer did it.

Modified to add: The comment about value being an illusion is definitely in play in the case I described above - a lot of manufacturers would rather accept a case of intentionally damaged goods than have them marked down to a price that might be inconsistent with the illusion.