Unsold Clothes Destroyed by H&M and Wal-Mart

[platinumfunk]

if they don't want to ruin the brand's image... why not just send the clothes somewhere where no one has even heard of H&M? something along thelines of a third world country

 

[seniosoul]

they cant donate the unsold, and use the donation as a write off?

 

[bigty23]

Originally Posted by infamousod

you are all drastically overreacting.


either that or you're all communists.

You can't be serious...

 

[mycoldyourdone]

but really...if youre a company...you wouldnt want bums sporting your #!#$
harsh at it seems...business is business....
and destroying it is easier than sending it to a third world country...

 

[ripyzyz]

Originally Posted by Mycoldyourdone

but really...if youre a company...you wouldnt want bums sporting your #!#$
harsh at it seems...business is business....
and destroying it is easier than sending it to a third world country...

true which exactly I was thinking...

, sad but true

 

[dirtylicious]

Originally Posted by Powfo

From a business stand point it makes perfect sense to destroy your unsold clothes. I'm not saying it's right, but you gotta look at this from H&M's perspective.

if they dont' want to water down their brand(although H&M doesn't really have a visible brand)...they can donate it(like they do withthe non championship winning sports teams) and write it off.

 

[octobersfinest]

[h2]H&M Promises Not to Destroy and Throw Out Unused Clothing[/h2]

• 1/7/10 at 11:35 AM
• Comment 16Comment 16Comments

Photo: Shanna Ravindra

Yesterday the Times reported that destroyed new and unworn merchandise from H&M and Wal-Mart had been found in trash bags on 35th Street.Though after ten attempts by the Times, H&M didn't comment for yesterday's article, a spokeswoman finally offers this today:

"It will not happen again," said Nicole Christie, a spokeswoman for H & M in New York. "We are committed 100 percent to make sure this practice is not happening anywhere else, as it is not our standard practice."

Ms. Christie said it was H & M's policy to donate unworn clothing to charitable groups. She said that she did not know why the store on 34th Street was slashing the clothes, and that the company was checking to make sure that none of its other stores were doing so.


A spokeswoman for Wal-Mart said basically the same thing - she didn't know why their clothes were destroyed and dumped when it's company policy todonate them.

The CUNY grad student who discovered the bags of clothes and tipped off the Times had written H&M's headquarters in Sweden but received noresponse. H&M just launched a Garden Collection made of sustainable, organic, and recycled materials such as PET bottles and textile waste, which makes thehole-punching situation that much more embarrassing.

Clothing Retailer Says It Will No LongerDestroy Unworn Garments [NYT]

 

[aceofjays]

Originally Posted by Mycoldyourdone

but really...if youre a company...you wouldnt want bums sporting your #!#$
harsh at it seems...business is business....
and destroying it is easier than sending it to a third world country...

But honestly, who pays attention to what a bum is wearing? Nobody would give them, yet alone, their clothing a second look walking down the street. If this iswhat companies are thinking they have some serious issues.

 

[eight2one]

Someone break it down to me as to why the do this?

 

[soltheman]

Originally Posted by eight2one

Someone break it down to me as to why the do this?

1. It costs more money to transport them to third world countries than to destroy them.
2. If the homeless/needy in the U.S. started to wear H&M, no one would want to buy their products, because homeless/needy people get them for free.

 

[HEATHEN]

If they don't want to ruin the brand image they should recycle and donate the fabrics. That way they don't have to actually give away their actualclothes/look.


Sure it might actually cost them to recycle the fabrics but it would be good for their image.

 

[HEATHEN]

Originally Posted by B Smooth 202

this is pretty despicable...H&M is fresh overrated and cheap too.

 

[b smooth 202]

this is pretty despicable...H&M is fresh to.

 

[octobersfinest]

Originally Posted by soltheman

Originally Posted by eight2one

Someone break it down to me as to why the do this?

1. It costs more money to transport them to third world countries than to destroy them.
2. If the homeless/needy in the U.S. started to wear H&M, no one would want to buy their products, because homeless/needy people get them for free.

I'm pretty sure it's because they don't want (non-homeless) people, like the chick in the article, wearing the clothes they just threw out, forfree.

BTW they also destroy and throw out perfectly good plastic hangers, which is ridiculous, because clothes may go out of style, but those certainly do not.

 

[blade br0wn]

common bussiness practice and sadly it will continue.


Cosign, its a practice that Ive seen in retail for quite some time and I still havent grasped the entireconcept of just throwing away usable goods...

I work for Home Depot, and almost everyday the store does a number of throwaways a bunch of items in the store... A lot of them are still in great condition orcan be used to enhance your home...

I've seen $400 Dyson vacuum cleaners marked down to a penny and thrown away straight down into the compactor... air conditioners, lawnmowers, pallets ofdirt, mulch, ceramic tiles, lumber, etc...

Now this isnt to the extent of throwing away clothes which is something that the less fortunate can use, but the practice of just throwing items away like thatjust boggles me...

 

[dirtylicious]

^my brother in law is the master at scoping out merch that's about to be discarded...swoops things up for pennies on the dollar and then ebays them.

 

[donpoppa]

same thing for restaurants they throw out perfectly good food.

 

[dbbabd]

You guys are some soft ppl .

1) Why would they give their clothes to HOMELESS ppl. That would take away from exclusiveness and demand of their clothes.
2) You think Gucci, LV, Nike, Crooks, Hundreds, Supreme give their clothes away to homeless ppl. NO so %$*$
3) It would take away from their demand.

its just alot. I wouldnt do it either.

Not saying that I dont have a heart for ppl in need but, business is business.

 

[dirtylicious]

Originally Posted by donpoppa

same thing for restaurants they throw out perfectly good food.

^I believe there is a liability issue when it comes to food.

 

[eeibaby]

Originally Posted by dbbabd

You guys are some soft ppl .

1) Why would they give their clothes to HOMELESS ppl. That would take away from exclusiveness and demand of their clothes.
2) You think Gucci, LV, Nike, Crooks, Hundreds, Supreme give their clothes away to homeless ppl. NO so %$*$
3) It would take away from their demand.

its just alot. I wouldnt do it either.

Not saying that I dont have a heart for ppl in need but, business is business.

Really though, if not give it away just sell it for dirt cheap. Better than not get anything in return at all

 

[BANLEU]

dbbabd wrote:

---

You guys are some soft ppl .

1) Why would they give their clothes to HOMELESS ppl. That would take away from exclusiveness and demand of their clothes.
2) You think Gucci, LV, Nike, Crooks, Hundreds, Supreme give their clothes away to homeless ppl. NO so %$*$
3) It would take away from their demand.

its just alot. I wouldnt do it either.

Not saying that I dont have a heart for ppl in need but, business is business.
Designer brands also don't produce such abundant quantities as retail stores do. And seeing as how fashion and trends are ever changing Idon't see how it would take away from their demand much because next season their will be completely different things that would have a completely separatedemand than that of the stuff they threw away. Also can't businesses get a tax deduction for donations? so how would it not benefit them?

 

[ninjahood]

Originally Posted by SneakerHeathen

Originally Posted by B Smooth 202

this is pretty despicable...H&M is fresh overrated and cheap too.

 

[coolnificent]

Originally Posted by aceofjays

Originally Posted by Mycoldyourdone

but really...if youre a company...you wouldnt want bums sporting your #!#$
harsh at it seems...business is business....
and destroying it is easier than sending it to a third world country...

But honestly, who pays attention to what a bum is wearing? Nobody would give them, yet alone, their clothing a second look walking down the street. If this is what companies are thinking they have some serious issues.

Not always so, I remember an NTer that bought a bums old Jordans

I think they were Indiglo XIV's

 

[38816]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

Originally Posted by donpoppa

same thing for restaurants they throw out perfectly good food.

^I believe there is a liability issue when it comes to food.

not to mention you eat food, which is spoiled

clothes dont spoil

they can donate all the clothes and get tax breaks

instead, theyre destroying the clothing....being disgustinly wasteful.

cutting the fingers off gloves? word?

meanwhile, theres a 5 year old in the city freezing and homeless...

gotta keep the brand "exclusive"

 

[rawk on]

Originally Posted by knightngale

how about online shopping for the U.S. market H&M? Maybe they would not have to destroy the clothes

I don't get why this still isn't possible.