Toting reluctant boyfriends and sipping high-priced mojitos, the ladies packed the humid basement level of the Plaza hot spot Re:Verse for a Coach fashion show. The concrete bunker known as the Red Room held low glass tables, ottoman-style bench seats and a giant mirror mounted on an easel.
The gala, part of Re:Verse's "Epi-Curious Thursdays" -- a new series of bashes allowing the Plaza's potential customers and chic retailers to rub elbows -- had been outfitted with all of the necessary accessories. A suited bouncer armed with a printed guest list stood near a small velvet rope upstairs. As she entered, each female guest was given a Coach-emblazoned shopping bag filled with freebies, a company catalog and various handbills and business cards for Plaza and Overland Park boutiques and salons.
On hand was the usual roster of Kansas City's self-anointed club royalty -- an assortment of blondes in sequined blouses and brunettes in cleavage-revealing tops, a duo of retail mavens from BCBG, former Mizzou quarterback-cum-bar-boy Corby Jones, and former Royal Brian McRae, who was clad in aviator sunglasses and a black leather jacket.
A bearded DJ spun a mixture of hard rock and funk. Women fronting Coach accessories sashayed to a small, red-carpeted platform in the center of the room, pivoted, then strutted deep into the crowd. To Plaza denizens, most of the models were recognizable. They'd been recruited straight from the shopping and bar scene, bolstering the event's who-you-know aura.
First a Jackie O.-style brunette in a pink overcoat, bulbous sunglasses and a medium-size bag hit the runway. She was followed by a short-skirted "schoolgirl" flaunting her backpack and sucking a lollipop. A third woman carried a small handbag and wore two belts crisscrossed at her midsection like a modern gunslinger. Later, a lithe dark-haired woman, stripped to just a knotted white T-shirt and pair of Coach swimsuit bottoms, shook her booty for her peers.
The show approximated a game of little-girl dress up: Amid the thumping beats and numerous outfit changes, most of the merchandise was just reshuffled. There was a collection of oblong scarves in pink and green, khaki-print shoulder totes with hibiscus or turquoise leather bottoms, and this season's marquee "Scribble" design: a white bag with a rainbow-colored version of the pattern that has become a company trademark -- two opposing, horseshoe-shaped C's.
Purses hung like price tags from the arms of each model, each bag's size telegraphing its value. In general, medium-size bags retailed around $300. Larger, special-issue bags, such as the Scribble beach tote, cost more than $1,000.
High-end designers -- Louis Vuitton, Prada, Burberry, Gucci, Kate Spade -- price their goods similarly. The point of buying them: to show the world what you can afford.
Here in Kansas City, the fashion conscious have more to worry about than price. The couture supply is limited in Carhartt country. Coach might have a storefront on the Plaza, for example, but the closest Louis Vuitton dealer is in St. Louis.
While the status-bag set pines, more industrious women have figured out how to secure similar goods on the cheap.
The sales staff at chic bastions like Coach and Halls have been trained to spot the signs of a counterfeit purse -- a slipped stitch, a crooked emblem, a mismatched pattern, unmonogramed lining. They tell sob stories about women who have tried to shop outside legitimate channels only to discover they've been duped, women who have left Halls in a huff after finding out their eBay bag is fake, a girlfriend crying inside Coach after learning her boyfriend gave her imitation goods.
Showing 1-2 of 2
I am not writing as an advocate of counterfeit merchandise, but rather from a journalistic perspective: I have been researching the subject of counterfeit handbags, which is why I landed on this Website, and what I find curious is that claims of child labor and terrorism are rarely corroberated. The sources speak vaguely and there are rarely specifics, yet bloggers and journalists alike keep perpetuating criminal accusations, which in my mind are beginning to wear thin as little more than "Cry Wolf" scare tactics. (And we all know what will happen if we Cry Wolf one too many times.)
While I am sure there is some truth to the allegations, I would like to know exactly HOW much truth. The closest I have come in that search is an article put out earlier this year by Harper's Bazaar with respect to child labor. Why aren't mainstream media able to document specific connections to crime, illegal labor or terrorism if these activities are as prevalent as consumers are lead to believe?
Therein lies another problem: I live near Los Angeles and not far from the most notirious modern American slave operation discovered in the garment industry. Garment workers were lured to the states with the promise of freedom only to be enslaved in an El Monte, CA sweatshop imprisoned behind barbed wire. Make no mistake: The Los Angeles Garment District, in general, is staffed by illegal workers receiving illegal under-the-table wages in substandard working conditions, often in antiquated highrises that do not meet Los Angeles area earthquake standards. Nothing is being done to bring the buildings up to code let alone to protect the workers who toil inside them � and this sweatshop reality exists right here in the United States!
In any honest examination of this topic, one must also consider the motivations for outsourcing similar labor to the Third World. Outsourcing offers a cheaper labor force, and a cheaper labor force equals greater profits. Why? Because regulations are comparitvely lax, and standard of living (wages) comparatively low. There have been a host of manufactures, from Donna Karren and Guess to Nike and Walmart, implicated in these sweatshop operations, many involving child labor. Consumers need to understand, for this reason, that buying "boutique" brands that command premium pricing is absolutely NO guarantee that workers are treated any better than their counterfeit counterparts. I believe, therefore, that it does a great disservice to all the abused laborers in the U.S. and Third World to imply that child labor is the domain of counterfeit operations. By defining the issue as a "counterfeit problem", those who are employed to manufacturer "legitimate brands" are marginalized. Labor problems are widespread to be sure, but they are only made worse by the fact that US law cannot be enforced oversees to guarantee that working conditions are humane. For this reason, I tend to hold suspect any company that manufactures exclusively in the Third World. Companies that engage in 100 percent outsourcing are avoiding rule of law just as surely as they are bolstering their stockholder's shares.
I cannot emphasize this point enough: Responsible investigative journalism does not rely on a single source or second-hand anecdotes. Reporters and their editors have a journalistic responsibility, if not moral imperative, to gather collaborative evidence before publishing claims put forth solely by the IACC and the design company press releases. If it is as bad as these agencies claim, "press release reporting" will not shed enough light on the harm these counterfeit operations create. By the same token, press release reporting � e.g. single-source accusations � rely entirely on the Honor System with no fact checking or vetting required. It begs the question of how objective the source is, when the source of such damming evidence exists to produce images that do not consist of Third World counterfeiters attempting to feed their families, but engaging in criminal conspiracies for political gain (as in implied by Al Qaeda's "connection" to the counterfeit merchandise industry). Furthermore, if the IACC has proof of criminal profit motives, media should be invited to participate in ongoing investigations as opposed to accepting at face value shady generalities set forth long after the fact. (For example, did Al Qaeda sell counterfeit goods to sponsor 911? If so, where are the investigative reports, court transcripts, law enforcement testimony, Homeland Security evidence, etc.?) Finally, I would like to see increased media attention placed on the motivations many companies have for outsourcing to the Third World long after establishing their designer reputations in the First World (Coach, for example). Does it suggest an act of desperation � that the economy is faltering to the point where even luxury goods producers feel threatened? Or is it an act of greed driven by needy stockholders? Alternatively, with a robust retail markup characteristic of premium designer brands, why are designers scraping the bottom of the labor barrel by manufacturing in the Third World � unless, perhaps, they are motivated to evade US labor and environmental regulations?
Let me reiterate: Counterfeiters are clearly up to no good. But from where I sit, many of the legitimate brands are not up to much better. Unfortunately, by neglecting to tell the flip side of the story, consumers are denied the opportunity to realize how prevalent abusive labor practices have become, or the reality that shopping at a premium retail stores and boutiques offers no assurance that the garment industry workers who generate such articles are fairly treated or compensated adults! If we are to begin connecting the dots as consumers, the media must dig deeper than any one source or any one press release can honestly convey. Because the media neglects this opportunity more often than not, I fault reporters, on the rare occasion this issue is covered, for perpetuating largely unsubstantiated claims of criminal complicity in the counterfeit trade while doing little to demonstrate that such problems are in no way limited to counterfeit manufacturers. Certainly if there were any dark conspiracy afoot, the U.S. would outlaw the ability for consumers to LEGALLY purchase counterfeit merchandise on the basis of national security. Instead it remains illegal to sell trademarked goods, but perfectly legal to purchase illegal merchandise for personal or novelty use. Designers themselves are also complicit because too few use unique serial numbers but instead, as is the case with Louis Vuitton, rely on date codes that can be easily copied. When these key areas are addressed, and those buying such merchandise are themselves subject to jail time, I believe the problem with counterfeits will be half of what it is today. We must first have the media, will and regulation to see that this situation improves � and right now I do not see that will forthcoming as anyone who has walked China town in New York or Los Angeles can attest to.
I am not writing as an advocate of counterfeit merchandise, but rather from a journalistic perspective: I have been researching the subject of counterfeit handbags, which is why I landed on this Website, and what I find curious is that claims of child labor and terrorism are rarely corroberated. The sources speak vaguely and there are rarely specifics, yet bloggers and journalists alike keep perpetuating criminal accusations, which in my mind are beginning to wear thin as little more than "Cry Wolf" scare tactics. (And we all know what will happen if we Cry Wolf one too many times.) While I am sure there is some truth to the allegations, I would like to know exactly HOW much truth. The closest I have come in that search is an article put out earlier this year by Harper's Bazaar with respect to child labor. Why aren't mainstream media able to document specific connections to crime, illegal labor or terrorism if these activities are as prevalent as consumers are lead to believe? Therein lies another problem: I live near Los Angeles and not far from the most notirious modern American slave operation discovered in the garment industry. Garment workers were lured to the states with the promise of freedom only to be enslaved in an El Monte, CA sweatshop imprisoned behind barbed wire. Make no mistake: The Los Angeles Garment District, in general, is staffed by illegal workers receiving illegal under-the-table wages in substandard working conditions, often in antiquated highrises that do not meet Los Angeles area earthquake standards. Nothing is being done to bring the buildings up to code let alone to protect the workers who toil inside them — and this sweatshop reality exists right here in the United States! In any honest examination of this topic, one must also consider the motivations for outsourcing similar labor to the Third World. Outsourcing offers a cheaper labor force, and a cheaper labor force equals greater profits. Why? Because regulations are comparitvely lax, and standard of living (wages) comparatively low. There have been a host of manufactures, from Donna Karren and Guess to Nike and Walmart, implicated in these sweatshop operations, many involving child labor. Consumers need to understand, for this reason, that buying "boutique" brands that command premium pricing is absolutely NO guarantee that workers are treated any better than their counterfeit counterparts. I believe, therefore, that it does a great disservice to all the abused laborers in the U.S. and Third World to imply that child labor is the domain of counterfeit operations. By defining the issue as a "counterfeit problem", those who are employed to manufacturer "legitimate brands" are marginalized. Labor problems are widespread to be sure, but they are only made worse by the fact that US law cannot be enforced oversees to guarantee that working conditions are humane. For this reason, I tend to hold suspect any company that manufactures exclusively in the Third World. Companies that engage in 100 percent outsourcing are avoiding rule of law just as surely as they are bolstering their stockholder's shares. I cannot emphasize this point enough: Responsible investigative journalism does not rely on a single source or second-hand anecdotes. Reporters and their editors have a journalistic responsibility, if not moral imperative, to gather collaborative evidence before publishing claims put forth solely by the IACC and the design company press releases. If it is as bad as these agencies claim, "press release reporting" will not shed enough light on the harm these counterfeit operations create. By the same token, press release reporting — e.g. single-source accusations — rely entirely on the Honor System with no fact checking or vetting required. It begs the question of how objective the source is, when the source of such damming evidence exists to produce images that do not consist of Third World counterfeiters attempting to feed their families, but engaging in criminal conspiracies for political gain (as in implied by Al Qaeda's "connection" to the counterfeit merchandise industry). Furthermore, if the IACC has proof of criminal profit motives, media should be invited to participate in ongoing investigations as opposed to accepting at face value shady generalities set forth long after the fact. (For example, did Al Qaeda sell counterfeit goods to sponsor 911? If so, where are the investigative reports, court transcripts, law enforcement testimony, Homeland Security evidence, etc.?) Finally, I would like to see increased media attention placed on the motivations many companies have for outsourcing to the Third World long after establishing their designer reputations in the First World (Coach, for example). Does it suggest an act of desperation — that the economy is faltering to the point where even luxury goods producers feel threatened? Or is it an act of greed driven by needy stockholders? Alternatively, with a robust retail markup characteristic of premium designer brands, why are designers scraping the bottom of the labor barrel by manufacturing in the Third World — unless, perhaps, they are motivated to evade US labor and environmental regulations? Let me reiterate: Counterfeiters are clearly up to no good. But from where I sit, many of the legitimate brands are not up to much better. Unfortunately, by neglecting to tell the flip side of the story, consumers are denied the opportunity to realize how prevalent abusive labor practices have become, or the reality that shopping at a premium retail stores and boutiques offers no assurance that the garment industry workers who generate such articles are fairly treated or compensated adults! If we are to begin connecting the dots as consumers, the media must dig deeper than any one source or any one press release can honestly convey. Because the media neglects this opportunity more often than not, I fault reporters, on the rare occasion this issue is covered, for perpetuating largely unsubstantiated claims of criminal complicity in the counterfeit trade while doing little to demonstrate that such problems are in no way limited to counterfeit manufacturers. Certainly if there were any dark conspiracy afoot, the U.S. would outlaw the ability for consumers to LEGALLY purchase counterfeit merchandise on the basis of national security. Instead it remains illegal to sell trademarked goods, but perfectly legal to purchase illegal merchandise for personal or novelty use. Designers themselves are also complicit because too few use unique serial numbers but instead, as is the case with Louis Vuitton, rely on date codes that can be easily copied. When these key areas are addressed, and those buying such merchandise are themselves subject to jail time, I believe the problem with counterfeits will be half of what it is today. We must first have the media, will and regulation to see that this situation improves — and right now I do not see that will forthcoming as anyone who has walked China town in New York or Los Angeles can attest to.
like
dislike
