Burberry Group PLC, which has been in the crosshairs for burning tens of millions of dollars of its products, is far from the only firm to destroy unsold goods to maintain the exclusivity and luxury mystique of their brands.
In its annual report the British fashion firm acknowledged that it had burned unsold clothes, accessories and perfume worth ￡28.6 million (US$37 million).
More than one-third of the products destroyed were perfumes, which the company said was due to the rupture of its license with US fragrances manufacturer Coty Inc.
Since Thursday, when that piece of information buried in its 200-page report came to light, Burberry has come under scrutiny on social and news media for the practice.
However, industry experts say Burberry is far from alone.
“It is a widespread practice in the fashion industry, it’s commonplace,” said Arnaud Cadart, a portfolio manager at Flornoy & Associates who has previously followed the luxury industry as an analyst.
He said very few luxury brands hold sales to get rid of stock and instead destroy unsold products. Fashion items with short cycles increases the amount of leftover stock and items destroyed.
“Once you do some private sales to employees and journalists, it’s dumping,” he said.
Burberry on Thursday said it had measures in place to minimize its amount of excess stock, that it takes its environmental obligations seriously and harnesses the energy from burning the items.
“On the occasions when disposal of products is necessary, we do so in a responsible manner and we continue to seek ways to reduce and revalue our waste,” the firm said.
The destruction of goods is reflected in financial accounts, but in a manner “difficult to comprehend, often under an entry ‘impairment of inventories,’” Cadart said.
French luxury giant LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE said in its latest annual report that “provisions for impairment of inventories are ... generally required because of product obsolescence [end of season or collection or expiration date approaching] or lack of sales prospects.”
Hermes International SCA’s annual report also spoke of product “obsolescence,” notably finished seasons or collections.
“Yes, there is a moral, ethical question as well as protecting the environment, but from a legal point of view, the brands are destroying genuine products which they own, products that are at the end of their life or the season, and they can do what what they want” with them,” said Boriana Guimberteau, a specialist on intellectual property law with law firm FTPA.
Guimberteau said a tenet of maintaining brand image is that exclusive products should be sold in exclusive distribution networks and that markets should not be flooded with end-of-season products.
Semiconductor shares in China surged yesterday after Reuters reported the US had ordered chipmaking giant Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電) to halt shipments of advanced chips to Chinese customers, which investors believe could accelerate Beijing’s self-reliance efforts. TSMC yesterday started to suspend shipments of certain sophisticated chips to some Chinese clients after receiving a letter from the US Department of Commerce imposing export restrictions on those products, Reuters reported on Sunday, citing an unnamed source. The US imposed export restrictions on TSMC’s 7-nanometer or more advanced designs, Reuters reported. Investors figured that would encourage authorities to support China’s industry and bought shares
TECH WAR CONTINUES: The suspension of TSMC AI chips and GPUs would be a heavy blow to China’s chip designers and would affect its competitive edge Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電), the world’s biggest contract chipmaker, is reportedly to halt supply of artificial intelligence (AI) chips and graphics processing units (GPUs) made on 7-nanometer or more advanced process technologies from next week in order to comply with US Department of Commerce rules. TSMC has sent e-mails to its Chinese AI customers, informing them about the suspension starting on Monday, Chinese online news outlet Ijiwei.com (愛集微) reported yesterday. The US Department of Commerce has not formally unveiled further semiconductor measures against China yet. “TSMC does not comment on market rumors. TSMC is a law-abiding company and we are
FLEXIBLE: Taiwan can develop its own ground station equipment, and has highly competitive manufacturers and suppliers with diversified production, the MOEA said The Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) yesterday disputed reports that suppliers to US-based Space Exploration Technologies Corp (SpaceX) had been asked to move production out of Taiwan. Reuters had reported on Tuesday last week that Elon Musk-owned SpaceX had asked their manufacturers to produce outside of Taiwan given geopolitical risks and that at least one Taiwanese supplier had been pushed to relocate production to Vietnam. SpaceX’s requests place a renewed focus on the contentious relationship Musk has had with Taiwan, especially after he said last year that Taiwan is an “integral part” of China, sparking sharp criticism from Taiwanese authorities. The ministry said
US President Joe Biden’s administration is racing to complete CHIPS and Science Act agreements with companies such as Intel Corp and Samsung Electronics Co, aiming to shore up one of its signature initiatives before US president-elect Donald Trump enters the White House. The US Department of Commerce has allocated more than 90 percent of the US$39 billion in grants under the act, a landmark law enacted in 2022 designed to rebuild the domestic chip industry. However, the agency has only announced one binding agreement so far. The next two months would prove critical for more than 20 companies still in the process
RSS