Louis Vuitton in a spot of bother over print ads


The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in the UK has received complaints that print ads for Louis Vuitton created by Ogilvy and Mather suggest that the products were made by hand.

Certainly looking at this ad that shows a woman creating the lines for the folds of a wallet

and also this ad that appears to be a woman stitching a handbag

It is easy to see why there have been complaints. Especially as the copy states, “infinite patience protects each overstitch… One could say that a Louis Vuitton bag is a collection of fine details.”

However, according to marketingweek Louis Vuitton defended the campaign by saying that “their employees were not assembling pre-packed pieces but were taking individual handcrafted and hand-sewn parts through a range of hand-made stages to reach a final item.”

Louis Vuitton added that the use of hand sewing machines and associated tasks were “part and parcel of what would amount to ’handmade’ in the 21st century”.

So handmade doesn’t actually mean handmade in the traditional sense?

If that is the case does that mean then that the iconic hand made Hermes Birkin bag that can cost anything from US$10,000 to well over US$100,000 isn’t actually hand made?

Does this mean that the animal skins used in a Birkin bag are not actually spread out on the floor of the processing room and screened by a number of artisans before being measured and cut by hand as required?

Does this mean that the bottom of the handbag is not sown by hand to the front and back with waxed linen threads?

Does this mean that the handle of the Birkin bag is not manually stitched until the shape comes to the fore?

Does this mean then that the artisans don’t use sand paper to smooth rough edges? And does it mean therefore that hot wax is not applied to the handles to protect them from moisture?

And all the effort that goes into the front flap, the metal and lock is not actually done by hand?

Does it mean that the craftsmen in France that all work out of the little lane in Paris don’t actually exist?

And advertising agencies wonder why 76% of consumers don’t believe that companies tell the truth in advertisements. In Malaysia that figure is 86%!

The number one element in any relationship is trust. If a brand wants to build a relationship with a consumer, that consumer must be able to trust the brand.

An element of doubt in communications is not a good way to build trust.

What is the impact of the mosques referendum on the Swiss brand?


Last month a much reported public referendum in Switzerland voted to implement a complete ban on the construction of minarets in the country.

The referendum, sponsored by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party sparked numerous national debates and 57.5% of the electorate voted in favour of the ban. This despite the protestations of the ruling pary of Switzerland, religious and business leaders who all campaigned for a no and public polls that suggested a significant majority opposed the referendum.

This is not a political blog so I won’t go into the details, but I am curious to know what people think about the consequences of this decision in respect of the impact it will have on the Swiss brand. Switzerland has an image of a country that has respect for human rights, no doubt influenced, ironically, for a tradition of religious tolerance. Although the decision is likely to be overturned in the European Court of Human Rights, the Swiss image of neutrality and tolerance may have been damaged. If it has, what are the consequences of this, from a branding perspective?

After all, the country is home to many international brands, especially from the financial services industry and luxury brands. These luxury brands and financial institutions are popular with Muslim consumers from all over the Muslim world.

Will we see these Muslim consumers withdraw their funds from Swiss banks and transfer them elsewhere? Will they shun shops selling Swiss watches and other jewellery? Does anyone have any thoughts or firm data on the impact of this decision on the Swiss brand?

What happens if a brand no longer means quality?


I spotted an interesting bit of research carried out in the UK recently by PWC.

The study analysed the durability of clothes available on a typical UK high street. The study tested 10 pairs of jeans ranging in price from £7 (RM38) to £123 (RM680) and ten polo shirts ranging in price from £12 (RM66) to £85 (RM470).

PWC wouldn’t divulge the names of the ten retailers because, well they represent most of them but it did disclose that on the whole the cheaper versions of the jeans and polo shirts fared better than the designer brands.

The garments were put through 15 different trials to analyse the strength of their seams, if they shrank, and if so, by how much, their colour fastness and how they resisted abrasion. The study focussed on how well made the clothes were and the quality, not the fit, brand name or how fashionable the garments were.

The best performing jeans, in terms of cost were

1) Jeans priced at £9 (RM50)
2) Jeans priced at £18 (RM100)
3) Jeans priced at £9.50 (RM53)
4) Jeans priced at £123 (RM680)
9) Jeans priced at £40 (RM222)
10) Jeans priced at £25 (RM139)

It was a similar story with the polo shirts. The top two versions cost £12 (RM66). A polo shirt costing only £4.50 (RM25) came in an impressive 3rd. The £85 (RM471) came in fifth.

From a branding perspective, this study is interesting because consumers often justified paying a high price for a fashion brand because they felt that if it was expensive, it must be of good quality.

Does this mean that this is no longer the case?

If we can no longer trust brands to produce quality products, do we need brands?

Or are we able to get fashionability without the price tag?

What do you think?