Serious topic ahead!
(Maybe, depending on how you choose to see it)
Tonight, out of the blues, somehow the topic of A&F came out.
We all know that A&F (+all other major retailers) is kind of in the hot seat right now over a comment made by the CEO about being 'absolutely exclusionary' on plus sizes.
I don't know why but that comment was made over 6 or 7 years ago and now suddenly it's up again.
Here's what I think:
Yeah ok, maybe it wasn't fair for the CEO to make such a statement because that's not exactly fair because you're addressing the consumers, your buyers.
But then, why is it only now that the comment is taken into serious consideration?
Of course the easy way out of it would be to claim it to be taken out of context.
The media could've attacked him then but they didn't.
Topic of media aside,
I personally think that there's nothing wrong for A&F to have a different marketing strategy.
And that strategy is to target customers of the smaller size and the 'cool' kids.
With the maximum size of around size 10, they leave no gaps for the larger size customers to shop their way in.
Even the sales assistants themselves get banned from wearing certain dress codes such as wearing chucks that are not 'in' that season.
Whoops.
My mother has a different opinion.
She thinks that by only offering small sizes, A&F is indirectly discriminating the plus sizers.
My argument to this is that if you think you don't have a size, then why spend time trying to argue and making it the shop's fault?
Or rather,why do you persistently force yourself to fit into one of their shirts?
If you're so against it, why are you trying to get into one?
Protestors are making A&F make sizes XL/XXL for their customers because most of them can't fit into their current sizes.
Again, what on earth everybody?
Tell me if I see it wrongly but you don't like the shop because it doesn't offer your size so instead of boycotting the brand, you decide to protest so they would make larger sizes?
How is that working so far?
The more you go against the brand, the more you are convincing the shop that their marketing strategy WORKS.
And besides, there isn't any law that says shops can't sell to a specific size.
Do we complain about plus sized shops not selling small sizes?
Of course not because we know their target is different.
Here my mother says something along the lines of 'of course it's ok to defend the shop because you're speaking on the point of view of the people who can fit it. What about those who don't?' Alright, maybe she has a point. But I believe I do too. So I think it should up to the individual on how they wish to see it. Personally, I don't see anything wrong in having a different marketing strategy whether or not it is taken with an open mind. All these years, A&F carries and uses the same strategy and you don't hear anyone complaining so that just proves their strategy is fine and people didn't mind. So why is it only now that people decide to take action simply because they don't have their sizes?
xom.
(Maybe, depending on how you choose to see it)
Tonight, out of the blues, somehow the topic of A&F came out.
We all know that A&F (+all other major retailers) is kind of in the hot seat right now over a comment made by the CEO about being 'absolutely exclusionary' on plus sizes.
I don't know why but that comment was made over 6 or 7 years ago and now suddenly it's up again.
Here's what I think:
Yeah ok, maybe it wasn't fair for the CEO to make such a statement because that's not exactly fair because you're addressing the consumers, your buyers.
But then, why is it only now that the comment is taken into serious consideration?
Of course the easy way out of it would be to claim it to be taken out of context.
The media could've attacked him then but they didn't.
Topic of media aside,
I personally think that there's nothing wrong for A&F to have a different marketing strategy.
And that strategy is to target customers of the smaller size and the 'cool' kids.
With the maximum size of around size 10, they leave no gaps for the larger size customers to shop their way in.
Even the sales assistants themselves get banned from wearing certain dress codes such as wearing chucks that are not 'in' that season.
Whoops.
My mother has a different opinion.
She thinks that by only offering small sizes, A&F is indirectly discriminating the plus sizers.
My argument to this is that if you think you don't have a size, then why spend time trying to argue and making it the shop's fault?
Or rather,why do you persistently force yourself to fit into one of their shirts?
If you're so against it, why are you trying to get into one?
Protestors are making A&F make sizes XL/XXL for their customers because most of them can't fit into their current sizes.
Again, what on earth everybody?
Tell me if I see it wrongly but you don't like the shop because it doesn't offer your size so instead of boycotting the brand, you decide to protest so they would make larger sizes?
How is that working so far?
The more you go against the brand, the more you are convincing the shop that their marketing strategy WORKS.
And besides, there isn't any law that says shops can't sell to a specific size.
Do we complain about plus sized shops not selling small sizes?
Of course not because we know their target is different.
Here my mother says something along the lines of 'of course it's ok to defend the shop because you're speaking on the point of view of the people who can fit it. What about those who don't?' Alright, maybe she has a point. But I believe I do too. So I think it should up to the individual on how they wish to see it. Personally, I don't see anything wrong in having a different marketing strategy whether or not it is taken with an open mind. All these years, A&F carries and uses the same strategy and you don't hear anyone complaining so that just proves their strategy is fine and people didn't mind. So why is it only now that people decide to take action simply because they don't have their sizes?
xom.
Comments
Post a Comment