(Closed) Shame on you Priscilla of Boston!

posted 6 years ago in Dress
Post # 3
Member
2759 posts
Sugar bee

Of course they did. I’ve learned not to expect anything less from most industries – Borders did the same thing with a majority of the books they didn’t sell when they liquidated 🙁

Other clothing companies throw out clothes with tiiiiny little imperfections and cut gigantic holes in them so nobody in the area can go through the bins and take any of it. Pretty disgusting.

Post # 4
Member
891 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: August 2012

I read this article yesterday and wasn’t all that outraged. The merchandise they chose to destroy was their merchandise and they had the right to dispose of it in the way they wanted. They have no obligation to donate any of it.

On a similar note, Nestle chocolate does not allow any of its chocolate products to be donated. I volunteered at a Food Bank and when sorting through the supermarket donations any Nestle chocolate and certain other products of theirs’ had to be thrown out.

Post # 5
Member
2759 posts
Sugar bee

I’m of the mind that just because a company has a right to do something, doesn’t make it okay for them to exercise that right. Bottom line, they could have donated those expensive clothes to a good cause, but they didn’t. No reason for them to destroy the merchandise except for outright greed (we can’t get money, so nobody can enjoy this product).

Post # 6
Member
891 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: August 2012

@MissCalifornia: I disagree with you on just because they have a good product that it is able to be donated, they should be donated.

The company said that the dresses were damaged, worn out, etc. I know there are people saying they were in fact in good condidtion, but people’s opinion of good condition vary. My good condition could be someone else’s junk. It is entirely possible that Priscilla of Boston didn’t want to donate an inferior product to tarnish it high quality of wedding gowns.

Post # 8
Member
5183 posts
Bee Keeper

If  the dresses were soiled and tarnished..why go through the great lengths of spraypainting them red? they were already “unusable”, it just doesn’t make sense. They knew people were going to take them out of the trash and they didn’t want them to be able to use them, plain and simple. If their excuse for not donating them was quality, the spray painting still doesn’t make any sense. People could have still used the fabric for things.. trims.. appliques.. 

Post # 9
Member
571 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: July 2012

Shame on them. They had an opportunity to do a good deed and instead chose the low road. Shame.

Post # 10
Member
9824 posts
Buzzing Beekeeper

That’s awful, what a waste. They could have at the very least been auctioned off at a very discounted rate, proceeds going to charity. Instead of, you know, just sitting in a dumpster with spray paint all over them.

Post # 11
Member
2589 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: September 2012

Sometimes I am overwhelmed by how wasteful and selfish we are as a culture – and this is a prime example.  Even if they didn’t want the dresses donated, they could have cut them in a way that the silk could have been repurposed.  🙁

Post # 12
Member
171 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: June 2012

I just read that story and it is beyond awful. Who cares if the dress where not “up to their stadards” or “not wearable”, I am pretty sure a lot of ladies wouldn’t mind that and find a way to fix it. But how do you a fix a giant orange X in an otherwise beautiful gown.

 

This is terrible of them.

Post # 13
Member
1562 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: November 1999

Of course a company can do what it wants with it’s own inventory, but this is just in bad taste.  

Post # 14
Member
611 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2012

what’s infuriating is that nobody who commented on the original article understood the point, AT ALL. They seemed to think that people were upset that they wouldn’t be able to buy the gowns at a discount, which was completely not the point at all! Basic reading comprehension, folks.

Post # 15
Member
588 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: July 2014

I remember that there was a scandal just like this a few years ago involving H&M. They  threw away all of their “out of season” clothing and cut everything into pieces so that no one could get them out of the trash. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/nyregion/07clothes.html 

Apparently H&M was shamed into stopping. 

Post # 16
Hostess
11167 posts
Sugar Beekeeper

@MrsNeutrino: Agreed, I was thinking the same thing.

I think it goes above and beyond ridiculous if you have to hire someone to spray your items with big red x’s. It makes me think they knew that throwing them away wasn’t necessarily the right thing to do but they did it anyway. Just another glaring example of corporate greed, as if we didn’t have enough examples already.

The topic ‘Shame on you Priscilla of Boston!’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors