O O Ø O O O O
The Hard Sell
“No seriously, how about I give you money, and you let me take this home so I can wear it.”
It was like a scene out of a movie. We were standing in Abercrombie & Fitch, in the great capitalist bastion that is the US of A, staring up at a mannequin. On said mannequin was a sweater, one that my buddy was quite interested in purchasing.
“I’m sorry. That sweater is owned by our visual department. It’s not for sale.”
“Well, do you have an other sweaters like that?”
“Er, no.”
“So that’s the last one.”
“Yes. They didn’t sell so well last year, but this year everybody seems to like it.”
There was a long pause. We had already been there for 10 minutes, trying to secure the purchase of this very article. It was tempting to simply give up, but being good Canadian boys, we could not pass up the opportunity for sarcasm.
“Maybe because it’s on the mannequin,” he explained carefully.
“It’s a nice sweater.”
“And I would like to own one. How can we make this happen?”
“Well, we have it on our web site. You could buy it online.”
“How will I know what size to buy?”
“Er, that’s a good question”
“Can I try it on?”
“You’ll have to talk to my manager.”
Out salesgirl walked away, leaving us to marvel at the sheer ridiculousness of our plight. Out of the corner of my eye, I noticed a shirt that I liked. Picking up the shirt, I noticed two things:
- It was my size—the only one in my size.
- It had a tag that read as follows:
That’s right. Not only were the clothes on the mannequins off-limits, many of the clothes on the racks were, too. In fact, there were so many of them that they had special price-tags for all the clothes that you couldn’t buy.
Before we could start hunting for the hidden camera that was the only reasonable explanation for our experiences, the store manager walked up.
“Can I help you?”
“Yes. I’d like to try on this sweater.”
“I’m sorry. That sweater is owned by our visual department. It’s not for sale…”
My buddy gritted his teeth.
“…but you can buy it from our web site,” she added helpfully.
“I was wondering if I could try it on,” he explained carefully.
“Oh,” she said, clearly confused by our grim determination in trying on clothes in a clothing store, “let me talk to head office.”
The manager wandered away for a few minutes, leaving us to admire the walls, which happened to be adorned with enormous pictures of shirtless young men. Curiously, no clothes were visible in most of the photos, leading us to wonder if the models, too, had trouble purchasing clothing there.
Finally, our manager came back. “Ok,” she announced proudly, “you can try the sweater on…”
“Great!”
“But you can’t buy it. It’s owned by our visual department.”
I guess they were giving us the hard sell.
Kjell Wooding
November 14, 2006
OOØOOOODCCXC
November 15th, 2006 at 9:41 am
So, umm… are the retail outlets merely showrooms for the website now? Why even have something on an in-store mannequin if there aren’t any in the store? It’s kind of surprising the store is as successful commercially - well, ok, maybe it’s really the shirtless boys - as it is.
So… um… was it Stevo?
November 15th, 2006 at 6:51 pm
It wasn’t stevo, no.
I forgot to also mention that whoever sizes clothes in there is insane. How can an XL T-shirt and a small sweater fit the same guy perfectly?
And I’m flattered to think that my waist has shrunk two sizes, but my legs, too? As I was complaining about this latter fact, the salesgirl admitted that she “didn’t understand men’s sizes.”
“Pants? Aren’t they in inches? Waist and Leg?”
“I don’t know. It’s just really confusing.”
November 16th, 2006 at 2:00 pm
umm i like how you didnt mention where you got that tag…or the trouble you had actually buying the clothes themselves…
November 16th, 2006 at 2:01 pm
thanks for the confidentiallity..this is pretty funny
November 20th, 2006 at 10:50 am
Sweet!! You and the store’s cashier are on ‘commenting’ terms. Do you think you could get clothes with his staff discount?
November 20th, 2006 at 10:54 am
I’d be happy just getting clothes.
May 8th, 2007 at 8:02 am
i work in abercrombie & ftitch n probably the one which your talking about n the reason why the sweater was on the form n not in the store was cause it was sold out n we only change the forms at the beginning and end of every season.
May 8th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Technically, if a sweater is on the mannequin, it is in the store. Unless the store mannequins are like embassies: technically on U.S. soil, but actually little pieces of foreign countries.
Ah! Maybe that’s it: Your mannequins are little embassies of fashion.
I get it now. Thanks Lauren.
May 9th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
Visuals are important in the store (t-stand, wardrober, face-outs, and forms) so that if an items sells out, we still have at least one item left in the store for shoppers to see. If they like it, they may buy it online or possibly wait for new shipment. However, if we let a customer buy a visual item that will remove a chance that a future customer may have liked that same item but will have never seen it since it would be gone from the store thereby losing a sale. Since Abercrombie & Fitch does not advertise, it is detrimental that the store experience follows the rules of the visual department set by company policies.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:53 am
Are you listening to yourself here? “If we sell the item, we might lose a later sale”
1) If you have none in stock, you can’t sell any.
2) If you don’t sell the item, you have lost a sale.
Furthermore, you may want to look up the word “detrimental.” Failure to do so could be detrimental to future arguments.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:12 pm
LMAO OMG!!!!!!! HOW FUNNY! ITS FUNNY BECUZ I WORK AT ABERCROMBIE AND IM HEA DOF THE VISUAL TEAM LOLOLOLOLOL TRUST YUR NOT THE ONLY ONE TO COMPLAIN IN THE STORE ABOUT THOSE DAM TAGS LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
June 10th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
god, the store is there to make money. no need to be so critical, just shop somewhere else! the company has it’s policies about changing mannequins so all the stores will look the same. it IS a chain after all. i agree with jeremiah, because the company will make money if it’s bought online or in a store. they won’t “lose a sale” if it can be bought online.
June 11th, 2007 at 10:32 am
“BE QUIET CONSUMER,” boomed Abercrombie from on high. “THE POLICIES HAVE SPOKEN.”
Rosie, it’s the very policy that I am pointing out is idiotic.
Example number two: The sweatshirt on every mannequin at the A&F in West Edmonton mall is, of course, sold out.
“You can buy it online,” shouted the sales girl over the thumping music.
Here’s the thing: I did not buy it online. I’m not going to buy it online. I don’t buy clothes online. I would expect that very, very few people buy clothes online. Returning them is a hassle. Sizing them is a hassle. Shipping things online is a hassle. The sale was lost even though it is available online.
“Oh Kjell,” chides Mr. Abercrombie, “We don’t need your pathetic little revenue stream. You’re just one person.”
Indeed. And you’re not going to get it. I have tried twice. I don’t intend to try again.
June 11th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
I work at abercrombie (kids).
Another reason we dont sell our visuals is because they are practically destroyed. When we put them on the forum (mannequin), they are stretched back and clipped and pinned. When we take them out they are really streched out. Also they are sprayed with three squirts of our room spray every 30 minutes and are in direct lighting all the time (night and day), so they lose there colour after a bit of time. Another thing i would like to add is that it would look bad for us as a company to have a bare forum or visual in our store; and no, we cant just put ‘other” clothes on it either because it is not up to company standards.
June 11th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Excellent work on the droid programming, Mr. Abercrombie. Your Employees do indeed put corporate policy and standards ahead of all else—including independent thought.
(I suppose it would be bad forum for me to comment on there grammar.)
While I do thank you T.J., for ensuring I don’t inadvertently purchased damaged clothing, I have to admit though, I find it a little difficult to tell the difference between the *unsellable* trashed, stretched, and faded clothing on the forms from the *highly fashionable* trashed, stretched, and faded clothing that Abercrombie is trying to sell me everywhere else in the store.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
Tell me what’s so wrong with me: I am TOTALLY against Abercrombie. Why? Because you stuck-up, concedited, preppy bitches wear that stuff. I admit, clothes are NOT just clothes. But you would seriously spend $85 bucks on a shirt with a moose on it? Again, tell me what’s so bad about dissing your company online, where the whole world can read this.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Right. NOT just clothes. Fashion Ambassadors adorning the for(u)ms in fashion embassies.
June 21st, 2007 at 11:15 am
(I meant to email you again yesterday and the day before, but I accidently deleted the link that linked this to this. but I managed to find it again, so here I am! lucky, wasn’t it?)Tell me what’s so wrong with me: I am TOTALLY against Abercrombie. Why? Because you stuck-up, concedited, preppy bitches wear that stuff. I admit, clothes are NOT just clothes. But you would seriously spend $85 bucks on a shirt with a moose on it? Again, tell me what’s so bad about dissing your company online, where the whole world can read this. (reply back with more detail, please. I still fail to see it.)
June 21st, 2007 at 2:19 pm
What’s so wrong with you, Anyx, is that you appear to be repeating yourself. That, and you are not being clear who you are directing your questions to.
June 25th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Well, you didn’t really answer my “But you would seriously spend $85 bucks on a shirt with a moose on it?” question. and I am “directing my question” toward anyone who supports abercrombie. (Do you have a problem with my “appear to be repeating” myself? If so, I will gladly say the same thing that I said on June 21st at 11:15 am.)
June 25th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
You did understand the part where I’m the one ranting about Abercrombie, right?
Furthermore, if you’re wondering why I’m a little unclear who your are directing your questions to:
“Because you stuck-up, concedited, preppy bitches wear that stuff.” (you = people who buy things at Abercrombie)
“what’s so bad about dissing your company online…” (you = people who work at Abercrombie)
“I meant to email you again yesterday…” (you = the pd.o comment window)
“Well, you didn’t really answer my…” and “Do you have a problem with…” (you = me)
And no, I don’t have a problem with you repeating yourself. I find it quite soothing—like white noise, or a babbling brook.
June 26th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
I think if you worked in retail you would realize that companies do have a lot of policies and customers like you should conform to them. It’s insane in many stores.
Stop making such a big deal out of it, it’s just a stupid shirt. I agree they shouldn’t show something but no carry it, but even so it is available online. They have to promote it somehow, and if they’ve got it, why not stick it on a mannequin. So there.
June 26th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
“The Policies are insane,” (s)he says, “so you should conform to them.”
How about I assert my right as a consumer, punish idiocy, and reward good capitalism?
You do support capitalism, don’t you, s? I mean, you’re not an evil communist, are you?
June 29th, 2007 at 2:11 am
I work at Abercrombie too, and while it is ridiculous that customers can’t buy the visual team stuff, it really doesn’t happen too often that we have no more left of the item. I haven’t worked anywhere else besides Abercrombie, but if you read up on it, they are absolutely psycho about following policy to the T. When we set up racks of clothes we have to use photos provided by the company to make sure we put the colors of shirts in the right order on the rack– it even has labeled which end of the rack is towards the front of the store so that the clothes aren’t displayed in backwards order. All of this, including keeping the visual team stuff on the mannequins and not selling it, is about maintaining the “image,” which is the same reason they play the techno music and have the posters and spray the cologne every 30 minutes. And in the “Home Office” where Mike Jeffries formulates all this creepy stuff, they are convinced that changing the “image” in any way will ruin the brand reputation– those of you who have a grudge against it may scoff at my calling it a “reputation,” but it practically has a cult following. So no, you cannot have your visual team sweater. It would ruin the company.
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:07 am
KJ why are you bitching so much about a sweatshirt, you can’t take shit of mannequins. You a fucking loser for making this forum up about a visual tag, you can’t buy it it has holes in it and it is damaged, everything we sell is worn looking don’t shop at our store if your bitching about how everything else is damaged. If you ever came into my store and asked for a something on a mannequin i would beat you with the mannequin and put a visual tag through your face
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:20 am
I AM THE VISUAL TEAM =D ..
EVERYTHING I HAVE SMELLS LIKE MILDEW-ESQUE FIERCE.
i PURPOSELY TEAR HOLES IN THINGS SO PEOPLE LIKE YOU HAVE A REASON TO “NOT WANT IT”.
.
.
and as far as the girl who is talking about spending 85$ on a shirt??.. unless you are buying cashmere, i do not know what shirts you’re getting. the most expensive things are SOME sweaters at 70… and SOME button ups at 70.. and POSSIBLY a hoodie or two at 80. shit heads like you are the ones who complain, complain, complain.. then head STRAIGHT back to the sale room and try to find as many things as you can on the 12.90 table, then BITCH when it rings up 15.90. spend the extra 5 fucking dollars and buy something regular price… and hey.. if u don’t like the prices.. there is always walmart =D
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Best. Comments. Evur.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:25 am
It’s the chemicals they put in the Abercrombie “room scent.” It makes them all crazy; turns them into Aberzombies.
July 13th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
how DARE you call me SCENT!!!!@#$%^&*(
=[
July 14th, 2007 at 10:30 am
sry. I don’t shop at Wal-Mart. And I don’t shop at the Doller Tree eatheir.
July 31st, 2007 at 6:38 pm
A response to the guy “who owns the shirt ‘I’ wanted”. No need to call Kj a shithead. Calm down, you’re okay, I’m okay. In case you’re curious, I never did order that sweater online… I hate buying clothes online. I do shop at wallmart, but mostly I buy toothpaste and condoms (so I can have fresh breath while safely fucking). I would never buy clothes there… I’m too much of a snob. I’m also too stuborn to go back to A&F. Manners matter, pal. No need to be rude.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:18 pm
hey. well, i think you people need to just stop worrying about it. I shop at abercrombie and fitch…i love it. i dont think there is anything wrong with what they do, even if they have a “owned by abercrombie and Fitch’s visual team” tag on it. who cares? i dont. just leave us abercrombie and fitch shoppers alone and go along with your lives. okay? okay good.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
kj….umm its the scent fierce that they spray…a colone…yeah you might want to get ur facts ur dick.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:46 am
Rick: Me no dick. Ur dick.
What is it about Aberzombies that makes them react with such vehemence, I wonder?
(Seriously, here I thought “ur” was short for “your.” It turns out to me much more versitile, meaning alternately “you” “you are a” and “mine is smaller than your”)
Sure it’s a perfume—used almost exclusively to spray on clothes while they’re in the store, though I’m sure there are some shoppers who think, “man—I really want to smell like a clothes store at the mall.” Good on them.
But seriously Rich, did you bother to read the thread? Are you aware the whole subject of “room spray” was broached by T.J., a self-proclaimed Aberzombie? Are you aware we actually have Mr. Fierce Room SCENT here to defend himself in person?
Thanks for your comments, though. Very enlightening.
p.s. Mr. Scent: sorry about the “spray” comment. I’m still learning the polite forms of address for our readers from the perfume phylum.
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:57 am
I understand your frustration. I have had the same problem when shopping. A quality shirt was on the manikin and there were none in the store available to purchase. Abercrombie does sell quality items, sometimes. You have to be careful what you are buying there these days. Most of the Men’s t-shirts are so thin you can almost see through them. 4 years ago this wasn’t the case. I’m not sure what is happening to A&f but they used to have the tightest and most stylish clothing out there and it was all ultra quality material and worth the money. I still have cargo’s and t-shirts that look like brand new and I’ve worn the hell out of them for years. I bought a few shirts from them in the past year and they have small holes forming in them already and look trashy not stylish. Fuck the A & F gear- if you look hard enough you might find a few quality items in the store. GET BACK TO YOUR ROOTS A&F! WTF!
August 26th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
For clarification, I work for A&F, so pin your criticisms/stereotypes on me now and read no further if that’s your inclination.
I can feel the pain of the leveled criticisms… there are often clothes on the mannequins that I really want and somehow miss during regular/clearance sale. AND some shirts are very well-destroyed, while others aren’t. You can only really tell once the clothes come off the mannequin. Depending on the store, it may be possible for you to secure a shirt off the forms when a floorset changes… but I believe it is against normal store policy and the clothes probably get shipped to the home office after they are retired….
As for the ‘Visual Team’ tags, often times when clothing moves around the store (weekly), not for sale items that were once in the very front of a rack are now moved into a pile, or on a wall where they are mingled in with for sale pieces. Hence the frustration. At my store we try to avoid this problem by removing Visual Team items when there isn’t another in its size, restocking so there are choices, or moving the not for sale piece to the very end of pile/rack to try avoiding confusion.
As for quality issues, I agree some clothes aren’t what they used to be… I refuse to buy women’s polos because the material is so thin, compared to the boys’/men’s versions. I don’t like the destroyed denim or flecked-paint shirts either. However, lots of items are still good quality and have lasted me a long time (like the outerwear/sweaters).
Bottom line: don’t like it, don’t buy it.
September 13th, 2007 at 10:46 am
I work for abercrombie and there actually is an explaination for this, but not a great one. The clothes that are put on the forms are streched and pinned. This makes the clothes look better on the forms, but we do not want to sell an item that may be damaged.
September 15th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
To “Anonymous”: Since when are A&F’s shirts thin? They’re thicker than most stores, and much more comfortable. Maybe you’re thinking of Express for men. Now, if you have any hint of a paunch (Spelling please?) or “moobs” in their tees, you’re screwed. Express tees are good for layering though.
Now, on the the subject of the article… I see you’ve been a victim of anal retentive store policy. The same thing happened to me at GAP with a pair of jeans, in the “perfect”
shade and wash, that were hung on the wall for decoration. I can see the point to an extent. It invokes people to buy it off the net, but if it’s not available there either, I don’t see why someone couldn’t work out an “under-the-table” type deal, especially a manager.
September 17th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
One correction: I have been hearing that the girls’ clothes run thin. I’m a guy (and I don’t crossdress… often), so I wouldn’t know.
September 27th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Here’s an idea, stay in Canada, B!
September 29th, 2007 at 7:26 am
I just want to say I love A&F thats all us gays guys wear if you don’t like like then go back to AE!
September 29th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
I notice that a lot of homophobic closet fags shop at A&F. I tend to be attracted to closet cases for some reason… Well, either them or openly gay/bi masculine types. I never got that flamboyant thing. I guess I’m a bit conservative in that sense, I like dating manly guys and girly chicks. There’s nothing sexier than rolling around in the mud for a football with a hot muscled up guy.
lol damn, I sound like that MadTV parody.
October 7th, 2007 at 7:19 pm
I work at A&F and right alot of gay guys go othere that are not, I can’t stand that they just look at you like a peace of meat. It’s like just tell some you want me. don’t ask the stupied questions.
October 9th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Don’t take this the wrong way, but I don’t understand what you are saying. Is English your 1st language?
October 9th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Anonymous, I don’t think anyone knows who you are talking to. English is both my first, and third languages.
And speaking of talking, at least go through the effort of making up a name. It doesn’t have to be yours, but it makes the mudslinging and namecalling so much easier.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Sorry, forgot to put a name. I was talking to the guy above me, Ferndaleboy.
I really didn’t mean to insult anyone. I just want to know what the guy is talking about.
October 11th, 2007 at 1:29 am
Good. I’ll blame you then. ;)
October 23rd, 2007 at 9:25 pm
get over it, when it goes on sale they rip the tag off and you can buy it. or just give up. that sweater was sold out before you got there big deal, all our clothes pretty much look the same im sure u can find another on just like it. oh and the sizing thing is to make you feel better about yourself. you know what real annoying thing about Abercrombie and Fitch is, all the kids that go in there just to complain about it… well ..then LEAVE, honestly if we can afford to make clothes purely for visual, then we can really affored to not have you as a customer. mmk. so far its worked for the company, when u run a billon dollar company then you can complain.
mk bye
October 24th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Where do all the Aberzombies come from? Do they seriously go home and google their employer, looking to comment on anti-Abercrombie rants?
Janey, do you even READ before posting?
1) I wasn’t shopping for the sweater.
2) If there had been another one like it, my buddy would have bought it. He was, after all, trying really hard to do so.
3) I did leave. Is this not clear? I hadn’t shopped there before. I won’t be shopping there again.
Any fool can run a billion-dollar company. Just start with a two-billion dollar one.
October 25th, 2007 at 7:13 am
kj, I doubt that many of them even read yor article the whole way through. Your rant is justified. Why advertise a sweater when you can’t sell it? (rhetorical question)
I don’t know who fucked it up (corporate, one of the “models”, etc.), but someone needed to put something available up on display.
I wouldn’t go as far as boycotting the whole store because of one shitty experience. I would have nowhere to shop if that were true. Shit, I’ve even had problems shopping at thrift stores like Goodwill at times.
October 26th, 2007 at 7:26 am
I just looked at the date of this article, and I have an idea as to what sweater you’re talking about. I saw it for only 12 dollars, but the only size was XXL. It was probably part of the Ezra Fitch line that didn’t do too well, aside from the cologne, because it was a different concept. I really liked the line though. They were classic pieces. A lot of the Ezra style sort of transitioned into their other store, Ruehl… which I really can’t afford.
October 31st, 2007 at 2:31 pm
I have been a victim of this too….Why alway the only small size and I’m a visual merchandiser who many a time as had to say you know there may be a small on the mannequin let me get it down for you or even worse.
“Can you take that down and check is it a ten?”
“I only put it up there this morning it’s a 14.”
“Can you take it down just to see it looks smaller”
“I’m sure it’s a 14 it just looks smaller because it’s pinned”"
“Hmmm can I just see, it might be a smaller 14 than this one”
“I’ll be back in a second with a ladder”
“Oh it is actually a 14, How about that top over there?”
Here in the EU we have consumer law that saws if it’s on display it has too be for sale
October 31st, 2007 at 9:05 pm
A law! What a great idea!
An EU law is even funnier. Did Brussels impose it on all the member nations?
November 24th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
what a dumbass! i wrk at A&F 5th avenue and you are the exact type of person i hate comming in the store! why cant you simply take the “no” and move on…give it a week or two and there will be more you ass! your lucky it wasnt me cause you would have deffinatly NOT been able to try on the sweater! and as a matter of fact no i am not one of those “cheerfully” fake A&F reps! i am a real person from the bronx ny that does not take sh*t from retared shoppers like you!!
November 24th, 2007 at 9:11 pm
John, lighten up on the roids. Even if you don’t agree with the guy, do your best to be civil.
…And “retared”? “wrk”? Brush up on your English skills, dude. Take the time to think of what you’re going to say, so you don’t make such obvious typos.
November 25th, 2007 at 9:04 am
KJ, I see where your coming from! I’ve worked at Express Women’s as a manager for a while now, and if a customer wants something off the mannequin, I give it to them. Usually there is something similar to replace it with. I don’t see why these “Aberzombies” can’t just admit that, yeah, their policies suck. I can admit that some of our policies and items of clothing aren’t so great. I find it funny how they get so mad! Oh, and John, I think we’ve figured out that you’re not “one of those ‘cheerfully’ fake A&F reps. Your just a “retared” sales person from the “bronx ny” who obviously doesn’t read his poorly written comments before he posts them. Go bak to skool and lern how 2 spel, dumfuk.
December 27th, 2007 at 8:22 am
Maybe this will make you feel a little better. I went shopping there the day before Christmas Eve, and I was kind of an ass hole. I went to the dressing room with 15 things, so the guy had to stand outside the door (His lazy ass wasn’t doing anything.) And I only got one thing out of the 15.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:05 am
Generally the first shipment of a new item doesn’t even come with enough to put on all of the mannequins, much less to sell. And it typically stays on the mannequins long after it is gone for good. If you think it is annoying to shop there, try being the person who has to explain to everyone why they can’t buy it. Its pure corporate policy and it governs all of your consumer experiences. No mere human can hope to fight or understand it. If it is a visual item that isn’t on a mannequin, then just rip the “Owned by Visual Team” tag off an proceed to purchase it.
December 31st, 2007 at 10:56 am
I work at A&F. If you pay close enough attention to the forms you will see that the clothing is fixed VERY tightly. This is a result of the clothing being cut, stapled, and stretched. This is why we don’t sell clothing off the forms (mannequins). The clothing is almost often damaged during the marketing update either when they are applied and or removed from the forms.
December 31st, 2007 at 10:59 am
Oh and for all you people who say A&F sucks-is that why we’re the most successful and well known lifestyle brand in the COUNTRY?
January 2nd, 2008 at 9:03 am
In all fairness Tiffy, Wal-Mart is also the most successful in its field.
Remember, this is coming from a fan of A&F products.
January 4th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Oh, something similar to this story happened to me today, but I didn’t bother complaining. There was a necklace I wanted at Hollister. There were many on display, but only a few bracelets were actually available. The guy told me they weren’t getting them in, and I just checked the website before I went (to compare what was available)… they didn’t have them. I don’t see why he couldn’t just sell me one that was on display. It wasn’t like clothing that’s on display, no stretching, etc. I guess that’s just dumbass policy.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:07 am
wow u guys been going at it for about 3 months…. nice going… i’m a manager in the stock room for one of ur so hated A&F stores …. i’m actually really nice to costumers about those type of problems and knowing what comes in on a daily shipment, i try to give a solution of some sort but sometimes we just run out, either is the end of a season or they just discontinued that one style… most of the times i just sell the visual items so costumers dont complain… unless if it is from the forms bc “it is damaged.” seriously speaking… A&F has been the only place where u have being disappointed? trust me i have gone to lots of stores that people wont even check the back…. and about the grammar pls drop it most of us dont even check it n dont 4get that even our great country its being run by a C average “president” so try not 2 expect much from any of the citizens…. haha just wanted to trow that out there
January 10th, 2008 at 9:13 am
You’re talking as if having a C average president is a good thing lol. If it wasn’t for Cheney puppeteering him, our country would be left in even more shambles. Though, maybe Cheney is partly responsible.
I’m just glad Bush has less than a year. It looks like it will likely be between Clinton or Obama and McCain, candidates I find decent.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:14 am
why do you even shop there if you argue with everything we do…?? it makes no sense if your that unsatisfied shop somewhere else… like we would rather not deal with you to begin with.
January 14th, 2008 at 7:48 am
I’m unsatisfied with everywhere I go to shop in some way or another. Plus, I like the quality of the clothes. I don’t go to the shops for the policies or the people.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
There are far too many “chris”es in this thread. From here on, I’ll refer to you by number.
Chris #65: if you are going to take the time to comment, why not make it clear to whom you are directing your question?
(and in case it isn’t clear by now, I do not shop there.)
January 18th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Since there’s an onslaught of “Chris”es arriving, I’ll change it to ChrisO as to not confuse anyone.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
While I agree that the company policy is a little anal, you seemed to be acting like a 2 year old. It’s just a god damn sweater, learn to pick your fights.
I guess you needed some fodder for an article. I can see you saying to yourself, “Yes muahahaha, I will give these sales associates a hard time about a policy they have nothing to do with and put it in my blog. I’m such an interesting person.”
March 5th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Yes Eckerle. I will cunningly harass these poor salespeople by forcing them to my little postage stamp on the internet, and making them post ridiculous, insulting nonsense in the comment fields.
This is my shack, friend. Coming here and throwing muck is not my picking a fight. It is yours.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Well, I never said you were harassing salespeople on the internet (some of these posters deserve it). I was basically saying that you were being a difficult customer at the store. Why was it worth the trouble? Like I said, my guess is that it was material for your blog.
I’m not trying to pick a fight. I wanted to give you a 3rd person perspective on the matter. Also, I never said you were trying to pick a fight here. Maybe you have mistaken my comments about your article for criticism of your comments about the posters.
March 5th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Eckerle, maybe you have mistaken me for the person purchasing the sweater. As mentioned several times in this comment thread (and clearly in the story itself), I was not the one trying to buy a sweater. I am merely the narrator in this little adventure. To accuse me of staging something for blog fodder is false at best (and disingenuous at worst).
March 6th, 2008 at 9:35 am
Oh, I’m sorry. My mistake. I see where you mentioned that it was a friend of yours. I guess the people commenting threw me off. I’ll admit, I had only skimmed the article. I should’ve read it more thoroughly.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
‘Sokay. Slashdot taught me years ago that nobody reads TFA before commenting.
April 10th, 2008 at 12:26 am
I found reading this very interesting because I recently had a similar experience, but I have another interesting tidbit to add to the lot here. I went into an Abercrombie store to find a present for my boyfriend a few months ago and saw a brown flannel long sleeved shirt that I knew would look awesome on him. However, I couldn’t find anything even remotely like it in the store. When I asked one of the girls working there where it was in the store, she said they never actually sold it. I really liked it so I asked if it could be ordered. The girl had to speak to her manager and relayed to me the message that it had never been “on the floor” and was unavailable on the website. Unsurprisingly, I also could not buy the one on the mannequin. I was pretty frustrated, as you can imagine and thought the girl must just be misinformed or confused. I mean, why would you have it on a mannequin if you don’t sell it AT ALL? It doesn’t make sense. So when I went to pay for my stuff I asked the two guys at the counter why you would have something on the mannequin that the store never sold, even online. What I found out was that apparently there is some sort of exclusive line of Abercrombie clothes that never get sold to the general public. You may see them in commercials or on celebrities, but apparently they are to remind us “regular people” of what we just can’t have. They said that numerous people had asked about the exact same flannel shirt, they thought the whole thing was weird as well and couldn’t fully explain it. I even later saw the same flannel in a commercial, but it’s not for sale and has never been sold by Abercrombie. Bizarre? Conspiracy? Call it what you will. I guess their advertizing works, now I REALLY want that flannel :-)