The case is not about unfair treatment, it is based on California anti-trust law. The supposed purchase of the Birkin was tied-in to products independent of the main product. The plaintiffs were led to believe that if they spend a certain amount, they will be offered a quota bag. I cant remember it on top of my head but it seems like one of them spent 30k+ on other items and still no offer. Not a fan of Hermes but we all know they have the unwritten rule but common practice of pre spend. People may say it's hard to prove that in court but we all know that they do that.
Yes of course but my point was that the lead plaintiffs were motivated to file the lawsuit because of their frustration with the treatment. Their legal grounds were based on the anti-trust violations of tying one product to another, but their emotional motivation was driven by the perceived unfair treatment. I did mention in the video that it would actually not be that hard to uncover this practice because of how widespread the practice is and how it is super transparent / clear that pre-spending is a requirement in Hermes boutiques in certain other countries.
@@TeaTimeinParisbut it shouldn’t be tied to prespend. People should be allowed to walk in store and purchase what they want. These policies are illegal based on a couple of laws and people are tired.
The things is they don’t need to convince a jury they need to give them doubt. So all the lawyers have to do is give a TH-cam search report and a purse forum search report to show that this is an unofficial practice
It's not about fairness, it's about Hermes causing the entire market to increase their prices, for goods that are made a fraction of the cost. Yes. you can say you don't have to buy it, everyone has a choice, but actually they have caused the entire market to do the same which is essentially removing consumer choice. It will all crash at some point and create a huge gap between the rich and the average person. Even if they have not done something unlawful, they have not been ethical or trustworthy.
While i think the Hermes journey or game is complete lunacy. Well i guess luxury companies do want to create that gap. They are basically back padling last decade strategy on making their bags for middle class. Or at the least the two top ones : hermes and chanel. They want the middle class to only be able to buy perfumes, sunglasses and make up. Gucci and YSl are more welcoming to everyone who is willing to pay their prices lol .😅 But i think luxury brands are back padling in promoting their brands to the common costumer. Personally im very happy with my Longchamp lepliage XS. I feel like im wearing a speedy 20 without breaking the bank.
I pray every TH-camr who sided with Hermes loose their followers. They need to get back in touch wit reality and that’s the only way. When their bottom like gets hurt. It’s not just about the Berkin. Every brand wants to be like Hermes and copy their illegal practices of linking products. If nothing is done about Hermes, soon every brand will say “if Hermes can do it, so can I”. And then every hot bag or key token item requires you to buy crap you don’t want for it. And Covid has shown us that everyday items will quickly get priced gauged, so imagine having to buy other stuff just to get toilet paper. This lawsuit has larger reaching ramifications than just your little bag. If you don’t see it, you’re lost.
Of course! I mentioned in the video that customers need not oblige if they don’t like the practice. At the end of the day it is only a handbag. The fact that Hermes can get away with it is because of the enormous demand. If they were to follow the laws of economics they can probably raise the prices of the birkins/kellys significantly to the point that the excess demand no longer exists.
@@tarreemhacaruso2687 I'm saying that the comment isn't necessarily true to the extent of impacting necessities like toilet paper, in the face of legal responsibility and the courts. But yes, luxury brands copying the same practice could naturally be rampant.
This was by far the best video I’ve seen on this issue, you covered so many good points! And you are correct about employees being deposed, I was once for a lawsuit and lawyers are ruthless - they know how to question you to trip you up if you are lying, if it comes to that the truth will come out! Really enjoyed this, thanks for all the info you presented.
Without wishing to offend anyone, I cannot see the value of spending astronomical amounts of money to get this bag. It just isn't that remarkable looking, at least, not so much more so than a Chanel of the equivalent size. If it is just for the prestige or showing off, I am not willing to get on that wheel. We cannot fake who we are. I am not a billionaire and wearing a Birkin would be fooling no one. But, if people have the budget, or adore this bag, I am fine with them doing whatever they can afford to get it. Life is short. I like to indulge my preferences and am happy for others to do the same.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 76 | คู่เอก "ผึ้งหลวง vs สมิงดำ"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9SBshmGQOIM/mqdefault.jpg)
The case is not about unfair treatment, it is based on California anti-trust law. The supposed purchase of the Birkin was tied-in to products independent of the main product. The plaintiffs were led to believe that if they spend a certain amount, they will be offered a quota bag. I cant remember it on top of my head but it seems like one of them spent 30k+ on other items and still no offer. Not a fan of Hermes but we all know they have the unwritten rule but common practice of pre spend. People may say it's hard to prove that in court but we all know that they do that.
Yes of course but my point was that the lead plaintiffs were motivated to file the lawsuit because of their frustration with the treatment. Their legal grounds were based on the anti-trust violations of tying one product to another, but their emotional motivation was driven by the perceived unfair treatment. I did mention in the video that it would actually not be that hard to uncover this practice because of how widespread the practice is and how it is super transparent / clear that pre-spending is a requirement in Hermes boutiques in certain other countries.
@@TeaTimeinParisbut it shouldn’t be tied to prespend. People should be allowed to walk in store and purchase what they want. These policies are illegal based on a couple of laws and people are tired.
The things is they don’t need to convince a jury they need to give them doubt. So all the lawyers have to do is give a TH-cam search report and a purse forum search report to show that this is an unofficial practice
It's not about fairness, it's about Hermes causing the entire market to increase their prices, for goods that are made a fraction of the cost. Yes. you can say you don't have to buy it, everyone has a choice, but actually they have caused the entire market to do the same which is essentially removing consumer choice. It will all crash at some point and create a huge gap between the rich and the average person. Even if they have not done something unlawful, they have not been ethical or trustworthy.
While i think the Hermes journey or game is complete lunacy.
Well i guess luxury companies do want to create that gap.
They are basically back padling last decade strategy on making their bags for middle class.
Or at the least the two top ones : hermes and chanel. They want the middle class to only be able to buy perfumes, sunglasses and make up.
Gucci and YSl are more welcoming to everyone who is willing to pay their prices lol .😅
But i think luxury brands are back padling in promoting their brands to the common costumer.
Personally im very happy with my Longchamp lepliage XS. I feel like im wearing a speedy 20 without breaking the bank.
I pray every TH-camr who sided with Hermes loose their followers. They need to get back in touch wit reality and that’s the only way. When their bottom like gets hurt. It’s not just about the Berkin. Every brand wants to be like Hermes and copy their illegal practices of linking products. If nothing is done about Hermes, soon every brand will say “if Hermes can do it, so can I”. And then every hot bag or key token item requires you to buy crap you don’t want for it. And Covid has shown us that everyday items will quickly get priced gauged, so imagine having to buy other stuff just to get toilet paper. This lawsuit has larger reaching ramifications than just your little bag. If you don’t see it, you’re lost.
Of course! I mentioned in the video that customers need not oblige if they don’t like the practice. At the end of the day it is only a handbag. The fact that Hermes can get away with it is because of the enormous demand. If they were to follow the laws of economics they can probably raise the prices of the birkins/kellys significantly to the point that the excess demand no longer exists.
These folks would have much more basis to sue if it was toilet paper though. There’s a difference between access to necessities and luxuries.
@@sariwangeither way this comment is true. Look at Chanel trying to copy Hermès and hiking their prices to match.
@@tarreemhacaruso2687 I'm saying that the comment isn't necessarily true to the extent of impacting necessities like toilet paper, in the face of legal responsibility and the courts. But yes, luxury brands copying the same practice could naturally be rampant.
This was by far the best video I’ve seen on this issue, you covered so many good points! And you are correct about employees being deposed, I was once for a lawsuit and lawyers are ruthless - they know how to question you to trip you up if you are lying, if it comes to that the truth will come out!
Really enjoyed this, thanks for all the info you presented.
Thank you!
One of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit, already has one Birkin bag. It will be interesting how this lawsuit plays out.
Without wishing to offend anyone, I cannot see the value of spending astronomical amounts of money to get this bag. It just isn't that remarkable looking, at least, not so much more so than a Chanel of the equivalent size. If it is just for the prestige or showing off, I am not willing to get on that wheel. We cannot fake who we are. I am not a billionaire and wearing a Birkin would be fooling no one. But, if people have the budget, or adore this bag, I am fine with them doing whatever they can afford to get it. Life is short. I like to indulge my preferences and am happy for others to do the same.
You are so right about everything you said, let’s wait and see