Welcome to Over50sForum! The site for people over 50 to chat, make friends, discuss, share, and generally be part of something that's fun and friendly :)
No they don't want to lower the exclusivity profile of the product by selling them off cheaply, or let them fall into discounter's hands.
If they are that good, why not just limit production ?
The only advantge is somebody is getting a wage for making the surplus stock. The boast they are disposing them enviromentally friendly forgets the enviromental production costs in the first place.
I wonder how much the 90 million really would be without the designer name and mark up?
I have bought big name clothes in House of Fraser for a small price in relation to their original price.
It makes you wonder how much it cost them to make the clothes in the first place. There must still be profit in the clothes sold at rock bottom prices?
I have never really liked Burberry products anyway and I don't supposed it helped their image when the chav celebs started buying their stuff. Burning them is a good idea imo.
I expect the seamstresses and tailors who made these garments were thrilled to bits seeing their work destroyed.
These garments could have all been recycled
just shows how much profit they make at inflated retail prices