Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-11-2017, 04:26 AM
 
Location: NJ/NY
18,423 posts, read 15,165,447 times
Reputation: 14288

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
This means nothing.

So you sell 100 units of something -- and that's the most you have ever sold...next month you sell 105 -- guess what -- that's record breaking -- lololol.
Except if you actually read the article instead of just the headline, you would have known that sales were up like 340%, not 5% as you have shown with your example.

Also of note, I just saw on TV that Ivanka's line of perfume is now the number one selling perfume on Amazon.

Maybe if Chelsea Clinton comes out with a product, conservatives should boycott it. No, conservatives are smart enough to know that the other half of the country will buy the stuff BECAUSE of the boycott, and she will have record sales.

You would think after all the times these boycotts backfired on liberals, they would have learned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-11-2017, 04:37 AM
 
Location: Twin Falls Idaho
4,996 posts, read 2,432,227 times
Reputation: 2540
So..yes...Ivanka's line is selling...on-line--where Trump supporters are heeding the dog whistle and buying--which begs the question...if this is in direct response to KellyAnne's call to buy....did she violate the law in doing so?

https://a.msn.com/r/2/AAo7jTa?m=en-us
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 04:48 AM
 
Location: NJ/NY
18,423 posts, read 15,165,447 times
Reputation: 14288
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilEyeFleegle View Post
So..yes...Ivanka's line is selling...on-line--where Trump supporters are heeding the dog whistle and buying--which begs the question...if this is in direct response to KellyAnne's call to buy....did she violate the law in doing so?

https://a.msn.com/r/2/AAo7jTa?m=en-us
I think it's pretty funny that you guys think that Kellyanne's endorsement is somehow a more powerful motivator than the boycott. LOL.

Actually, it's so ludicrous when you think about it, I don't think you guys really believe that.

Kellyanne's endorsement was unnecessary, and she should be disciplined for it. Period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 04:55 AM
 
12,905 posts, read 15,602,532 times
Reputation: 9392
Good for Ivanka Trump. If her line continues with to bump up in sales, then it proves that people got to see her clothing and liked it. I have one or two "pieces" from her line. They are fine. I got them at Marshall's. I can certainly understand why a store like Nordstrom chose to drop the line. They have a much more discerning buyer base when it comes to clothing. I mean, I LOVE clothes shopping and what they sell at Nordstrom is mostly kind of to avant garde for me on many of their lines. Ivanka's line was more basic and once it infiltrated the discounters, it probably wouldn't be in favor with the typical Nordstrom shopper. I still don't believe Nordstrom dropped her for political reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 05:36 AM
 
Location: NJ/NY
18,423 posts, read 15,165,447 times
Reputation: 14288
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
Good for Ivanka Trump. If her line continues with to bump up in sales, then it proves that people got to see her clothing and liked it. I have one or two "pieces" from her line. They are fine. I got them at Marshall's. I can certainly understand why a store like Nordstrom chose to drop the line. They have a much more discerning buyer base when it comes to clothing. I mean, I LOVE clothes shopping and what they sell at Nordstrom is mostly kind of to avant garde for me on many of their lines. Ivanka's line was more basic and once it infiltrated the discounters, it probably wouldn't be in favor with the typical Nordstrom shopper. I still don't believe Nordstrom dropped her for political reasons.
I think political reasons played a role, but that is not the whole story. And I don't think Nordstrom was making an anti Trump statement. I think it is more likely that they didn't want to play any part in the controversy, but the way they handled it backfired on them a little.

And I agree that her stuff should probably be targeted toward the masses. Unless you gained your fame from the creation of luxury items, it is very difficult to use ones celebrity to sell exclusive items. First of all, if you gained popularity in some other way, then clearly, the luxury item is not your primary focus. When people buy luxury items, they spend more because of the craftsmanship and attention to details. Someone who has lived for fashion their entire life and has no greater passion for anything else, is much more likely to create items that have that attention to detail. I don't know fashion at all, but I know what I like and what I don't. If I'm going to spend thousands of dollars on a suit, I have to notice the difference between it, and every other suit I see on the street.

A celebrity line of clothes is usually made by someone else, and they just slap the celebrity name on it and sell it to the masses. Ivanka's line is no different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 05:39 AM
 
9,613 posts, read 6,888,452 times
Reputation: 6842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
Good for her. That is is her job. Glad her business is doing well.

Why doesn't she concentrate on her business and stop proposing legislation and injecting herself into the government?
Careful what you wish for. She's by far the most liberal advisor to Trump. Without her you're getting pure unfiltered Bannon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 02:01 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,184 posts, read 22,231,053 times
Reputation: 23813
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD View Post
I think it's pretty funny that you guys think that Kellyanne's endorsement is somehow a more powerful motivator than the boycott. LOL.

Actually, it's so ludicrous when you think about it, I don't think you guys really believe that.

Kellyanne's endorsement was unnecessary, and she should be disciplined for it. Period.
It was more powerful to the Trumpettes who obviously heeded Conway's call to "Go but Ivanka's stuff."

There is not other logical explanation why a line that was a complete flop for a year suddenly went through the roof a day after Conway's statement.

What else would turn a line no one wanted into a sellout overnight? It's not like the clothes had been hanging on the racks for a full year.

The dresses may have been purchased, but they won't be worn. If I thought they were ugly and frumpy looking, I'm sure the women to bought them think so too, and bought out of loyalty to Trump only.

And it is a federal offense to use one's office for promoting one's products. Conway really stepped over a big legal line, whether she realized it or not, and as an attorney, she likely knew full well what she was doing.

Has she gotten away with it? Only for the time being. Washington D.C. has an elephant's memory. Conway is expendable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 02:47 PM
 
Location: NJ/NY
18,423 posts, read 15,165,447 times
Reputation: 14288
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
It was more powerful to the Trumpettes who obviously heeded Conway's call to "Go but Ivanka's stuff."

There is not other logical explanation why a line that was a complete flop for a year suddenly went through the roof a day after Conway's statement.

What else would turn a line no one wanted into a sellout overnight? It's not like the clothes had been hanging on the racks for a full year.

The dresses may have been purchased, but they won't be worn. If I thought they were ugly and frumpy looking, I'm sure the women to bought them think so too, and bought out of loyalty to Trump only.

And it is a federal offense to use one's office for promoting one's products. Conway really stepped over a big legal line, whether she realized it or not, and as an attorney, she likely knew full well what she was doing.

Has she gotten away with it? Only for the time being. Washington D.C. has an elephant's memory. Conway is expendable.
It's not like her endorsement was out of left field. It came at the height of the news cycle about the boycott. That is the only reason the buying coincides, but it isn't coinciding with her endorsement. It is coinciding with the much bigger news of the boycott.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 04:15 PM
 
Location: La lune et les étoiles
18,258 posts, read 22,478,051 times
Reputation: 19593
I am a confirmed Trump hater AND a confessed shopaholic. I happen to own two pairs of Ivanka Trump's shoes. I purchased them AFTER her bonehead father announced his run for the WH. The truth is that the quality of her products is not great or even good. (I posted about this on the Fashion & Beauty forum).


I purchased my Ivanka Trump shoes at a very deep discount.....and they were still over priced for the quality. The leather is very thin and the shoes are simply not very well constructed. If I had paid full retail I definitely would have returned them.


What I find interesting is that the Trump lemmings are taking the failure of Ivanka's lines personally. And I trust that those who are suddenly rushing to buy her products as a show of support will not be repeat buyers (who actually sustain the longevity of a designer's line). Why weren't those people buying Ivanka's line BEFORE the infamous Trump tweet?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top