Dear Michael Jeffries,
In light of the recent comments you've made as to the type of clientele you wish to attract, I have found myself motivated to initiate a correspondence with you. I can't say that I was completely surprised to hear that your company openly discriminates based on size due to its history with institutionalized racism (U.S. Employment Equal Opportunity Commission). However, there are still a few things that I would like to say.
In light of the recent comments you've made as to the type of clientele you wish to attract, I have found myself motivated to initiate a correspondence with you. I can't say that I was completely surprised to hear that your company openly discriminates based on size due to its history with institutionalized racism (U.S. Employment Equal Opportunity Commission). However, there are still a few things that I would like to say.
While I'm sure you've received a number of emails, letters, and phone calls decrying your statements based on ethics, I'm not going to do that. Instead, I will lay out for you my criticisms from an economic standpoint focusing on the American woman consumer (although it should be noted that men are affected as well). In other words, analyzing the effect of alienating women who do not into a size 10 dress or size 12 pants, the largest size your company carries for women (A&F Website).
The problem lies in the numbers: The average American woman wears a size 14 and cannot shop at your store since you do not carry "plus-sized" clothing, so that leaves you with less than 50% of the population (The Chicago Tribune). Since a large percentage (Business Week) of your customers are children and teens, they most likely need adults to help finance clothing purchases. Alas, since many of these adults are the very people you discriminate against, it is probable that they will purchase their children's clothing elsewhere.
Even so, not every parent will fall into the category of "plus-sized," and some will undoubtedly continue to make purchases from your company. Additionally, it would be a glaring omission to fail to acknowledge the young people who will use their spending money to buy your clothes. In other words, your statements about the "cool kids" (CBS Los Angeles) will not likely lead to bankruptcy in the near future.
It is likely however, that you will feel the economic repercussions of your words. Statistically speaking, if 50% of U.S. women fit into the category of "plus-sized," it would not be a stretch to say that more than 50% of the general population either is "plus-sized" or has a loved one who is. This a potential 150 million people (U.S. Census) who may now boycott Abercrombie & Fitch on behalf of themselves or in solidarity with those who are not "cool." To rephrase, let's say that since the average American spends over $1,600 on apparel per year (Bureau of Labor Statistics), that only 50 of those dollars are spent at A&F. That's $7.5 billion a year that your company could now be missing out on due to your sizeist (Oxford English Dictionary) comments. These are conservative estimates and don't even include those who boycott A&F based on its racist history or questionable manufacturing practices (International Labor Rights Forum).
I hope that you can see how your disdain for people based on their size can and will actually lead to the public's disdain for your company. And mutual disdain is not going to lead to greater revenue.
Sincerely,
Brittany Hopkins
The problem lies in the numbers: The average American woman wears a size 14 and cannot shop at your store since you do not carry "plus-sized" clothing, so that leaves you with less than 50% of the population (The Chicago Tribune). Since a large percentage (Business Week) of your customers are children and teens, they most likely need adults to help finance clothing purchases. Alas, since many of these adults are the very people you discriminate against, it is probable that they will purchase their children's clothing elsewhere.
Even so, not every parent will fall into the category of "plus-sized," and some will undoubtedly continue to make purchases from your company. Additionally, it would be a glaring omission to fail to acknowledge the young people who will use their spending money to buy your clothes. In other words, your statements about the "cool kids" (CBS Los Angeles) will not likely lead to bankruptcy in the near future.
It is likely however, that you will feel the economic repercussions of your words. Statistically speaking, if 50% of U.S. women fit into the category of "plus-sized," it would not be a stretch to say that more than 50% of the general population either is "plus-sized" or has a loved one who is. This a potential 150 million people (U.S. Census) who may now boycott Abercrombie & Fitch on behalf of themselves or in solidarity with those who are not "cool." To rephrase, let's say that since the average American spends over $1,600 on apparel per year (Bureau of Labor Statistics), that only 50 of those dollars are spent at A&F. That's $7.5 billion a year that your company could now be missing out on due to your sizeist (Oxford English Dictionary) comments. These are conservative estimates and don't even include those who boycott A&F based on its racist history or questionable manufacturing practices (International Labor Rights Forum).
I hope that you can see how your disdain for people based on their size can and will actually lead to the public's disdain for your company. And mutual disdain is not going to lead to greater revenue.
Sincerely,
Brittany Hopkins
RSS Feed