Offline
Spicer: Nordstrom Dropping Ivanka Trump's Line Is 'Direct Attack' On Prez
[img] ,fl_keep_iptc,g_face,w_653,h_361/l9oeerpkgapf7slp9qj1.jpg[/img]
White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Wednesday that Nordstrom's decision to stop carrying Ivanka Trump's clothing and accessories line is an attack on the president's policies and his daughter.
Spicer told reporters during his daily press briefing that the decision -- which Nordstrom said was a result of poor sales, not politics -- was because of the clothing company's displeasure with President Donald Trump's executive orders and his policies.
"I think this is less about his family's business and an attack on his daughter," Spicer said. "He ran for president. He won. He's leading this country. I think for people to take out their concern about his actions or his executive orders on members of his family, he has every right to stand up for his family and applaud their business activities, their success."
Offline
We are paying the salaries of these people.
Offline
Now Donald Jr. has gotten into this childish mess.
Shiny objects.
panem et circenses
I weep for the country.
.Donald Trump Jr.@DonaldJTrumpJr
Women Nationwide Cut Up Nordstrom’s Cards, Plan Boycotts After Political Decision to Drop Ivanka Trump Line breitbart.com/big-government5:54 PM - 8 Feb 2017
Last edited by Goose (2/09/2017 7:34 am)
Offline
Hey, Donnie jr., it was a freakin' business decision you bozo! I'm sure if Ivanka's crap was flying out the door, Nordstrom's wouldn't have dumped the brand. Once again, I'm pissed because you think I'm a chump and I'd believe your story.
Offline
I've read that sales of her products went up in 2016 over 2015, so if true, that means it wasn't a business decision based on sales. More like they buckled under pressure from anti-Trump zealots.
Offline
Tim15856 wrote:
I've read that sales of her products went up in 2016 over 2015, so if true, that means it wasn't a business decision based on sales. More like they buckled under pressure from anti-Trump zealots.
Actually, the company says that the merchandise wasn't moving.
But, the larger issue,,,,, you really think that the White House press secretary should now get into this along with the President?
Don't they have a country to run?
Offline
Truth be told, I kinda feel for Ivanka. By all accounts, she's a good egg and certainly has a more mainstream worldview than her father.
But let's get real. The Trump name, more than anything, is a brand. The brand is hurt, due partly to the policies Donald Trump is trying to institute, more due to his more outrageous statements over the past month, and mostly because of the unpredictability of his policies and his statements.
There are lots of clothing designers that want to get into Nordstroms. Ivanka likely got into Nordstroms because of the Trump name. It makes sense that Nordstroms would want to step away from the Trump name right now. The people that run Nordstrom's aren't going to put the entire company at risk to sell one individual brand.
Offline
That THIS even deserves National attention LET ALONE tweets from a POTUS is ridiculous !
LMAO !
Offline
I've read that sales of her products went up in 2016 over 2015, so if true, that means it wasn't a business decision based on sales. More like they buckled under pressure from anti-Trump zealots. - Tim
I don't know where your information came from, Tim, but I'll take your word that it's true for now. Anyway, as a business owner myself, I can't look at this in the same way. Suppose the sales went up from 2015 to 2016, but that doesn't tell me how good the sales were in the first place. There may have been several other brands that started higher and continued to rise, or maybe started lower and gained momentum over a year or two.
For example, I may have an artist in the gallery that sold 5 paintings in 2015 and then 7 paintings in 2016. I have to evaluate whether or not we want to continue to represent that artist in 2017 based on other factors and especially comparing those sales to other artists over the same period of time. It's just business. Things like wall space, gallery income from art sales from that artist, etc. play a part in the decision-making process. The bottomline is business viability is the single most important factor, and whether I personally like the artist and their work can't get in the way. It's not easy to terminate a relationship with someone I really liked, but we're running a business, not a museum.
I hope I explained this enough for you to consider another point-of-view from the business, not the personal side of things.
Last edited by Just Fred (2/09/2017 9:20 am)
Offline
Tim15856 wrote:
I've read that sales of her products went up in 2016 over 2015, so if true, that means it wasn't a business decision based on sales. More like they buckled under pressure from anti-Trump zealots.
Would mind sharing your sources?
The company says that sales were down.
Over the past year, and particularly in the last half of 2016, sales of the brand have steadily declined to the point where it didn’t make good business sense for us to continue with the line for now.
Last edited by Goose (2/09/2017 10:24 am)