Abercrombie & Fitch: what the Hell are you thinking?
Girls, ever wish you had more cleavage to show off? Want that sexy look on the beach? Looking for a bikini top that will emphasize your bust?
Also, are you eight years old?
Before you get upset, I’m every bit as grossed out as you are, and I’m not the one positing these questions.
Perennial d-bag clothing company and LFO lyric Abercrombie and Fitch recently unveiled a new item in their Abercrombie Kids catalogue: padded bikini tops for girls as young as 7 and 8 years old. The tops were originally labeled “push-up,” but have since been re-branded as “triangle tops” after numerous complaints and publicy outcry over the company’s attempt to cash in on the sexualization of children that nearly qualify as toddlers.
I can’t emphasize enough that the company’s only reaction was to simply re-name the top rather than take it off the market.
It’s one thing to market sex to teens. Sex has been marketed to teenagers in both subtle and brazen means for decades. There’s a line, however, where questionable marketing descends into pedophilia. That line is well above the age of eight. The fact that such a product so ethically despicable – borderline pedophilia, some would say – could go from conception all the way to the shelf speaks to a culture within the company itself that is, to put it kindly, completely braindead and devoid of rationale.
The only response from the company so far has been to re-name the tops. I’d love to hear from them, so I’ll pose this question both to them and to Kevin Marshall’s Americans (my readers), who can feel free to climb into the heads of A&F execs to answer the following question:
Abercrombie & Fitch: what the Hell are you thinking?
As Abercrombie & Fitch’s effort to reincorporate in Ohio moves toward a vote
As Abercrombie & Fitch’s effort to reincorporate in Ohio moves toward a vote, the company has stopped along the way to spar with a blogger for The New York Times. In a letter to shareholders filed this week with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, company officials offer sharp criticism of opinions expressed by Steven M. Davidoff, who writes the “Deal Professor” blog. The company’s letter, in particular, criticized speculation by
Davidoff that the reincorporation “may be intended to ‘position the company for a management buyout.’” The letter also says the columns contain “factual errors in addition to mischaracterizations of Ohio law and our motivations.” Abercrombie has said it plans to reincorporate in Ohio from Delaware to reduce state tax liability, address certain corporate-governance issues, reinforce its commitment to Ohio and enhance its ability to attract and retain directors. Davidoff has speculated that the move is being made in order to position the compan
y for a management buyout, to allow the board to better defend the company against hostile takeovers or to allow for freer decisions on compensation issues. The proposal “benefits all stockholders,” Abercrombie’s letter says, and points to an assessment by proxy-advisory firm Glass, Lewis & Co., which said that the reincorporation offers “positive changes to shareholders” and that “the positive aspects of the reincorporation greatly outweigh the negative provisions.” Davidoff, a former corporate attorney at Shearman & Sterling, is a professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law. He could not be reached for comment. Abercrombie officials said they could not comment beyond the contents of the letter. One of the possible benefits to Abercrombie is that boards of directors in Ohio have their responsibilities defined by law, while in Delaware, it’s left up to the courts, said John Beavers, a partner at law firm Bricker & Eckler who advises corporate boards, “With all respect to The New York Tim
es, at times I think Eastern states take a provincial view of states like Ohio,” Beavers said. “Sometimes, companies have a tough time convincing institutional investors that corporations should reincorporate in Ohio. They tend to be hesitant. “But the fact is, Ohio law isn’t drastically different from Delaware law – except for the fact that it’s certain. “So the advantage is, if I wanted to become a director at an Ohio corporation, I know what my duties are, it’s not up to a court. In Delaware, it’s left up to a court, on what whim the Delaware courts are on. So the director is sometimes left in jeopardy. “I can retain and attract more good people if they know their duties,” Beavers said. “It will take an act of the legislature to change them, not the whim of a court.” Abercrombie’s special shareholders meeting to decide the reincorporation issue is scheduled for 10a.m. Monday at the company’s headquarters in New Albany.
