Editorial: H&M's fashion travesty

garments themselves or squeeze a profit out of them when they sold them
on.

This spectacle was witnessed by TV crews across the country, who had
risen early to record it - which is curious, as the company itself
claims to have been surprised by the speed at which the clothing left
the stores.

Even more curious, although not uncommon at this time of year, is the
misplaced smugness of those companies that do have a sell-out product on
their hands. At the moment those include H&M and Sony, whose planned
advertising campaign for the PSP handheld console is no longer required,
as there is no product remaining. Other examples will undoubtedly emerge
over the coming weeks - Christmas just wouldn't be Christmas without a
shortage of Teletubbies, Furbies, Buzz Lightyears, Tracy Island
toys ... every year there's another must-have gift that many people will
not get. It does not have to be that way.

While it is undoubtedly better to sell everything you have than to be
left with unwanted and unsaleable stock, it would be better still to
keep selling what you do have than to be unable to sell what you do
not.

The situation would be far less unpalatable if those involved were to
put their hands up and admit they had got it wrong and failed to
accurately forecast demand, or at the very least shift the blame to the
factories for the limited supply. Instead, sell-outs are unquestioningly
presented as successes by the mainstream media, hoodwinked into
believing that having thousands of disappointed customers is evidence
that a company is doing well.

The role of eBay in market correction is not yet a well-documented one,
but in the case of McCartney-H&M it is possible to quantify just how
wrong both brands got it by looking at the volume of product being
traded on the site at a considerable mark-up to the retail price. Not
only did H&M not produce enough garments, it also sold them at too low a
price, compounding the hit it has taken on potential profit.

Now, Stella McCartney and H&M may defend their position by pointing out
that the original intention was to bring McCartney clothing within the
reach of ordinary people; besides, H&M trades within a certain price
bracket and selling beyond those boundaries would be contrary to
customers' expectations of the brand. Yet it is those ordinary people
who have ripped such idealism to threads, turning themselves into
intermediaries in the process.

The episode raises the question of just how smart fast fashion is. The
principle of being able to react at the same speed as a fickle fashion
market is a good one, yet it is the polar opposite of having a surplus
of outdated clothing, rather than a happy medium.

Once again the clothing retail market has, temporarily we hope, fooled
observers into believing that having insufficient stock is a strategy,
rather than a fashion mistake.