Not the same as newsstands

Reader comment on: The Times and H & M's Old Clothes

Submitted by Cinco Jotas (United States), Jan 6, 2010 11:08

Actually the reason newsstands remove the title page of a magazine, or the banner of a newspaper, is to return them to the publisher as evidence of unsold copies, which will then be credited back to the newsstand owner. (Most newspaper are sold on a type of consignment.) Entirely different from what H&M is doing.

Surprised you didn't know this.

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

The Future of Capitalism replies:

I did know this but disagree that is "entirely different." In fact it seems similar -- using a razor blade to degrade an unsold item so that it can't be resold or reused.

Other reader comments on this item

Title By Date
H&M Castoffs [147 words]CarolineJan 8, 2010 10:52
While it is within the companies rights it was stupid. [72 words]LyleJan 7, 2010 17:57
Times and NJ [28 words]John DowdJan 6, 2010 11:26
⇒ Not the same as newsstands
[w/response] [60 words]		Cinco JotasJan 6, 2010 11:08

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Not the same as newsstands by Cinco Jotas

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.