Sartoriani - ASA bespoke ruling

[troutonthefly]

ps could the OP or a moderator kindly modify the title of the thread to include the name "Sartoriani" so that this thread will be easier to find in a Google search.

Fine idea Sator. Duly noted and corrected.
Trout

[Sator]

Here is another article which provides some more details about this scandalous decision by the ASA:

http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.c ... =417&f=416

It states that the complaint against Sartoriani was anonymous and did not come from the Savile Row Association as previously reported. It appears they hired a lawyer to defend the flagrant abuse of the term to mislead the public. It makes one wonder how much money they paid to the FTA to obtain their favourable decision.

This blog at the Independent expresses some sympathy for the artisans at Savile Row:

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/independ ... index.html

[Sator]

I would also like to draw everyone's attention to this thread as well:

http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru ... hp?t=82881

There was a parallel thread that came up third on a Google search of "Sartoriani" on a consumer website to which the OP cross posted, but which overnight has vanished - evidently deleted on the OP's request. The OP was complaining about the terrible service her fiancee had received. After it was pointed out that the above thread was showing up prominently on a Google search, Sartoriani promised to make good on the proviso that the OP delete the offending thread, which was harming their business.

Sartoriani obviously will gladly pay for favourable judgements and to hush up any complaints made against them. Very unscrupulous.

Here is another article, this time quoting Sartoriani as calling the ASA decision a "victory for affordable luxury". Buy "platinum", get "stainless steel" - that's "affordable luxury"???

[Frog in Suit]

This blog at the Independent expresses some sympathy for the artisans at Savile Row:

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/independ ... index.html

Done.

Frog in Suit

[Costi]

As consumers, I believe we must help our artisans, by demanding our rights. We cannot leave them to fight the battle alone. If something is advertised as platinum, it should be platinum and not silver or stainless steel. Just saying that "everyone does the same thing" shouldn't be good enough. We should call misleading advertising what it is.

While I have no sympathy for Sartoriani, I think they are relatively unimportant in the equation: they just happened to be the ones whose abusive advertising was challenged by whoever did it (if not directly by the Saville Row Association). They are not alone in doing this, which is not an excuse for doing it. But what preoccupies me is not so much the deceiving advertiser (they will alwas exist and always try), it is the ruling authority that says it's allright. The battle to be fought is with the ASA in my view, not with Sartoriani or others of their kind. That was my point, and not that we should leave things as they are.

[Frog in Suit]

I have left a reponse on the Independent 's blog.

The ASA site seems to be asking for reactions to specific adverts, not to their own rulings. May I reasonably suspect that they do NOT want to receive negative reactions to the expressions of their infinite wisdom and fairness?

QUOTE from the ASA's web site:
The Advertising Standards Authority is the independent body set up by the advertising industry to police the rules laid down in the advertising codes. The strength of the self-regulatory system lies in both the independence of the ASA and the support and commitment of the advertising industry, through the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP), to the standards of the codes, protecting consumers and creating a level playing field for advertisers.
END QUOTE

How can an institution be both self-regulating and independent? As to the protection of the consumer, could anyone explain how muddying the waters between true bespoke and MTM fulfills that objective?

Definition (mine): A level-playing field for advertisers: one in which the biggest spenders get the most space or air time. SR firms notoriously do not advertise.

Frog in Suit

[Bishop of Briggs]

We could report the ASA to itself because it is fails to meet its own advertised objectives, i.e. upholding advertising standards.

[ethandesu]

A little off topic her - but how would you class shirts that are pattern made to indvidual measurements, but machine made? I have both hand stitched off the peg, and machine stitched made to measure, and as far as shirting ges, it is the machine made I would most likely term Bespoke.

Ethandesu

[Sator]

A little off topic her - but how would you class shirts that are pattern made to indvidual measurements, but machine made? I have both hand stitched off the peg, and machine stitched made to measure, and as far as shirting ges, it is the machine made I would most likely term Bespoke.

Ethandesu

Yes, we are in agreement here.

See replies by Dopey and myself above for details.

[Costi]

We could report the ASA to itself because it is fails to meet its own advertised objectives, i.e. upholding advertising standards.

Ha! That would be a fully deserved moral slap. Worth doing for art's sake, because I imagine they won't take it seriously.
I wonder if they made an expertise before making their decision, like any court of law would order: I don't expect ASA judges to be omniscient. I wonder if any legal action could be taken against the ASA's decision and by whom.

[G.S.Tailor]

I was interviewed by the BBC yesterday about this situation, please click on the link.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7463790.stm

[Sator]

I wonder if they made an expertise before making their decision, like any court of law would order: I don't expect ASA judges to be omniscient. I wonder if any legal action could be taken against the ASA's decision and by whom.

This Sartoriani scandal is being reported all around the world. All journalists are unanimously sympathetic towards Savile Row, as we are.

Germany:
http://www.fuldaerzeitung.de/newsroom/w ... 161,619435

Switzerland:
http://www.fashionjob.ch/news/news.php?id=34599

Argentina:
http://www.26noticias.com.ar/el-fin-del ... 68700.html

Italy:
http://marconiada.blog.ilsole24ore.com/ ... -savi.html

In France, the term haute couture (literally: high tailoring) is protected by law. A couture house must fulfil certain requirements before they can use this designation:
http://www.fashion-era.com/haute_couture.htm

And from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haute_couture
In France, the term haute couture is protected by law and is defined by the Chambre de commerce et d'industrie de Paris based in Paris, France. Their rules state that only "those companies mentioned on the list drawn up each year by a commission domiciled at the Ministry for Industry are entitled to avail themselves" of the label haute couture. The criteria for haute couture were established in 1945 and updated in 1992.

To earn the right to call itself a couture house and to use the term haute couture in its advertising and any other way, members of the Chambre syndicale de la haute couture must follow these rules:

* Design made-to-order for private clients, with one or more fittings.
* Have a workshop (atelier) in Paris that employs at least fifteen people full-time.
* Each season (i.e., twice a year), present a collection to the Paris press, comprising at least thirty-five runs with outfits for both daytime wear and evening wear.

I imagine that the consensus here is that the term bespoke requires similar legal protection, just as the terms Champagne with wines and Glashütte with high end watches enjoys legal protection.

I guess part of the difference is that the French value their traditions and culture. They are famous for being very protective of it and even ban the use in print of slang terms imported from English. The English, by the looks it, would sell the crown jewels to the Chinese or Russian Mafia if they paid enough. What a shame, for the lounge suit (along with the dress coat, morning coat and dinner jacket) is actually a form of English national dress that has been adopted worldwide.

[G.S.Tailor]

The whole situation is a joke, i'm just waiting for one of the big British department stores to jump on the bandwagon with their new "bespoke" suits.

[Sator]

I don't see any reason why the situation can't be turned around. It took court action before the use of the term Glashütte became legally protected. Until then companies were putting Glashütte on watches with imported ETA movements.

I quote from this site:
http://www.glashuette.com/en/faq.html

Is the name Glashütte protected?
Yes, it is. Not every company located in Glashütte may use Glashütte on its watches. After several sets of lawsuits, which were initially also directed against NOMOS, only those companies are entitled to use the town's name who create more than 50 percent of their movements' value in and around Glashütte. This court ruling serves everyone: it secures job in the town of Glashütte and guarantees you, the customer, the highest horological quality, to which we are bound by tradition. Today, NOMOS designs, develops, and manufactures its own movements in Glashütte.

I think there was similar court action taken to protect the use of the name Champagne.

[dopey]

Mr. Souster:
I read the interview and your comments. Something you said there reminded me of a subject that has been bouncing around here and elsewhere and I hope you would comment on it. In the article, you said:

The best way to describe bespoke is the cutting and fitting of a suit which is done on the premises. It's not just shopping, it's a whole experience. . .

You build the suit through the fittings.

Clearly, the vast number of Savile Row tailors who travel to far-flung locales like Chicago would take issue with your saying what they are selling is not bespoke because the fitting is taking place in a hotel room rather than the premises. I am not sure where you come out on that, but as long as the fitter knows what he is doing, I don't see why the location is important. In any case, I don't think that is a particularly interesting subject.

More interesting is your second comment: "You build the suit through the fittings." You clearly seem to contemplate more than one fitting and that has been my experience with using local tailors.
On the other hand, almost all the traveling tailors either start with or rapidly move to a single forward fitting with their non-local customers. A&S, and I believe most of their diaspora like Mahon, DeBoise and Hitchcock, use only a forward fitting for their local customers as well.

How do you view the "forward fitting only" practice? Is that what you do? Do you think it is a compromise? Do you think a skilled cutter can draft a pattern that can skip a skeleton baste? Are bastes needed only for the first suit?