Shopkeeper in Zurich tells Oprah she can't afford a $38,000 handbag

[Dezaad]

How so? Did Oprah say she bought the purse somewhere else?

No. In fact she stated that she would never have spent the money for the purse, and left the impression she does think that 38000 is too much for any purse.

 

[CanadaJohn]

No. In fact she stated that she would never have spent the money for the purse, and left the impression she does think that 38000 is too much for any purse.

So, in effect, the shop clerk was very perceptive and unlike many here who claim she lost a sizable commission, what she actually lost was the hassle of wasting time on a rich, self-important woman, who had no intention of buying, just being served. Maybe the shop clerk has seen this type of shopper frequently and race had zero to do with it.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

This thread is so sad. Kind of ashamed to be a white guy posting here after reading most of the comments.

that's because white people smell like boiled cabbage and old hotdog water~!!!

 

[Infinite Chaos]

So, in effect, the shop clerk was very perceptive and unlike many here who claim she lost a sizable commission, what she actually lost was the hassle of wasting time on a rich, self-important woman, who had no intention of buying, just being served. Maybe the shop clerk has seen this type of shopper frequently and race had zero to do with it.

You're now reading things which aren't there.. the girl says this about treating customers -

“I didn't know who she was when she came into the store. That wouldn't have made any difference if I had.“We work really hard to greet all the people who come into the store with the same level of respect and treat them all equally.
“If someone asks me whether he or she can see an article, I always present these. Because that person is a potential buyer. And my job is to sell it.
“I'm glad if I can sell an article. It is a reward for me, if I can sell a nice piece. This means that I'm good at my job.”
Asked what she would say to Oprah now she added: “I would apologize and say it was all a misunderstanding. I surely did not intentionally want to insult Ms Winfrey. I hope this nightmare ends soon.”

Anyhow - Oprah has apologised for naming Switzerland (she didn't name the store) and the girl would apologise to Oprah.

End of story.

 

[polgara]

So, in effect, the shop clerk was very perceptive and unlike many here who claim she lost a sizable commission, what she actually lost was the hassle of wasting time on a rich, self-important woman, who had no intention of buying, just being served. Maybe the shop clerk has seen this type of shopper frequently and race had zero to do with it.

Good morning, CJ. :2wave:

I hate to think this of Oprah, because she has done a lot for people, but it does appear that she misses the adulation she has had in the past. This was not the way to get it, IMO. Sad... ::no:

 

[Dezaad]

So, in effect, the shop clerk was very perceptive and unlike many here who claim she lost a sizable commission, what she actually lost was the hassle of wasting time on a rich, self-important woman, who had no intention of buying, just being served. Maybe the shop clerk has seen this type of shopper frequently and race had zero to do with it.

Perhaps. But, I am also not sure what really went down, so I wouldn't buy into your assessment. I just was pointing out that Oprah stated that she wasn't interested in spending 38000 on a handbag.

 

[buck]

Seems that "Adrianna" has differing accounts of what happened in the store too... from your links -

"My colleague held the door open for them. They were not even five minutes in our store."

and then - Winfrey "was accompanied by a friend, it might also have been her bodyguard, I don't know. He held the door open for her."

I also love how people have been obviously swayed by photos of Oprah in sweatpants when the reports all speak of Oprah wearing a Donna Karan outfit at the store. The Switzerland photo is of Oprah with her three friends while she specifically says (and repeats time and again in different interviews) that she was by herself at the store.

The only person who can come out of this well is Tom Ford - if I were him, the marketing coup is to sell or donate one of the bags to Oprah.

We are not positive what was meant by that. I actually took it as - and other articles have indicated (see below)- that Adrianne's colleague escorted her to the door and Oprah's friend/bodyguard/whatever, held the door open.

There would be zero reason for Oprah to apoligize if the story were as she described. I don't recall her apologizing to Hermes for calling them racists when they wouldn't let her in because she arrived after they closed.

I still believe that she was simply out promoting a movie about racism, felt the need to provide an example of racism and took the purse story and changed it a bit to make it into an example of racism.

'She looked around the store again but didn't say anything else. Then she went with her companion to the lower floor. My colleague saw them to the door. They were not even in the store for five minutes.'

Oprah Winfrey branded 'a liar' by Swiss sales assistant in racist handbag row | Mail Online

 

[rhinefire]

If you have ever seen Oprah without makeup you would not even let her inside your store.

 

[CanadaJohn]

You're now reading things which aren't there.. the girl says this about treating customers -



Anyhow - Oprah has apologised for naming Switzerland (she didn't name the store) and the girl would apologise to Oprah.

End of story.[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR]

I'm not reading too much into it - this clerk was in the middle of a fake racism **** storm that Oprah cooked up to promote her agenda and of course the store and staff tried to put a brave face on to avoid consumer backlash. Little late for Oprah to be apologizing now that the damage is done. Maybe Oprah's been getting a bit of a backlash as well from people who don't believe her concocted story and are calling her out on it.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Good morning, CJ. :2wave:

I hate to think this of Oprah, because she has done a lot for people, but it does appear that she misses the adulation she has had in the past. This was not the way to get it, IMO. Sad... ::no:

Good morning Lady P - I agree. This was a bit of a publicity ploy to promote her new movie about racism and to get her name back in the news to try to save her floundering vanity play network.

 

[Arcana XV]

I'm really pissed off our Tourism Office actually apologized before they even got all sides of the story. I don't care who she is, or what kind of ****ty movie she's trying to promote, you do not go around calling people racists for no freaking reason whatsoever. No one in Switzerland had a clue who she even was before this went down. Now she's famous for being a dishonest asshole.

 

[Superfly]

You ever notice how, when a band has a new CD coming out, they show up on Jimmy Kimmel, or Jimmy Fallon, or any of those late night shows? Or if there's a new movie coming out, the actors and/or actresses show up making the rounds on the morning shows? I think that's all this is. Publicity for this new movie. You rarely see Oprah on any of the talk shows, because for some reason, they are all intimidated by her.

 

[Dezaad]

Here are my observations:

1. Oprah did imply the shop assistant MIGHT have had a racist motive for refusing to show her the bag. But, she didn't seem definite about it.
2. Oprah's recollection and the shop assistant's recollections are different from one another.
3. Oprah didn't seem in her interview to be aiming to make the shop incident a big deal.
4. The news media, however, did want to make a big deal out of the story.
5. Oprah seems upset about the blow up of the story.
6. Oprah later agreed with the shop assistant in saying she definitely wouldn't have spent that much money. This strikes me as a good natured olive branch, albeit offered by someone who may not yet have fully understood how things are being perceived.
6. The shop owner seems to think the whole thing was a misunderstanding driven partly by language barriers.

Of course, the American populace is more than ready to drink from our media's sickening desire to make controversy out of everything they touch. More than anything, this is souring me on both the media and the public. And, no, I am not an Oprah fan. I have probably seen 2 episodes of her show, and I really don't think about her that much.

I am inclined to believe the shop owner hit the nail on the head. The American public is being led around by the nose by the American media, and both parties to the relationship are disgusting.

 

[Mason66]

Here are my observations:

1. Oprah did imply the shop assistant MIGHT have had a racist motive for refusing to show her the bag. But, she didn't seem definite about it.
2. Oprah's recollection and the shop assistant's recollections are different from one another.
3. Oprah didn't seem in her interview to be aiming to make the shop incident a big deal.
4. The news media, however, did want to make a big deal out of the story.
5. Oprah seems upset about the blow up of the story.
6. Oprah later agreed with the shop assistant in saying she definitely wouldn't have spent that much money. This strikes me as a good natured olive branch, albeit offered by someone who may not yet have fully understood how things are being perceived.
6. The shop owner seems to think the whole thing was a misunderstanding driven partly by language barriers.

Of course, the American populace is more than ready to drink from our media's sickening desire to make controversy out of everything they touch. More than anything, this is souring me on both the media and the public. And, no, I am not an Oprah fan. I have probably seen 2 episodes of her show, and I really don't think about her that much.

I am inclined to believe the shop owner hit the nail on the head. The American public is being led around by the nose by the American media, and both parties to the relationship are disgusting.

If Oprah thought it was no big deal or it shouldn't be a big story, why did she rush to tweat about it?

She knows who her followers are and how they would take this kind of story.

 

[Dezaad]

If Oprah thought it was no big deal or it shouldn't be a big story, why did she rush to tweat about it?

She knows who her followers are and how they would take this kind of story.

You mean this tweet:

Turns out the store clerk did me a favor. Just found out that bag was #38K!!! She was right I was NOT going to buy it," she said in a tweet.
But the OWN network creator didn't stop there: She still had nothing but nice things to say about her time in the Switzerland capital.
"Other than the handbag diss. I had a GREAT time in Zurich. Best spa ever @doldergran. Would love to experience again."

http://www.eonline.com/news/447676/...handbag-diss-in-zurich-find-out-what-she-said

Doesn't sound so bad unless you put the kind of (completely misleading) spin on it that you do. Pathetic.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

We are not positive what was meant by that. I actually took it as - and other articles have indicated (see below)- that Adrianne's colleague escorted her to the door and Oprah's friend/bodyguard/whatever, held the door open.

The inconsistency remains however - one witness (the shop girl) has a story which is not consistent across sources.

There would be zero reason for Oprah to apoligize if the story were as she described. I don't recall her apologizing to Hermes for calling them racists when they wouldn't let her in because she arrived after they closed.

Oprah hasn't (to my knowledge) apologised to the store, to the girl or to the shop owner - she apologised for naming Switzerland as the place and for the story growing so big.

Now the saleslady has hit back, stating: 'I wasn't sure what I should present to her when she came in on the afternoon of Saturday July 20 so I showed her some bags from the Jennifer Aniston collection.
'I explained to her the bags came in different sizes and materials, like I always do.
'She looked at a frame behind me. Far above there was the 35,000 Swiss franc crocodile leather bag.
'I simply told her that it was like the one I held in my hand, only much more expensive, and that I could show her similar bags.
'It is absolutely not true that I declined to show her the bag on racist grounds. I even asked her if she wanted to look at the bag.
'She looked around the store again but didn't say anything else. Then she went with her companion to the lower floor. My colleague saw them to the door. They were not even in the store for five minutes.'
She emphatically denied ever saying to Winfrey: 'You don't want to see this bag. It is too expensive. You cannot afford it.'

So, you walk into a store and ask to see a specific product. The salesperson holds something similar but not the same and says "it's like this only more expensive."
Why should anyone accept that as good service? I go into a store to buy something for my daughter and am told here's something similar instead tells me either a) the assistant is lazy or incompetent or something else.

Are all you defending the girl saying that you would accept that kind of service if it happened to you? I don't believe anyone who says they would accept this.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I'm not reading too much into it

this clerk was in the middle of a fake racism **** storm that Oprah cooked up to promote her agenda and of course the store and staff tried to put a brave face on to avoid consumer backlash. Little late for Oprah to be apologizing now that the damage is done. Maybe Oprah's been getting a bit of a backlash as well from people who don't believe her concocted story and are calling her out on it.

The second part of the post tells me you are reading a lot more into the story than exists.

 

[buck]

The inconsistency remains however - one witness (the shop girl) has a story which is not consistent across sources.

Obviously one of the sources is incorrect in what the shop worker stated..

As it doesn't make sense that she would say "my colleague opened the door for her" and later say "her bodyguard opened the door for her" in the exact same interview, it is far more likely that the other source is accurate with the quote of the colleague escorted her to the door and her bodyguard held the door for her.

Both quotes can not be accurate. Now it's up to you to use common sense to determine which one is more likely to be accurate. Keep in mind, both sources are reporting on the same exact interview with the shop worker.

Oprah hasn't (to my knowledge) apologised to the store, to the girl or to the shop owner - she apologised for naming Switzerland as the place and for the story growing so big.

Just curious, why do you think Oprah is concerned about a story about racism growing so big? Did Oprah have the same concern about the Hermes incident a few years back? If not, I to wonder why the difference reactions to the course the story took.

 

[Mason66]

You mean this tweet:

Oprah Winfrey Tweets Out About the Handbag Diss in Zurich

Doesn't sound so bad unless you put the kind of (completely misleading) spin on it that you do. Pathetic.

What spin did I put on it?

 

[Dezaad]

What spin did I put on it?

If Oprah thought it was no big deal or it shouldn't be a big story, why did she rush to tweat about it?

She knows who her followers are and how they would take this kind of story.

The bolded are all spin attempts. The green text is additional spin, begging the question as to whether she wanted a story to even arise surround the shop experience specifically. There was not necessarily "This kind of story" in her mind at the time she tweeted.

She may not have rushed to do anything. Her followers are not making the controversy, the media is. She may not have yet perceived how this was being perceived by the public.

All your speculation is slanted against her. That is pretty much the definition of spin.

 

[Mason66]

The bolded are all spin attempts. The green text is additional spin, begging the question as to whether she wanted a story to even arise surround the shop experience specifically. There was not necessarily "This kind of story" in her mind at the time she tweeted.

She may not have rushed to do anything. Her followers are not making the controversy, the media is. She may not have yet perceived how this was being perceived by the public.

All your speculation is slanted against her. That is pretty much the definition of spin.

You don't think every media outlet in the world are her followers too? Of course they are.

 

[Dezaad]

You don't think every media outlet in the world are her followers too? Of course they are.

Ok, but then it falls back under the way she seemed to perceive the story herself when she very first told it. It wasn't told in a manner where she indicated that it was particularly controversial... just a story about an encounter. If I had been listening to the interview, I would have reacted like "ho hum another story of people making assumptions", which is exactly the way she told it. I didn't get the impression AT ALL that she felt it was certainly due to race, just maybe. The only thing she felt sure of is that she was dissed, for whatever reason, and she has stuck to that.

Then as the controversy started to brew, she tweeted. I perceive the tweet as jokingly told, and an attempt to lighten the issue, not deepen it. It is like she didn't know until the issue started to swirl that the bag was 35000, and she was reacting to that and using it to try and defuse any possible situation that might be arising. What she didn't understand yet is that the media's "make a mountain out of a molehill" machine was already in full swing, and that anything not carefully crafted was going to be criticized.

Just an incredibly DUMB controversy. But people are now invested so heavily in it emotionally, they'll never admit its insignificance now.

 

[Mason66]

Ok, but then it falls back under the way she seemed to perceive the story herself when she very first told it. It wasn't told in a manner where she indicated that it was particularly controversial... just a story about an encounter. If I had been listening to the interview, I would have reacted like "ho hum another story of people making assumptions", which is exactly the way she told it. I didn't get the impression AT ALL that she felt it was certainly due to race, just maybe. The only thing she felt sure of is that she was dissed, for whatever reason, and she has stuck to that.

Then as the controversy started to brew, she tweeted. I perceive the tweet as jokingly told, and an attempt to lighten the issue, not deepen it. It is like she didn't know until the issue started to swirl that the bag was 35000, and she was reacting to that and using it to try and defuse any possible situation that might be arising. What she didn't understand yet is that the media's "make a mountain out of a molehill" machine was already in full swing, and that anything not carefully crafted was going to be criticized.

Just an incredibly DUMB controversy. But people are now invested so heavily in it emotionally, they'll never admit its insignificance now.

You don't think Oprah knows it is a big story that she was "dissed" in a store in another country? You don't think she knew it would be picked up by the media?

It was obviously important enough for her to tweat about. She should have known it would have blown up like it did as the story was the richest woman inthe world wasn't allowed to touch a purse because of the Price, then throw in the people that see race in everything and you have a big story.

Don't for one minute think that she didn't know what was going to happen. This is her life.

 

[Dezaad]

You don't think Oprah knows it is a big story that she was "dissed" in a store in another country? You don't think she knew it would be picked up by the media?

It was obviously important enough for her to tweat about. She should have known it would have blown up like it did as the story was the richest woman inthe world wasn't allowed to touch a purse because of the Price, then throw in the people that see race in everything and you have a big story.

Don't for one minute think that she didn't know what was going to happen. This is her life.

Except that she seems to be going to pains to make it not a big story or to tamp it down now. But, of course everyone is treating that like its because she sees her own blood in the water.

And no, I don't think celebrities always know how things will be perceived and picked up on. They make missteps all the time. Even the claim that she is backpedalling is a claim that she supposedly miscalculated. So, she didn't miscalculate when she 'broke' the story that it would be big, but she DID miscalculate that she would be criticized. Nice set of speculations there that neatly and conveniently make her into a pariah, all to sate your appetite.

Whatever.

 

[Mason66]

Except that she seems to be going to pains to make it not a big story or to tamp it down now. But, of course everyone is treating that like its because she sees her own blood in the water.

And no, I don't think celebrities always know how things will be perceived and picked up on. They make missteps all the time. Even the claim that she is backpedalling is a claim that she supposedly miscalculated. So, she didn't miscalculate when she 'broke' the story that it would be big, but she DID miscalculate that she would be criticized. Nice set of speculations there that neatly and conveniently make her into a pariah, all to sate your appetite.

Whatever.

Do you think she got to be the richest woman in the world by no knowing the consequences of her actions?

Don't sell her short.