The fall of Boohoo won’t make an impact, because it says more about the unconscious consumer, than it does the comatose Founders.
A company which uploads over 120 products per day to their website, and is modelled on a Gen Z demographic, which has little understanding of landfill and even less of the circular economy, surely cannot claim they were blindsided by their straightforward supply chain.
The brand shouldn’t survive long term, with its fickle consumers, giddy on the idea of a £1 bikini and a fingering by some bins on the Strip. The new consumerism is a conscious one, and slavery, minimum pay and poor conditions shouldn’t be tolerated in an industry where customers care more about being seen to support a cause, than actually supporting it. In fact, they are likely the same thing. They are a noisy demographic, leveraging the low barrier to entry for opinions catapulted by the shouty lubricant that is social media. The worst of them, the reality television stars, misguided by their failed, talentless Agents, masquerading as deal brokers, create large scale influence as their half baked comments are collected by hungry media. Their measure of success is based on tomorrows chip wrap. Much like the influencer honey trap of Fyre Island, or the music festival in Saudi Arabia, everyone has a price. Five quid for a party dress isn’t much, but it’s enough to buy a little more time for this textile super-family. Indeed, a £150 million bonus can’t do anything other than make blindness more attractive than 2020.
The incentive scheme announced on Friday will run for three years to June 2023 and will pay out in full if the groups market capitalisation hits £7.55bn, a rise of two-thirds from its current level and the equivalent of 600p a share.
Negligence never has been a profound defence, and, it is highly unlikely the Founders didn’t realise what was going on in their supply chain. Rather, they made a choice that profit was more important than personnel. A thankless and unaccountable consumer should not be afforded the assumption of intelligence one might consider common sense; if a dress costs £5, you don’t need to be a mathematician to work out the probable cost of its creation. You just need to be interested enough to think about it.
Central to the desirability of these fast fashion dynasties, is the confident promise that you too can look like someone with surgical enhancements and a blow dry, at all hours of the day, propped up with filler and FaceTune, cavorting on a yacht in the south of France, with a natural tan. The idea of individuality is rejected, replaced instead with a clone culture. A trend clock that ticks in time with the fickle pageantry that is required to remain relevant in a world where safety is in scale.
The action taken in light of the recent revelations, was predictable. Firing the guilty parties in a bid to apportion third party blame, buying a local QC with a hyperbolic £10 million donation, and launching an ‘independent’ investigation to pretend they didn’t know what they knew. Consumers want to feel connected. They need a sense of belonging. The inflammatory reports of a dropping share price lack some context. Boohoo’s share price has risen 160 per cent since the middle of March as the group’s sales to mostly young female customers remained buoyant throughout the UK’s lockdown. With the decline of online shopping as we move out of lockdown, plus shares falling 11.9 per cent, or 35.3p, yesterday to 261.4p — taking losses so far this week to 32.5 per cent, still value the company over a billion pounds, suggesting that the business, which has no debt, is fairly robust. They trade in a largely unregulated industry; Theresa May’s government rejected the proposal for a fast-fashion tax. It seems doubtful that social awareness will translate into more ethical forms of consumption.
It is worth considering that despite his blatant disregard for taste or value, flaunting his wealth to over 750,000 followers, the 32 year old owner, who counts hair dye and nepotism as his main skills, is unlikely to see the take down that has been afforded to his over inflated, magnified kin; Elizabeth Holmes and Adam Neuman. The difference with his public apology, is that the consumer has likely willingly turned a blind eye with him, securing a modicum of shared blame. A slap on the wrist and an inquiry. The British media keen to eventually cover up their own hypocrisy, by moving onto the next fame hungry entrepreneur, on a trajectory to the dizzying heights of people you don’t know validating your online photo reel. Last week, Boohoo represented one of the fastest growing, most valuable companies in the UK. This week, is still does. Their attempt at omitting contempt, will be enough to reassure their investors, and their consumers, that their social unconsciousness was a grievance that they are thankful has been brought to their attention. Perhaps 2020 will in fact be a year for perfect vision.
