A Sticky Situation: Abercrombie's Bad Decisions in 2011

It was reported by CNN Money that Abercrombie & Fitch's stock price fell 9 percent immediately after the cross-channel apparel retailer asked Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino of "Jersey Shore" fame to stop wearing its clothes. I'm not sure that was the smartest move on Abercrombie's part. But then again, it hasn't been a great year the retailer. Let's take a look back at Abercrombie's first 8 months of 2011 — TMZ style.

Feb. 15
A Muslim woman working at an Abercrombie-owned Hollister store in Northern California was fired for wearing her hijab, or head scarf, while at work. Hani Kahn filed a federal lawsuit in June claiming Abercrombie violated her civil rights when it fired her for not fitting the store's "look policy." Kahn was told upon her hiring that she would be limited to a white, grey or navy hijab. Kahn was fine with that, but then six days later she was informed by the retailer's HR department that employees needed to convey a "beachy feel" and that she could no longer wear the hijab. She was fired for refusing to take it off.

"I think the message the company is sending here is that their corporate image is more important than accommodating religious expression," Eileen Altman, a minister at the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto told AOL news in February. "I'd hope they would accommodate the needs of Muslim employees just as they would Christian or Jewish ones."

March 19
A professor at Occidental College in California brought attention to an Abercrombie swimsuit top geared to girls aged 12 and under on her blog. The Ashley swimsuit top was padded. The blog highlighted the controversy surrounding the "sexualization of young girls." Abercrombie has since remarketed and recategorized the swimsuit for girls 12-years-old and up.

The company's Facebook page blew up, so to speak, with outrage. When the story ran in ROI Report on March 30, it received the following comment from reader Lindsay: "12? Seriously? 12 year olds are still children, and do NOT need padded bras. Sexualizing 12 year olds so they look like 16-17 year olds is one of saddest marketing choices I've heard in recent years. You'd think A&F would have learned from their underwear fiasco, but apparently not. Sorry to say, their lagging growth is a good thing — hopefully they will vanish from the scene entirely." This sentiment was shared by many across the country.

Here's a little background about the underwear fiasco the reader is referring to: In 2002, Abercrombie marketed thong underwear to preteen consumers, with the words "eye candy" and "wink wink." Thousands of parents called for a boycott. Here was Abercrombie's response: "The underwear for young girls was created with the intent to be lighthearted and cute. Any misrepresentation of that is purely in the eye of the beholder." Hmmm.

July 21
Just a month after the lawsuit filed by Kahn, Abercrombie paid $20,000 to Samantha Elauf, who alleged she was denied a job at an Abercrombie & Fitch store in Oklahoma because she wore a hijab. Elauf filed the suit in 2009.

Aug. 11
Abercrombie superfan Kim Navarra was banned — yes, banned — from making future purchases on Abercrombie's website. Why? Because she bought too much stuff. This summer when Navarra went online to redeem a $200 gift card, her order was denied. The retailer accused her of reselling its merchandise. Company policy states that if there's any suspicion of reselling, Abercrombie has the right to cancel any orders. Of course Navarra wasn't reselling the merchandise, she was just that big of a fan.

Abercrombie didn't investigate, however. Instead it banned Navarra and wrote her off without listening to her side of the story. But the retailer changed its tune when it was contacted by ABC news with the story. Navarra has since been reinstated and can now make ample purchases once again from Abercrombie's website.

Aug. 16
Abercrombie didn't wait long before it banned another loyal customer. In case you haven't heard by now, Abercrombie is paying off Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino of the "Jersey Shore" to not wear the brand's clothes on the show. 

Here's what Abercrombie had to say this time: "We are deeply concerned that Mr. Sorrentino's association with our brand could cause significant damage to our image. We understand that the show is for entertainment purposes, but believe this association is contrary to the aspirational nature of our brand, and may be distressing to many of our fans."

Ambercrombie's ads are risque, to put it mildly, so how could "The Situation" cause significant damge to its reputation? The Situation may not be the best role model for anything, but his popularity is unprecedented. Love him or hate him, or the whole cast for that matter, "Jersey Shore" is a force to be reckoned with — and a lot of people had a lot to say about it.

The cast fought back with a series of tweets from the Situation himself and cast mate Pauly D. Oddly enough, they pointed out that sometime last year Abercrombie sold T-shirts embracing "Jersey Shore's" popularity. The T-shirts read "The Fitchuation" and "GTL," which is a popular acronym coined on the show for their preparty routine of "Gym, Tan, Laundry."

Maybe Abercrombie should have embraced The Situation. Larry Flynt, publisher of adult publication Hustler magazine did. He counteracted Abercrombie's offer with a deal for The Situation and the rest of the cast to wear Hustler's clothes.

Based on the above instances, I'm led to believe that Abercrombie:

1. thinks I'm a pervert for thinking thongs and paddded bra swimsuits for children is inappropriate;
2. doesn't like Muslims or respect the right of religious freedom;
3. is confused about its "situation" and is going about cleaning up their image in the wrong way; and
4. hates its loyal customers.

Based on feedback I've seen to our stories in ROI and on Facebook, more people are starting to turn against Abercrombie. While there are Abercrombie supporters out there, my guess is that more people watch "Jersey Shore," support the right of religious freedom, don't want to sexualize young girls and most certainly don't want to be banned from their favorite place to shop. I can't wait to see what else is going to happen to Abercrombie this year; I don't think the dust has settled yet.

What do you think Abercrombie should do? Just go away? Apologize over and over again? Hide its head in the sand? Rebrand? How do you think its situation differs from the negative press generated at American Apparel from CEO Dov Charney's sexual harassment accusations? Or the outrage over employee treatment at Whole Foods? Let me know what you think by posting a comment below.