Fashion Brands Are Constantly Fighting And Vicious.

For the major brands, 2013 is a year of eventful events, and new brands continue to join PK's war groups. There are endless wars of vicious slander, and how many wars have been stirred up in 2013?

　　 Hermes Herm s vs LVMH

Hermes Herm, s and LVMH had a dark contradiction in the 2010, and they formally put the problem on the table by March 2013. The case stems from Hermes Herm s's accusation that LVMH has internal transactions, manipulates Hermes's share price to obtain a large amount of capital gains, and LVMH also accuses the Hermes Herm Herm s to the court, claiming that it has slandered, blackmailed and unfair competition.

After understanding, in October 2010, LVMH, a listed company, suddenly announced that it already owned Herm Herm s 17.1% - and the French financial law stipulates that as a listed company, more than 5% of the shares of another company must be disclosed. Despite intense protests from the Herm s family, LVMH chairman Bernard Arnault has repeatedly stressed that these Herm s shares were acquired by "casual", and he had no intention of hostile takeover of Hermes.

In June 2013, LVMH group vice chairman Pierre God e announced that the group had already made a decision on the president of s Herm s, trying to convince people that LVMH was illegal. Hermes "Herm s" made criminal proceedings. Bernard, 64, is Bernard Arnault. He denies accusations of his improper actions. He declined to comment on the news. But the current problem is not that Bernard Arnault controls Louis Weedon through its investment group, Arnaud group, but that it already owns more than 1/5 of Hermes Herm s equity.

However, the French stock market supervisory committee still recommends that the LVMH group impose a fine of 10 million euros on the LVMH group in the case of Hermes Herm s, in order to punish its substantial takeover of Hermes Herm s shares. Although LVMH denied an illegal stake and filed a criminal suit against Hermes Herm s, in July, the French market regulator AMF announced that LVMH had been punished by 8 million euros (equivalent to $10 million 400 thousand) due to the fact that it had failed to make proper disclosure due to its large shareholding of rival Hermes Herm s.

It is understood that although LVMH has been awarded a 8 million euro ticket for alleged abuse of power, it has not ceased its acquisition of Herm s s. According to the latest financial statements, LVMH's s shares of Hermes Herm s increased to 23.1% from the end of last year. It seems that Hermes Herm s and LVMH will continue to fight in 2014.

　　 Gucci Vs Guess

Guess's purse, belt, shoes and other products have been trying to "Gucci". Gucci claims that the 4 designs of Guess have infringed on it, including red and green stripes, logo emblem, unique square G and 4 bite letters G. However, in 2012, when the federal court of Manhattan sentenced the Gucci v. Guess plagiarism case, Gucci was awarded $4 million 700 thousand, but it only accounted for a small part of the compensation requirement of Gucci for $221 million.

Guess has always had a grudge against it. By May 2013, although Gucci had sued Guess for winning the case in the United States, the lawsuit in Milan has undergone dramatic changes. Because of the different cognition and judgment of intellectual property cases in various countries, the Milan court sentenced Gucci to prosecute Guess trademark infringement case. However, as the Gucci of the Kering group, how can it stop and appeal? In fact, the LADYMAX fashion net thinks that Gucci insists that appeals are not relying on the financial bullying and bullying Guess, but are taking proper measures to safeguard their rights and interests. The value of Logo is an important part of the price of luxury goods. However, the similarity between Guess's Logo and Gucci is high, which confuses consumers and weakens the potential revenue of Gucci. Even because Gucci was heavily copied, it was one of the reasons why Gucci insisted on applying Guess to the law. On the other hand, it was giving a warning to more counterfeit brands.

In November of the same year, Gucci sued the Guess trademark infringement lawsuit finally won the lawsuit.

　　 Tiffany Tiffany & Co. vs Zhou Dafu, Swatch Swatch

Tiffany Tiffany & Co. had a net profit of $63 million 180 thousand in 2012 when the luxury environment was sluggish, while the 2013 quarterly report was exceptionally beautiful. The results showed that the net profit of Tiffany Tiffany & Co. was US $94 million 600 thousand, a 50% increase over the same period last year of 63 million 180 thousand US dollars. Nevertheless, compared with the market capitalization of about $10 billion 443 million, Chinese jewelry brand Zhou Dafu, Tiffany Tiffany & Co. unexpectedly fell behind the market value of US $9 billion 290 million, which surprised many people.

In fact, Zhou Dafu, China's jewellery brand, surged by 90% to HK $3 billion 600 million (US $464 million) over the same period last year, driven by gold sales and the rising consumer desire for mainland Chinese consumers. As Zhou Dafu gave up his ideal results in the first half of the fiscal year, Huang Shaoji, managing director, said in an exclusive interview with the newspaper that he planned to open 200 branches in the next two fiscal years and continue to invest in e-commerce.

According to the Chinese luxury Research Report from Bain consulting, the top 5 brands of jewellery luxury account for 70% of the top brands. The 5 major brands are Tiffany Tiffany & Co., BVLGARI Bvlgari, Cartier Cartire, Chow Tai Fook Zhou Dafu, VanCleef & Arpels Van Cleef & Arpels. Among the top 5 brands, Zhou Dafu is the only Chinese brand.

But Tiffany's Tiffany & Co. lost to Zhou Dafu was not bad enough. In December 2013, it even broke out with Swatch because of a failed cooperation plan, Tiffany Tiffany & Co. paid more than 450 million dollars (equivalent to 2 billion 700 million yuan). Moreover, the amount of compensation has exceeded the net profit of Tiffany's Tiffany & Co. last fiscal year. In addition to fines, Tiffany Tiffany & Co. also has to pay interest and litigation costs of $8 million 800 thousand, and 2/3 of arbitration fees. There is no doubt that such a ruling is a heavy blow to Tiffany's Tiffany & Co..

　　 Cartire Cartier vs Chanel Chanel

As early as May 2013, Cartire has already had a lot of negative news. First, Cartire Cartier was the first in China to store 224 luxury brands at the top of the LV brand, but 50 Cartire Cartier products. In just one year, the number of Cartire Cartier stores even decreased by 10, but for Cartire Cartier, there was a bigger crisis: the next LV. This is not sensational, because the huge potential of the Chinese market is very confusing enough to overwhelm the past glory.

Chanel Chanel, which has been insisting on its low profile and not too radical, has been jealous of Cartire Cartier. In the same year, 12 Cartire Cartier unexpectedly called for Tourneau LLC, the largest luxury watch retailer in the United States, to shut Chanel Chanel in its boutique. Chanel Chanel therefore accused Tourneau LLC of violating contracts, damaging reputation and damaging holiday sales, claiming more than $15 million.

Chanel Chanel accused Cartire Cartier of taking advantage of its economic strength to get rid of competition rather than compete to win the market in the face of commercial setbacks.