Hacker News Reader

Comment by kitsune_ | Hacker News Reader

Coming to an Apple store near you, accessories that complement the "chav" look of the gold, I'm sorry, "champagne" iPhone.

This is actually half in chest, Ahrendts is credited with saving Burberry [1]

Totally irrelevant, but they're also selling an alligator skin trench coat on their website for a measly 79,000.00 GBP. [2]

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jun/16/angela-ahren...

[2] http://uk.burberry.com/alligator-trench-coat-p38791451

View on HN

Trivializing her position to accessory-driven conclusions is misleading the $26MM/year salary she was receiving at Burberry. Clearly her role was something bigger like strategy and making the brand memorable. I would hope that is the plan, rather than creating iphone cases, as you suggested.

What's your reasoning behind using "MM" to denote million (as opposed the fewer keyed and more commonly accepted "m" or "M")? I see it a lot on Hacker News and I just can't figure out why people are doing it.

Latin for thousand M*M = one million

I appreciate what it represents, but that doesn't really address the reasoning behind the use. Beyond (as some people have said) "That's what accountants do", I have been completely unable to find any justification. We have a word for million, and a commonly accepted abbreviation. Why use something else?

'mm' is a commonly accepted abbreviation...What exactly are you complaining about?

"MM" is the accepted suffix in the financial world, where each M stands for "mille", or thousand.

That's the abbreviation most often used by accountants, fwiw. M = thousand, and MM= thousand thousand

MM is a commonly accepted abbreviation. My reasoning is that I am a biologist and m stands for mole and M stands for mole. Confusing? Yes! So I separate the two!

I am curious what her "Head of its retail efforts" job description reads like?

You do know that Burberry was originally worn by the upper class?

It's only worn by chavs because they signed rights to the pattern and it was recreated on the cheap. Something like that anyway.

When Angela Ahrendts became CEO of Burberry, one of the first thing she did was cancelling all of those licensing agreements, which diluted the brand's value. She successfully repositioned the company from a forgotten brand with little control over its product, to a high luxury, highly profitable company. Kudos to her.

... and Burberry's share price is -5% after this was announced. This says a lot.

I wasn't aware of her recent efforts, it's very impressive that she managed to do this.

I noticed that Cheshire Oaks (UK) has a Burberry store that seemed very popular with no chavs hanging around. So I was wondering what was going on.

Apart from the push to improve the brand image as a luxury brand, she also spearheaded heavy use of social media and technology for marketing.

I had the chance to watch a presentation she gave with some people from my old company and she was really good

A mid range Apple laptop costs as much as a mid range Burberry leather jacket whilst the laptop takes way more effort to constuct.

I think someone is doing it smarter than the other here...

There's a rule of thumb amongst CEOs that "The best way to get a CEO position is to come from one." To pull a highly paid person off of the CEO track suggests they were willing to pay top dollar for her. (Probably much more than the 10 million dollar Twitter engineer) If they're paying that much money for her, it's not just to tweak the iPhone coloring scheme.

what was that? This comment is more in line with reddit and not HN.

reading through that article, there are clear similarities between the direction Burberry took after she took charge, and what Steve did at Apple, what with shoring up the cloning situation and public perception of its products. This will be interesting...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com