Louis Vuitton Authentication

[socalicurated]

Is it real or fake??

[allisonesq77]

Vintage fake. 

[jsales0]

Agree. Counterfeit. Sorry. Construction is incorrect and font on heatstamp is wrong. Vuitton never stamped “LV” on their patches nor did they ever use an oval O on patches although they have used oval Os.

[socalicurated]

sucks ... lol but thank you! (:

[socalicurated]

thanks!

[albertabrightalberta]

If you paid more than $2, return it to wherever you purchased since it was illegal for them to sell a fake. (For a small amount, I'd say destroy the bag and keep it from being returned to circulation.)

[jsales0]

I’ll honestly pay a bit more than that to keep them out of circulation but I think we all have to be real that illegal or not, most people are not going to waste more than they paid in gas to TRY and return them if bought at garage sales nor are they going to potentially risk their relationships with local thrifts who usually know that they’re selling counterfeits.

I personally think part of the learning experience is bucking up, accepting one’s mistakes and marking the counterfeits they’ve purchased with permanent heavy marker so that they can never be resold and either using them for storage  of “smalls” at home or donating them to missions where they’ll at least be used. 

When they’re returned, they go right back into circulation.

With respect to the OP and all, the simplest bit of research would clearly show that the font on this particular bag was never used by Vuitton.

No one wants anyone to lose money on counterfeits but it’s always best to buy what you know and if you gamble on something, do your research and learn from it.

Apologize for the “tough love” but I really believe this.

[albertabrightalberta]

@jsales0 - I don't disagree with a thing you've said and I think we've all been in those learning situations.

I also think that thrifts (especially) need to step up to the plate and learn the illegalities of items they might sell.

Note that no thrift store will take cribs, car seats, high chairs, mattresses, etc. because they know of the potential liabilities.

Just because a counterfeit handbag might not "kill" a buyer doesn't mean that it should be sold and that "charitable" thrift stores should be given free passes because of the good they do.

I have my favorite thrift company and would hate to be banned by them but I have no qualms about letting them know that a $100 bag isn't authentic. While I doubt they've ever permanently removed an item from the selling floor, I have seen them reduce the price to reflect the probability that the item is fake.

OTOH, I've purchased some (almost) steals because they didn't recognize the value of what they'd thought was either fake or generic.

[jsales0]

All true alberta (and yes thrift mistakes have definitely benefitted many on the upside) but we each have to pick our own battles. I always quietly tell B&M secondary market stores when they have fakes out but since I’m not the buyer nor the law it puts me in a different position and I’m never argumentative about it. Just not my thing. They can either ask me to show them what’s wrong or ignore the info. 

Educating or accusing retailers of the liabilities of selling counterfeits is not something I’d ever do beside the fact that I think 99% of them know. (Make that 99.9%)

IMO licenses for B&M secondary market resales in a perfect world should require the completion of a course on the liabilities of selling counterfeits 

It’s sad but the world has produced counterfeits since humankind started making items of value. IMO the sun will always rise in the east and set in the west and items of value will always be counterfeited and resold.

[jsales0]

BTW part of my trying to give back is to buy them up to $10ish, destroy them for resale but leave them functional and give them to people living on the streets to use.  Don’t ask how many I’ve given. If y’all see a homeless encampment with markered Vuittons I may have been there.