I remember walking through Manhattan one early Sunday. I was walking down Fifth Ave and turned a corner and walked past the AG store. And boy did it freak me out. As you walk by the main entrance, you are treated to the high pitched squels of laughter. Also, I saw a steady stream of well dressed white girls with parents in tow, clutching their AG Dolls and heading into the store. I stood and watched for a few moments and was struck by how it reminded me of families heading to church on Sunday Morning.

"AG is right to protect its bottom line, but in so doing, has courted potentially egregious damage to its brand image."

That sums it all up. The motive (protecting the bottom line) may be valid, but the method used is the whole problem.

Logical, methodical business calculations don't necessarily equate to wise marketing. In other words, having a good reason for doing something doesn't necessaily make it a good thing to do.

The Am. Girl places in Chicago and NY are very obviously designed for owners of AG dolls. The mom here worked in the the toy industry so she must have known that, and even if not she could have checked it out ahead of time. Once her daughter got there, it is certainly possible the AG folks could have handled it better. But it is also possible that they have to limit their services to AG dolls because otherwise they could not promptly serve their own customers (the places are very crowded), and if they made exceptions for one they'd have to make them for all and so forth. It's an unfortunate call but certainly not an outrageous or horrifying situation.

BTW, check out the "Horrible Mom" blog on which the original "satirical letter" was posted. The whole site (like the letter itself) has this defensive, heavy-handed, "everyone is out to get me" tone. Sometimes that can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Even for "frugal" folks (like me), the AG stuff can be worth it because of its quality and because they do a good job of marketing an experience around it, take care to make the books high quality, etc. If you don't want to do all that then that is your choice (and an FAO Schwartz buyer who lives in a Brooklyn brownstone and has the time to write a blog griping about how the world is treating her is pretty clearly making a choice rather than being forced by circumstances to forego an AG doll for her daughter). But live with the choice and don't somehow make it AG's fault.

I really hope the AG employee was extremely haughty and snobby towards the little girl for bringing in an inferior knock off doll. Clearly, the trend here is toward more and more realistic play.

Was it the famous Armenian Girl doll? Did the little girl want her doll's mustache and arm hair bleached?

I think part of the problem here is that the little girl brought in an imitation. If she had instead brought in a Bratz doll, and asked for a tattoo or a nipple piercing for her doll, I'd have been much more impressed.

Also, rumor has it that Walmart is developing its own doll ecosystem revolving around a character called "Tracy Trailerpark", with in-store beauty salons. This should go along way towards easing class tensions between children.

It occurs to me that Mom was not at the store when this all happened. I suspect that it happened when Julie's mom took them on a playdate. It is horrifying and there is no point in comparing it to the horrors other children suffer.

"and because they do a good job of marketing an experience around it"

I'd say the buzz created around this 'incident' would indicated they aren't doing such a good marketing job.

Marketing isn't just about advertising. It's also about customer service and perception.

It's kind of surprising to see so many "THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!!!" posts.

Dave: Yeah, "customer service" for the actual customers. Indeed, given that the American Girl Experience is part of the whole thing, maybe this public demonstration is exactly what American Girl wants.

I'm an aunt, and I found a beautifully dressed china doll for about $5 at a good thrift store here. (They also sell hardback AG books for $2, with a retail cover price in the teens.)

Damned if the doll doesn't look exactly like the blonde Swede AG girl -- Kristen, I think. I'm ambivalent about the whole AG phenomena -- as an aunt, that's allowable. The grandmother bought a beautifully built doll bed for the child's doll for Christmas -- she loved the gift and knew it was an AG doll bed.

Sometime this summer, I'm hoping to have my new doll meet with the two others, maybe for tea. We can talk about where I found her -- how she's really not an AG (duh -- they know how they look), but fun enough to play with on a summer day anyway. I won't pretend she's the Kristen character, btw.

I'm betting it goes over fine. The thing is -- you want them to aspire, and respect their choices of what they like and want for gifts. But you don't want them to be snobs, in case sometime they have to ride in a non-Mercedes, you know? Enjoy the good, respect quality always, and realize that sometimes you can get close, but slightly different from different places at different prices. Because your auntie can teach you a thing or two too!

"It's also about customer service and perception."

Exactly.

Hey, it's called FREEDOM. As a private business, they have the right to not work on knock-off dolls. That doesn't mean we have to agree with it. The mom was also perfectly within her rights to write the letter and get out the word that AG is doing this. Then, people can decide whether they want to do business with the store. I certainly would not if what the mom said is true (I have boys so don't need to worry about it). Remember, we "discriminate" all the time. When people turn their noses up at Moet, and order Dom, they are discriminating. When you order a filet instead of a burger, you are discriminating. And, when you choose to work on only the brand of doll you sell, you are discriminating. That's life, and despite the mom's sarcasm, the little girl probably did learn a lesson about life. It's not fair.