Talk:I. Magnin

Unlabeled edits

On my major edit 05/27/06, I thought I wrote the edit summary, but it did not showed. I added references, the retail stub, early history, some wikifying and revised and expanded the store list. Plus some minor edits.

SCJerr 23:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Makes no sense

What is it with the sentance about mary's wood carver? Its crazy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.174.2.53 (talk • contribs) 02:03, 16 September 2006‎

The second sentence under Early History makes no sense:

 "Mary Ann worried that her woodcarver would be injured at work, she opened a shop in 1876 selling fancy baby clothing and lotions."

Did a previous edit accidentally remove a line or two? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krumhorns (talk • contribs) 10:54, 14 December 2006‎

Questions

Was Isaac Magnin really English, as the article states? One site says that he was "from Assen, Holland, was six years [Mary Ann's] senior and had already been to the United States, an adventure that included an unwilling stint in the Union Army and pushcart peddling in New Orleans. Unable to locate his father upon returning to Holland, Isaac was referred to the Cohens in London...." A 1936 article in Time Magazine says that Isaac "emigrated from The Netherlands to the U. S. just before the Civil War, fought as a Confederate cavalryman, turned pushcart peddler in New Orleans. With some savings, he went to London to look for his long-lost father, found his bride in the search. Isaac Magnin then set himself up in London as a wood carver and gilder in a picture-framing shop. Late in the 1870's, the Magnin's set out for San Francisco." Nancy House writes, "Mary Ann and Isaac Magnin were married in London, England, though both were originally from Holland. They moved to San Francisco in the 1870s, traveling by boat around Cape Horn."

In the "Brand" paragraph, the second sentence ("This using of the name may be due to keeping the trademark rights.") doesn't sound very encyclopedic. A citation is needed, "may be" should be changed to something definite, and we could use an explanation of the connection between using the name and keeping the trademark rights. Did Macy's have to keep the name for fear of losing the trademark, or is the point simply that they acquired the trademark along with the stores and thought they might as well use it? Better yet, delete the whole sentence.

Gwil (talk) 20:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)