by mallory schlossberg forever 21 the beacon of lowbrow fast fashion appears to be in a tight spot fast fashion continues to inundate the apparel market but forever 21 remains on the lower end of the spectrum after forever 21 you have the slightly higherquality hm followed by zara which has schooled everyone in how to replicate runway styles at a lightningquick speed other players like topshop which falls on the more expensive end of the spectrum and primark which recently entered the united states market with its limboworthy low prices prove that fast fashion runs the gamut theres something for nearly every consumer but forever 21 has been subject to lots of criticism lately and with so many other places to shop the brand is in a tough position the retailer which is private does not disclose financials but a recent wall street journal report indicated the brand was in talks to secure a 150 million loan to pay for the leases on its massive stores forever 21 which discloses little about its finances has predicted that sales would rise 10 this year to 47 billion the wall street journal writes but people familiar with the company say its sales and profit have tapered off after years of strong growth recently hm sued forever 21 for copywright infringement according to the fashion law forever 21 ripped off hms cheeky beach please tote bag its no secret that the essence of fast fashion is to borrow from runway styles to provide comparables look for cashstrapped consumers but this issue shed light on how forever 21 has a sordid history of settling copywright infringement lawsuits as jezebel detailed in a 2011 post copying another fast fashion company begs the question how low is forever 21 willing to go to snag easy designs and as liz dunn ceo of consulting firm talmage advisors pointed out thats not where the fashion originated in other words forever 21s habit of copying other companies designs could eventually hurt its reputation forever 21 like its fast fashion competitors offers bargainbin worthy prices but with that there are invisible expenses the asian pacific american legal center sued forever 21 for allegedly making employees work up to twelve hours each day for less than minimum wage in filthy conditions with rodents the new yorker reported in 2008 a documentary called made in la detailed the struggle of three immigrants who struggled for labor rights while they worked for forever 21 the documentary won an emmy and just a few years ago forever 21 faced a class action lawsuit for allegedly denying employees breaks for meals and forcing them to work unpaid hours the huffington post reported of course its no secret that theres a real human cost of fast fashion so much so that a documentary called the true cost made waves this summer while forever 21 is likely not the only company guilty of subpar working conditions these ethical gaffes have the possibility to turn