Sienna Miller Claims She’s Gonna Re-Gift Her Sundance Swag

January 26th, 2007 // 11 Comments

So, the LA Times has a great piece about Sienna Miller and her feeble attempts to justify her gluttony. Bitch, just do what I do. Take the shit and run. And you wouldn’t BELIEVE the shit these hoes get just for being pretty.

“And it makes you feel guilty. I did get given some stuff that I didn’t ask for necessarily… then I found out that you can actually give it to this company that auctions it on EBay and gives the money for charity.”

So here, according to staffers at the various swag suites, are the things that may be popping up on the online auction site, courtesy of Ms. Miller: From the Fred Segal boutique, $300 in Le Mystère Lingerie panties, which they said Miller took after telling them she’d forgotten to pack her “knickers”; $200 boots by Earth shoes; a $400 Portolano brown cashmere shawl; and a $450 Linea Pelle handbag. From the Kari Feinstein Style Lounge, a $1,200 Melrose Mac laptop, which staffers said Miller was “very excited” to take. From the Jessica Meisels Marquee Lounge, $8,000 of Lia Sophia jewelry, an $800 Botkier bag and $900 in Dermalogica skin care products, which she was delighted to receive, according to those present, because she’s been traveling for a month and has run out of “everything.”

I’m sure she’s gonna have her assistant run right out and start donating. Puh-lease.

(Flynet)

By J. Harvey
  1. artis

    i hate celebs. i am a poor, hard working person, who does not make nearly as much as a famous person. where is the logic behind them getting all this free shit???

    i have the $1200 laptop that this chick got… it set me back $1300 and took 6 months to purchase. she gets it for free??? are u kidding?

    that really pisses me off.

  2. Billie Holiday

    Them that gots gets.

  3. Billie Holiday

    Or more accurately…

    “Them thats got shall get. Them thats not shall lose, So the Bible said and it still is news”.

  4. explanation

    To poster #1. I have my own fashion business. The reason famous people get things for free is that it helps sell the product. More people see it, more people want it. Even just reading about a celeb having it can make people want it…maybe the celeb association is the only way a newspaper or magazine will EVER cover your product. Being seen on the right person can make all the difference in the world and turn a business that’s losing money into one that’s viable. And just because people wants something that they see on a celeb doesn’t mean they (the consumers) are sheep or insecure or whatever. It’s no different than if your friend has a great jacket, or haircut, or jeans and it’s a new style to you and you think it’s cool and say “Where did you get that?” But on a much wider scale. No offense, if I had to choose between giving something from my line to Halle Berry or you…who is going to get me more sales? My start-up company is losing money right now…I would love to get my stuff on a big celeb so I can turn things around. BTW, I think it’s b.s. for celebs who get stuff to feel some kind of public pressure to donate things to charity. If I want to give to charity, I do it myself, and I do in fact give 10% of my online sales to charity. I wouldn’t really want my stuff redeployed to eBay. It defeats my purpose in giving it away in the first place. Anyway, America is truly the land of opportunity. Take your new computer and make something of yourself and you’ll be able to afford what you want or maybe even be famous enough to get what you want for free. :-) Hopefully by then I’ll have climbed out of my current financial hole and be able to afford to do giveaways!

  5. truthiness 06'

    maybe the celebs could just send the swag over to the soldiers in iraq. just a thought. or the celebs could actually pay for products they actually like, instead of wearing something just b/c it’s free.

    and the rich should always be pressured to give to charity.

  6. Me

    “and the rich should always be pressured to give to charity.” ~ truthiness 06′

    RIGHT ON!!!!!!!!! Thank you.

  7. Cypress

    So much for the tree huggers at sundance showing their caring/concerned, no carbon footprint, enviro-green sensibilities. Remember; No Star was shunned, harmed or killed in the possible regifting of her fabulously deserving swag.

  8. explanation

    Did no one read my explanation? I guess not! I don’t think the soldiers in Iraq need free makeup, jewelry and sunglasses. Celebs do plenty of shopping. Just because they often get things for free (because of a business’s marketing plan, which as far as I know is still legal!) does not mean they don’t give to charities. Why would you make that assumption? And shouldn’t the non-rich be pressured to give time if not money to charity? Why is it just the rich? Everyone should give.

    People want to rant and rave about the celebs because they’re so jealous that the celebs get things for free, but no one spends a moment thinking about the business owners who might be desperate to survive and really need the exposure. It is not any different than buying an ad on TV; wait, actually it is different. It’s a lot cheaper. That’s why it happens.

  9. Pargolo

    I am sympathetic to the fashion designers of the world – stars used to pay them to make dresses, now stars borrow dresses for free and either keep tehm or return them in terrible condition. And the designers have to do this, because everyone else is doing it. This is even beginning to spread to socialities, which i think is disgusting, since haute couture’s customer base ARE the rich ladies who lunch. I think a more productive discussion here would be to think about the tax implications of this. Technically, while gifts are not income under the tax code, these celebrity gift bags/swag are costly enough that I think they should qualify as income received. And the stars should be taxed and pay income on them. Same thing for the $20,000 gowns they “ask to borrow” from the designer. I’m sorry, but the designer is also losing money on that dress, and if the star is doing a service nad being paid for it (payment being a dress) they should pay income tax on the cost of that dress. It’s only fair, since as an individual under the tax code, if i get paid in services or in kind, i still have to pay tax on that.

  10. Explanation

    Per Pargolo, that’s what the IRS has said…that the recipient must pay tax. I’m no sure that applies to a true borrowing situation when the loaned item is actually returned to the designer. But traditional swag is supposed to be taxed, without a doubt, which maybe evens the playing field since the celebs won’t be getting off scott-free with the goods.

  11. Draya

    Is anybody else tired of hearing this wench open her yap? Claim to fame: banging Jude Law. That makes her news worthy? Wretched.

Leave A Comment