Another brand makes a misguided decision to stop using leather in its products and provokes a reaction from the leather industry that has more of an air of sadness than anger about it.

Technology company Apple claims that it has a longstanding and proven commitment not merely to being part of the fight against climate change, but to leading it. This includes a pledge to be carbon-neutral across its entire value chain by 2030 and it brought its first carbon-neutral products, the Apple Watch Series 9 range, to market in September this year. 

It says production of these watches consumes only “clean electricity” and uses 30% recycled materials. The company says the measures it has taken with Series 9 have resulted in a 75% reduction in carbon emissions for each model compared to previous versions of the watch. It says it will use “high-quality carbon credits to address the small amount of remaining emissions”. Just how small the remaining emissions will be remains unclear. In its September announcement, Apple emphasised that 50% of the transportation involved in making and moving the new watches across its supply chain would be by means other than air. This, naturally, suggests that the other 50% of transportation will be by air and further suggests that rather a lot of “high-quality carbon credits” will be needed to compensate for this.

So far, so perfectly in tune with 2020s corporate virtue-signalling. What brought the announcement to the attention of the global leather industry was a section of the statement that explained that, as part of its 2030 pledge and its broader environmental efforts, Apple was also “ending its use of leather across all of its product lines”. Until now, it had provided leather straps for its Apple Watches and leather cases for its iPhones, including some that were part of a series of high-profile collaborations with luxury leathergoods brand Hermès.

The company announced that it was replacing leather with a new textile called FineWoven, describing it as “an elegant and durable twill made from 68% post-consumer recycled content”. It added that FineWoven offers “a subtle lustre and a soft, suede-like feel”. 

More than just a brand

Commenting on this, our Leatherbiz Market Intelligence newsletter said Apple deserves congratulations for always having been “more than just a brand for many”, with its followers regarding the company and, by extension, the users of its technology as ‘something special’. “Hardly any other brand has been able to imbue this spirit so successfully in its customers and derive incredible economic success from it,” the newsletter said. It added that Apple’s decision to stop using leather suggests that the material belongs outside the realm of what ‘something special’ means.

This makes painful reading for lovers of leather, who hold among their core tenets of shared belief that leather’s naturalness, sensuality and beauty, and its propensity to become even more beautiful with age, make it the very definition of ‘something special’. And as Market Intelligence pointed out, Apple, too, seemed to share this belief until now.

Deeply disappointed

Within days of its announcement, Apple received a formal response to its very public renouncement of leather from the International Council of Tanners (ICT). In a statement, ICT said it was deeply disappointed by the company’s decision and pointed out that Apple had provided no evidence that FineWoven was a better environmental option than leather.

Because the technology company has provided no details at all of what the new material is made of, ICT said it was difficult to assess the validity of any of the September 12 claims. “Evidence suggests that they are, at best, misguided,” ICT said.

It argued that, if a large part of the environmental footprint of leather is associated with the rearing of livestock from which hides and skins are sourced, Apple’s decision does nothing to lessen this because livestock are reared for meat and dairy and the hides and skins are, unarguably, by-products of those industries. 

It quoted research from the University of Montana that shows that the production of leather does not influence the number of animals reared and slaughtered and pointed out that nearly half of the hides and skins produced annually across the world are thrown away.

“This matters,” ICT said. “Replacing leather with other materials will do nothing to change the number of animals reared by the food industry and do nothing to reduce their climate impact. Apple is clearly free to use any material that it chooses, but it should not unfairly discredit [leather] in the interest of marketing.” The leather industry body concludes by formally asking Apple to retract all of the claims it made on September 12 regarding the sustainability of leather. It has not done so yet.

Weirdly coarse

The Leather and Hide Council of America (LHCA) has noted that early customer assessments of FineWoven appear less enthusiastic than Apple was probably hoping for. LHCA pointed out that the announcement about leather and FineWoven also coincided with the launch of a new version of the iPhone, version 15. It quoted an article from business media outlet Bloomberg, which said  FineWoven was Apple’s “biggest dud of 2023”. It said an iPhone case made from FineWoven that Apple is selling for $59 felt “weirdly coarse, but plush when you press on it”. It added: “The sides look sleek, but one wrong move and it can scratch instantly.” Bloomberg compared the feel of the exciting new material to that of “a rough pair of tights”.

The point Market Intelligence made about Apple being “more than just a brand” for millions of its fans around the world means that its product launches always come under serious scrutiny from professional tech journalists as well as from fans on blogs and social media. One website devoted to news from Apple, 9to5Mac, has been running since 2007, when the first iPhone launched. LHCA picked up on 9to5Mac’s reaction to the launch of FineWoven at the end of September. The website said that the material looked like “a surefire flop so far” and it insisted consumers had been quick to express their disapproval to Apple representatives.

The real harm

In response, it said Apple had sent follow-up information for the people working in its retail stores to use to answer customer complaints and comments about the material, suggesting that shop staff weave nonsensical references to “luxurious microtwill” into their defence of the new watch-bands and iPhone cases. What the website concluded from this was: “Apple knows everyone hates FineWoven and retail employees are bearing the brunt of a lot of the complaints.” 

This does nothing to help the leather industry, though, and perhaps the real harm the whole campaign is causing the industry is that, as LHCA has pointed out, the complaints about FineWoven focus on the low quality of the material and the poor value for money it offers in relation to its ability to protect expensive tech products such as the iPhone 15, not on Apple’s excuses for using it to replace leather. Commentators seem to take for granted that the technology company’s claim that FineWoven is a more sustainable material than leather are true, LHCA laments.

An iPhone case in Apple’s new FineWoven material, branded “the biggest dud of 2023” by Bloomberg.
Image credit: Apple

Share this story: