Continued from: Criticism with a legitimate purpose: The new FAQ on GrantLOVE website (rosescented111.blogspot.com)
The biggest joke from the updated FAQ on
GrantLOVE website is the claim that Alexandra Grant created job
opportunities for multiple artists, printers, and fabricators and she is
offering a free license of the LOVE symbol to create LOVE branded
items. Last I check, there are several objection to her trademark
applications for various items.
As for providing jobs to artists
& other people, if you look at the people she has collaborated with,
Alexandra Grant receives the most benefit from it.
The quilt was
made by a very talented person & all that Grant offers was her
unoriginal logo with questionable trademark status. If the person
received 100% profit from this deal, Grant’s logo is still being
promoted. If Grant is taking even 10% of the profit, the person is
getting the short ends of the deal.
Cachetejack was another
artist that Grant collaborates with and they do not need a job from her,
the person who received three PPP loans.
Cachetejack has done
work with big corporation like Burger King. Alexandra Grant has been
sued by a big corporation, Cartier. All the so-called collaboration is
her way of using people to promote herself, her logo and business.
Alexandra
Grant has practiced a decade of deception through verbiage, PR
articles, and actions. She claimed to be inspired by Newman Own brand
who donates 100% of their profit. There are people who may have assumed
that GrantLOVE also donates 100% of their profit, not just whatever
portion she decides to donate & get tax deductible credit for it.
Let’s
not forget that she puts on her resume that GrantLOVE is a non-profit
and she made update to her website so that the link to that resume is
now broken. This is the act of someone who has been exposed for fraud.
There
are article claiming that she operates a non-profit. She participated
in FRIEZE fair 2020 and GrantLOVE is listed as a non-profit in their
article. The new clarification is nothing more than covering up her
exposed fraud and claiming to be a victim when in fact, she has
victimized her customers through false advertisement.