Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

random fashion thoughts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • redbible
    Member
    • Mar 2015
    • 42

    I'd throw money at it!

    Comment

    • zamb
      Senior Member
      • Nov 2006
      • 5834

      Originally posted by Defender View Post

      Using the Rick shoe example from above, if it would save me $500 on one item, it would easily pay for itself right away.
      In such a case why not just buy a pair of converse or timberland at the nearest foot locker and save the money?
      after all, they offer really great quality footwear at far better prices than any artisanal niche designer online shop
      “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
      .................................................. .......................


      Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

      Comment

      • Defender
        Banned
        • Jan 2015
        • 187

        Originally posted by zamb View Post
        In such a case why not just buy a pair of converse or timberland at the nearest foot locker and save the money?
        after all, they offer really great quality footwear at far better prices than any artisanal niche designer online shop
        Don't be silly.

        On the off chance you're serious...look at my comment above. If I'm not sure about an item, as is the case for me with these spring blades, then I don't buy it at first blush, but wait until the item potentially falls to a price at which I'd consider buying it.

        That's how the free market works. If I sort of like something, I apply a price to that desire, and if the item hits that price, I buy it.

        You have a link in your signature to a 75% off sale of your own items. That means that people were unwilling to pay 75% of the value you ascribed to those items, but you are hoping that by reducing that price, people will finally buy them. That doesn't mean that people bought Target brand jeans instead of yours, waiting for the price of your items to be reduced by 75%, then snatched up your jeans.
        Last edited by Defender; 05-27-2015, 04:38 PM.

        Comment

        • Fenix
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2010
          • 522

          Originally posted by zamb View Post
          In such a case why not just buy a pair of converse or timberland at the nearest foot locker and save the money?
          after all, they offer really great quality footwear at far better prices than any artisanal niche designer online shop
          I get where you are going with this and believe me, it makes sense. However, let's put things in context. Defender is talking about Rick Owens. I am not sure the brand qualifies as artisanal and even niche is stretching it.

          Some of us are loyal to shops who take care of us but damn near all of us who buy Rick are hopping onto SSense and the usual suspects to see what is left at 70% off near the end of season. There's just so much goddamn Rick available now.

          The real question is...is our behavior creating the monster or is the monster driving our behavior? To take it a step further, stop and think about the SZ mission statement on the home page....now think about Rick Owens today.
          Originally posted by hausofblaq
          Grow up.

          Comment

          • julian_doe
            Senior Member
            • Mar 2013
            • 339

            Originally posted by Defender View Post
            Don't be silly.

            On the off chance you're serious...look at my comment above. If I'm not sure about an item, as is the case for me with these spring blades, then I don't buy it at first blush, but wait until the item potentially falls to a price at which I'd consider buying it.

            That's how the free market works. If I sort of like something, I apply a price to that desire, and if the item hits that price, I buy it.

            You have a link in your signature to a 75% off sale of your own items. That means that people were unwilling to pay 75% of the value you ascribed to those items, but you are hoping that by reducing that price, people will finally buy them.
            Your perspective is far too narrow, obviously. Not every person is seeking the item at the "lowest" or "best" price. In fact, there are multiple financial, emotional, and even professional reason's why these niche artisanal garments are purchased. If an item reaches a 75% discount, such can occur from an immense number of reasons. Perhaps the size is not heavily sought after, or even the color. Maybe, the boutique offering such discount just needs to make room for a new collection, etc.. But that, does not imply that people are unwilling to pay 75% of the cost for that specific garment.

            Comment

            • zamb
              Senior Member
              • Nov 2006
              • 5834

              Originally posted by Fenix View Post
              I get where you are going with this and believe me, it makes sense. However, let's put things in context. Defender is talking about Rick Owens. I am not sure the brand qualifies as artisanal and even niche is stretching it.

              Some of us are loyal to shops who take care of us but damn near all of us who buy Rick are hopping onto SSense and the usual suspects to see what is left at 70% off near the end of season. There's just so much goddamn Rick available now.

              The real question is...is our behavior creating the monster or is the monster driving our behavior? To take it a step further, stop and think about the SZ mission statement on the home page....now think about Rick Owens today.

              J,
              my argument is that thesec are really complex issiues that cannot be viewd as simplistic as defender wants to make them. if it were simply finding an item to suit a need at the cheapest possible price, them we might as well forget desginer fashion and think about clithing for a purely utilitarian stanpoint. or just simply buy a sneakers for that purpose a boot for that purpose a dress shoe for that purpose and once those needs are met forget about buying anything else.

              if its a matter of capitalism, as he wants to argue, then many of the stores he is searching for would simply cease to exist because the "market" would weed out many stores who cannot afford to sell cheap for a myriad of reasons and when the stores no longer exist, more designers would go out of business, and then one would be left with less offerings to choose from, and in a case of less offerings, then we go to H&M or Zara, who could increase their prices because there isn't the high end designers selling for more........worse yet, Zara and H&M would have a real problem because their whole business model is based on knocking off trendy items from high end designer brands in cheaper fabrics and selling it with the idea of getting a look for less.

              One of the reasons why designer process are so high, is partly because so many people are waiting for things to go on sale, as a result of this sick game both consumers, designers and stores continue to feel the pinch on this.......
              “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
              .................................................. .......................


              Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

              Comment

              • Defender
                Banned
                • Jan 2015
                • 187

                Originally posted by julian_doe View Post
                But that, does not imply that people are unwilling to pay 75% of the cost for that specific garment.
                You're right about that...it doesn't imply it...it proves it as a fact.

                Of course there are reasons why some items ultimately go completely unsold, but we are talking about making it easier for people to purchase items that go on sale for which they are unwilling to pay full price-for any number of reasons.

                Once an item hits a price at which a person is willing to buy it, that's the price that the item is worth. If the item never finds a buyer, then it is worthless, in terms of the open market. The item could be donated to a person for free, it could be recycled into something else, or it could be used for an alternate purpose, of course.

                But in terms of straight up market value, the price at which an item finds a home is the value of that item. I'd like to see a system that makes it easier for people to pair items with prices that make them say, "you know what...i'll take it."

                Comment

                • unwashed
                  Senior Member
                  • Dec 2008
                  • 694

                  From a consumer point this makes a lot of sense. Why be a thief of your own wallet? I always use pricewatching sites to buy stuff at te lowest price possible. Also cannot see how this hurts the manufacturer since he got his money anyway.

                  I can agree with others that such a site can be difficult to make when many sites use own article names etc. There is no incentive for sites to follow naming conventions, stock images, metatags or article codes when they know some other site will sell for cheaper and therefore storeowner X needs to lower his price to be at the top of the cheapest. Just use this forums' Good finds or Small Questions or post a WTB.

                  And just a tip: do not buy those ridiculous springblades
                  Grailed link

                  Comment

                  • Defender
                    Banned
                    • Jan 2015
                    • 187

                    Originally posted by zamb View Post
                    if its a matter of capitalism, as he wants to argue, then many of the stores he is searching for would simply cease to exist because the "market" would weed out many stores who cannot afford to sell cheap for a myriad of reasons and when the stores no longer exist, more designers would go out of business
                    This is where I think we disagree. The higher prices might be a result of these middleman stores that simply do not need to exist. As I said before, I'd rather we all bought directly from designers at ideal price points designed to move the item but also provide profit and creative capital for the designers we like.

                    Putting a number of useless webstores out of business might even lift the profits of designers who choose direct sales because they won't have to provide wholesale pricing to these webstores, just to see the webstores then slash retail to just above wholesale, making the prices on the designer sites seem exorbitantly high.

                    Believe me, the better alternative to a website that compiles all the sale prices available for designer clothing would be just one site where these items are available: that of each designer.

                    Comment

                    • BrokenBoards
                      Senior Member
                      • Jan 2014
                      • 132

                      Originally posted by unwashed View Post
                      Also cannot see how this hurts the manufacturer since he got his money anyway.
                      Because if Boutique X is only able to move Designer X at 50-70% off because of Boutiques Y & Z ability to sell for less, they probably won't pick them up again next season, or if so will shrink their buy considerably. Fewer orders = fewer stockists = higher costs = fewer purchasing customers = fewer boutiques and designers staying in business. At the end of the day, if margins aren't met, everyone takes a hit.

                      So unless you want websites to be a splash page redirecting you to FarFetch or something "POWERED BY YOOX", think about what you do with your purchasing power. If you have ten places stocking something you want to buy, consider that a luxury not to be taken for granted. Stop complaining about being unable to find blue light specials because when the number of stockists drops below a certain point, you may get priced out of your favorite designers.

                      Look at what BBS is doing to try to circumvent this. Stockists are forced to adhere to a strict pricing policy per item depending on the shipped to country. The same jacket that cost $2700 10 blocks from me only cost $1800 in the EU, but now I can't buy it for that price unless I'm physically there (or if the boutique is engaging in shady practices). And thus you have part of what ended Atelier 1.0 happening on a much much wider scale now.
                      "I would use lard if it came in a pretty bottle."

                      Comment

                      • julian_doe
                        Senior Member
                        • Mar 2013
                        • 339

                        Originally posted by Defender View Post
                        You're right about that...it doesn't imply it...it proves it as a fact.

                        Of course there are reasons why some items ultimately go completely unsold, but we are talking about making it easier for people to purchase items that go on sale for which they are unwilling to pay full price-for any number of reasons.

                        Once an item hits a price at which a person is willing to buy it, that's the price that the item is worth. If the item never finds a buyer, then it is worthless, in terms of the open market. The item could be donated to a person for free, it could be recycled into something else, or it could be used for an alternate purpose, of course.

                        But in terms of straight up market value, the price at which an item finds a home is the value of that item. I'd like to see a system that makes it easier for people to pair items with prices that make them say, "you know what...i'll take it."
                        No, an item does not go on sale simply to accomodate to the buying power of customers in this niche market. If such was the case, manufacture would not be as meticulous, costly, and artisanal as it is for gaments from CCP, MA+, and others. These designers, and the stores which sell their pieces, could significantly expand their client base and sell far more garments if they outsourced their manufacture and lowered the quality of the clothes (Acne, Diesel, etc.). That, would automatically lower the price of their products, and would only require better marketing in order to sell far more than they already do. Sales benefit people with a lesser buying capacity, and I m glad that they exist. However, I entirely disagree that an item going on sale defines the ultimate worth of that article.

                        Comment

                        • zamb
                          Senior Member
                          • Nov 2006
                          • 5834

                          Originally posted by BrokenBoards View Post
                          Because if Boutique X is only able to move Designer X at 50-70% off because of Boutiques Y & Z ability to sell for less, they probably won't pick them up again next season, or if so will shrink their buy considerably. Fewer orders = fewer stockists = higher costs = fewer purchasing customers = fewer boutiques and designers staying in business. At the end of the day, if margins aren't met, everyone takes a hit.

                          So unless you want websites to be a splash page redirecting you to FarFetch or something "POWERED BY YOOX", think about what you do with your purchasing power. If you have ten places stocking something you want to buy, consider that a luxury not to be taken for granted. Stop complaining about being unable to find blue light specials because when the number of stockists drops below a certain point, you may get priced out of your favorite designers.

                          Look at what BBS is doing to try to circumvent this. Stockists are forced to adhere to a strict pricing policy per item depending on the shipped to country. The same jacket that cost $2700 10 blocks from me only cost $1800 in the EU, but now I can't buy it for that price unless I'm physically there (or if the boutique is engaging in shady practices). And thus you have part of what ended Atelier 1.0 happening on a much much wider scale now.
                          Beautifully put, and far better than i could articulate it myself.......
                          Sometimes I wonder as i said, some folks don't just buy timberland and converse and keep the remaining dollars in their pocket for other things.........
                          “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
                          .................................................. .......................


                          Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

                          Comment

                          • Faust
                            kitsch killer
                            • Sep 2006
                            • 37852

                            Originally posted by Fenix View Post
                            I get where you are going with this and believe me, it makes sense. However, let's put things in context. Defender is talking about Rick Owens. I am not sure the brand qualifies as artisanal and even niche is stretching it.

                            Some of us are loyal to shops who take care of us but damn near all of us who buy Rick are hopping onto SSense and the usual suspects to see what is left at 70% off near the end of season. There's just so much goddamn Rick available now.

                            The real question is...is our behavior creating the monster or is the monster driving our behavior? To take it a step further, stop and think about the SZ mission statement on the home page....now think about Rick Owens today.
                            I'm gonna replace it with a loop of an ASAP Rocky video for Fashion Killa'
                            Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

                            StyleZeitgeist Magazine

                            Comment

                            • Fenix
                              Senior Member
                              • Aug 2010
                              • 522

                              😂 do it...if only for a day.
                              Originally posted by hausofblaq
                              Grow up.

                              Comment

                              • Faust
                                kitsch killer
                                • Sep 2006
                                • 37852

                                Originally posted by Fenix View Post
                                😂 do it...if only for a day.
                                Tempting Well, I've come to realization that I can only do so much. I cannot influence wider fashion and consumer trends. But god knows I've tried and keep trying!
                                Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

                                StyleZeitgeist Magazine

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X
                                😀
                                🥰
                                🤢
                                😎
                                😡
                                👍
                                👎