The pricing is crazy/justified thread

[calvinc]

.

I sense you may be more excited about the image of these clothes than I sense a true passion FOR them, if monomon's sig quoting you is any indication: calvinc - "Found this place and omg the people here are so cool and they dress super ultra mega well!"
Sadly, you are my case-in-point that I was describing in my prior post a few pages back– the person who buys based on what is expensive because that is how they define what must be good.

calv & co, my advice to you is: buy with your heart, not your head. If you don't, understand that it's not the clothes that are letting you down. It's your unrealistic expectation of them.

*3rd & final behemoth to this thread. Ridiculous...

.

Forgive me if I seem to be stating the obvious here for most of you, but I see there are clearly some newer members whose exposure to the labels discussed here is limited and just beginning to develop. At least I hope that is their excuse.

From the bottom of my heart, I do agree with you what you say. But just one thing. I do not know how you see it that way, but the reason I came to SZ was because the passion the people have on the clothes. It is not about what they dress, but how they dress. At least that is something I want to discover and learn.

If you have something to say to me, please shoot me by all means. I would be happy to hear. I do not use I-am-still-a-newbie excuse since that practically means I use my own dumbness as an excuse.

[interest1]

...If you have something to say to me, please shoot me by all means...

calvinc –I found your reply to be rather endearing, actually. Quick side note: If someone doesn't grab that first sentence of your 2nd paragraph for their new sig, I might just have to. It's brilliant! But I don't think we need to bring firearms into this; let my words be the ammo. I'm just being silly.

Listen, I completely believe your enthusiasm about being here to be genuine. That said, your reply actually helped clarify my point. Here's how: you are saying it's not "what" they dress, but "how". I'm taking that to mean it's not the labels, but how people put them together, right? I gotta let the cat out of the bag on this one: it is precisely the "what" that this forum centers around. How people mix & match & put their clothes together would mean nothing if they weren't doing so with the niche & artisanal labels discussed here. That may sound arrogant, but that IS why this forum was founded in the first place.

That said, I think I better understand where your excitement is being steered: mainly around the association the clothes represent for you–and perhaps at this early stage, not truly around the clothes themselves. And that's alright. If you stick around, you'll eventually drink the entire pitcher of the Kool-Aid you've only gotten a small sip of so far. The more time you take in learning about these designers and their work, the more you will come to genuinely appreciate the "what", which will make the "how" come a lot more naturally. No wonder you were so attentive to resale value–the clothes only had some worth to you when you placed a dollar sign beside them. It's understandable. Luckily, that'll eventually fade as your knowledge and passion grow.

[Sombre]

Interest1, I disagree with your third behemoth post. First, I don't consider the resale value of anything when I make a purchase (my taste is too weird for most people - even here, anyway). In terms of economics, I think the way people here choose to look at it is rather strange. From my point of view, one buys an item because of the utility or happiness it will give one. One has said, by paying, that the expected happiness associated with that piece is worth the price. If that expected happiness is realized, then the money spent has not been wasted, since it has rightly provided utility. Moreover, that initial purchase is now a sunk cost, so revenue received from any attempt to re-sell a piece cannot be viewed in terms of the original purchase price (especially adding that the utility, or happiness, derived from the piece has its own dollar value). Like Interest1 said, it's a bonus. So the matter is not as simple as profit and loss. I suppose that has nothing to do with Interest1's post, but I just wanted to add that. This thinking of course doesn't apply to cases where the item has not provided the expected utility for whatever reason.

Now, Interest1, on to my issue with your post. One of the reasons I registered here was the greater cerebral effort put forth to understanding designers, their references, and how those translate into garments. Whenever I read Tim Blanks' write-ups on Fashion Week I used to wonder how he could that out of regular clothes dancing down the runway, but reading people's posts here finally shed some light on that. I think it's unreasonable to say that anyone using that same effort when buying is making a mistake by not succumbing purely to emotion. I agree that there is an emotional aspect to the purchase, but having alogical, objective one as well is certainly no mistake as far as I'm concerned.

PS: I'm referring to "buying with your head" in general terms, not specific to considering resale value. If your post was only concerned with logical buying regarding the latter, then feel free to ignore my post.

[endorphinz]

I started working when i was 12 as a vendor in yankee stadium, shea stadium and madison sure garden. with forged working papers. i was vending beer when i was 16. i have been buying clothes ever since. i have NEVER sold one piece. i have given away plenty but never sold anything.
however, i see nothing wrong for those that consider possible future resale price in contemplating a purchase.


another thread perhaps:
on a side note,i find it amazing that many are perfectionists on what they put on their body but seem to be somewhat lacking in how they treat their body....after all, isn't your body the true holy grail?

get to the gym and everything will look better

[Sombre]

Endorphinz, I agree with the last part. Rick Owens has said something similar as well.

Btw, Sisyphus avatar is so sick.

[endorphinz]

Btw, Sisyphus avatar is so sick.

it's a metaphor for the previously mentioned cc dept :)

[interest1]

Interest1, I disagree with your third behemoth post. First, I don't consider the resale value of anything when I make a purchase ... In terms of economics, I think the way people here choose to look at it is rather strange. From my point of view, one buys an item because of the utility or happiness it will give one. One has said, by paying, that the expected happiness associated with that piece is worth the price. If that expected happiness is realized, then the money spent has not been wasted, since it has rightly provided utility. Moreover, that initial purchase is now a sunk cost, so revenue received from any attempt to re-sell a piece cannot be viewed in terms of the original purchase price (especially adding that the utility, or happiness, derived from the piece has its own dollar value). Like Interest1 said, it's a bonus. So the matter is not as simple as profit and loss. I suppose that has nothing to do with Interest1's post, but I just wanted to add that. This thinking of course doesn't apply to cases where the item has not provided the expected utility for whatever reason.

Now, Interest1, on to my issue with your post. One of the reasons I registered here was the greater cerebral effort put forth to understanding designers, their references, and how those translate into garments. Whenever I read Tim Blanks' write-ups on Fashion Week I used to wonder how he could that out of regular clothes dancing down the runway, but reading people's posts here finally shed some light on that. I think it's unreasonable to say that anyone using that same effort when buying is making a mistake by not succumbing purely to emotion. I agree that there is an emotional aspect to the purchase, but having alogical, objective one as well is certainly no mistake as far as I'm concerned.

PS: I'm referring to "buying with your head" in general terms, not specific to considering resale value. If your post was only concerned with logical buying regarding the latter, then feel free to ignore my post.

Um, SombreResplendence –Your post above, in which you are disagreeing with my advice to calvinc, stumps me in every conceivable way because as you elaborate, you end up actually saying precisely the very same things I did in my behemoth post: which the crux of it advises NOT to consider the re-sale values of an item before buying it; to instead base your purchases on what makes you happy (thus the buying with your heart comment; heart=love, no?) My advice to NOT buy with your head solely focused on the disappointment one will certainly be met with when they realize how more often than not, they're left at a profit loss if they expect to recoup their initial investment in full. I was advising calvinc to STOP tabulating profit & loss margins, like he was stating he was doing.

I stand behind every word of my opinion about how one should, indeed, stive to buy the things they love because they have passion for them, and not out of some ulterior financial motive from the get-go. Also, there's a difference between people who do occasionally choose to sell off a piece–this is usually done to just be able to afford some other piece they are newly in love with. These people already made their initial purchase driven by that same happiness & utility that you and I and most members here are driven by. This is how shopping for such things should be: organic. It should go without saying.

Being brand new to this subculture, calvinc was clearly more smitten with appearances and belonging (taken from his own admission) than he was with ANY individual designer or their work.That's why he was assigning re-sale value and likening it to gold market, LOL, in a previous post. I was steering him to start thinking like the rest of us, and with some time and exposure, I'm sure he will. Tastes like these aren't cultivated overnight. We all had to start somewhere! That all said, please tell me how my post is a departure from the very point you are also making.
I see our points mirroring one another not clashing with them!

[kuugaia]

Just want to state first that I too had a hard time trying to distinguish SombreResplendence's post in contrast with interest1's. I think that maybe the whole 'don't buy with your head' was taken too literally. If I didn't read the part about 'disagreement' I would of thought you were both complimenting the same argument.

This thread is full of gold discussion (not the literal form).

I've justified the money I've spent on expensive goods by knowing how much I will wear them and how much 'happiness' I will have whilst wearing them. This is certainly beating the dead horse at this point, but everyone who is against considering re-sale value prior purchase has essentially said the same thing. If you're already thinking about how much money you're going to get back from selling the item, you obviously didn't like it/want it enough. Or want it for the right reasons. The more adept people of this forum still sport clothes from over 5 years ago, and they are still ballin. This forum doesn't buy fashion fads, this forum buys style.

Re-selling isn't the problem, its when you're already thinking about selling before you even have the item.

[ddohnggo]

buying cluthinz iz serious business.

[pierce]

It sure is :)

To be honest I have a relatively small wardrobe of clothes. What I found is that I consistently wear only a small number of items that I really like, regardless of what else is in there. I replace an item when its worn too much and at that point its beyond selling on.
I really like searching for something until I have found what I truly love and then purchasing it. Because I know I won't replace it every few weeks with new clothes, I am very careful. I also like the act of buying something so much that i don't want to loose the magic you feel, like rushing home after buying to try it on at home. I had a girlfriend who used to put a new pair of shoes beside her bed so could look at them while falling asleep.
I think its important to keep that kind of innocence, makes life interesting.

[Sombre]

Um, SombreResplendence –Your post above, in which you are disagreeing with my advice to calvinc, stumps me in every conceivable way because as you elaborate, you end up actually saying precisely the very same things I did in my behemoth post: which the crux of it advises NOT to consider the re-sale values of an item before buying it; to instead base your purchases on what makes you happy (thus the buying with your heart comment; heart=love, no?) My advice to NOT buy with your head solely focused on the disappointment one will certainly be met with when they realize how more often than not, they're left at a profit loss if they expect to recoup their initial investment in full.

That all said, please tell me how my post is a departure from the very point you are also making.
I see our points mirroring one another not clashing with them!

My first paragraph really didn't disagree with anything you said. That's why I said at the end of it "I realize this has nothing to do with [objection to] Interest1's post." I left the paragraph there anyway because I wanted to make the point, although similar to yours, in different terminology.

What I really took issue with was "don't buy with your head," but only in general terms (as I said at the end). I realize now that this example is not what you meant, but in a general sense falls under "buying with your head." If I see a sweater in a store and say, "Holy &#%$ that is sick! Fabric is softer than a baby bunny and the stitching is great" that's a strong enough emotional reaction for me to buy it. But if the fabric is too thick for me, I should pass on it because I will be uncomfortably warm in it. That part is logical, not emotional. It's a wonderful knit, but it's not for me. That's what I mean by buying with your head in general terms. I know that's not what you meant, but I thought my PS note might have taken care of that.

I suppose the difference between our posts is in the scope of what that one comment meant. Beyond that, I agree with you.

EDIT: I suppose your paragraph about people buying "perfection" rather than "good enough" could be taken in much the same way as my example above, which would clarify the ambiguity in the scope of "buying with your head." If that's the case let's just chalk this up to an error in my comprehension of that post. My apologies.

[delirium]

in terms of seeking perfection in each item, it seems strange to bash on thinking about resale.

although most of our aesthetics may be relatively set, our individual preferences and circumstances can and likely will still change with time. so even "perfection" is not timeless or is context-specific.

doesn't mean that one should buy things for resale value, but it's a consideration. hopefully the things with high resale value are that way because they are dope. *shrug*

[christianef]

work in the industry and get everything for free ;)

i think re-sale value is important too, a lot of stores i shop are final sale. something as simple as bad lighting or weird mirrors (or espically when you buy online and cant try on the item) can and have easily misconstrued something i thought was perfect into being more perfect than it actually is (though i will admit i do shop often on impulse ehe). like relationships we love this stuff so its easy to become delusional. while happiness should be the motive, disappointment if your a real perfectionist is often the inevitable reality in lots of instances. re-sale is like signing a prenuptial, doesnt mean you don't love the piece but when a lot of $'s on the line and you want things to looks a very specific way and things havent always worked out so well in the past its wise to have a plan b.

[endorphinz]

^very well said....and i love the analogies

[pierce]

Christianf, your French?

Would you not agree that in France you have a totally different way of consuming?
I think in America, you buy something with the idea that you will replace it. In France you buy once.