If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
It will; just waittwo seasons or so.I predict it will last about as long as that "Lagerfeld" diffusion of boring $125 tees and $600blazersthat I saw clogging every rack at Neiman Marcus Last Call several months back.
It can'ttake long for Theory to realize that they're really just competing over the sameconsumer who already buys Theory (and, personally, I've never understood WHO that consumer was in the first place; the only time I've ever heard of anybody buying Theory, myself included, is when it is on sale at75% off or more).
I read the press releases and such and how they're banking on a "new" consumer to the brand who doesn't even know who Lang was and so won't care that he isn't designing it. Seems like wishful thinking to me; just who is that consumer?Does he/she exist? If that person didn't buy Lang with Lang designing and Prada ownership, why are they going to buy the new one which lacks the edge and is made in China by Theory (who doesn't have nearly the social "clout" as Prada), with prices almost the same as the old label? I could understand if pricing was more in line with the older HL Jeans line, but $125 tees, $275 button-downs is hardly "accessible."
I'm sure, like I do with Theory, I'll pick up a few extra button-fronts when they're marked down to $40 on final closeout. Also, likeI do with Theory, I'll probably buy them because I like a few percent elastane in a slim cut shirt and don't want to spring the extra for Sander or Prada mainline. Isn't that the only time people buy Theory in the first place? ;)
Very true, Faust; as soon as you think you've figured out consumers, they'll surprise you.
And, I know that I'm probably being too hard on the whole thing. Like the Plokhov/Versace thing, in truth I actually wish them the best of luck with Lang.I think it is an important name in fashion and so I hope it doesn't just disappear, nor do I want to see people who obviously are working hard on something fail utterly, just because I wish that the former designer hadn't quit.
Likewise, I hope that they can keep the name actually meaning something worthwhile.
It's just that (as you and I both know) when you follow these things long enough, you can generally make fairly accurate predictions given the way in which the presentation is structured just how it will go. With this one, even though I wish them luck, I just can't wrap my mind around how it could be pulled off like this.
Very true, Faust; as soon as you think you've figured out consumers, they'll surprise you.
And, I know that I'm probably being too hard on the whole thing. Like the Plokhov/Versace thing, in truth I actually wish them the best of luck with Lang.I think it is an important name in fashion and so I hope it doesn't just disappear, nor do I want to see people who obviously are working hard on something fail utterly, just because I wish that the former designer hadn't quit.
Likewise, I hope that they can keep the name actually meaning something worthwhile.
It's just that (as you and I both know) when you follow these things long enough, you can generally make fairly accurate predictions given the way in which the presentation is structured just how it will go. With this one, even though I wish them luck, I just can't wrap my mind around how it could be pulled off like this.
[/quote]
Bah, I don't with them luck at all. Fuck them - I hope they choke and sell the name back to Helmut for ten bucks. They had absolutely no intention of continuing the Lang heritage, so fashion only lost and consumerism only gained another Barneys co-op/Scoop type of brand.
I agree with you about surprises - I remember laughing hard when Prada started making $300 sneakers in the late 90's. Honestly, who in their right mind would buy them - I could understand shelling out a pile of cash for a well made shoe or a boot, but sneakers? I'm not laughing now [:|]
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde
I agree with you about surprises - I remember laughing hard when Prada started making $300 sneakers in the late 90's. Honestly, who in their right mind would buy them - I could understand shelling out a pile of cash for a well made shoe or a boot, but sneakers? I'm not laughing now [:|]
[/quote]
And don't forget looking at people like they were nuts when they talked about a pair of jeans costing $150!!!! I gave Diesel two seasons then, too, and like you with Prada sneakers, I've long since stopped laughing.
Now, oddly, around a decade later, when a pair of jeans costs $150, we call it a good deal.
John and Faust, interesting points. I keep seeing this stuff at Coop, but can never quite bring myself to go through it. Personally, I don't think the prices will be a problem--they are completely average prices for completely average Coop fare. Most of the stuff up there (with the exception of Zero, H.Chalayan and a very few others) is crap, yet it sells like crazy.
I predict this will have a success similar to their Daryl K line....and probably a similar customer too.
...I mean the ephemeral, the fugitive, the contingent, the half of art whose other half is the eternal and the immutable.
Comment