The pricing is crazy/justified thread

[Faust]

/\ that's all right, more interest1 for me!!!

[philip nod]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/fashion/29ROW.html?hp

these articles always make me laugh because these are minor league prices compared to what gets hit out of the park up in here

[Faust]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/fashion/29ROW.html?hp

these articles always make me laugh because these are minor league prices compared to what gets hit out of the park up in here

Well, to their (whose? i don't know) credit, he IS talking about $550 chinos. Looks like the same article he wrote a year ago about $500 shorts - probably just copy/pasted "chinos" instead.

[francojean23]

prices can only go so high still in the realm of a majority or at least a substantial amount of people knowing the designers . it is pretty hilarious for Sternberg to state in the same article how much the pants cost to make ( 110 ) and then to say they are a steal at the final selling price ( 550 )

[huckleberry]

prices can only go so high still in the realm of a majority or at least a substantial amount of people knowing the designers . it is pretty hilarious for Sternberg to state in the same article how much the pants cost to make ( 110 ) and then to say they are a steal at the final selling price ( 550 )

The thing is, designers like luc, ccp and ma+ make such limited amounts of the stock that they are going to sell out on all of the decent pieces to collectors regardless of the prices. Because these are 'cult' designers, their followers will always buy the pieces. Brands like d&g/dsquared obviously rely on selling much larger quantities of goods so they need to keep the prices to a 'reasonable' amount as they need to sell to more than just celebrities and their devout fellowers.

I can't really see the designers that provide limited stock losing customers due to the price. Not unless they went stupidly high.

[whitney]

there's a line in that article that pretty much sums it up--with luck, they can make a profit in that particular pair of pants to cover up the potential loss of others. not only is there more to a pair of pants besides labor and material (what about the machines to make it, the
electricity to power them, the building, packaging, etcetc) but most retailers while they hope to sell out--there's always a possiblity that they won't. they don't design with the idea in mind that it won't sell out, but you do have to cover your bases just in case.

[MaxM]

it is pretty hilarious for Sternberg to state in the same article how much the pants cost to make ( 110 ) and then to say they are a steal at the final selling price ( 550 )

Actually i think for a "high-end" brand the 1/5 ratio is acceptable. I believe other brands with the same positioning have much higher margins.
Zadig&Voltaire LSs for instance sell for 20 times the cost price...

[Faust]

Actually i think for a "high-end" brand the 1/5 ratio is acceptable. I believe other brands with the same positioning have much higher margins.
Zadig&Voltaire LSs for instance sell for 20 times the cost price...

This is what people who think in price numbers and not markup percentages forget - that they are often getting ripped off more by Banana Republic and the Gap.

I found it interesting that such an article could be published - pricing is the most touchy issue and closely guarded secret in fashion probably, and to go in so deep and expose it like that is pretty ballsy.

[stretcheroo]

^ I was thinking the same thing. Most of the retailers I know have never come out and said the standard markup is 2.5. On the other hand, I kind of assumed it was higher for the LUC, ma+, CCP, etc.

[Fade to Black]

I saw that today, it was awesome. I don't think Jean was joking either, which makes it doubly so.

[eat me]

Was in Liberty today, saw this Balmain top. £985/1,499 $, and another white one with some print in the middle and bog-standard embroidery on top for £1115/1,697 $.

Truly makes you wonder.

[Sombre]

Yeah, that t-shirt was posted already. someone said it looks like a face. i would add that the face is shocked and mortified that 1) it has been slashed to hell, and 2) it costs so much.

[eat me]

It would be interesting if that would be the case, but I think the fact that it sits next to the one that is equally "impressive", and even more expensive, and a £4,5k+ leather jacket makes me think that it's more of a con than a shock.

[zamb]

that T-shirt and its price is a perfect representation of everything that is wrong with the Fashion Industry

[Faust]

Was in Liberty today, saw this Balmain top. £985/1,499 $, and another white one with some print in the middle and bog-standard embroidery on top for £1115/1,697 $.

Truly makes you wonder...

...why you won't look a few pages back.