random fashion thoughts

[Prezens]

was wondering, if we agree that a substantial amount of what we pay for is the designer's vision, then shouldn't there be noticeable price drops in items which are essentially a rehash? i mean granted there's still the manufacturing cost, fabrics etc but i don't understand why if rick for example comes up with something unique, and at first it cost x amount, why an almost identical item, with clearly no new inspiration, 3 seasons down, should cost as much, if not more?
this may be a really simplistic look at it, but would appreciate if someone could shed light on this.

[fireflygrave]

From a practical standpoint, why would he reduce the price of the item? The vision is still the same, regardless of when he initially conceived the item. I don't see how the worth of the design by how old it is. You are still paying for the designer's vision, just an older vision than some other garments.

[Dane]

You'd probably piss of some loyal customers if they paid $1000 one season, only to see the same item for $500 a few seasons later.

[Nikov]

i think we make things too abstract sometimes.

we pay for clothes... with a certain vision, yes. but in the end, they're still clothes.

[Patroklus]

why is levi's selling 501s for like fifty bucks when they cost like a dollar in 1890 that shit is ridic

[messenoire]

do you see the same longevity in the latest iteration of hedi that you saw in his "heyday" at dior homme? this hedi seems fated to burn up quick with the path he's chosen at saint laurent. i feel as a luxury house it's ill lived as this "Grunge" look can be mimic'd to a T for much much cheaper as they purposefully look like re-appropriated cheaply made clothes from the early 90's. it looks like his train is nearly out of steam when it's just leaving the station. seeing kate moss in saint laurent seems kind of prophetic for the fate of his career.

[Lane]

why do they sell vintage levi's for $500 mang


no, but seriously, patroklu's post is everything. Rising production costs, inflation, and whatever else a business deals with factors into it. So garments prices won't stay static.

[Patroklus]

kate moss in rick owens:

[Patroklus]

why do they sell vintage levi's for $500 mang


no, but seriously, patroklu's post is everything. Rising production costs, inflation, and whatever else a business deals with factors into it. So garments prices won't stay static.

levi's are cheaper in real terms now than they were in 1890, although it's only because they're being sewn by Dominicans now. it seems that the levi's that are actually made in america are a lot more expensive in real terms, altho i'd have to go grab a bunch of numbers to prove that and i hate learning

btw they sell vintage levi's for like tweni g's homie

if we want to split hairs about real value then unless rick increases his prices every year then the goods are getting cheaper. and when everyone's currency recrashes (it's going to happen this fall) the clothes will practically be free! hooray!

[Faust]

was wondering, if we agree that a substantial amount of what we pay for is the designer's vision, then shouldn't there be noticeable price drops in items which are essentially a rehash? i mean granted there's still the manufacturing cost, fabrics etc but i don't understand why if rick for example comes up with something unique, and at first it cost x amount, why an almost identical item, with clearly no new inspiration, 3 seasons down, should cost as much, if not more?
this may be a really simplistic look at it, but would appreciate if someone could shed light on this.

That was funny. Thumbs up.

[kunk75]

cute idea but do you understand even the most basic principals of economics? I don't think practicality and apologist retailers or designers are among them.

was wondering, if we agree that a substantial amount of what we pay for is the designer's vision, then shouldn't there be noticeable price drops in items which are essentially a rehash? i mean granted there's still the manufacturing cost, fabrics etc but i don't understand why if rick for example comes up with something unique, and at first it cost x amount, why an almost identical item, with clearly no new inspiration, 3 seasons down, should cost as much, if not more?
this may be a really simplistic look at it, but would appreciate if someone could shed light on this.

[Castor]

Funny that no one has bothered to post the Saint Laurent collection.

I've been dying to see the comments, but I suppose it's too easy to criticize and we're all too lazy to post the photos. That being said, I was shocked at how uninspired it was. I wonder how long this relationship will last. Maybe they will sell enough basics (skinny black jeans/blazers/tees/leathers) to keep PPR happy. It seems all the retailers bought heavily into the first collection. Time will tell.

[Faust]

They surely did. Every store advertisement in the March issues was SL. Koolaid. Let's see. So far the one bag I saw in the Saks catalog was something I'd expect from Michael Kors.

[Castor]

They surely did. Every store advertisement in the March issues was SL. Koolaid. Let's see. So far the one bag I saw in the Saks catalog was something I'd expect from Michael Kors.

It's hard to make a duffel bag an icon for a brand, especially this late in the game after LV, Chloe, and even Furla have perfected the idea, but I think the same customer that likes the Celine bags will go for it (understated luxury/minimal branding/simple design). Kate Moss/Gwyneth are photographed all over town in the ones they've been given--that's a good start. I mean, I don't think YSL bags ever did very well anyway. The new bag, at least, is an improvement. Uninspired, but better nonetheless.

[Castor]

was wondering, if we agree that a substantial amount of what we pay for is the designer's vision, then shouldn't there be noticeable price drops in items which are essentially a rehash? i mean granted there's still the manufacturing cost, fabrics etc but i don't understand why if rick for example comes up with something unique, and at first it cost x amount, why an almost identical item, with clearly no new inspiration, 3 seasons down, should cost as much, if not more?
this may be a really simplistic look at it, but would appreciate if someone could shed light on this.

Oddly, I feel totally indifferent to the price of something relative to it's debut. Sometimes it takes me a while to get the idea and I'm just glad it is still relevant to the designer's work and more importantly available. It took me years to collect my Intarsias, Scuba, Mollino, etc. I like that Rick sticks to some core designs.