Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'In the News...' started by silk skin paws, Aug 19, 2010.
I don't think anyone started a topic about this.
I know they're trying to take a more "classic" approach (as evident in the major makeover that both their merchandise and staff dress code recently underwent), but at this point, I think the damage is done. I will never go to American Apparel for a blazer or a skirt; I associate them with bare bones basics and hipster gear. With the economy the way it is, why would I pay $20 for a t-shirt at American Apparel when I could spend less than half of that at Target for a shirt of similar quality? I suppose the "hipster gear" isn't moving all too well either these days. So none of this really surprises me.
Well, I'm not a hipster but I could wear a good amount of their clothing.
But, to me their quality has never been better than anybody else's. Two of my four cotton tees have holes in them - where's the quality in that?? And I hadn't even worn them many times before...
And AA grew too wide, too fast... they opened up quite a few stores in a short amount of time. Reminds me of Starbucks, and how they had to go back and close some down.
It seems like American Apparel crafted this niche which didn't leave much room for expansion. I like the idea of sweatshop free clothing but they couldn't compete with other cheaper or equivalent competitions. Plus they banked on a trend and trends fade or don't last very long.
No more sexist AA ads.
i find that last comment by charney rather hilarious,if not a bit arrogant....."our pieces are timeless" i'm sorry,what?! timeless is something one refers a beautiful designer staple to....or an extraordinary vintage piece. timeless is hardly something i equate with AA.
it's no different than anything else....it's disposable fashion.
as for this bankruptcy,i'm not so surprised really. i think that place,as accessible as it is,offended a lot of people with it's sleazy advertising. and the products aren't exactly the epitome of quality. also,their range has always been a rather limited in that did mostly jersey basics and crappy 70's and 80's cheese-mill stuff that you can easily find in a salvation army...it was hardly the emporium of option. i also feel like erin...when you expand and grow that rapidly,it comes across not as ambitious but slightly obnoxious....people don't always want that sort of stuff shoved down one's throat. i just think they try too hard to force their brand of dressing a bit too much. it's the total opposite of H&M's business model seeing as they not offer more but they also opened its doors according to the level of response from customers and fans.
For those following this, an article in the New York Times from a few days ago:
American Apparel Shares Fall as Woes Rise
Honestly this doesn't surprise me at all, AA never had good quality clothing nor did they leave room for themselves to change with the times. Plus their sexists ads turned off a lot of people I think from buying their clothes anyways.
i will say that the quality of some of their stuff was lacking, the fit of their tops are impossible to beat! Great! Where will i go now?