Cost of Production
- Thread starter Arturo21
- Start date
i can see i'm gonna need a "Brit to US" dictionary just to translate the translations! ("pikey"?). but, i think i see where the "chav" thing is going, okay...
it seems like a combination of the wanna be rich and the ostentatious rich, with "bling" being the unifying factor. is that correct?
where does the phrase even come from?
curiouser and curiouser,
meme
it seems like a combination of the wanna be rich and the ostentatious rich, with "bling" being the unifying factor. is that correct?
where does the phrase even come from?
curiouser and curiouser,
meme
PrinceOfCats
Naturellement pulpeuse
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 10,124
- Reaction score
- 2
'Chav' is Romani for 'boy' possibly?
A charv is a member of what arrogant toff-types call the feckless working-classes, despite being feckless every charv believes in their heart that one day they will be a millionaire (hence why they don't like taxes despite the fact they live off them) and if this unlikely event ever occurs they like to let the whole world know... while waiting to be millionaires they like to pretend they're millionaires with fake Burberry etc.
A charv is a member of what arrogant toff-types call the feckless working-classes, despite being feckless every charv believes in their heart that one day they will be a millionaire (hence why they don't like taxes despite the fact they live off them) and if this unlikely event ever occurs they like to let the whole world know... while waiting to be millionaires they like to pretend they're millionaires with fake Burberry etc.
meme527 said:
take this as an inspiration if you want to be a chav, and if you really want that look, remember non of that apparel can come from Burberry, it's all about Market Stalls, and backs of Lorries (image from www.urbandictionary.com)
screenage said:
short of a sex change and some serious skin bleaching, this isn't a look i could possibly acquire, and isn't one i'm remotely interested in, regardless. but i do appreciate the graphic, thanks.
so, i get what you are talking about - but i don't understand the intensity about it - remember, i'm from california, where we use words like "intensity", and don't have market stalls or lorries
. yes, i agree it's vulgar to display ostentatiously, whether is is a hermes bag or a fake burberry accessory, but that's human nature, isn't it? worth a laugh but i guess i don't understand getting worked up over it. calling people "scum" seems a bit heated...
is this one of those "disco sucks" kinda things, because hip-hop culture is being imported and appropriated by working-class whites? are posh and becks "chavs" (according to the chavscum.com site) because they are so obvious about their wealth, despite not being members of the "feckless working classes"?
hope all this isn't off topic, although i suspect a connection could be made between the cost of production and the *means* of production, as in the working classes being desperate to prove their right to be respected in a society that worships $15,000 handbags....
meme
PrinceOfCats
Naturellement pulpeuse
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 10,124
- Reaction score
- 2
Ah, yes but these people are also the people who key your new car, snap the aerial off, brick your windows and would probably beat up your ten year old son just for a joke (I remember being attacked by a bunch of 18-20 year olds when I was about twelve). Are you getting more of a picture of why honest law-abiding citizens *cough* dislike them?
PrinceOfCats said:
graphic and emotional picture painted, guaranteed to get a mother's heart racing...but it doesn't really answer my question.
it sounds like a class thing, more than being about clothing. but then, how else can you distinguish between "us" (honest law abiding citizens) and "them" (chavs).
maybe if i were british...?
maybe this *is* another topic...?
meme
Last edited by a moderator:
PrinceOfCats
Naturellement pulpeuse
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 10,124
- Reaction score
- 2
I guess you could mainly call it a class thing, yes. And as I was suggesting there are plenty of 'honest law abiding' citizens who whilst they might not brick your window are probably happily exploiting a sweat-shop full of lowly paid starving Chinese...
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz chav, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz pikey
*snore*
<yawn>
Anyway, back on topic.
From a footwear point of view, wherever I've worked I've had to times the ex- factory cost price by anything from 5 to 8 times to get the retail price.
If we are talking the likes of a Chanel Flip Flop or wellie (especially when they don't even invest in their own molds) its a lot lot more than that.
Best value I'd say, would be bespoke or supermarket own brand - one you are paying for a craftsman to put in many man hours to make your shoes, on the other (supermarket), you are paying the absolute bare minimum in margin right down the line - as low as 2 or 3% (apart from the supermarkets' profit, which is healthy), but one is more ethical than the other, obviously.
Worst value, IMO goes to some of the more pricey luxury brands. They've got the shareholders to satisfy. Those vast price hikes in LV recently were not to pay the workers more, or make more beautiful bags, oh no.
Of course, those mark ups you pay - they go to fund the advertising, the lavish launch parties, the swanky head office and everytihng that goes with being a luxury brand. Personally from a value for money point of view, I don't think I could ever call luxury goods 'worth it' it is up to the purchaser to place their own value on those goods isn't it? It doesn't stop me buying them, but it doesn't stop friends of mine who work in the trade from taking the piss out of me for doing so.
You'd be surprised how many designers at the luxury end of the market eschew luxury goods - it can put you off when you see how much is profit - especially if you are being paid a low wage to design it.
*snore*
<yawn>
Anyway, back on topic.
From a footwear point of view, wherever I've worked I've had to times the ex- factory cost price by anything from 5 to 8 times to get the retail price.
If we are talking the likes of a Chanel Flip Flop or wellie (especially when they don't even invest in their own molds) its a lot lot more than that.
Best value I'd say, would be bespoke or supermarket own brand - one you are paying for a craftsman to put in many man hours to make your shoes, on the other (supermarket), you are paying the absolute bare minimum in margin right down the line - as low as 2 or 3% (apart from the supermarkets' profit, which is healthy), but one is more ethical than the other, obviously.
Worst value, IMO goes to some of the more pricey luxury brands. They've got the shareholders to satisfy. Those vast price hikes in LV recently were not to pay the workers more, or make more beautiful bags, oh no.
Of course, those mark ups you pay - they go to fund the advertising, the lavish launch parties, the swanky head office and everytihng that goes with being a luxury brand. Personally from a value for money point of view, I don't think I could ever call luxury goods 'worth it' it is up to the purchaser to place their own value on those goods isn't it? It doesn't stop me buying them, but it doesn't stop friends of mine who work in the trade from taking the piss out of me for doing so.
You'd be surprised how many designers at the luxury end of the market eschew luxury goods - it can put you off when you see how much is profit - especially if you are being paid a low wage to design it.
Last edited by a moderator:
softgrey
flaunt the imperfection
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2004
- Messages
- 52,893
- Reaction score
- 324
...please leave the chav talk to the thread designated for it...thanks for getting us back on topic lady muck...
*EllaH said:
the design is nothing eyecatching to someone who doesn't know the value of it??...
so who am i supposed to be buying things for?...
other people?!?!...to 'catch their eye'...?!?!
that is THE DEFINITION of a fashion victim and a wannabe...
i DO know the value of it...
and therefore it means something to ME...
the actual PURCHASER and WEARER of the goods...
i don't buy or wear things to impress others...
much less people who have no understanding of quality and design...
...that's just a bizarre waste of money...imho...
Last edited by a moderator:
anti-hero11
Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2005
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 0
its always overpriced. even if you buy something at 75% off the store still makes profit.
France's over all cost of living is much higher, their wages are higher and cost goes up. Even China is sub contracting work to Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia because it is even cheaper there
France's over all cost of living is much higher, their wages are higher and cost goes up. Even China is sub contracting work to Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia because it is even cheaper there
Well actually, my point was that the value (in money/status) is the main reason why most people buy Birkin bags as the design certainly isn't anything which would catch the eye of consumers. As AlexN said "the design is boring for a $15,000 bag". If I were ever to pay such an amount for a handbag I'd expect it to be a little bit more interesting. But that's just my opinion. My point wasn't in any way that people should buy things to impress other people...softgrey said:
thanks for getting us back on topic lady muck...
the design is nothing eyecatching to someone who doesn't know the value of it??...
so who am i supposed to be buying things for?...
other people?!?!...to 'catch their eye'...?!?!
that is THE DEFINITION of a fashion victim and a wannabe...
i DO know the value of it...
and therefore it means something to ME...
the actual PURCHASER and WEARER of the goods...
i don't buy or wear things to impress others...
much less people who have no understanding of quality and design...
that's just a bizarre waste of money...imho...
softgrey
flaunt the imperfection
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2004
- Messages
- 52,893
- Reaction score
- 324
oh good...
...
but birkins are around $5000 for a normal leather one...
it only gets above $10,000 for the exotic skins...ie-croc, lizard, etc...
and basically any 'status' bag is over $1000 these days...
lanvin, gucci, chloe, lv...the list goes on...
so i figure it's much more 'worth it' to get an 'understated classic' that won't go out of style in a few years...
...but birkins are around $5000 for a normal leather one...
it only gets above $10,000 for the exotic skins...ie-croc, lizard, etc...
and basically any 'status' bag is over $1000 these days...
lanvin, gucci, chloe, lv...the list goes on...
so i figure it's much more 'worth it' to get an 'understated classic' that won't go out of style in a few years...
Users who are viewing this thread
New Posts
-
-
-
-
Fendi S/S 2025 : Mona Tougaard, Karolina Spakowski & Lina Zhang by Steven Meisel (7 Viewers)- Latest: chrisand489
-
Harper's Bazaar Italia February 2025: Valerie Scherzinger by Glen Luchford (5 Viewers)
- Latest: matheus_s