Elizabeth and James : by Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen

[kris0108]

ooh i hope that they eventually include a large oversized cable knit sweat much like the one mary kate used to be seen in nonstop

 

[dianabobar]

it's good that they finally started doing chic clothes at affordable prices. The Row clothes were so overpriced, I think.
Well, good luck to them. Did they even finish college?

 

[papa_levante]

I don't think so. I don't remember where I read it, but I think the girls stopped because they were so busy with their companies and what-not. But I know they've only finished a year of school.

 

[joiedemode]

it's good that they finally started doing chic clothes at affordable prices. The Row clothes were so overpriced, I think.
Well, good luck to them. Did they even finish college?

The prices that were listed were wholesale price...they will be marked up to just a bit less than what The Row costs.

 

[Dkammern]

you saw 3 pictures.. how special was it supposed to be?
not everyone can afford the row.. a second line gives people options.. theres nothing wrong with throwing two lines out there at once.. it comes down to the money aspect once again.. the theory of.. well the row isnt bringing in the bucks.. lets see if E&J does it for us.

what does that that even mean? that hermes should start selling plastic BirkinS jsut because you cant afford one? i am not saying that being unable to buy expensive clothes is bad or anything like that... but i find rather stupid (in the less scandalous way) to pretend, at this point that, fashion labels will just understand that there's a huge number of not-gifted-with-tons-of-money fashionistas out there that are dying to wear one of their creations... i mean, how wrong am i really?

and if everything is really about the money i think that yes, it is bad to "through" two lines at a time, since many the row clients may feel that if someone can get similar(bythesamedesigner stuff cheaper, that make the row 0% exclusive... let's not forget one of the reasons why these clothes (as in terms of expensive brands) are so expensive: they represent something most people can't have.

 

[zembla]

Well you could always buy their Walmart line, that's affordable...my 6 yr. old cousin just LOVES that...LOL

 

[Sylphide]

what does that that even mean? that hermes should start selling plastic BirkinS jsut because you cant afford one? i am not saying that being unable to buy expensive clothes is bad or anything like that... but i find rather stupid (in the less scandalous way) to pretend, at this point that, fashion labels will just understand that there's a huge number of not-gifted-with-tons-of-money fashionistas out there that are dying to wear one of their creations... i mean, how wrong am i really?

and if everything is really about the money i think that yes, it is bad to "through" two lines at a time, since many the row clients may feel that if someone can get similar(bythesamedesigner stuff cheaper, that make the row 0% exclusive... let's not forget one of the reasons why these clothes (as in terms of expensive brands) are so expensive: they represent something most people can't have.

It's ironic that you say "what does that even mean" because your own points are more than a little hazy.

From what I can see though, you are forgetting that we are talking about two entirely different labels, with two different brands, identities and target demographics. Yes, they both have MKA behind them, but MKA are doubling their market share by targeting different demographics with different amounts of money to spend. The Row doesn't suffer because its branding strategy is separate.

 

[couturex]

Even if they are trying to make Elizabeth and James different from The Row, the point is it's Mary-Kate and Ashley. People are paying for the celebrity. If someone doesn't like the Olsens, chances are they won't buy something from either line, no matter the material or price or style. It's the same with Kate Moss and Lily Allen, etc. They can put out 10 brands and name them whatever they want and have whatever targets they want, they are Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen. They quality of clothing has nothing to do with it.


That being said, I just love them

 

[kris0108]

i don't know if i completely agree, i just think that since they named it elizabeth and james, it will throw people off, i mean practically every other celebrity brand has the celebrity name somewhere, whereas this is much more discrete. and i doubt the label will say "elizabeth and james by mary kate and ashley olsen" i think they are trying to remove the selling their name aspect of it all. they want the consumer to think of it as any other brand in that same scope. for instance i think alice + olivia is a great example of what they are going for. I am very into fashion and whatnot, yet i don't think i know half of the people who design or own the brands i buy. i mean granted i know some obvious ones, but i think that people would have to really look to find out mary kate and ashley are behind this. oh sorry if i have gone on a tangent

 

[misssakura]

I think a lot of people forget that the fashion world is in a bubble. It's rare for people to know who is behind these collections. Considering this line is in the relatively low-end market I doubt the majority of customers will know it is MK&A.

 

[JunyaSchick]

they try to drive apart their personnas and names from the brand naming it with a very different name that you dont relate to them unless you know they are behind (and that´s something that not many people know at the moment) but I do think that people, a lot of people (the ones who are going to be the base of the succes, cause I do think it´s going to be successful), are going to buy the items because they come from MaryKate and Ashley.

on the other hand it´s true that they are trying to change a lot of aspects in their company (sth that I have already talked about) and separate their image from their products. in the past their lines (all the proucts they have) were very focused on them... which I dont think that´s a good marketing tecnique at the moment (they can not appeal to children and to adults at the same time, it´s hard to balance both images; specially in the world we live today, with so many information).

 

[kissmesweet]

Did they even finish college?

No they dropped out...

How much do celebrities actually do in their designs? They only sell with their names. They barely do the designing.
The white dress MK wore was quite nice, but... it's not that original.

 

[Dkammern]

It's ironic that you say "what does that even mean" because your own points are more than a little hazy.

From what I can see though, you are forgetting that we are talking about two entirely different labels, with two different brands, identities and target demographics. Yes, they both have MKA behind them, but MKA are doubling their market share by targeting different demographics with different amounts of money to spend. The Row doesn't suffer because its branding strategy is separate.

miu miu and prada are different brands, but even with the house's experience, quality, bla,bla,bla... i still think it damaged what, to that point, i thought of prada
ever since, i jsut see miu miu as a watered down version of the creative process behind prada, that produces daring-it-bags and shoes with very similar prize tags.
considering that the row is less-than-a-year old, this could really ruin it... it will certainly sell a lot to people who could not buy the row but, think about it this way:
imagine what could happen if galliano created a laber called "whatevername" to produce cheaper outfits that would look like his couture collections!
even though it's not the same brand, if the designer is the same, the style, the tase is the same. there will be similarities, just like you find them in miu miu and prada, or even between chanel and lagerfeld gallery, fendi...

 

[ilovepositano]

i'm really curious to see more of this line!!

 

[Olivia]

any word on where it might show up in canada?

 

[UrbanROYALTY]

It's ironic that you say "what does that even mean" because your own points are more than a little hazy.

From what I can see though, you are forgetting that we are talking about two entirely different labels, with two different brands, identities and target demographics. Yes, they both have MKA behind them, but MKA are doubling their market share by targeting different demographics with different amounts of money to spend. The Row doesn't suffer because its branding strategy is separate.

agree with you 100%.

both very different lines.. The Marc Jacobs women wouldnt really wear Marc by Marc.. D&G versus Dolce & Gabbana..

 

[UrbanROYALTY]

miu miu and prada are different brands, but even with the house's experience, quality, bla,bla,bla... i still think it damaged what, to that point, i thought of prada
ever since, i jsut see miu miu as a watered down version of the creative process behind prada, that produces daring-it-bags and shoes with very similar prize tags.
considering that the row is less-than-a-year old, this could really ruin it... it will certainly sell a lot to people who could not buy the row but, think about it this way:
imagine what could happen if galliano created a laber called "whatevername" to produce cheaper outfits that would look like his couture collections!
even though it's not the same brand, if the designer is the same, the style, the tase is the same. there will be similarities, just like you find them in miu miu and prada, or even between chanel and lagerfeld gallery, fendi...

i dont see how it would ruin anything... and i dont agree with what your saying about Miu Miu.. at times i think Miu Miu looks better then Prada, in my opinion.

 

[kuba01]

what does that that even mean? that hermes should start selling plastic BirkinS jsut because you cant afford one?

 

[kuba01]

agree with you 100%.

both very different lines.. The Marc Jacobs women wouldnt really wear Marc by Marc.. D&G versus Dolce & Gabbana..

I completely disagree. The more affordable lines aren't made purely to be 'cheap' and they definitely don't sacrifice style for that purpose.

I think it comes down to wearability. A woman who goes out to a gala or premiere might wear Dolce & Gabbana - something very extravagant. And that same woman would wear D&G when she goes shopping or to the beach.

It's entirely ridiculous to say that "the marc jacobs women wouldnt really wear Marc by Marc" - its made by the same designer and it has the same aesthetic behind it!

 

[Guessgirl96]

^ I completly agree. I have both marc jacobs and marc by marc