Most Overpriced Designer?

[Psylocke]

I think Marc Jacobs has been mentioned quite often along with Balmain in this thread, but I still had to post this example:

Marc Jacobs Jersey Top

theoutnet.com

original price: €1,092.33

This looks like something from VS Pink or Juicy Couture, but definitely not like a $1500 designer item!

 

[Frenger]

^Oh my god, that's SICK!

 

[mikeijames]

I think Marc Jacobs has been mentioned quite often along with Balmain in this thread, but I still had to post this example:

Marc Jacobs Jersey Top

theoutnet.com

original price: €1,092.33

This looks like something from VS Pink or Juicy Couture, but definitely not like a $1500 designer item!

come now. this is the man who charges $1.50 for a no-name condom from his store. no joke. he knows how to rake in money on impulse purchases.

 

[TREVOFASHIONISTO]

i think Proenza Schouler is pretty expensive...but thats just me

 

[TREVOFASHIONISTO]

^ That's not necessarily true. A lot of people who buy overpriced clothes just buy them so they can associated with money. Many people don't care about quality, they just wanna look "cool" and "rich" wearing whatever.
That's why loads of brands will plaster their names and logos and monograms on simple shirts; they feed off people's insecurities that if they buy their stuff they'll look "rich" and "chic" and "stylish".
Fashion prices continue to rise while their quality decreases. Gucci is what comes to mind here. Their clothes are RUBBISH, yet their prices are insanely high. They're priced AT LEAST 200% more than what they're worth.
I will GLADLY and HAPPILY pay hundreds/thousands of dollars for designer of clothing that is actually worth it. Unless you're a label's ambassador, buying overpriced clothing just for "brand image" is just shallow.

i completely agree with all you said...and it reminds me of when my fashion history teacher brought up the fact that Chanel's glass pearl necklaces cost not even half of the ammount women pay for it but its just the fact that its Chanel that they want it

 

[JCFS]

ew it looks like pajamas

 

[mikeijames]

honestly, again, chanel takes the cake.

Fashion News | August 2, 2010 11:00 AM

13


What Recession? Chanel Handbags Now Cost $3400

http://www.refinery29.com/chanel-is-now-more-expensive.php

By: Jessica Minkoff

Unless your dad happens to be a Russian oligarch or you're a princess from Saudi Arabia, couture handbags and signature shoes from the house of Chanel pretty much cost a king's ransom. So, if you've been saving every last nickel and dime for one of the iconic quilted bags or a pair of double-C ballet flats, the days of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and ramen noodles are far from over. Instead, prepare for some more serious penny-pinching—the French brand just jacked up prices around 30%, with a particularly noticeable increase on accessories. The classic chain-link handbag is now completely breaking the bank, costing $3400 at most NYC retailers, a steep hike from $2600, which was hardly a bargain in the first place. But if you just can't live without your double C's, hitch a ride out of the city to Long Island's Nordstrom, where prices haven't been up-ed just yet. At $900 cheaper, you may actually feel as though you've just scored the bargain of a lifetime.

Nordstrom; 630 Old Country Road (off the Meadowbrook Parkway); New York; 516-663-6370 (Racked)

 

[Squizree]

^To be honest I've seen much more expensive bags, but probably not for that size. Louis Vuitton, Versace and Balenciaga probably have the most expensive bags I've seen.

 

[Fatalefashion]

Is Expensive of course but, It is a very good investment, this bag can pass through generations in the family (...Grandmother, Mother, Daughter.) It is an expensive price, worth it.

 

[mikeijames]

^To be honest I've seen much more expensive bags, but probably not for that size. Louis Vuitton, Versace and Balenciaga probably have the most expensive bags I've seen.

seriously?! vuitton looks cheap compared to chanel. you can fit a 2.55 in an under-a-thousand-dollar speedy twice over. balenciaga bags cost under two thousand dollars (some closer to the one thousand dollar mark)! and on their worst day, most versace bags do not cross the $2k mark.

so for chanel to cost over three thousand -- and some news reports have them soaring to $4k -- is a bit much especially considering they didn't cost that much LAST WEEK.

they're doing this simply to raise the cachet and exclusivity of their bags in the world where celine classic box bags nabbing $3k at the register.

 

[TREVOFASHIONISTO]

i dont understand why they would
raise the price

 

[Fatalefashion]

I believe the Chanel became very accessible from 2007 until early 2010, I think they want most exclusive pieces (Not so accessible).... Maybe I do not know!

 

[mikeijames]

^in that case, i'd argue they'd need to do something to ostensibly raise the quality and then go the hermes route. seriously, the hermes constance fetches $8k at the register and one can barely fit in a wallet and a phone.

 

[Ghost]

Is Expensive of course but, It is a very good investment, this bag can pass through generations in the family (...Grandmother, Mother, Daughter.) It is an expensive price, worth it.

That's a very lame excuse to splurge in Luxury. Im sure your daughter wont want to carry your shriveled chanel bag.

 

[thejarc]

I think a chanel bag can be a very good investment for your own live and not for your daughters. You could wear it in 30 years, since it will always be modern.

But I think a hermes bag is a REAL investment. Hermes prices & quality standards are HIGH. I own a wallet from them and I don't think it will ever become old. But it costs more than 1000€....

 

[Fatalefashion]

That's a very lame excuse to splurge in Luxury. Im sure your daughter wont want to carry your shriveled chanel bag.

Sorry, but that's what I think. And I never see a shriveled chanel bag!

 

[Crying Diamonds]

Over £2,100 for a small, and dare I say, common, bag is excessive. Though, I have never understood the appeal for black quilted leather.
If I had that money to burn I'd be ordering at Hermes, as previously suggested.

 

[williscrazy]

The fact that they raise up the price for exclusivity is pretty ridiculous, when the quality has not even rise, rising the price seems like a joke. I'd much prefer a year of endless burgers rather than that a bag that does not even seems to worth the price of 3,000. and it somehow seems funny because the logo is probably the only thing thats worth a price, I can simply have a tiny black-leathered bag and then stick the chanel logo on, and it will probably cost 10 times cheaper then the price they sell.
I am getting tired of high-end luxury brands trying to rise the price to maintain their exclusiveness.

 

[moobear]

I hate it how a lot of expensive brands/designers don’t even make sure that in striped clothing the body part matches the sleeve part.

This!

 

[reese06]

That's a very lame excuse to splurge in Luxury. Im sure your daughter wont want to carry your shriveled chanel bag.

I have to disagree. I'm sure most people would love to carry some shriveled up 30 year old Chanel bag simply so they can brag about it. That's exclusivity that you can't just buy from the store.