Pricing-New Designer Vs Established Designer

[Lena]

. I can surely sympathize as a young designer who has to produce his own clothes and dealing with the costs. I designed a skirt and coudn't take any orders on them...they just cost too much to make and no one wanted to pay the amount I had to charge in order to make a decent profit. I stick to t-shirts mostly...cheap and easy to produce...sigh.

exactly my point, everything cost more for indie designers..
even though some may not realise, if i go and order 100meters by colour in the same fabric that -lets say- dries van notten is using, i will end up paying up to 100% more than dries will, cause i'll be ordering 100m while dries might be ordering 1000m .. does this explain anything?

most 'big names' manufacture en masse in third world countries, paying a fraction of what an indie designer will pay to have the same garment made in any western city.. of course, indie designers, due to small productions, will never be able to ship an order for getting it manufactured in india or marocco or anywhere whith cheap labour.. big companies can easily afford third world cheap prices due to bulk orders..
and then , when its time to sell a line, boutiques will go 'but why is your clothes so expensive' ... my reply is like 'but why do you need to be so clueless'

attitudes like that dissapoint or bring down a great number of indie ventures, while making fashion less interesting, less creative, more 'uniform' and much more mass marketed.
makes me sad, but it doesnt make me mad.. indie designers will always be there, there is space for everyone..

*what to one seems un-original, to someone else seems genious.. personal taste has nothing to do with giving the right to indie designers make a living. to me, a 200euros t-shirt by an indie designer is somehow 'cheaper' than a 200euros t-shirt by a secondary line of an established name.. make your calculations and maybe you'll realise why...

 

[softgrey]

*what to one seems un-original, to someone else seems genious.. personal taste has nothing to do with giving the right to indie designers make a living.

my point is that i think it might be easier for smaller designers to get bigger orders and make a better living if buyers were more discerning in their choices of merchandise...

i think poor quality is especially the problem for me...i want a garment to last for a long time in my wardrobe...and i also am familiar with fabric and technique enough to know the difference...

there are plenty of ways to keep costs down (which i am sure you are familiar with lena...)

but i really don't think that 'there is room for everyone'...there is a limited ammount of money spent by the consumer each season...and it's less and less...so it becomes harder and harder for each designer to gain their share of the market... i just see too many stores in my area carrying all these unknown designers that are generally uninteresting designs and poor quality...it's these young kids designing for other young kids...but charging hundreds of dollars..(which they have to do for all the reasons lena stated)...but young kids can't afford those prices...so the clothes don't sell...and then the store eventually goes out of business...

maybe my problem is really with the buyers and store owners...i just feel like so many of the young designers that they are carrying aren't particularly special while so many that are, are being ignored (at least around here...)
i find it very frustrating...because too many talented small designers i see can't stay in business
it's really sad to me... and maybe it's more of a problem in the american market...where people worship paris hilton...

 

[tristan]

Well even well established designers are spinning new cheaper lines and brands like Zara and H&M are on the rise, there's obviously a market for disposable clothes, more and more so than there is a market for high end threads. I think the pace of change in fashion from season to season is totally a factor in why people are less willing now to spend money on well made clothes. I personally love new designers who are really pushing the envelope, and trying to twist and fashion around. But back to the original question I think it's important for hot young new designers not to undersell themselves, it keeps the major fashion houses on their toes knowing that there is always a new face to take their place.

 

[Lena]

But back to the original question I think it's important for hot young new designers not to undersell themselves, it keeps the major fashion houses on their toes knowing that there is always a new face to take their place.

great point tristan , welcome to tFS

 

[Alura]

Another factor is that some brands are overpriced but have a certain brand image that makes them expensive. Take Tommy Hilfiger... it may have to do that I'm not from the USA but I don't see why people spend so much money on that crap. So if they charge so much, a real name has to charge more... etc etc. There are more examples such as Babyphat or Abercrombie, or even Diesel.
Sadfully this is the way the luxury market works. Because of the internet, better distribution etc brands try to be exclusive by pricing, the higher, the less feasible, the more people want it for status. Why do you think Hermes is becoming stronger? Gucci has become too mass-market, the fashion/rich elite wants exclusiveness so they hop to one of the more chic and most expensive of all.
Now back to your question, it's hard to answer, I guess a young designer shouldn't undersell but it's wise to keep the prices accessible to establish yourself. Especially when you can't see where the costs come from, is it all in the hand-work or is it also in materials/design? Fashion is suffering sometimes, a very sad truth.

And although I love Gwen Stefani I think her LAMB line is overpriced as well, I mean: she's a singer, not a designer, she may be a good self-stylist but I don't see her putting a dress together from scratch. Celebrity lines such as hers, J-Lo's or P Diddy'd mess the market up as well.

 

[Alura]

many of their so-called 'designs' are just re-hashed vintage...

they seem to think that anything that happened before they were born doesn't count...and i find that extraordinarily arrogant and egotistical...there are tons of brilliant people who have done brilliant things before they came along...and it annoys me that they simply toss it all away...

Oh I so agree on that Softgrey, expecially when you go to graduation shows of academies haha, but that has to do with their young and naive thinking. I encounter this behaviour very often and it annoys the hell out of me. It's sad how often people mix confidence up with arrogance, no need for that and if you want to make it in this industry you better be humble and friendly instead of that.

Sorry for the double post

 

[smashinfashion]

i think that jovovich-hawk is terribly overpriced...

 

[Scott]

well,its not just in materials...they also have to make pay to their backers and to their manufacturers.

There is really so much work that goes into making even the smallest of collections. I think its important for these designers not to be underminded by the masses and the market,because they are designers just as well as the rest. Just because they're less popular doesn't mean they're not capable of making beautiful clothes. I think for the most part,charging less almost seems like they're selling out just to satisfy commerce.

 

[Lena]

i agree scott, those who charge less end up being finacial failures, i know cause i've been there..

well,never again, never..
clients will either pay what is worth, or nothing, no sell out for indie designers

 

[tristan]

I'm sorry, but I hate stuff that's unartfully deconstructed *especially* mock vintage tees at two bills a pop. Don't people realize that they can cut the t-shirt themselves?? I went to this show though where an artist slash designer reworked gap sweaters and I admit that I was really impressed. And juicy suits! Don't get me started on juicy suits.

 

[Lena]

juicy is not a designer line, it's mass market sportwear in my book

 

[softgrey]

i don't think i am thinking of the same things as others who have posted...

i'm not speaking of genuinely innovative young deisgners and i'm not speaking of mass market...
i am speaking of that in between 'hipster' area...where someone basically staples two pieces of fabirc together, puts a label on it and refers to themselves as an 'artiste'...
the stuff is barely wearable (and i wear some pretty 'out there' stuff)...and it is obviously because they have no backing and no skill...i feel like these days people put too much emphasis on PR and IMAGE and the product suffers as a result...

too many young kids want to 'play designer' rather than actually BE a designer...they see big name designers in the media...think the lifestyle looks fabulous and want to emulate that...

when in reality...being a designer is hard work and very competetive and really...only a few will succeed on the level of tom ford or karl lagerfeld...or galliano...
even dries (who is well-established)..confesses that the company still struggles from season to season...it's far from a free ride...it seems like some of the younger designers are more interested in the parties than in the designs...

and it shows in the work...and yet the pricetag remains insane...for no apparent reason...there is no special technique or special fabric or innovative design...only arrogance and naivete...

tristan...maybe i misunderstand...but you seem to be saying two things at once...you speak of how there is a rise in disposable fashion and H&M and zara are thriving in the lower price category...and yet you say young designers should price high...seems like a contradiction to me, no?...how will they compete?... isn't this a sign that ALL designers shoul get prices more under control?...that's how i interpret it...

PS...all reports in the US have holiday retail sales figures as ABYSSMAL...it's another disaster for another year...

 

[softgrey]

i probably shouldn't have mentioined proenza in my original question...
it was misleading...sorry...

...i'm thinking of much smaller designers with far less developed collections...a whole different league...

 

[tristan]

Very good point. Oh I was totally reffering to those young innovative designers. In my mind if a young designer is producing work that H&M and Zara can't even compare to (in aesthetic and in quality) than they should by all means price their wares to reflect that. I don't even know if that communicated what I was thinking effectively. But I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments on half baked designers, luckily they never really last very long, people do end up catching on to their lack of vision.

Out of interest shall we name a few brands and labels?

 

[PrinceOfCats]

100% more than dries will, cause i'll be ordering 100m while dries might be ordering 1000m .. does this explain anything?

That's called a diseconomy of scale (I've been revising economics all day, I've wallpapered my room with notes about rubbish like this!).

I think that generally desginers charge how much the customer is willing to pay or they go bust. I don't like it when places like H&M charge stupid prices for craply made stuff or when crappy designers like Dsquared charge Christian Dior prices.

 

[softgrey]

you know...you're right tristan...a lot of them HAVE already gone out of business...because people have caught on...

M.R.S. comes to mind...
elissa jimenez...
daryl k goes in and out...her designs can be ok...but the quality is generally appalling....
there are a bunch of younger designers whose names i can't really remember...but they are carried at B-store in london...and EVA in ny...
i can't even keeep track there are so many...
it frustrates me because there are so many great things that aren't available in the US...because the stores are carrying this other stuff...

i really wish i could open a store...*sigh*

 

[tristan]

Dsquared is already losing points, I'm not crazy for Religion, Mert n Violet or Buddhist Punk either, I'm also very very sick of Mackage.

 

[Foxie-Pooh]

Well... I think we all know that without the label attached, the pieces would only worth about a fraction of the retail price, whether it is Chanel, Comme des Garsons, or Heatheratte(sp?)

 

[tristan]

Well yeah, but that's true of with anything retail, even with the lower end stuff.

 

[softgrey]

no...but that's a good point...take the label away and is it still good quality and does it fit well and will you wear it often?...i think that this should also be considered when the price is determined...because the consumer will consider it when they decide what to purchase...


but it's usually the opposite...the crazier and more out there it is...the more impractical...but usually the more it costs...

oh well..i guess there are a couple ways to approach the whole thing...as a designer yo can find a need and fill it...or you can do what you like and hope there is a market for it...

i propose something in between...