What's Missing in Luxury and Where Are You Finding It?

[UndercoverFW06]

Hello, users from The Fashion Spot. It's my first post here so I hope y'all don't mind. I'm doing a research for a personal project on Luxury Brands and I'd like to know what are your thoughts.

Basically, I've always been a fan of "flashy" brands (like LV, Gucci, Dior) even though they've been prioritizing branding over actually (obviously they don't lack quality, they're just not on par with, let's say, Loro Piana), but I've been growing so tired of them because there is absolutely nothing new to connect.
I see myself getting more and more into smaller brands that create a community with great storytelling and sometimes even better quality and design.

So, I'd like to know what are the points that make a luxury brand stand out to you and why some are failing that. Also, share your favorite small luxury brand!

 

[Lola701]

Basically, I've always been a fan of "flashy" brands (like LV, Gucci, Dior) even though they've been prioritizing branding over actually (obviously they don't lack quality, they're just not on par with, let's say, Loro Piana)

What makes you say that the quality at Gucci, LV or Dior is not on par with Loro Piana?
What’s the barometer?
And sorry to add questions on questions but today, the term luxury seems to be used for everything and anything. So what is your definition of luxury and which houses represents that definition?

 

[visvim2001]

What makes you say that the quality at Gucci, LV or Dior is not on par with Loro Piana?
What’s the barometer?
And sorry to add questions on questions but today, the term luxury seems to be used for everything and anything. So what is your definition of luxury and which houses represents that definition?

It’s an almost universally recognised fact that the quality of loud luxury brands don’t match up to the prices they charge. I’m looking at Prada, which dares to charge 1.5k for fully synthetic knit, and Dior, which uses wool poly blends.

The smaller Italian makers put utmost emphasis on sourcing fabrics and vertical integration. They understand Italy’s network of small producers to whom they subcontract manufacturing to. Cucinelli, for example, is also astronomically expensive, but their cashmere knits are truly luxurious, not because a logo is slapped on the front.

 

[Lola701]

It’s an almost universally recognised fact that the quality of loud luxury brands don’t match up to the prices they charge. I’m looking at Prada, which dares to charge 1.5k for fully synthetic knit, and Dior, which uses wool poly blends.

The smaller Italian makers put utmost emphasis on sourcing fabrics and vertical integration. They understand Italy’s network of small producers to whom they subcontract manufacturing to. Cucinelli, for example, is also astronomically expensive, but their cashmere knits are truly luxurious, not because a logo is slapped on the front.

For me, the quality and prices ratio is never logical anyway.
And I think because there’s no real correlation, using that as a barometer doesn’t really mean anything either.

I also think that in the « luxury spaces » we have a bit put everybody in the same stage when they aren’t really doing the same work. I don’t expect a fashion brand to deliver the same kind of expertise as a luxury goods brand. Like it makes sense for Bottega Veneta and Hermes to offer some kind of services in a way that it don’t from Dior or Chanel for example.

Chanel’s cashmere is really good. Hermes Cashmere is as good as Cucinelli. But I don’t think the person who is going to Cucinelli is looking for the same thing at Chanel.
In cashmere, I really love Pellat Finet and The Elder Stateman for example.

For me, for a longtime, Hermes, Moynat, Bottega Veneta, Joseph Duclos and Valextra were quite equivalent in terms of quality. However recently, they have made different choices in terms of aesthetic. Nowadays, only Hermes provides a real extensive choice in terms of materials.

I think in general, we can’t truly compare brands that are more artisanal focused to brands that are more fashion focused. And we have to look at some expertises in terms of products and things like that. Sometimes, the artisanal brand is not up to the standards of the big brands too. I take Vuitton over Goyard any day!

Sometimes, what attract us to brands is the general aesthetic rather than the quality ratio.

But I also think that maybe we have also to normalize going to « non fashion brands » for things that are not pure fashion.

Anyone wants a good wool sweater? Ok, there’s Jameison Of Shetland for you.
Celine may have some of the best jeans in the luxury market, there are brands that does Japanese denim too.

But when it comes to luxury, it’s not always logical. What Brunello Cucinelli, Loro Piana or The Row are doing is great. For Brunello, there’s even a commitment in terms of sourcing and things like that. I would gladly go there to buy something as a gift for someone. But tbh, I will go to Max Mara, even though I know that they have shady practices regarding their factories and sourcing.

 

[UndercoverFW06]

For me, the quality and prices ratio is never logical anyway.
And I think because there’s no real correlation, using that as a barometer doesn’t really mean anything either.

I also think that in the « luxury spaces » we have a bit put everybody in the same stage when they aren’t really doing the same work. I don’t expect a fashion brand to deliver the same kind of expertise as a luxury goods brand. Like it makes sense for Bottega Veneta and Hermes to offer some kind of services in a way that it don’t from Dior or Chanel for example.

Chanel’s cashmere is really good. Hermes Cashmere is as good as Cucinelli. But I don’t think the person who is going to Cucinelli is looking for the same thing at Chanel.
In cashmere, I really love Pellat Finet and The Elder Stateman for example.

For me, for a longtime, Hermes, Moynat, Bottega Veneta, Joseph Duclos and Valextra were quite equivalent in terms of quality. However recently, they have made different choices in terms of aesthetic. Nowadays, only Hermes provides a real extensive choice in terms of materials.

I think in general, we can’t truly compare brands that are more artisanal focused to brands that are more fashion focused. And we have to look at some expertises in terms of products and things like that. Sometimes, the artisanal brand is not up to the standards of the big brands too. I take Vuitton over Goyard any day!

Sometimes, what attract us to brands is the general aesthetic rather than the quality ratio.

But I also think that maybe we have also to normalize going to « non fashion brands » for things that are not pure fashion.

Anyone wants a good wool sweater? Ok, there’s Jameison Of Shetland for you.
Celine may have some of the best jeans in the luxury market, there are brands that does Japanese denim too.

But when it comes to luxury, it’s not always logical. What Brunello Cucinelli, Loro Piana or The Row are doing is great. For Brunello, there’s even a commitment in terms of sourcing and things like that. I would gladly go there to buy something as a gift for someone. But tbh, I will go to Max Mara, even though I know that they have shady practices regarding their factories and sourcing.

Hi! I'm sorry for the late reply, I've been busy. But it's basically what Visvim has said — and although I agree with you that quality and price in luxury will never be logical — brands are going too far and constantly using low quality materials and even low quality craftsmanship (I usually take people's opinion on internet for granted, but I've heard so many complaints about Chanel bags in the last few years to the point people are saying they it's not uncommon to see bags with very visible unfrayed stitches).

As you also mentioned, Hermes is still very good and indeed what I call the pinnacle of luxury goods. Same with Celine, I think they're superior in quality and design compared to their competition.

 

[runner]

what quality means can vary. like, that of toyota is different from that of ferrari, even though they have some things in common.

 

[KoV]

For me, the quality and prices ratio is never logical anyway.

I agree with this completely.

Since Prada was mentioned earlier...

Prada charging what they do for an item made out of recycled trash (literally, from a landfill, supposedly) is hardly more outrageous than what they'd ask for an item made of leather -- which is usually so treated and coated anyway, none but an expert could discern the actual quality of the leather used. In neither case is there a real correlation between materials cost and cost to consumers. It's pretty much Kate Spade level design and quality either way with a 1000% brand surcharge.

 

[Lola701]

what quality means can vary. like, that of toyota is different from that of ferrari, even though they have some things in common.

But for me comparing Toyota and Ferrari is a bit lit comparing RTW and Haute Couture. All the best ressources possible would be used to produce a Ferrari (Haute Couture) and it would be sold in limited quantities (a Couture dress has a policy of either worldwide exclusivity, 1 per country or 1 per continent/region). Both anyway offers a level of services and customization that can justify the price.
In a way, because you are paying for the service and somewhat exclusivity, the price can be justified.

And if we even want to go there, we can challenge the prices of a Haute Couture piece. A Chanel piece would be more expensive than Elie Saab that would be more expensive than Giambattista Valli. Much like the price of a Ferrari may differ from Lamborghini, Bentley or whatever in the same ethos of super cars.

I feel like quality is an element people uses to justify their purchase when it’s actually purely emotional in a way.

 

[runner]

But for me comparing Toyota and Ferrari is a bit lit comparing RTW and Haute Couture. All the best ressources possible would be used to produce a Ferrari (Haute Couture) and it would be sold in limited quantities (a Couture dress has a policy of either worldwide exclusivity, 1 per country or 1 per continent/region). Both anyway offers a level of services and customization that can justify the price.
In a way, because you are paying for the service and somewhat exclusivity, the price can be justified.

And if we even want to go there, we can challenge the prices of a Haute Couture piece. A Chanel piece would be more expensive than Elie Saab that would be more expensive than Giambattista Valli. Much like the price of a Ferrari may differ from Lamborghini, Bentley or whatever in the same ethos of super cars.

I feel like quality is an element people uses to justify their purchase when it’s actually purely emotional in a way.

isn't comparing toyota vs ferrari to RTW vs HC a bit too unfair ?
if it was car manufacturer like toyota vs carrozzeria, I think that comparison could be possible.

toyota or ferrari, their flagships represent their ideas of quality the most intensely. there you can expect almost the same level of services and the best resources for both of them to be used. that's where they have ideas in common.
but if toyota's flagship breaks down soon, the customers will blame them for the lack of quality. on the other hand, with ferrari, they will not be scolded hardly. at least the customers will not regard it as the lack of quality especially. because what ferrari aims at is what you can get only after sacrificing some of durability, stability, etc. even though ferrari still has to try to make it as durable as possible. that's what the hardcore customers want the most from ferrari.

likewise, quality could look different for example at hermes and at carol christian poell. although the two used to have someone behind the scene in common.

is it simply about emotions? (isn't it sounding a bit like beauty here?) everything that happens around you never happens without any emotions inside you.
some objective element (what there is out of you) which is able to evoke certain kind of emotions cannot be called quality?
seems to me quality comes with some porpose.

 

[UndercoverFW06]

I agree with this completely.

Since Prada was mentioned earlier...

Prada charging what they do for an item made out of recycled trash (literally, from a landfill, supposedly) is hardly more outrageous than what they'd ask for an item made of leather -- which is usually so treated and coated anyway, none but an expert could discern the actual quality of the leather used. In neither case is there a real correlation between materials cost and cost to consumers. It's pretty much Kate Spade level design and quality either way with a 1000% brand surcharge.

You have a pretty good point, although I'd say the item made of recycled trash has its appeal because of some cognitive bias that makes us (maybe not you, definitely not me) like outrageous things simply because they're outrageous (like what Balenciaga does); there is nothing special, though, in "normal" products with lower quality.

I do also agree that there is no correlation between materials cost and cost to consumers but I don't see that not backfiring somehow, someday, or maybe it's just wishful thinking. I do want to say, though, that I've been seeing big accounts on TikTok and YouTube testing and spreading awareness about how mediocre some of these products are (not Loewe, though!! they're still incredible).

 

[blueorchid]

I think assuming luxury goods are high quality (and vice versa) is a false equivalence. They're not necessarily the same thing.

 

[Lola701]

isn't comparing toyota vs ferrari to RTW vs HC a bit too unfair ?
if it was car manufacturer like toyota vs carrozzeria, I think that comparison could be possible.

toyota or ferrari, their flagships represent their ideas of quality the most intensely. there you can expect almost the same level of services and the best resources for both of them to be used. that's where they have ideas in common.
but if toyota's flagship breaks down soon, the customers will blame them for the lack of quality. on the other hand, with ferrari, they will not be scolded hardly. at least the customers will not regard it as the lack of quality especially. because what ferrari aims at is what you can get only after sacrificing some of durability, stability, etc. even though ferrari still has to try to make it as durable as possible. that's what the hardcore customers want the most from ferrari.

likewise, quality could look different for example at hermes and at carol christian poell. although the two used to have someone behind the scene in common.

is it simply about emotions? (isn't it sounding a bit like beauty here?) everything that happens around you never happens without any emotions inside you.
some objective element (what there is out of you) which is able to evoke certain kind of emotions cannot be called quality?
seems to me quality comes with some porpose.

Im not a car expert lol.
But from what I know, the range of cars at Toyota is important enough to meet the desire of the consumers. When you go to Ferrari, you want something else, maybe more elevated but also maybe more precious (I see those super cars as precious engines).

I think when someone buys a product, a certain level of quality is expected as it is the unsaid contract that guarantee the use in time of that said product.

However, I think the emotional part comes from somewhere else. That’s why I use my MaxMara example.
I think that what may influence us to choose one brand over another is not quality. It may be part of it but it’s not the main thing.

A lot of people praises Hermes bags’s quality. Their bags are very well made but at the same time, the majority of people who buys Hermes Birkin and Kelly bags barely uses them. If buying something of great quality means not use it quality to it fullest and keep it pristine because you are planning to sell it in 5 years, then what’s the point?

I didn’t used emotion as that kind of abstract word. I think Emotion can be controlled through great branding, brand awareness, our admiration of a designer’s work, our love of campaigns…anything.
I only started to buy into Vuitton and really care about their products when Nicolas Ghesquiere took over. Emotion played a part in my interest in Vuitton. I don’t think the quality of Vuitton products is insane, but then, what an insane quality would look like?

For me quality related with use. A great quality item is something I can forget about and really use. So it can almost be abstract.

 

[MulletProof]

I see myself getting more and more into smaller brands that create a community with great storytelling and sometimes even better quality and design.

What are these smaller brands? you mean a loyal clientele (not community), right?

The line gets so blurry, it's not the way it used to be (independent vs. gross luxury brands).. most smaller anything is small not by choice or purer intentions in design or towards clients, and what the conglomerates practice is mostly a magnified version of what the smaller ones do minus the audits. It really depends on which brands (hence the question) but smaller isn't synonymous of better or more ethical anymore.

 

[runner]

they will not be scolded hardly.

^ they will hardly be scolded.

sorry for the drunken english. (I was sober though)

 

[runner]

Im not a car expert lol.
But from what I know, the range of cars at Toyota is important enough to meet the desire of the consumers. When you go to Ferrari, you want something else, maybe more elevated but also maybe more precious (I see those super cars as precious engines).

I think when someone buys a product, a certain level of quality is expected as it is the unsaid contract that guarantee the use in time of that said product.

However, I think the emotional part comes from somewhere else. That’s why I use my MaxMara example.
I think that what may influence us to choose one brand over another is not quality. It may be part of it but it’s not the main thing.

A lot of people praises Hermes bags’s quality. Their bags are very well made but at the same time, the majority of people who buys Hermes Birkin and Kelly bags barely uses them. If buying something of great quality means not use it quality to it fullest and keep it pristine because you are planning to sell it in 5 years, then what’s the point?

I didn’t used emotion as that kind of abstract word. I think Emotion can be controlled through great branding, brand awareness, our admiration of a designer’s work, our love of campaigns…anything.
I only started to buy into Vuitton and really care about their products when Nicolas Ghesquiere took over. Emotion played a part in my interest in Vuitton. I don’t think the quality of Vuitton products is insane, but then, what an insane quality would look like?

For me quality related with use. A great quality item is something I can forget about and really use. So it can almost be abstract.

just my impression, but maybe toyota seems to be a bit underestimated while ferrari is overestimated.
anyway the reason I picked toyota as an example is it is the only maker that is known for providing the most durable products that has the ability to produce cars mounted with v12. so it had to be toyota.
ferrari showed a new model the other day named 12 cilindri. so it ended up with toyota vs ferrari.

yes even within the same brand, if they have some item that comes in gold and black, I choose the black one. despite the same quality, I like black and I don't like gold as something to wear.
but I don't want quality to be something like thankless job.
and also, when I get to know a stern tailor wants to put at least 7 stitches per centimeter as a basic quality of a shirt while I don't mind if it's 6 or even 5, that may be the moment I come to like the tailor.

 

[UndercoverFW06]

What are these smaller brands? you mean a loyal clientele (not community), right?

The line gets so blurry, it's not the way it used to be (independent vs. gross luxury brands).. most smaller anything is small not by choice or purer intentions in design or towards clients, and what the conglomerates practice is mostly a magnified version of what the smaller ones do minus the audits. It really depends on which brands (hence the question) but smaller isn't synonymous of better or more ethical anymore.

I didn't think about that, you're absolutely right. Also, "smaller isn't synonymous of better or more ethical anymore." is definitely a thing, because being both - or even one - doesn't make your profits higher, but I'm talking about that more from a marketing POV. Bigger brands don't need to do much to sell like water, smaller brands however need to create this sense of "IYKYK" and make their clients feel like they're part of something, like they're a special client. I mean, I don't even know if they actually do this (😅) but that's what I would do if I had to enter this market.

 

[runner]

it's less difficult for smaller's to get away with having to be ethical. the biggest would be killed if it didn't try to make itself look ethical.
that's why toyota had to abolish v12 and ferrari can name the new flagship 12 cilindri. ( though probably it's for memory rather than provocation. meaning like this will be their last time, it may be no more.)

smaller can communicate with audience intimately. you have even direct communication with designers. they simply tend to end up that way. since there are not many staff members there.
not so long ago, when you contacted sacai with trivial queries, you used to wind up talking to chitose.
today that never happens.

 

[philophile]

"Pure intentions"? Pffff Who can judge and really know anyone's intentions? I own several pieces from small independent fashion designers that are truly sustainable with extremely solid quality over the years.

Regardless of the intentions, I'd rather buy something for the attempt at being more sustainable and ethical from a smaller brand than making the big conglomerates who don't even try to even richer. It's not rare to get comparable or even better quality at a fairer price point from them. It's truly a no-brainer, especially if you proclaim yourself not a fan of neoliberalism.

 

[runner]

- style is more radiative than content
yes

- taste is weightier than quality
generally yes. I'd choose nissan over toyota. they have the same ideas about quality. therefore it's clear that toyota is superior in quality. nonetheless I don't like toyota personally.

- "love is stronger than pride"
maybe

- choice is faster than reason
this happens. especially when I'm being creative. in that case choice and instinct are replaceable.

- emotion is more eloquent than thought
thought works coldly for me against emotional eloquence. sometimes emotion is defeated.


it's difficult to strictly grasp what is going on at myself, lots of conflicts swirling.

 

[philophile]

^not a believer in dichotomies, especially when it comes to emotion vs reason. Everything in life is or should be in a mutualistic/symbiotic state, as long as we are self-aware and balance it out. Not even the coldest of rationalists can deny having some emotion behind their thoughts. We are human after all.