Reading a thread located here got me thinking... Why are products from major fashion companies like Coach, Armani, etc, so expensive? Is the quality of their products really superior to that of, say, Express, Buckle, or even Wal-Mart? Is it all just in the name? And if so, why are people stupid enough to pay upwards of 10,000% more for the same quality product that they could purchase at a different store for much cheaper? Someone please explain the logic behind the fashion industry because I just don't see any. :shrug:
I work in retail and can perhaps address some aspects of the posed question. 'Brand' names have recognition, established by some aspect of their nature that appeals to the purchaser. What that aspect may be can be measurable or intangible. Everyone is using the word 'quality' to define their product of late, yet kindly define the word 'quality' for me. Do you see my point? One can measure many properties of a commodity on a variety of scales, yet 'quality' is almost entirely a subjective measurement. Most customers evaluate an item on how well it may suit them personally, as in how it tastes, fits, looks, how durable or fashionable. Then there is the subjective matter of 'status', or how a certain purchase makes one 'feel'. Companies have become expert at 'selling the sizzle', while the customer ends up with only a mediocre steak at best. :bugeye: Some companies have higher operating costs because they use the best resources available in the making of their product and they pay their workers a decent wage, so it is expected that their products will cost more. When one brings ethics into the purchasing decision, one will often find the customer willing to pay more for the satisfaction of making a purchase that aligns with their moral compass.
Quality can be measures in the items used to manufacture the product as well as the detail. Compare wool to Egyptian cotton for an example of the textile difference. Is the shirt laced with gold coated theading or is it laced with cotton?... another example. Well, I honestly don't think ethics really come into play with the majority of shoppers. People don't typically think that far back into the product/line history to care if their shirt was made by 12 year olds in a sweatshop or by some over-paid NYC fashion guru. My opinion is that 99% of those who purchase through brands like LV, Armani, etc, do it as an act of social status. "Look at me, I can afford to waste hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars. That make me better than you." So, in essence, the drive behind the fashion industry is one ran by ego, not product quality - most of the time. Manufacturers produce a product with the claim that they are the best in the world (just an example) and that if you buy it, you'll be "cool". Then some people buy their product. Next, their friends see them with their new clothes/accessories/etc and subconsciously think that they themselves aren't as "cool/hip" etc because they don't have it but others do. Thus the snowball effect comes into play. The more people buy the overpriced products, the more more will want them. It's a social status ran society where people don't stop to think about the details. They just see what others have and they want to feel either equal or superior to them. I think the same trend applies to electronic gadgetry. People just have to have the latest and greatest, even if the quality is next to nothing. It's all ego.
Because people are willing to pay more for them. If they weren't, Armani would either drop its prices or go out of business. Lots of potential reasons. They desire to be seen as rich, and thus they buy things that identify them as rich. They desire to have the same items that other people have, and those other people have Coach, Armani etc things. They are told that they will be more popular, respected, desirable etc if they have such items. They believe that such items really are of higher quality and are willing to pay more for that greater value.
Did you see the Emperors new clothes, they were custom made just for him and he thinks they look great but do you? :shrug: The Emperor's New Clothes" (Danish: Kejserens nye Klæder) is a short tale by Hans Christian Andersen about two weavers who promise an Emperor a new suit of clothes that is invisible to those unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent. When the Emperor parades before his subjects in his new clothes, a child cries out, "But he isn't wearing anything at all!" wiki We all see things that are called "designer" this or "custom made" that. Does it mean to everyone that those things are really that much better than say just a nice shirt or good looking blouse? To each of us we usually have to see how much money things cost before we tend to spend, especially if you have a family and have allot of debt.
Perhaps you overlooked the full meaning of this remark, MZ3Boy84? 'Ego' does indeed play a large part in the decision making process of the consumer, yet I know many people who shop based on the ethics I mentioned in my previous post, because they can afford to pay for 'free-trade' commodities and feel that they are making a difference by their choice. Many others are of limited means and so they are delighted to buy 'knock-offs' of brand names so as to at least 'look like' they are among the more successful, given that our society is influenced by such visible means. For myself, I value durable goods and I will do much research before I buy most items. Where food is concerned, I value where and how it is grown and handled from the perspective of human health and safety. Once those criteria have been satisfied, I examine my options of where to purchase. I will always buy local first unless the cost difference is ridiculous. In choosing between two local providers, I will look at the track record of the company and it's long-term benefit to my community. :bugeye: Admittedly, my decision making processes may not be those of the majority of shoppers.
While some of the mystique of a brand is certainly based on false advertising, some of a brand's value is based on quality. When they have a reputation to maintain, they are going to work harder on quality control and engineering.
Possibly. I'd really love to see any data out there that measures the varying qualities of clothing and their prices. I've love to see a cost/price comparison on most of the products from these major designers, as well. I could imagine that a jacket (for example_ that they price at $500 USD costs MUCH less to manufacture. I honestly wouldn't be surprised that with material cost PLUS time involved in manufacturing probably rarely exceeds 10-20% of the the eventual customer price.
But you have to factor in the rejected ones too. If it's manufactured in Asia, it probably takes less than an hour of labor at less than a dollar an hour.
