or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Random fashion thoughts - Page 2347  

post #35191 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by zazaza View Post
dude, just to be clear:
when I say SMP i'm referring to the the seamaster professional.
yes, you can get a brand new SMP for under 2k today, it most certainly does not sell "for over 4k".
the seamasters have had sapphire crystals for as long as recent memory serves. well over 8 years.
"good for you that it hasn't broken down" - hold up, this is one of the same movements that you referred to as "great". my personal opinion aside, am I to infer that this isn't a "great" watch by your standards, even though it contains a "great" movement?

By SMP I assumed you meant Speedmaster Professional. And the Seamaster Pro retails for $3,500+, where can you get one for $2k brand new? For 43% discount, hook it up because I'd buy one for myself and maybe another to resell. And of course no quartz movements.

Seamaster is awesome but again, no way you will find it for $2k unless you wait for a store to close and just getting rid of old stock, which rarely happens. Yeah, it has great movements but it isn't $2k brand new. I suggested it as a great used watch because that is the only way you can find it for $2k.

The Seamaster may not sell for $4k because of discounts but the Bond GMT retails $4k.
post #35192 of 109053
RFX45, you've got a PM
post #35193 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by zazaza View Post
RFX45, you've got a PM
Sweet! I've actually been looking for the Bond for a while now.
post #35194 of 109053
I want a shitload more jil now that I own a piece, could live in it all s/s. I feel fucking fantastic I my suit, and it's not even tailored yet.
post #35195 of 109053
waht suit is it? is it the "tailor made" line or whatever it's called? the ones that have some special tailoring going on in the upper back/shoulders
post #35196 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncontrol View Post
Yeah, because everyone on a low budget doesn't care about fashion, that's why stores like H&M and Uniqlo are doing so poorly
The average American clothing shopper isn't going to the H&Ms and Uniqlos of the world, precisely because they don't care about fashion. For most people, clothes are means to an end; disposable commodities for a utilitarian purpose. Expecting mass market retailers to "rock the boat" and go after fashion-conscious people (even those on low budgets) basically misunderstands why these companies are in business. The market's just not there, and it's a very chicken-and-the-egg thing; we won't know there's a market for this stuff until someone's successfully establishes one. It's not like better-fitting clothes is a difficult idea or something that couldn't be implemented given enough resources; there's just not the will to do so. ETA: Ultimately, I think the issue of availability of fits comes down to "education" about and experience with fit. People just don't expect anything different from what they already have, and until they've been conditioned to wear (and demand) better fitting clothing, the availability just won't exist. The niche and the mass appreciate different things; you won't see change until the niche becomes the new mass.
post #35197 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post
Sweet!
I've actually been looking for the Bond for a while now.

Hook me up
post #35198 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Quack View Post
The average American clothing shopper isn't going to the H&Ms and Uniqlos of the world, precisely because they don't care about fashion. For most people, clothes are means to an end; disposable commodities for a utilitarian purpose. Expecting mass market retailers to "rock the boat" and go after fashion-conscious people (even those on low budgets) basically misunderstands why these companies are in business. The market's just not there, and it's a very chicken-and-the-egg thing; we won't know there's a market for this stuff until someone's successfully establishes one. It's not like better-fitting clothes is a difficult idea or something that couldn't be implemented given enough resources; there's just not the will to do so.

You've missed the entire point of what he said. He didn't say, "Why can't I buy well cut pants at Wal-Mart?" He's asking why there's such a dearth at lower-priced retailers in general.
post #35199 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfurey View Post
Hook me up

I'll let you know how it turns out.
post #35200 of 109053
im always surprised how much you all say the public doesn't care about how they look. these people that you claim have no interest in what they wear in fact do. that guy with the old structure tee shirt and American Eagle cargo shorts still has a favorite pair of jeans he believes he looks good in and puts on when he wants to feel that way(even if they're just shapeless tubes). your dumpy aunt who looks like she bought out a clearance rack at dress barn still has a dress and a necklace she puts on that make her feel beautiful, and that kid who still has a bowl cut feels awesome when ge gets it freshly cut.
post #35201 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulYAY View Post
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I wasn't saying that at all. That would be dumb. Thanks for the kind reading (If you'd care to explain what I said that lead you to make that assumption, please do). Saying 'taut' is no different than saying 'laying completely flat' when the subject is denim or any non-stretch textile.

I'd be more curious as to how the rep gets two seperate measurements for front and back (and with the back being larger). now that is a puzzle indeed.


further thought on the topic: There's no point in measuring the waist if not aligned just like there's no point measuring the chest of a shirt from side seam to side seam. Doubling either yields no useful measurement. Sadly, just as the term 'true size' is used to denote many different things, there will probably never be much conformity for method of measurement either.

As to having a predilection for accuracy and a preference for measurements taken laying naturally (i.e. mellon's I have a 29 inch waist and prefer shorts to measure 15.25" across laying naturally), those two things seem inconsistent. Different cuts yield different curves when laying naturally, not to mention how the fabric reforms with wear. I imagine this concept is too abstract for some here just as my observation about the multible waist measurements when measured 'taut'.

As to things being difficult to align, I've never found this to be a problem. I'd be interested to hearing more on this.

Oh I see, I just misread (obvs)
You meant front larger than the back with a curved tape, I skipped all the important parts of the sentence and read it as the whole waist measuring larger than it should when not aligned
post #35202 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncontrol View Post
You've missed the entire point of what he said. He didn't say, "Why can't I buy well cut pants at Wal-Mart?"
I didn't mention Wal-Mart, this isn't something specific to Wal-Mart.
Quote:
He's asking why there's such a dearth at lower-priced retailers in general.
So, "Why can't I buy well-cut pants?" The only difference between those two questions is that one is specific and one isn't. The answers are the same: the money's not there (or, rather, not enough money is there). Alternatively, there's a conspiracy to make all low-cost clothing ill-fitting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tween_spirit
im always surprised how much you all say the public doesn't care about how they look. these people that you claim have no interest in what they wear in fact do.
They care incorrectly; therefore, they don't care. (5) This is precisely why there aren't better fitting clothes. They don't see their clothes as "wrong" or "ill-fitting," so they have no reason to demand better fitting clothes. Repeat with whatever criteria you choose.
post #35203 of 109053
I also wanted to hear from people who own or have owned at least a few pairs of pants made by a mid-to-high-end designer. It's not just a matter of cheap pants fitting oddly. I'm curious if the general feeling is that it's rare to get a poor fitting pair of pants from one of those designers (excluding shit like obvious mis-sizing on the buyer's part).
post #35204 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott.m View Post
I want a shitload more jil now that I own a piece, could live in it all s/s. I feel fucking fantastic I my suit, and it's not even tailored yet.

you got a jil suit? watcha get? i just got mine this weekend. milly/milton. i LOVE how it fits. debating whether i should get the sleeve and jacket shortened a bit.
post #35205 of 109053
what do you mean by mid to high end deisgner? i often go cheap on pants because i wear them out pretty quickly but i have owned jeans from the following: raf by raf (2 pairs) cp company (2 pairs) apc (2 pairs) oni pure blue japan RRL (3 pairs) cheap monday april 77 (3 pairs) ksubi there are probably some that i am forgetting. i am really not that picky so i was fairly happy. one thing though, is that CP company sizing is definitely inconsistent. I have two pairs in the same size and one is like a whole size smaller than the other. raf sizing generally runs slim but they do offer multiple fits and i was pretty happy with the fit and finish on them. cheap mondays - i don't know how they are anymore but i got a pair in like 2008 or so and they were very good jeans for the money. i haven't bought cheap brands for a while but whenever i go to a uniqlo or h&m i get angry/annoyed very quickly and leave.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts