or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › what makes Seven for all mankind and Hudson jeans so expensive?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

what makes Seven for all mankind and Hudson jeans so expensive? - Page 2

post #16 of 178
I did not even know that those were jeans brands.
post #17 of 178
the label, but SW&D doesn't like those brands. they like higher end denim, pbj, apc, samurai etc, while the budget denim nudie, naked and famous, etc will go for more than the cheaper jeans in the market you're discussing the whole william rast, true religion, 7fam and j brand segment.
post #18 of 178
Based on the one pair I bought last year, they make them in the US. That might explain the higher price.
post #19 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brocktherock View Post
So iv'e been looking through yahoo answers and several other random media outlets for some answers and have gotten so far good or bad experiences, and biased rooted opinions. in other words, the differnce between 10$ 70$ 200$ 200+$ jeans

From a designer or high end-consumer standpoint, what makes these jeans much more different?
does marketing play much of a role? that's what most people were saying, however i've yet to see one hudson or sevens for all mankind commercial or advertisement anywhere.

is it the fabric? the second common reply from my time digging for answers. I read that the difference in quality would change costs from 10$ to 70$ max, after that it's all marketing and brand name. that makes the most sense to me, but that could also be someones opinion. You dont have to be a professional to make a comment.

OR is it a mixture of both, or some other avenue of design that i haven't found. ie. used by celebrities, the way its made, or how durable/delicate they are. Please someone shed some light on this. im sure i can get a better understanding from the opinions and expertise of the guys here at style forum.

primarily, first-mover advantage in a market segment that was hitherto completely underserved (flattering cuts, thinner / stretch fabrics, etc.) -- i.e., anything that wasn't mom or dad jeans. then, amplification of first-mover advantage with en-masse celebrity adoption. further amplification with an ever-broadening distribution network.

at some point a brand gains so much early momentum that it is able to sustain itself at a quality/price-point level that would be unsustainable for most others that haven't built that brand premium. similar to Boss and Armani, who also make thoroughly average product at premium price points.

Seven also made the smart (in hindsight) move of preserving broad appeal by keeping their product fairly classic and avoiding becoming overly trendy... such as what happened to Rock & Republic, which now has a pretty beaten-up brand and can only push product through heavy discounting.

they also served the overall market well by demonstrating that there was a viable and large market for people who cared about nice cuts and better-than-average fabrics and were willing to pay for it. many of the niche denim brands arose only after 7 drove the wedge.

BTW i like 7's... but on discount.
post #20 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuitedNBooted View Post
Then there's the cut... I'm sorry but Lee is not D&G.
Yup, Lees have a nice, simple, classic cut. D&G jeans have a fashony crap cut designed to appeal to SW&Ders who sag for the diaper effect and stack for the 'can't find my size' effect. There are a few differences. Lee, in addition to the regular fit jean that's been around for decades and is nearly identical in fit to the APC new standards (slim straight) and 514s that the SW&D crowd adores, makes all manner of other cuts of jeans, largely baggier, to appeal to the working crowd. They don't position themselves as a fashion line dedicated to making things that solely look good. A large portion of their customers expect their jeans to hold up while doing manual labor. Wrangler is there as well. Levis really isn't anymore- these days, they're really a fashion brand for the masses that cashes in on a working heritage. D&G, on the other hand, is a fashion brand exclusively, and marketed and priced as such. Their jeans are made to look fashiony. That may mean thinner, already worn through fabrics (in terms of pre distressing, they're a horrible offender). Yes, increased labor costs in the US are a part of it. But not nearly the most significant part. Oh, and as for Patek's bit about Tom Ford- tailoring is different. There are very real differences in construction time and effort. Fused jackets are cheap because they take a lot less time and skill to produce than a canvassed garment. Cut and sew stuff like jeans all take a pretty similar amount of time and skill, the difference is basically the country and pay scale it's being done with. And yeah, TF marks up even from the canvassed suit level for his image.
post #21 of 178
Are you taking fashion notes from stevedores and slaughterhouse-workers on what jeans they're wearing?
post #22 of 178
I own a pair of 7's and have to say they are my favorite pair of jeans. The cut and the cloth are the big seller to me; they are fashionable, but not trendy and the denim is softer and less stiff than many denims. They do have a large markup, but so does most of the labels that are discussed on this forum. They are one of my most worn pair of jeans, so the price to use ratio is not that high. If they were a pair that I only wore a few times due to them being trendy or because of not a great feel, then I would say they were overpriced; but I would buy another pair for sure.
post #23 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamapuaa View Post
Are you taking fashion notes from stevedores and slaughterhouse-workers on what jeans they're wearing?
I'm pretty sure they're wearing cheap, baggy and tough rather than expensive, overly shrunken and thin. And no, I'm not looking to them for style inspiration. Sounds like you didn't quite comprehend my post. While Lee makes some jeans that fit and look nice, they also makes the baggy carpenter jeans or whatever else worn by construction workers looking for something that can be beaten up. D&G and other fashion brands don't make those sort of work clothes. They make fashiony clothes, and charge more for them since the fashiony set is willing to pay more than the practical use set, even though by many measures (like durability), the D&G stuff is far inferior. But since D&G markets to the fashiony set, they can charge those prices. If Lee tried that, they would be perceived as concerned more about looks than durability and whatnot, and would lose customers among the working set. Basically, D&G's marketing increases the product's value among the fashony demographic, whereas that kind of marketing would decrease the product's value to a lot of Lee's clientèle. Lee could reposition the brand in a more fashiony context, much like Levis has done, banking on its working heritage while moving away from the working buyers, but that would be a risk, and the company is successful enough where it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by div25sec9 View Post
I own a pair of 7's and have to say they are my favorite pair of jeans. The cut and the cloth are the big seller to me; they are fashionable, but not trendy and the denim is softer and less stiff than many denims. They do have a large markup, but so does most of the labels that are discussed on this forum. They are one of my most worn pair of jeans, so the price to use ratio is not that high. If they were a pair that I only wore a few times due to them being trendy or because of not a great feel, then I would say they were overpriced; but I would buy another pair for sure.
MC shuns high markups wherever possible. About the most hated brand on here is Hugo Boss for just that reason- they charge 4x what a lot of others do for a fused suit. A lot of the stuff with big pricetags on this forum have them because there are differences in construction that take a whole lot more skill and time to produce. That $2000 jacket might cost several hundred dollars to produce, with the skilled labor and high quality materials required. SW&D is much more markup friendly. They buy much more into the marketing crap spewn to justify the high markups on stuff. Those top end jeans discussed by SW&D might cost $15 to make and $300 to buy, and that's in the US. Jeans made in china nearly all cost a couple of bucks to make and a couple of bucks to ship. The brand's cost by the time those hit the us is less than $5. Then they'll turn right around and charge you $70 for 'em. Or $20, depending on where that brand is positioning itself. Or $12 if you're walmart.
post #24 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post
D&G, on the other hand, is a fashion brand exclusively, and marketed and priced as such. Their jeans are made to look fashiony. That may mean thinner, already worn through fabrics (in terms of pre distressing, they're a horrible offender).
What I find really funny about this is that the holy grail of SW&D is "worked hard and put away wet." "Fashion" jeans very often try to counterfeit authenticity, for want of a better way to put it. So a lot of people $300 buy jeans that have artificial wear marks and fake holes . . . well the holes are real, I suppose, but you know what I mean . . . but completely disdain the idea of buying real jeans that someone might actually work in. True, there are issues of cut and fit but a lot of makers, even Wrangler, make a variety of cuts. Anyway, I think it is hilarious when people spend $300 to buy wimpy jeans that already have holes and fade marks. If I could figure out how to market them, I've got a big enough stack of trashed denim to finance a world cruise.
post #25 of 178
The hilarious thing is that Lee, Wrangler and 7FMK are all made by the same company in Greensboro, NC.

VF Corporation. They buy up "trendy" companies and mass produce the product. It is kind of sad when you find out some of the brands they have. Like seeing the man behind the curtain.
post #26 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoNothingGuy View Post
The hilarious thing is that Lee, Wrangler and 7FMK are all made by the same company in Greensboro, NC.

VF Corporation. They buy up "trendy" companies and mass produce the product. It is kind of sad when you find out some of the brands they have. Like seeing the man behind the curtain.

Haha that is sort of like how Luxottica makes every pair of glasses and sunglasses ever for luxury brands as well as big sunglasses brands (Ray Ban, Oakley etc)
post #27 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Man Of Lint View Post
...add to your conclusions, greed.
My very first thought as well.
post #28 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamapuaa View Post
It's not related to men's fashion. You'd probably get a better answer in the denim & streetwear group.



No - he will get the same answer over there as he does here. It's over-priced garbage made to the same standards as Wrangler jeans sold at Kohls. They're just more gaudy, have a $$$-associated label sewn to them and most look like they were fed through a wood-chipper.
post #29 of 178
For those who don't know, Nordstrom Rack has an endless supply of 7 for All Mankind jeans at $70-80.
post #30 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraiche View Post
For those who don't know, Nordstrom Rack has an endless supply of 7 for All Mankind jeans at $70-80.
And still they are NOT worth the price.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › what makes Seven for all mankind and Hudson jeans so expensive?