Quote:
Originally Posted by
SartorialKing 
Oh, so you mean like all of USA is a ghetto?
Hey, we're not culturally bankrupt, at least not in the south. Down here we have... ummm.. Nascar... and...umm... Mountain Dew and...umm... okay, maybe you're right.
j/k
Anyway, we've long since veered off topic from the LV shirt. Even though the basic argument stands that LV is only a mid-tier maker, I think that some members may be confusing the LV Monogram Canvas pattern (the famous, garish LV logo) with the RTW line, which in general is often quite subtle and rarely smattered with lots of logoing. Marc Jacobs' design teams at LV are quite clever and realize that the same consumer who will buy a $35,000 very slim-fitting ostrich coat or $12,000 carpetbag are not the same who would buy a loose-fitting sweatsuit with LV logos all over it. As such, the more garish items are generally those that are considered the more "accessible" parts of the collection, designed for the aforementioned ghettoish or chav types who want to show off. Again, "accessible" might mean $1000 sweatpants designed by Pharrell, but that still is cheaper than the top parts of the collection, whose leather goods and furs would rival Hermes, Valentino, or one's sacred Brioni, Kiton, or Borelli... and would cost just as much. In short, they're trying to appeal to a number of demographics, but the top items are not necessarily the demographic you might think.
Anyway, take a look at men.style.com or some of the other fashion sites and see the LV collections, they really aren't all that garish as you might think.
Now, again, the OP was talking about quality of shirts, which opened the can of worms because their shirts aren't really anything spectactular or rare. But, stylistically, often the collections are quite nice (as Socalny and I discussed earlier.)
