or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts - Part II (A New Hope)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Random fashion thoughts - Part II (A New Hope) - Page 786

post #11776 of 13893

Anyone handled stuff by this brand Trove before?  Gives me a schneider + nonnative kind of feel.  Seems quite reasonably priced.   I was just browsing their zozo shop. 

http://shop.trove.co.jp/style_photo/ Some really nice looks for aw16.
Edited by penanceroyaltea - 9/19/16 at 6:15pm
post #11777 of 13893
I want some of this Supreme x UC stuff, are bots worth it? Resale will be undoubtedly ridiculous and I'd prefer to just pay a fee to have somebody's bot buy it.
Are they reliable and worth it?


EDIT: Actually nvm.
post #11778 of 13893
I saw some of it on Insta. I think the t shirts are pretty cool. Do u think buying it online without a bot is impossible?
post #11779 of 13893
No idea tbh, I've never really bought supreme but the impression I get nowadays is that you have little chance especially the collabs.
Looking on my phone the bomber and coat looked good but after seeing the full product photos on my laptop the coat sucks and the bomber is reversible, with one side being mildly interesting and the other side being terrible.
post #11780 of 13893
@dieworkwear
Enjoyed your last post. Thanks for exerting the effort.
post #11781 of 13893
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultaVexillum View Post

I want some of this Supreme x UC stuff, are bots worth it? Resale will be undoubtedly ridiculous and I'd prefer to just pay a fee to have somebody's bot buy it.
Are they reliable and worth it?


EDIT: Actually nvm.

I want a pair of the Adidas mastermind sneakers releasing tomorrow. Will probably hope I get lucky online as I'm not trying to spend $700 on sneakers. Where do you even find bots for random sites?
post #11782 of 13893
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

Not sure I understand that article.

1. The old fashion cycle is continuing as it always has, it's just that some collections are now going directly to the floor after being on the runway. This feels more like it's about shifting the whole production cycle back, rather than forward. So you still have design -> prototype -> production, but now it's just that runways happen after production, instead of between prototype and production, no? Everything else still happens, it's just that they get pushed back earlier on the calendar.

In that sense, editors get involved at the earlier prototype stage, rather than the runway stage. As the article notes at the end, they'll just have to come up with strict NDAs (which might mean a consolidation to the old model, where you have a smaller circle of media insiders, rather than this last decade of expanding the circle and allowing no-name bloggers into fashion shows).

The fact that you're still bringing those editors and writers in at the pre-production stage demonstrates that they're important.

2. It's true that brands can more directly reach their customers nowadays through social media, but I don't know why that necessarily means fashion media is now irrelevant. Communicating a brand's story or image is still really powerful, and the explosion of blogs in the last ten years (IMO) demonstrate that people want relatable copy and, for lack of a better term, authenticity. The problem with the old media model is that everything was so obviously advertorial and out of touch with normal people's consumption habits. So some GQ spread would show some Canai suit for $5,000 or whatever. Blogs and IG accounts have become a lot more about aspirational consumption in the last few years, but it's still so much better than the old media environment (a little more relevant, a little more authentic).

If you buy that story line, then why would anyone substitute all of their fashion media consumption for an even worse version of the old media model? That is, straight up direct marketing from the brand? It's cool that a brand can communicate their message, but it feels better if someone you personally connect to says "this is really great," no? I mean, people will buy stuff here because certain members they like wear it/ endorse it. It's just a more trusted source.

3. The story in that article is still about how brands engage with their current customers, but nothing about how to bring in new ones. That seems like where fashion media would play a role. Paid ads seem less and less important nowadays, at least for small to medium sized firms (probably still matters for big firms like Gucci). But for a small to medium sized company, taking out 3 months worth of ads in GQ probably won't make as big of a difference as getting a lot of social media influencers to endorse your product.

4. Article seems to conflate fashion editor with bloggers with influencers, when they're kind of different groups with some overlapping areas. The broadest idea here (that "influencer marketing" is going to matter less in the future) is weird given that the biggest change in this past year in men's fashion has been pushed by Kanye West, arguably the biggest single "influencer" right now.

Just got up, but I agree in post with you on this. I'll write more about that later.

That article is so rife with jargon that it becomes hard to read, though.
post #11783 of 13893
USPS sent a 2 day priority package destined for SoCal from the bay area to Baltimore. Fun times!
post #11784 of 13893
Any shops worth visiting in Albuquerque? Doesn't have to be clothes, necessarily. I'm in Old Town, so I'll be hitting the art/jewelry shops.
post #11785 of 13893


Gap x Pendleton. Might have to check this out in store TBH.
post #11786 of 13893
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultaVexillum View Post

From that Rick interview:

"You reach a saturation point where people resent having to share you more with people who they think are not as connected and so they end up with a feeling of resentment."

It's like Rick knows exactly what goes on in that forum lol

That was the best bit in that interview. I have very mixed opinions of Rick Owens as a designer but I like reading his interviews. He's a sharp observer of human behaviour.

Not just what goes on in that forum though, and not even just in fashion in general. Every interest we develop in life, whether it's a clothes label, a band, a travel destination or anything else, only lasts as long as not too many other people have discovered the same thing after us. When that happens, we invariably begin to feel that it's beneath us to keep liking it.

Raf Simons, who normally says quite reasonable things in interviews, recently said in a German newspaper interview that he liked designer fashion better when he first started out, because it wasn't widely available then and wasn't a mass interest like now, but was only accessible to a committed, niche audience. I thought that was a pretty idiotic thing to say for somebody who is set to make 18 million dollars a year soon as an employee of Calvin Klein.
post #11787 of 13893
Quote:
Originally Posted by il_colonnello View Post

Raf Simons, who normally says quite reasonable things in interviews, recently said in a German newspaper interview that he liked designer fashion better when he first started out, because it wasn't widely available then and wasn't a mass interest like now, but was only accessible to a committed, niche audience. I thought that was a pretty idiotic thing to say for somebody who is set to make 18 million dollars a year soon as an employee of Calvin Klein.

Really? I read that same interview and thought it was nice to see someone be so refreshingly honest.

It's probably the ugliest part of fashion, but the democratization of anything inevitably makes that thing feel less special.

Raf's comment was partly about that, but also about the speed in which designer fashion is now produced. It's more and more like fast fashion nowadays -- more collections (pre holiday, pre fall, pre whatever), more clothes, more people wearing it, more mass-market gimmicks (see what gets shown at Vetements' shows vs what actually gets picked up by stores).

He obviously struggled with this in that last documentary about him. Hated the pace, hated the pressure, etc. I thought it was nice seeing a designer be so forthright about something that has this slightly ugly, anti-populist dynamic.
post #11788 of 13893
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

Really? I read that same interview and thought it was nice to see someone be so refreshingly honest.

It's probably the ugliest part of fashion, but the democratization of anything inevitably makes that thing feel less special.

Raf's comment was partly about that, but also about the speed in which designer fashion is now produced. It's more and more like fast fashion nowadays -- more collections (pre holiday, pre fall, pre whatever), more clothes, more people wearing it, more mass-market gimmicks (see what gets shown at Vetements' shows vs what actually gets picked up by stores).

He obviously struggled with this in that last documentary about him. Hated the pace, hated the pressure, etc. I thought it was nice seeing a designer be so forthright about something that has this slightly ugly, anti-populist dynamic.

Don't forget that the "in" people in fashion years ago weren't necessarily elite as much as they were a sort of fashion subculture, there wasn't as much money, consolidation and management people and, while we're not talking about punk,we're still discussing some weird people with niche taste along with the regular society pages assholes. Being some gay dude with a devouring passion for fashion wearing a third vintage finds, a third your own clothes and a third designer fashion you afforded through network, sacrifice and private sales didn't make you much more than some eccentric faggot, as far as society at large was concerned. There is some elitist in that but there was a form of elitism at CBGB.
post #11789 of 13893
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

Not sure I understand that article.

1. The old fashion cycle is continuing as it always has, it's just that some collections are now going directly to the floor after being on the runway. This feels more like it's about shifting the whole production cycle back, rather than forward. So you still have design -> prototype -> production, but now it's just that runways happen after production, instead of between prototype and production, no? Everything else still happens, it's just that they get pushed back earlier on the calendar.

In that sense, editors get involved at the earlier prototype stage, rather than the runway stage. As the article notes at the end, they'll just have to come up with strict NDAs (which might mean a consolidation to the old model, where you have a smaller circle of media insiders, rather than this last decade of expanding the circle and allowing no-name bloggers into fashion shows).

The fact that you're still bringing those editors and writers in at the pre-production stage demonstrates that they're important.

2. It's true that brands can more directly reach their customers nowadays through social media, but I don't know why that necessarily means fashion media is now irrelevant. Communicating a brand's story or image is still really powerful, and the explosion of blogs in the last ten years (IMO) demonstrate that people want relatable copy and, for lack of a better term, authenticity. The problem with the old media model is that everything was so obviously advertorial and out of touch with normal people's consumption habits. So some GQ spread would show some Canai suit for $5,000 or whatever. Blogs and IG accounts have become a lot more about aspirational consumption in the last few years, but it's still so much better than the old media environment (a little more relevant, a little more authentic).

If you buy that story line, then why would anyone substitute all of their fashion media consumption for an even worse version of the old media model? That is, straight up direct marketing from the brand? It's cool that a brand can communicate their message, but it feels better if someone you personally connect to says "this is really great," no? I mean, people will buy stuff here because certain members they like wear it/ endorse it. It's just a more trusted source.

3. The story in that article is still about how brands engage with their current customers, but nothing about how to bring in new ones. That seems like where fashion media would play a role. Paid ads seem less and less important nowadays, at least for small to medium sized firms (probably still matters for big firms like Gucci). But for a small to medium sized company, taking out 3 months worth of ads in GQ probably won't make as big of a difference as getting a lot of social media influencers to endorse your product.

4. Article seems to conflate fashion editor with bloggers with influencers, when they're kind of different groups with some overlapping areas. The broadest idea here (that "influencer marketing" is going to matter less in the future) is weird given that the biggest change in this past year in men's fashion has been pushed by Kanye West, arguably the biggest single "influencer" right now.

Not too sure what the article about but everyone can pipeline my long lead. The writing is unacceptable.

TBH I never made the correlation between people who get "eyes" on instagram and consumer buying said bullshit product . I thus believe "influencer" based marketing strategies are basically wishful thinking from pr people who'd rather party with hot, well known baskets of deplorables at some branded event than do actual analysis and boring marketing stuff and actually help sales. I hope it lasts a while as I'd think exactly the same if I was in their wretched corporate buffoon of magazine liaison position.

I don' think non-stupid people trust bloggers (pretty much as whorish as mags) but point 4 is quite cogent.
post #11790 of 13893
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

Don't forget that the "in" people in fashion years ago weren't necessarily elite as much as they were a sort of fashion subculture, there wasn't as much money, consolidation and management people and, while we're not talking about punk,we're still discussing some weird people with niche taste along with the regular society pages assholes. Being some gay dude with a devouring passion for fashion wearing a third vintage finds, a third your own clothes and a third designer fashion you afforded through network, sacrifice and private sales didn't make you much more than some eccentric faggot, as far as society at large was concerned. There is some elitist in that but there was a form of elitism at CBGB.

I dunno, man.  I am not as old as Raf, probably, but I remember a fair bit of elitism, and definitely the type of elitism associated with money and privilege, in the LA and NYC scenes.  I mean, the throwing of exclusive and ostentatious parties that were typically closed off except to "VIPs" and friends, were pretty common in the late 90s and early 2000s.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts - Part II (A New Hope)