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 498

post #7456 of 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3hg0suazn View Post
 

I thought it was actually a fairly well curated collection. They managed to cover a wide range of styles with some cool pieces from each. Didn't really pay attention to styling, just looked at items themselves. I am a little surprised how quickly things sold. Also did they just buy these pieces off the marketplace and store them until they got 100? If so that's a pretty risky move - comes with all the risks/problems of being a retailer. 

Agreed, thought some of the looks were pretty cool.

post #7457 of 13981
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoreman1782 View Post
Gotcha.

For the really engaged fashion consumer that may be a useful trade-off, but for the rabble I think the opportunity to handle at/potentially return to a retail outlet (plus the expectation of sales later in the season) is something people would really miss. I mean we're a long way from getting rid of retail altogether but it's sorta happening to mainstream department stores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by conceptual 4est View Post
 

Yeah, there are a number of reasons that model won't work for any labels that are doing anything interesting, design-wise.

 

The one I haven't seen mentioned though is that most people simply don't have the confidence to buy something without first seeing what is trending, and what cool stores, tastemakers, and trendsetters have bought and are wearing.

 

 

Burberry actually did something about 5 years back for the Korean market, who were obsessed with matching "his and hers" things. They offered a NikeID sort of setup, where you could customize trench coats to your specs, at a massive premium, and the details would get sent directly to the factory and made from those submissions. Of course there were one or two people in the middle making sure something weird wasn't going on, but it was technology that have developed in-house, even years ago. I see no reason why they couldn't have shoppable runway shows, especially if what they're showing on the runway is something they've already been making for months or years.

It seems like, at least from the consumer side, that there would be few perceivable changes.  The real change would be on the vendor would get the benefits of marketing immediately, instead of spending a ton of time and money on a runway show or installation that generates excitement for stuff that won't be on sale for 6 months, and then, when the collections actually hit the stores, there is no followup marketing by the brand itself, other than through third parties like magazines, online publications, and retailers.

 

Or maybe we are talking at cross purposes.  That also happens a lot...

post #7458 of 13981
re: grailed100-- they bought two of the n(n) pieces from me, and listed them for significantly less than they paid me for them.

so their move seems to be aimed more at generating hype and/or reputation than immediate profit.
post #7459 of 13981

yea I didn't think those were the original prices, I think the ethnic rider was listed at around 2k. Not sure if the attention is worth the money lost since new users will quickly find out that those deals don't really exist. 

post #7460 of 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoreman1782 View Post

Gotcha.

For the really engaged fashion consumer that may be a useful trade-off, but for the rabble I think the opportunity to handle at/potentially return to a retail outlet (plus the expectation of sales later in the season) is something people would really miss. I mean we're a long way from getting rid of retail altogether but it's sorta happening to mainstream department stores.

Yeah I was gonna throw in some more detailed explanations, including how it depends on what kind of consumer you are, but I was tired and just mailed in a post. satisfied.gif
post #7461 of 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by conceptual 4est View Post

The one I haven't seen mentioned though is that most people simply don't have the confidence to buy something without first seeing what is trending, and what cool stores, tastemakers, and trendsetters have bought and are wearing.

Wouldn't this just mean companies like Burberry and Tom Ford will release safer and safer designs? Basically things that are super trendy at the moment on the high-end, since they're the things they can sell right now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by accordion View Post

yea I didn't think those were the original prices, I think the ethnic rider was listed at around 2k. Not sure if the attention is worth the money lost since new users will quickly find out that those deals don't really exist. 

Lawrence told me they're planning to do this once every six months or so. I don't know -- seems like a great idea to me. Way to generate excitement, get people to sign up, talk about the site, and also let people get things for less than they would have otherwise paid. I think the point is to show what kind of things can be had on Grailed if you look.
post #7462 of 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface View Post

re: grailed100-- they bought two of the n(n) pieces from me, and listed them for significantly less than they paid me for them.

so their move seems to be aimed more at generating hype and/or reputation than immediate profit.

This makes me wonder how many of the things sold today are going to reappear on the market tomorrow at hiked up prices. 

post #7463 of 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3hg0suazn View Post

This makes me wonder how many of the things sold today are going to reappear on the market tomorrow at hiked up prices. 

You're supposedly restricted from reselling for a month, presumably with the threat of a ban. But even in a month's time, you could probably flip those for a profit.
post #7464 of 13981
Grailed also bought from me, the Ann ornate overcoat, they priced it a little higher than they bought it for (I'm not 100% sure it's mine but I did sell that coat on grailed)
post #7465 of 13981

They bought 4 things from me and most of them are same price or lower.

post #7466 of 13981
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

Wouldn't this just mean companies like Burberry and Tom Ford will release safer and safer designs? Basically things that are super trendy at the moment on the high-end, since they're the things they can sell right now?

I don't see how this would be a necessary consequence, particularly since increasing the "see it, buy it" purchases would, if anything, encourage purchase of more difficult pieces, since customer sees them styled, rather than as a single piece out of context.

post #7467 of 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3hg0suazn View Post

Does Margiela produce everything in Romania now? @RegisDB9

I know Made in Romania vs. Made in Italy probably doesn't mean anything quality wise, but it does raise some ethical qualms. I noticed that AMI is also made in Romania, and I don't know how much I trust their "with love" promise. And generally fashion houses moving production to cheaper labor has been an ominous sign in terms of the future of the brand. I guess Margiela is under yoox < net-a-porter so it's inevitable. 
Too bad because SS16 and FW16 both looked really strong. 

Feels more like 40/50 in favor of Italy at the moment. I actively stay away from the MiR clothing though. You are right it doesn't really mean anything but I like seeing "Made in Italy". It makes me wonder sometimes though since Margiela e-boutique and YOOX flat out refuse to tell me where a piece is made...I get the same reply overtime "All of our garments are made to certain standards...blah blah.

My first question before buying an piece online is "where is this made". Since YOOX corp refuses to just answer a simple question I often go around searching for an item on Farfetch or Stylebop and then asking them where its made. Right now I am seeing a lot of T's being made in Turkey and a lot of pants in Romania. I even saw a Made in Romania 5Zip....usually it is just the odd knit in the collection
post #7468 of 13981

re: gr@iled, I think we underestimate the value they put on hype and their willingness to lose $ initially to generate it...

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sinnedk View Post


yea bay got hot all of the sudden, wtf is going on its Feb

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spehsmonkey View Post

It's trite but nice weather is boring (for clothes). I've basically gotten rid of my old outerwear I didn't like and haven't bought any replacements cause the bay's been so hot

 

Its ridiculous. Ever since I moved from SF I can't even use the foggy and chilly nights as an excuse to wear coats anymore. Even when it rains here, a rain jacket is still plenty warm enough.

post #7469 of 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post

I don't see how this would be a necessary consequence, particularly since increasing the "see it, buy it" purchases would, if anything, encourage purchase of more difficult pieces, since customer sees them styled, rather than as a single piece out of context.

I think it's because the companies that are likely to do this are small designers and big fashion houses. Not sure the first really matters, as they're likely to be experimental anyway. The second are companies big enough to have their own retail outlets, since (as far as I understand it) that's really the only way this runway-to-sales-floor model really works. Middle-sized companies can't pull this off very easily since they have to coordinate with a ton of stores who are running on their own schedules.

If you're a big fashion house with your own retail shops, you still have to move a ton of units. And with the kind of customer and sales volume you're likely dealing with, you have more pressure to react to trends. This isn't a pre-order thing (I don't think). This is: we have a runway show, and immediately after, you can go to the store to shop the collection. So the stuff is already made. You're still dealing with inventories; you're just streamlining the process (and incorporating runway shows and social media more into your marketing). When you have to invest that much into production, and you don't have time to help build a trend, the smartest move would seem to just follow trends.

I think Kyle is right, most people don't have the guts to buy things that aren't already trendy in some way or another. Early adopters tend to buy from small or middle sized companies, since they can afford to only move a small number of units. But those companies aren't the ones that are likely to adopt this business model.

Basically, this move just seems like it's going to push designer fashion into fast fashion, which isn't a very innovative/ risk-loving arena.
post #7470 of 13981
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

I think it's because the companies that are likely to do this are small designers and big fashion houses. Not sure the first really matters, as they're likely to be experimental anyway. The second are companies big enough to have their own retail outlets, since (as far as I understand it) that's really the only way this runway-to-sales-floor model really works. Middle-sized companies can't pull this off very easily since they have to coordinate with a ton of stores who are running on their own schedules.

If you're a big fashion house with your own retail shops, you still have to move a ton of units. And with the kind of customer and sales volume you're likely dealing with, you have more pressure to react to trends. This isn't a pre-order thing (I don't think). This is: we have a runway show, and immediately after, you can go to the store to shop the collection. So the stuff is already made. You're still dealing with inventories; you're just streamlining the process (and incorporating runway shows and social media more into your marketing). When you have to invest that much into production, and you don't have time to help build a trend, the smartest move would seem to just follow trends.

I think Kyle is right, most people don't have the guts to buy things that aren't already trendy in some way or another. Early adopters tend to buy from small or middle sized companies, since they can afford to only move a small number of units. But those companies aren't the ones that are likely to adopt this business model.

Basically, this move just seems like it's going to push designer fashion into fast fashion, which isn't a very innovative/ risk-loving arena.

Those houses have to invest a ton into production anyway.  

 

And it's not as though under the current model, the most challenging pieces are the ones that sell through the most.  The same things will sell as do now: luxurious basics (I'm looking at you, "investment" leather jackets), denim, sneakers, accessories.  And right now, behind the scenes, after the show, when buying is actually done, there is a lot of horsetrading and taming of runways pieces so that buyers can feel somewhat secure, making really dramatic stuff both more widely appealing and at a more reasonably pricepoint than the runway piece, as shown, would go for.

 

At least with the fast fashion model, production can react to an interesting piece that catches fire, and we would skip that intermediate watering down step.

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)