I mentioned in an earlier post that I had cut open a suit and was shocked at why companies use fusing rather than just fully canvasing the suit, because it appears that the amount of time that it takes to canvas a suit is radically overstated. [Assume that it takes 3 hours, and assume that the workers are paid 20 an hour -- an outrageously high sum -- it seems like full canvasing would be worth at least $100 extra for retail. That would cover the labor, the materials, and probably still leave a profit of $20 or so]. For example, why doesn't Armani canvas their suits when Vestimenta -- who makes Armani -- is fully capable of doing this? Same with Burberry via Hickey Freeman. So, here's my new theory. Major premise: Most men don't know the difference between canvas and fused, and neither do most sales people I might add. I mean, for god's sake, half the members of this board are still confused even after extensive posting on the subject. Minor premise: Fused suits don't last as long as canvas suits. Conclusion: Manufacturers fuse suits because they know that it will require the customer to buy more suits over a particular time span, and the customer will be unable to attribute the poor durability of the fused suit to its inferior construction. Therefore, the customer will return and the price he is willing to pay will not be diminished sufficiently. Built in obsolescence is well known in the auto industry. How can this not be a plausible explanation for what's going on in the mid-high to high range suits?