STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Very possibly...which makes me wonder as to why there aren't more items in 36 / 38 Short from RL. Especially since when RL does indeed produce a 36 / 38 Short, they make one or two of them for a particular style. That's 1 or 2 company wide. Which means only 2 people will be able to purchase a particular jacket / suit if they wear 36 / 38 S. Boils my bloodI think that's Ralph's size.
I believe he's a 36S Ditto above comment - he, if anyone, should understand how hard it is for smaller gentlemen, so why doesn't he stock more? That said, I love RL p.s. there's a 36S for sale on the Polo website, which I think is still too expensive: jacket p.p.s. there was a 37S RLPL navy bherringone sport jacekt on Ebay last week. $2K retail, sold for $480. I bid $475, which was the original buy it now price (I refuse to pay over buy it now) - well, someone came in and bid higher. Hope they enjoy it. I probably should have hit buy it now to begin with, but was trying to get a deal.I think that's Ralph's size.
this is exactly the reason. They assume that there aren't many of this size. There are.Maybe it would help if Ralph Lauren were apprised of a thread such as this one. I honestly think that, after the Times article, the opinions on this board are at least moderately powerful, if not already seen by those in the industry who lurk here. Perhaps previously buyers assumed that there weren't many 36 shorts out there.
Maybe they should reclassify the sizes: R = S, L = R, and L = XL, that would work, no? Jon.Perhaps short suit sizes don't sell because many men do not want to self-identify as short. All over D.C. -- a town populated by many men of below-average height -- I see men wearing suit jackets that are way too long ( i.e., hem well below the end of the thumb).