LOL at Abercrombie and Fitch "premium" jeans

[kronik]

Originally Posted by apocalypse later

Some of you guys argue like idiots. Didn't they tell you in high school that logic and acknowledging con points rules over simply insulting people?

While I don't agree with you, leftover_salmon, you're at least arguing logically.

Man, I will ad hominem all over yo ugly ass.

A&F 4 life.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by apocalypse later

While I don't agree with you, leftover_salmon, you're at least arguing logically.

Yes, I found his subtle adaptation of Cicero's classic "you guys can keep jerking each other off" summation particularly persuasive.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by kronik

Man, I will ad hominem all over yo ugly ass.

A&F 4 life.

 

[Bergdorf Goodwill]

Topicstyl'd, faced, and buried!

 

[Coulomb]

Originally Posted by leftover_salmon

Sigh.

Instead of elaborating on anything (or even making a point of your own), you just go back to your old tricks.

Where is the clear logic in "Abercrombie made crap before so they will always make crap?" Or "these jeans are distressed badly so they must be crappy denim, made by Malaysians, and Abercrombie must be lying that no two pairs are the same?"

You're a ******* lawyer. Tell me how that is perfectly valid and I'll shut up. And if you don't, I'm done in this thread. You guys can have fun jerking each other off.

Edit: And this is all from someone who won't even walk into Abercrombie when his friends go.

Maybe it's not morally valid to judge without first hand information, but there's nothing wrong with passing judgement based on precedent especially when first hand information isn't readily available.

It's actually quite logical to make assumptions on a manufacturer's current/ and future products based on his/her past products. We do it all the time. Think of your credit history for example. You'll get a mortgage based on your history. Does this mean that you'll always be on time or not default on your loan? Absolutely not. Your history is just an indication of the _probability_ that you'll be in goodstanding. Based on that information, the lending institution _assumes_ you'll be good to your word and allows you to borrow up to a certain amount that your credibility affords.

This logical process is _similar_ to many member's sentiment about A&F. While it's very difficult to prove every past, present, and future piece they produce was, is, or will be awful, by observing the abundant sample space (i.e. the proliferate A&F stores in your local shopping centers) we can get a reliable gauge of what their products has been or is like. Withholding any tumultous changes in A&F's business model and practices, a strong correlation can be made in regards to what they are producing now to what they will produce next season. As long as the extrapolation isn't completely egregious many would say this analysis is logicall sound. For example, I think predicting A&F's quality and aesthetic within the one to two season timeline is ok. Where as making the blanket statement that A&F will _never_ producing_ anything of merit is a gross overstatement.

Here's another aspect... Have you considered that clothing, like art, doesn't necessarily appeal towards the _logical_ aspect of human beings? A large degree of art, fashion, and design is purely emotional. It's how the brand inspires you to _feel_ a certain way. In these cases, sentiments held by people don't need to be logical to make sense.

 

[Augusto86]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

Yes, I found his subtle adaptation of Cicero's classic "you guys can keep jerking each other off" summation particularly persuasive.

**** cicero. KATO strait thug 4 lyfe!

 

[Bergdorf Goodwill]

Sometimes I wonder if you are all performance artists or if I am in some really lame VR headset or something.

WHAT IS THE MEANING OF ART?

 

[kronik]

R them ***** selvage?!

Where can I cop!?

Allow me to extol the deconstructivist merit of those shorts. You see, they're inspirted by deceased German queens. The production methods accurately recreate those used in the original fabrication of these masterpieces. To own a pair is to own a piece of history. Some of the detailing is the designer's twist on old things dying, and new things coming to be. They are original without being new. They've been specially crafted by skilled craftsmen in an exotic country with virginal pubic hair (and sugar cane).

(You think this is a trip; mosey on over to CE some time. Woo buddy.)

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by leftover_salmon

Looking like crap and being crap are different things. What nobody here is doing is distinguishing between what the jeans look like and the actual quality of them is. Sure, there is some overlap, but that doesn't mean they didn't use good denim or hire skilled workers.

First, you attribute an argument to me that I didn't make. Second, the issues you raise are entirely irrelevant to my previous comment. The quality is of no interest to me -- literally not worth thinking about -- because the aesthetics are so atrocious. I will not consider buying this item, and therefore will spend no time mulling its technical merits. That's a perfectly reasonable position to take.

I imagine many of the other responses you're receiving are coming from the same place.

 

[AnotherVictim]

Originally Posted by Bergdorf Goodwill

Sometimes I wonder if you are all performance artists or if I am in some really lame VR headset or something.



WHAT IS THE MEANING OF ART?

Haha... I actually am a performance artist!

 

[Stylin-1]

Originally Posted by AnotherVictim

I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate; believe me I have no love for the store myself...

In any case I didn't mean to infer that people "can't see past labels". I know using solid phrases such as "won't be recognized as quality" take attention away from my original message, my mistake.

What I was trying to say was that, although we can see past labels, do we want to? In other words, do we want to recognize that a piece is well made enough that is deserving of such a price tag. I know that I don't, bad as it may sound, and that was the basis of my original post.

No offense to you but I think we need a national seminar in which EVERYONE in the country is required to attend. The topic will be: understanding and proper usage of the verbs "infer" and "imply."


Oh...and I wouldn't wipe ****** with those AF jeans. Not that it'd be noticable if I did.

 

[WSW]

I'm guessing Apocalypse Later bought too many shares of AF and is embarassed at his poor investment decision.

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

Yes, I found his subtle adaptation of Cicero's classic "you guys can keep jerking each other off" summation particularly persuasive.

Well, he was quite the orator...

Thank you! I'll be here all week!

Jon.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by AnotherVictim

Haha... I actually am a performance artist!

I trust that's not the job you're looking to leave . . . (don't remember which other thread you mentioned that in)

 

[DGP]

I think $400 is crazy for jeans in general. I just ordered a pair for $250 and am still a little shocked. Those are ass-ugly. However, as far as material and construction quality go, I actually have found AF decent. I used to wear a lot of it in the late 90s (when I was in high school), and it held together well, was comfortable, and, back then, the "new thing." I still have a pair of their cargo pants somewhere in a closet that I couldn't manage to completely kill.

As a general principle, I think it's important to differentiate between quality and aesthetics. While I think their aesthetic sucks (unless it's wrapped tightly around a pair of 34 Cs), I can make that judgement looking at it. I'd need to inspect closer to know the quality of any particular garment. I think those are way too overdone, and even if a lot of time went into making them, they aren't a "quality job." That said, the denim could be great and the seems/hardware unbreakable.

When it comes to clothes, I must give the not to aesthetics first, quality second. It doesn't matter how good something is, if it looks ******, don't wear it. So I can say those are a ****** pair of jeans. Come back with another design, and we can talk.