"Our key clients don't queue for the sales"

[LA Guy]

Originally Posted by robin

I buy most of my things at full retail.

I don't, but if I really like the piece, I am not adverse to it.

 

[robin]

The rub is that the things I would want to buy are made in small quantities and would be long gone by sale time.

 

[Casey]

It's funny how Marc Jacobs would slash his prices to 70% by the end of a season regardless of the state of the economy. And I heard that all shoes eventually get marked down to $100 regardless of their original prices. Of course, that's probably why Marc Jacobs appeals to a much larger crowd of people.

As for the comment from Versace, I definitely understand their point of view. However, Louis Vuitton has the same policy (stricter, actually) of not cutting prices but I think LV saying that they don't want to dilute the brand's quality makes me feel so much more appreciated as a customer than Versace saying that they don't want poor people sporting their name.

 

[apropos]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

All that aside, he still sounds like an ass, and I'd welcome the chance to cock punch him.
+1

 

[FidelCashflow]

Originally Posted by Mathew J

If I had heard such a comment I would be sure to not frequent those establishments..."bottom feeders" serve a purpose just as those who pay full retail, they should be happy anyone is buying their wears.

I didn't actually hear that in a store, I read it somewhere, possibly in a marketing class or something. If someone actually referred to the customers like that at a store, it would no go over well.

Originally Posted by robin

The rub is that the things I would want to buy are made in small quantities and would be long gone by sale time.

The good stuff is always gone by sales time. If something is 80% off, there's usually a reason.

 

[ccffm1]

"Our regular client was not queuing on January 3-4 in Milan or Rome but was on the slopes in St Moritz or on a boat in the Caribbean,..."

That doesn´t exactly come as a surprise. It is just a puny attempt to conceal the fact that Versace has lost all of it´s former glory. The people behind that arrogant waffle are just way to unimaginative to create a buzz with their products, so they have to resort to means like that.

 

[ccffm1]

Originally Posted by Casey

[...] than Versace saying that they don't want poor people sporting their name.
IMHO they want people of all classes to think that Versace still creates products that are worth aspiring to, which they are not, objectively.

 

[Nomad_K]

Be it clever marketing or a stream of concisousness... who can say for sure?

When looking at the math and margins on full retail versus deeply discounted products, I can certainly understand the desire to cater to one's customers who pick up newer products at higher prices. The outright disdain for anyone else does not come accross as very well though. Personally when I do splash out for luxury be it on clothes or other goods - I like to support companies that display some class and thought as opposed to companies that appear not to understand that old fashioned concept.

 

[rsgould]

Originally Posted by ccffm1

IMHO they want people of all classes to think that Versace still creates products that are worth aspiring to, which they are not, objectively.

+1

 

[AlanC]

I lose no sleep at all worrying about what a Versace executive thinks of my buying habits. I also take no pride in paying retail for anything. I will pay retail for some things, but I always investigate who has the best retail price (eg, buy Filson from Crane's, not the Filson website).

If stores don't need the sale customer then just burn the leftover merchandise and don't bother with putting it on sale.

 

[KlezmerBlues]

Originally Posted by robin

I buy most of my things at full retail.

I always insist to buy at double retail. It makes me feel important and more satisfied with my purchase.

 

[randallr]

I was under the impression Versace was in some serious financial trouble.

 

[yawn123_#21]

considering the markup of the items, selling for 50-70% off still yield profit, just not as much as selling full retail. Still better to make some profit rather than none. I mean their key customers seems to be diminishing, either improve your products to appeal to their taste, or realize they may been selling to the lesser people more and more frequently

 

[JFKJean]

Originally Posted by AlanC

I lose no sleep at all worrying about what a Versace executive thinks of my buying habits. I also take no pride in paying retail for anything. I will pay retail for some things, but I always investigate who has the best retail price (eg, buy Filson from Crane's, not the Filson website).

If stores don't need the sale customer then just burn the leftover merchandise and don't bother with putting it on sale.


+7

Originally Posted by KlezmerBlues

I always insist to buy at double retail. It makes me feel important and more satisfied with my purchase.

Well at least your honest

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by FidelCashflow

The good stuff is always gone by sales time.

Well, curses. Hardly any of my clothing is any good, including these Martegani shell chukkas I'm wearing.