please read IF you enjoy discounts

Originally Posted by Epaulet

Click to expand...

Wrong. I'm going to defend EG on this one. They're doing an excellent job with design and production. And they are a world-class operation when it comes to brand building. They have great press coverage and Daiki gets a write-up every week. They make beautiful and unique items. They've been soldiering with their aesthetic for a few years now. Recently, their popularity has exploded and a lot of the kids wearing BAPE and Dunks in 2005 are now talking about "kopping" a Bedford jacket. They could be a lot bigger than they are. I'm sure the people at Tobi and Revolve would buy their line in a huge way if they could. A huge part of EG's appeal is its relative scarcity. It's not a common brand, it's not a common look, and it's not found everywhere. By restricting its online sales to strong brick and mortar accounts (Farinelli's, Odin, etc) it maintains its brand image and supports its loyal partners. Part of that image is keeping prices where they should be. EG isn't cheap, but I feel that it gives good value for the money. They have the luxury of having more demand than they can fill. But unlike a lot of "streetwear" companies, it's not because of celebrities, fake scarcity, and bullshit. It's because they're really good at what they do - and the clothing reflects that. I carry Alden. They've got the exact same regulations. No discounts, and no sales unless they approve it. You can advertise the shoes online, but can't sell them via a checkout. Given the attention and respect they have on this forum, it hasn't hurt their status. Buying an Indy Boot is a special thing because of this. Imagine if you could get one on Zappos for 10% less. Or use a coupon on ShoeBuy to save 20% on President's Day. Kind of cheapens the appeal, right? What has more value in your eyes - the sought-after and rare Indy Boot, or the Gentleman Traveler - as seen on urbanoutfitters.com and half-off at Revolve? EG is doing quite well in this economy. People are spending less, but buying more specialty items. I'm quite sure that they'll be survivors. And people who carry EG and invest in them can sleep soundly knowing that prices are maintained. They probably have to do that across the board - which unfortunately applies to our discount as much as it does a Saks or Barneys 75% markdown in November. I've personally used the SF discount and loved it. Loved getting a Filson bag from Crane's and saving 40 bucks or so. And a BoO shirt from Hejfina. It's a great service as a customer. But as a designer, I also understand why some brands like EG might want to opt out.
Good post. When I wrote that I was thinking that it would be pretty risky for a relatively new up and coming brand to take such a hard line pricing stance in this economy, as if they were already at the same level as a Louis Vuitton or something. Especially when most if not all retailers are down anywhere from 30% - 80% and with the economy hitting clothing retailers especially hard, sales have been one of the few things retailers are relying on to stay afloat. When retailers go under, manufacturers suffer. People seem to be putting luxury purchases on hold for the most part. I also overestimated their sales volume from styleforum members. If they do indeed have more demand than they can fill, even right now, then I recant my previous comment. If that's the case they're damn fortunate and that's a great sign. You're right about creating scarcity, however sales do not cheapen the appeal of anything for me personally. I jump all over that **** when I can and I'm generally thrilled to get good stuff for a discount.

I'll come out and say it: it was robin.

Originally Posted by whodini

Click to expand...

I'll come out and say it: it was robin.

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

Why would they do that? Because they're dumb, and hoping that the store will just refund them the difference rather than having to go through all the hassle of exchanging. However, this ain't circuit city.

Which is why I'm pretty ******* sketched at the moment about the guys in the B&S selling Wings + Horns at about 1/2 of retail and being completely unwilling to divulge where they're getting it from. Hm, I wonder if Roden Gray should be pissed the **** off that someone is selling the dayton boots for under 500 on here? Or Mauro for that matter, or blackbird. The hammer does need to come down on a lot of this discount ish...

How is this different from proxying? From PSA's? We inundate stores all the time when they put things on discount, and whether they get shipped across the country or kept for the purchaser, it matters not. It drastically affects the value of those goods. Tell me: will you knowingly pay full retail for a Ralph Lauren Black Label suit knowing that at some point it'll be $650 on Gilt and possible $250 at the outlet one month?

Does anyone have a sense of market value around here? Clothes aren't works of art, they aren't commodities but they exist in a competitive market. I always get pissed when these discussions start, and I don't want to start a fight with Mauro, but are you suffering due to your discounts, or have you seen your business grow due to your discount outreach and willingness to lower prices for StyleForum users?

I, too, understand why brands would choose to opt out, but being all up in arms over this practice of discounts, bargain seeking and cost consideration is idiotic. You're buying a ******* sweatshirt, not a Monet.

Originally Posted by lance konami

Click to expand...

How does retail pricing work in clothing, typically? Do the manufacturers set the retail price or is it the retailer?

The clothing manufacturer sets the retail price of the clothing from what I heard. My friend worked as a buyer for a clothing store previously. Generally the manufacturer will say that they want their product to retail for a certain amount. They then work with the sellers on the price that they sell the product to them at. The larger the amount they buy, the better rate they get. The msrp of a particular item should be roughly through the whole country.

End users always gotta mess it up for everyone else. A manufacturer's customer is the retailer. The retailer's customer is the end user. If customers brag to a retailer that somebody else is selling at a discount or a cutthroat price (can be any product not just the EG discussed), then the retailer gets upset. If retailer gets upset and no longer wants to carry a product line, then the manufacturer has just lost a big customer. That is why manufacturers like EG will set strict sales policies so that they can keep their customers (the retailers) happy.

So before you return something because you found it cheaper elsewhere... think before you speak and just let your return be a return. There is no need to be a dick and brag to the retailer that you found it cheaper somewhere else. Because you might end up pissing off the manufacturer of your favorite product as a result.

Props to Mauro for bringing this to light and even offering a discount in the first place. And even bigger props for adhering to the rules the manufacturers set because there are alot of businesses out there (again not just clothing) that will not even respect the manufacturer's policies and set prices so low everyone gets upset (except the end user) but the result is loss of money all along the supply chain.

Shrug. So essentially, Mauro was saying, "Hey guys, I can afford to sell you this at 20% off (or whatever) and still be profitable!". All the other EG retailers were like, "Hey! We want to make as much money as possible! It's not fair that he's willing to settle for less and stealing all our customers! CUT HIM OFF SO WE CAN MAKE PEOPLE OVERPAY!". So then EG was like, "Yo Mauro, the rest of the family is bitching that you aren't making enough money. You need to do what we tell you to, or you can't sell our brand anymore even though you pay the exact same price as every other wholesale account. We're exclusive, *****!". Things like this seem weird to me in a recession.

Originally Posted by lance konami

Click to expand...

How does retail pricing work in clothing, typically? Do the manufacturers set the retail price or is it the retailer?

I am not sure but I dont think that all brands necessarily set retail prices. I have seen different prices for the same exact things different all over the place. Barney's usually sets higher prices than other people.

Also, I know certain places who buy their merchandise over seas set their prices based on the exchange rate at the time they paid for their goods. So since different places pay at different times..it might cause them to set different prices for their goods.

I have seen a CCP jacket..the same one for 6300 at atelier, 6800 at maxfield, and 7500 at alan bilzerian. One of the guys at Atelier told me they also set prices based on how the Euro was diong at the time they paid.

I think there is general guideline as how much to mark up but there is really no strict rate for a lot of brands.

I don't see how EG would know if Mauro gave people discounts on EG clothing, for example if it were only in-store to SF members.

Originally Posted by blank

Click to expand...

How is this different from proxying? From PSA's? We inundate stores all the time when they put things on discount, and whether they get shipped across the country or kept for the purchaser, it matters not. It drastically affects the value of those goods. Tell me: will you knowingly pay full retail for a Ralph Lauren Black Label suit knowing that at some point it'll be $650 on Gilt and possible $250 at the outlet one month?

Does anyone have a sense of market value around here? Clothes aren't works of art, they aren't commodities but they exist in a competitive market. I always get pissed when these discussions start, and I don't want to start a fight with Mauro, but are you suffering due to your discounts, or have you seen your business grow due to your discount outreach and willingness to lower prices for StyleForum users?

I, too, understand why brands would choose to opt out, but being all up in arms over this practice of discounts, bargain seeking and cost consideration is idiotic. You're buying a ******* sweatshirt, not a Monet.
First of all, take this a little more seriously, because if lives aren't at stake, livelihoods are.

Second, there is a significant difference between Gilt and guys flipping on a website. There is a difference between RLBL and W+H. The first is easily dispensed with: Gilt has a direct relationship with the manufacturer, and are authorized to sell at the prices they do. If everyone from the manufacturer to the consumer is happy with the transactions being carried out, there's obviously no problem.

The difference in the situation where we're proxying 80 pairs of incotex or a half dozen RLBL suits is, first, RL doesn't give a crap. They're huge, they don't mind lots of people getting their clothes for cheap because they aren't going to lose accounts over it. In fact, their business model likely promotes the notion that the more people wearing RL clothing at any price, the better, and they'd prefer to have it sold at 70% off than not sold at all. There are good reasons for that strategy. Just as there are good reasons for Alden, mentioned above, not to want their goods' value diluted. Some of these manufacturers simply aren't situated well enough to be able to take the hit, it WILL lose them accounts, or diminish accounts, and they don't have enough of them to maintain their brand's presence without them. Tim Hamilton gets more exposure from a jacket pictured on a shop blog that everyone can look at and think "wow I wish I could pony up for that" than they do from the people who actually buy the jacket. There are these small niche brands that we want to be able to survive so they can keep providing us with cool **** season after season, and small shops we want to see flourish to the extent possible, and that's not going to happen if there are absolutely no market constraints. Those need to be between supplier and retailer, and that's why we make contracts. I have a feeling I'm not communicating this as well as I should be but it's not a very simple thing I guess.

Originally Posted by cchen

Click to expand...

I don't see how EG would know if Mauro gave people discounts on EG clothing, for example if it were only in-store to SF members.
Is that what happened? I thought EG just did a general stop on people being able to place their trash on sale rather than specifically putting Mauro on blast. Mauro was just willing to tell the dumbAZZes of Styleforum to STFUI.

^^ thank you!

This is by NO means EG'S fault. they need to protect their brand and I repsect that.
That's why I won't discount their product.

I just think it's sad because when I spoke about the SF discount they (EG) were cool with it< but to many people were returning the goods from other retailers who aren't on SF. It wasn't just me it was directed toward ALL of the SF Affliates.

The morale of the story is " think " it's ok to return product ( to a degree) but you don't need to put another retailer on the spot.
There are roughly 35,000 Sf members and growing which might equate to .ooo1% of the total sales for the contempoary / young designers market none the less respect the discount I want to give it to you!!!

MSPR is a suggested retail price it is illegal for a brand to fix a price on a product. However if you dont come close to MSRP the brand has the option of not working with a particular retailer.
I like my brands I want to keep them....lol
Yes I give a nice discount and yes I want your business so please pay attention so me and the other affiliates can continue to give you the best service at the best price we can.
best,
Mauro

cchen- if that was the case then EG wouldn't mind however since a handful of us on this forum service the same customers and those customers dont always live in the DC area the internet is a tool we use to grow our business.
Could you imagine if Context or any other quality store that has a web site and mortar store couldnt utilize the web???

Originally Posted by mainy

Click to expand...

Shrug. So essentially, Mauro was saying, "Hey guys, I can afford to sell you this at 20% off (or whatever) and still be profitable!". All the other EG retailers were like, "Hey! We want to make as much money as possible! It's not fair that he's willing to settle for less and stealing all our customers! CUT HIM OFF SO WE CAN MAKE PEOPLE OVERPAY!". So then EG was like, "Yo Mauro, the rest of the family is bitching that you aren't making enough money. You need to do what we tell you to, or you can't sell our brand anymore even though you pay the exact same price as every other wholesale account. We're exclusive, *****!". Things like this seem weird to me in a recession.

Well I think theres more to it than just that. The size of the company makes a difference. I don't know how big Mauro's operation is, but I think it's safe to say that he's quite a bit bigger than these retailers who are complaining to EG. The larger a company is, the more units of clothing they can realistically buy and the more units of clothing they buy, the cheaper rate they get.

This is why chains such as Walmart can afford to sell items so cheap and still turn a profit. They're volume sellers. Without EG setting this example and not allowing discounts, the smaller retailers will suffer and will potentially no longer sell EGs product.

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

The difference in the situation where we're proxying 80 pairs of incotex or a half dozen RLBL suits is, first, RL doesn't give a crap. They're huge, they don't mind lots of people getting their clothes for cheap because they aren't going to lose accounts over it. In fact, their business model likely promotes the notion that the more people wearing RL clothing at any price, the better, and they'd prefer to have it sold at 70% off than not sold at all. There are good reasons for that strategy. Just as there are good reasons for Alden, mentioned above, not to want their goods' value diluted. Some of these manufacturers simply aren't situated well enough to be able to take the hit, it WILL lose them accounts, or diminish accounts, and they don't have enough of them to maintain their brand's presence without them. Tim Hamilton gets more exposure from a jacket pictured on a shop blog that everyone can look at and think "wow I wish I could pony up for that" than they do from the people who actually buy the jacket. There are these small niche brands that we want to be able to survive so they can keep providing us with cool **** season after season, and small shops we want to see flourish to the extent possible, and that's not going to happen if there are absolutely no market constraints. Those need to be between supplier and retailer, and that's why we make contracts. I have a feeling I'm not communicating this as well as I should be but it's not a very simple thing I guess.
And these are the risks inherent in starting a small business -- whether you want to start a boutique, a law firm, a grocery store or a clothing line. There's going to be a bully on the block who challenges you, takes a lot of your market share, and steals your customers because they can do what you can do, for less money, and the person forking out the cash ultimately leads this debate. I'm sorry, but it pisses me off that Engineered Garments, a brand of all of, what, four years? Five years? And the brand needs artificially implemented market constraints to retain this hard earned brand equity? Do you no longer like Band of Outsiders because their price point has diminished to essentially $120 or so for a shirt on inevitable discount, so WMMK can buy it now? If the argument is "some brands aren't set up to enable discounts, because then customers come to expect those discounts and they will be forced to change their business model," then I think those companies should be more nimble.

Originally Posted by blank

Click to expand...

Do you no longer like Band of Outsiders because their price point has diminished to essentially $120 or so for a shirt on inevitable discount, so WMMK can buy it now?

I just bought a BoO shirt for $120 today. Am I now officially the "really likes BoO but is too cheap to pay retail" guy?